六位數學實習教師教學身分內涵及發展的個案研究

Abstract

本研究以Wenger (1998)的學習理論為基礎，將學習的歷程視為成為某人的過程(learning as becoming)，嘗試從身分的觀點剖析數學實習教師學習教學的歷程，瞭解教師如何建構及發展自己的教學身分。亦即，教師在教學中是個(或展現出)什麼樣的人？經由實習歷程又使她們成為什麼樣的教師？Ghaye& Ghaye (1998)亦建議，當教師欲回答「我是什麼樣的教師？」時，應該可以先反思自己的教學並瞭解其內含的價值。因此，本研究即以教師的數學教學價值作為預設性的研究主體，以進一步檢視教師教學身分的內涵及其發展的歷程。

作者以6名數學實習教師為研究的對象，她們所屬實習學校為研究的場景，進行為期1年的個案研究。研究過程參考Chin & Lin (2000)探索與詮釋教師教學價值系統的架構，透過課堂教學觀察、半結構及遞迴性的訪談、撰寫問卷及省思報告來蒐集研究的實徵資料，經比較、分析及層層探索的過程精鍊出教師的教學價值及教學身分。

研究結果顯示，每位個案教師皆反映出不同的教學風格及特色，凸顯不同取向的教學身分內涵，而且，部份教學特質已與過去傳統數學教師有所不同。而在1年的教育實習過程中，個案教師的教學身分呈現三種不同的發展情形，包含教學身分大致維持一致性、教學身分衍生兩種存乎不同教學情境下的教學角色，以及教學身分的徹底轉換。另外，本研究亦發現，實作環境中的他人對待個案教師的態度對其教學身份的發展產生不同程度的影響，而實習教師的身分因素也限制了教學身份的可能發展空間。再者，教師在實習歷程中雖可扮演多重的教學角色，但是，其內部深層本質的身分內涵仍保有長久的自我同一性。當教師整合多重角色而又能夠確實教出所側重的教學價值時，即反映出自己的教學身分。本研究的結果反映出教學身分的多樣性與重要性，以及發展過程的複雜與多變，也間接地提醒師資培育者，應該更加重視教學身分對教師專業發展的影響。Based on Wenger’s (1998) social theory of learning as becoming, the author tried to explore how six probationary teachers construct their pedagogical identities in the process of learning to teach mathematics, concerning ‘who she or he is in the teaching’ and ‘what kind of school mathematics teachers they want to become’ through one year internship. Ghaye& Ghaye (1998) proposed that we need to reflect on what we do before we answer the question ‘what kind of teacher am I?’ And our professional values therefore play a key role to provide us with reasons for teaching in the particular ways. Thus, teachers’ pedagogical values were the subject of this study used to investigate the content and development of pedagogical identities.

Six mathematics probationary teachers were selected for this one year case studies. By using Chin & Lin’s (2000) framework for investigating and interpreting teachers’ pedagogical value systems, the author collected empirical data from classroom observations, interviews and reflective journals to refine these 6 teachers’ pedagogical values and identities.

Research results indicated that each case entailed with different pedagogical identities, and some pedagogical qualities were different from traditional mathematics teachers. Besides, their pedagogical identities reflected three kinds of development states including identities consistent, identities separated and identities transformed. In addition, the perceptions of others in the different community of practice have different influence to the development of corresponding pedagogical identities, and the probationary teachers’ identities seemed also to limit the possibility of identities development. Although teachers may act multiple roles in teaching, their internal and in-depth identities are almost the same. When a teacher combines the multiple roles that she or he can play and teaches the core values in the classroom, then their pedagogical identities stand out. The study shows the multiplicity and importance of mathematics teachers’ pedagogical identities, the complexity and variation in the process of identity development. This seems to suggest that mathematics teacher educators should consider seriously the effect of pedagogical identity on the professional development of mathematics teachers.