Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/98446
Title: 台灣省高職專業類科教師評鑑內涵之研究
A Study of Teacher’s Appraisal Content for Professional Teachers in Vocational High School
Authors: 李基常
吳榕峯
詹勳林
Shiun-Lin Jan
Keywords: 高職
專業類科教師
教師評鑑
Vocational High Schools
Professional Teacher
Teacher Appraisal
Issue Date: 2005
Abstract: 本研究旨在探討台灣省高職專業類科教師評鑑內涵之研究。瞭解高職專業類科教師對「高職教師評鑑目的」、「高職教師評鑑項目」、「高職教師評鑑實施方式」、「高職教師評鑑資料蒐集方式」、「高職教師評鑑實施程序」與「高職教師評鑑結果應用」之看法,並根據研究結果提出建議,供參考研究。 本研究以調查研究法進行研究,台灣省公私立高級職業學校之工業類、商業類、農業類及家事類的專業類科教師為研究對象,問卷共寄出1372份,有效問卷789份,經SPSS 11.0 for Windows資料處理與分析後,獲得以下結論: 壹、高職專業類科教師重視的教師評鑑目的為「促進教師專業發展,激勵教師專業成長」、「協助教師提昇教學品質」、「透過診斷及輔導方式提供教師自我省視教學的機會」及「維護學生的學習權益」。 貳、高職專業類科教師因性別、服務年資與任教類別之不同,而在「高職教師評鑑目的」上之看法,各有差異。 參、高職專業類科教師都很重視九項教師評鑑項目。 肆、高職專業類科教師因性別、學歷、服務年資、任教類別與學校屬性之不同,而在「高職教師評鑑項目」上之看法,各有差異。 伍、高職專業類科教師重視的評鑑實施方式為「自我評鑑」、「同儕評鑑」與「校內評鑑小組評鑑」。 陸、高職專業類科教師因性別、學歷、現任職務、服務年資與學校屬性之不同,而在「高職教師評鑑實施方式」上之看法,各有差異。 柒、高職專業類科教師重視的評鑑資料蒐集方式為「學生學習成果」、「教室觀察」、「問卷或訪談(學生和家長)」及「教師教學檔案」。 捌、高職專業類科教師因學歷、現任職務、服務年資、任教類別與學校屬性之不同,而在「高職教師評鑑資料蒐集方式」上之看法,各有差異。 玖、高職專業類科教師都很贊同七項教師評鑑實施程序。 拾、高職專業類科教師因現任職務、服務年資及學校屬性之不同,而在「高職教師評鑑實施程序」上之看法,各有差異。 拾壹、高職專業類科教師贊同的評鑑結果應用為「發現及表揚優良教師之依據」、「發現表現不佳教師,可提供協助及處置」及「決定教師專業進修優先權利之依據」。 拾貳、高職專業類科教師因學歷、現任職務、服務年資、任教類別及學校屬性之不同,而在「高職教師評鑑結果應用」上之看法,各有差異。
The research delved into appraisal for teachers of professional subjects of vocational schools in Taiwan Province (except for Taipei and Kaoshiung) to know views of these teachers on the appraisal of goals, items, methods of execution, data gathering, execution of procedure, and application from outcomes and be proposed according to outcomes. The method was survey research and the research target included teachers from industry, business, agriculture, and housing of all vocational schools in Taiwan Province. 1372 questionnaires had been sent and 789 questionnaires were valid and completed. The outcomes are showed as following via data processing and analysis of SPSS 11.0 for Windows. 1)The appraisal goals, which teachers of professional subjects value, are “to promote and encourage development of teachers’ expertise”, “enhance teaching quality” and “offer chances of introspection on teaching by diagnosis and guidance for teachers” and “uphold students’ rights”. 2)Teachers of professional subjects, with dissimilarities of gender, seniority, and subjects, demonstrate different opinions on teachers’ appraisal goals. 3)Teachers of professional subjects greatly value the nine teachers’ appraisal items. 4)Teachers of professional subjects, with dissimilarities of gender, academic background, seniority, subjects, and schools, demonstrate different opinions on teachers’ appraisal items. 5)The appraisal methods, which teachers of professional subjects value, are “self-appraisal”, “peer appraisal” and “appraisal of teams to appraise on campus” 6)Teachers of professional subjects, with dissimilarities of gender, academic background, positions, seniority, and schools, demonstrate different opinions of methods of execution on teachers’ appraisal. 7)The ways on data gathering of appraisal, which teachers of professional subjects value, are “achievement of students’ studying”, “observation in classroom”, “questionnaire or interview with students and their parents”, and “files on teaching”. 8)Teachers of professional subjects, with dissimilarities of academic background, positions, seniority, subjects, and schools, demonstrate different opinions of the ways on data gathering of appraisal. 9)Teachers of professional subjects greatly approve seven items of appraisal execution of procedure. 10)Teachers of professional subjects, with dissimilarities of positions, seniority and schools, demonstrate different opinions on appraisal execution of procedure. 11)The top three application outcomes approved by teachers are “criteria to find out and praise outstanding teachers”, “offer assistance and handling on teachers with poor performance” and “criteria of decision of advanced studying for teachers”. 12)Teachers of professional subjects, with dissimilarities of academic background, positions, seniority, subjects, and schools, demonstrate the difference of appraisal application of outcomes.
URI: http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=%22http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22G0069170005%22.&%22.id.&
http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/98446
Other Identifiers: G0069170005
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
000501.pdf34.39 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
000502.pdf115.18 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
000503.pdf206.26 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
000504.pdf200.16 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
000505.pdf27.12 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
000506.pdf190.14 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.