國小教師專業倫理決定之研究--構念發展與歷程模式驗證

Abstract

本研究目的在建構國小教師專業倫理決定模式，並透過結構方程模式的統計方法進行驗證，受試選取修習教育學程的學生、實習老師與現職教師共541人，先觀看教師專業倫理情境劇影片後填答問卷，研究統計結果顯示模式與實徵資料之間的適配度並不理想，未來仍有待修正。 至於各變項間的關係可獲得幾項結論：對行為意向預測力最高的三項，依序為敏感度、程序處理判斷與負責行為，突顯出敏感度與程序處理判斷在倫理決定研究中的重要性。另外，負責行為受到來自動機、反省與人格的影響達顯著水準，以及與程序處理判斷的關聯達顯著，顯示本研究所主張的負責行為與專業倫理領域傳統研究派典相呼應。至於過去強調的道德推理傾向則與本研究情境中所填選的倫理判斷方式之間關聯性非常低，符合人類有限理性的認知觀點。最後，資深與資淺教師的多群組模式考驗顯示二者反應並不相同，但是差異比較並不明顯，變項關係的共同點與前述整體受試的模式十分類似。 根據本研究結果提出三項建議：一是未來可以透過教育訓練或專業人員的對話與溝通中提升敏感度，以及促使專業教師多運用理性審慎的辯證與推理。此外，經統計驗證顯示本研究模式仍有待再增加重要變項，建議可針對解釋性基模再考量，例如人性或教育的基本信念或是過去經驗。最後在研究與測量方式上，建議未來採取由受試自由回應、配合部分訪談，再根據不同重點進行分析評分，如此可以減少統計上違反常態性假設的問題。

The purposes of this study were to construct Elementary Teachers’ Professional Ethical Decision Making Process Model and to verify the goodness of fit between empirically observed data and the model with the theory structure equation modeling (SEM). The participants were 541 university students of studying education program and elementary teachers. The study procedure was seeing scenario first, then writing the questionnaire. The result was not ideally fitted well and waited to modify the model. Between the relations of each latent variable, there were some conclusions: (1) first three predictive variables of intention were sensibility, procedural treatment judgment and responsible behavior. (2) responsible behavior was affected by motivation, reflection and personality, in the other way; procedural treatment was effected by it. (3) the correlation between emphasized moral reasoning and the judgment in this study were very low. It fitted bounded rationality of human being. (4) the hypothesis about the expert teachers and the novice teachers fitted in the same model was rejected, but comparing differences were not so significant, those models were as same as the whole model. Based on the results of the study, the researcher provided three recommendations: First, in future we would enhance teachers’ sensibility by training and communicating, and impel teacher more using reasoning. Moreover, the verified result indicated that we should add more important variables in the model, for example belief for human nature and education, or past experiment, which were interpretative schema. Final, future researches may adopt that subjects could free answer and partly be interviewed, in order to resolve the statistical problems that violated assumption of normality.