中學數學實習師資生教學知能指標之建構：改良式德懷術之應用

Pen-Hwang Liau; Hisn-Min Chen

doi:10.6209/JORIES.202303_68(1).0003

山西大学，您好！

感谢采购，人社期刊库｜人社论文库，期间：2024/01/01~2024/12/31

感谢试用，科学期刊库｜科学论文库，期间：2024/10/20~2025/01/20

浏览高级检索

关闭
检索检索高级检索出版物检索
浏览期刊主题浏览核心期刊浏览期刊拼音浏览

关闭

查询符号(半角)	查询符号意义说明
空格	表示为「AND」两个查询词之交集
双引号 ( " " )	片语以双引号标示开始及结束，而且只寻找出现顺序相同的字词，例： " image process "
?	表示一个字母切截，输入两个?表两个字母，依此类推，例：输入「Appl?」，查得结果应为appl e , appl y … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
*	表示不限字母切截，由0~n. 例：输入「appl*」，查得结果应为appl e , appl es , appl y , appl ied , appl ication … ( 常用于英文字查询 )
AND、OR、NOT	布尔逻辑组合关键字，用来扩大或缩小查询范围的技巧。 (1) AND ：缩小查询范围 (2) OR ：扩大查询范围(3) NOT：排除不相关的范围

DOI 是数位物件识别码（ D igital O bject I dentifier ）的简称，
为物件在网路上的唯一识别码，可用于永久连结并引用目标物件。

使用DOI作为永久连结

每个DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」便成为永久网址。
如以DOI号为 10.5297/ser.1201.002 的文献为例，此文献的永久连结便是： http://dx.doi.org/ 10.5297/ser.1201.002 。
日后不论出版单位如何更动此文献位置，永久连结所指向的位置皆会即时更新，不再错失重要的研究。

引用含有DOI的文献

有DOI的文献在引用时皆应同时引用DOI。若使用APA、Chicago以外未规范DOI的引用格式，可引用DOI永久连结。

DOI可强化引用精确性、增强学术圈连结，并给予使用者跨平台的良好使用经验，目前在全世界已有超过五千万个对象申请DOI。如想对DOI的使用与概念有进一步了解，请参考（）。

ACI:

数据来源：Academic Citation Index，简称ACI

台湾最大的引用文献资料库，目前收录台湾与港澳地区所出版的人文学、社会学领域学术期刊之书目资料与参考文献，总期刊量超过690种，每年定期公布收录期刊的影响指数(Impact Factor)等指标给大众，并提供专家学者与学术单位实用的计量与分析功能。

五年影响指数（5-Year Impact Factor）：某一期刊前五年所出版的文章在当年度的平均被引用次数。

公式：（前五年发表论文在统计年的被引用次数）÷（前五年论文产出论文总篇数）

例如：A期刊2017年之五年影响指数

(A期刊2012-2016年发表论文在2017年的被引总次数)/(A期刊2012-2016年发表的论文总数)

什么是预刊文章？

为提供读者最前线之学术资讯，于期刊文献获同意刊登后、纸本印制完成前，率先于网路线上发表之文章即为预刊文章。预刊文章尚未有卷期、页次及出版日期资讯，但可藉由DOI号识别。 DOI号是文献的数位身份证字号，不论预刊或正式出版皆不会改变，读者可点击DOI连结，或于DOI号前面加上「 http://dx.doi.org/ 」连结到文献目前最新版本。

如何引用预刊文章？

请使用预刊文章的线上发表日期及DOI号来引用该篇文献。

引用范例(视不同引文格式规范可能有所差异)：

作者姓名。文章篇名。期刊名称。 YYYY/MM/DD线上预先发表。

doi:DOI 号

来源数据

P73 - 108

社会科学 > 教育学

DOI： 10.6209/JORIES

书目管理工具

相关连结

问题回报

全文下载

中学数学实习师资生教学知能指标之建构：改良式德怀术之应用

Construction of Indicators of Teaching Competences Among Middle School Student Teachers: A Modified Delphi Study

廖本煌(Pen-Hwang Liau) ；陈欣民(Hisn-Min Chen)

教育科学研究期刊； 68 卷 1 期 (2023 / 03 / 01) ， P73 - 108

繁体中文;英文 DOI： 10.6209/JORIES.202303_68(1).0003

十二年国教；中学数学实习师资生；改良式德怀术； 12-year compulsory education ； middle school student teachers ； modified Delphi study

0 个人觉得这篇文章赞

摘要 │ 参考文献 (65) │ 国际计量

摘要〈TOP〉

并列摘要〈TOP〉

1. Background. The modern educational reform movement has continually promoted high teaching quality since the 1980s. In the education system of Taiwan, a reliable evaluation system for probationary teachers has been developed. First, since the approval of the Teachers Cultivation Law in Taiwan by legislators in 1994, both colleges and general universities have offered education programs for teaching mathematics. Second, during the teachers' probationary period, both an experienced math teacher and a university professor play the role of supervisors and mentors. However, not all experienced school teachers have mentor training experience. Furthermore, the opinions about the criteria for assessing probationary teachers may differ between school teachers and university professors. Third, after 2002, the probationary period for new teachers in secondary schools in Taiwan was changed from 1 year (two semesters) to half a year (one semester). Therefore, identifying ways to make the half year of apprenticeship as effective as a 1-year apprenticeship is crucial. Fourth, the vision of the 12-year compulsory education is "Making All Students More Successful," which emphasizes that students are active learners. Core competencies refer to the knowledge, ability, and attitude that an individual must possess to adapt to daily life situations and face future challenges (Ministry of Education, 2014). Based on the aforementioned concerns, establishing an appropriate quality assessment system that not only ensures that probationary teachers' grades are objective and consistent but also maintains the quality of all future mathematics teachers is essential. This is the rationale for developing a set of indicators to serve as a fair standard for evaluating each probationary math teacher in secondary schools. Accordingly, this study applied a modified Delphi method to establish a set of feasible and practical indicators for the evaluation of the teaching competence of probationary mathematics teachers in Taiwan. Moreover, the proposed modified Delphi method was tested and verified. 2. Review of Literature on the Delphi Method. The Delphi technique is a process of collecting and refining the opinions of experts in order to obtain a consensus on a particular topic of present or future action, especially topics for which there is little knowledge of certainty (Dalkey & Helmer, 1963; Fischer, 1978; Hardy et al., 2004; Powell, 2003). The Delphi method has been widely applied in education, business, industry, heath care, and many other fields worldwide. Although the Delphi method is notable for its democratic, structured approach and participant anonymity, little is known about the minimum level of agreement required to achieve a consensus, thus leaving the technique open to criticism (Goodman, 1987; Keeney et al., 2001; Osborne et al., 2003; Powell, 2003; Reid, 1988; Rowe et al., 1991; Williams & Webb, 1994). Concerns regarding this technique include how to achieve a consensus for an indicator and what is the minimum level of agreement to reach a consensus in a given situation. 3. Methods. Step 1: Set the target values: Because the expert panel in this study comprised 25 experts and a topic from the education field was selected, we used a higher criterion to reach a consensus. After discussion with other researchers, we decided to use a 5-point Likert scale and set the following target values: (1) the percentage of respondents choosing "5" should be greater than 65% without no one choosing "1"or "2"; (2) For mean, if 17 experts choose "5" and 8 experts choose "3", set the mean as 4.36. (3) For standard deviation, if 17 experts choose "5", 4 experts choose "4", and the other 4 experts choose "3", set the SD as 0.77. Step 2: Compare the observation results with the target values: After determining the target values, means, and standard deviations, we perform the statistical hypothesis process to reach a consensus as follows. (1) Testing of the Standard Deviation: H_0: σ ≥.77 vs. H_1: σ<.77. First, we compare the sample standard deviation for each indicator with the target value through statistical hypothesis testing. If the null hypothesis is not rejected, it indicates that the expert panel's opinions are not consistent, and that the indicators must be modified and experts must be consulted again for further analysis until a consensus is reached. Otherwise, if the null hypothesis is rejected, it indicates that the experts have reached a consensus, and that further input from the expert panel is not needed. We then proceed with testing the mean of the indicator. (2) Testing of the Mean: H_0: µ ≤ 4.36 vs. H_1: µ > 4.36. After the standard deviation is tested, the mean of the indicator is assessed to validate its' importance. If the null hypothesis is rejected, it indicates that a consensus has been reached for the expert panel's opinions, and that further input from the expert panel is not needed. Otherwise, if the null hypothesis is not rejected, the indicators must be modified, and that the experts must be consulted again for further analysis until a consensus is reached. If the experts are consulted again, the standard deviation testing must also be performed again. To sum up, this modified method is more stringent than the traditional Delphi method and more efficiently identifies final indicators because some ideal indicators may be preserved only through one or two rounds. 4. Results. This study found that a set of 4 aspects, 7 vectors, and 34 indicators are essential components of teaching competences of middle school student teachers. 5. Conclusion. (1) A set of indicators were established in this study by considering aspects such as mathematics teaching, class management, evaluation, and attitude. These indicators emphasized "perceptible," "hands-on learning," "motivation," and "technology integration," which corresponded to the core competencies of the 12-year compulsory education. (2) The proposed modified Delphi method can be used to effectively and accurately judge the expert panel's consensus. For example, a consensus was reached for the opinions of the expert panel regarding 16 indicators in round 2; therefore, the experts only had to judge the last indicators in round 3.

参考文献 ( 65 ) 〈TOP〉

左台益、李健恒（2018）。素养导向之数学教材设计与发展。教育科学研究期刊，63（4），29-58。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0002【Tso, T.-Y., & Lei, K.-H. (2018). Design and development of mathematical literacy-oriented subject materials. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 63(4), 29-58. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0002】
连结：
左台益、胡政德（2009）。准教师从真实情境中建构数学模式的认知因素分析与机制。当代教育研究季刊，17（4），61-101。https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.2009.1704.03 【Tso, T.-Y., & Hu, C.-T. (2009). Analyzing and understanding the cognitive factors and translation mechanisms of pre-service teachers in their processes of mathematical modeling. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 17(4), 61-101. https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.2009.1704.03】
连结：
吴正新（2019）。数学素养导向评量试题研发策略。中等教育，70（3），11-35。https://doi.org/10.6249/SE.201909_70(3).0024【Wu, J.-S. (2019). The approaches of developing mathematical literacy-based assessment. Secondary Education, 70(3), 11-35. https://doi.org/10.6249/SE.201909_70(3).0024】
连结：
林素微（2018）。数学课室教师支持与学生数学素养关联探讨：以PISA 2012台湾资料为例。台湾数学教师，39（1），1-17。https://doi.org/10.6610/TJMT.201804_39(1).0001【Lin, S.-W. (2018). The investigation of relationship between mathematics teacher support and mathematical literacy: A secondary analysis of Taiwan PISA 2012 data. Taiwan Journal of Mathematics Teachers, 39(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.6610/TJMT.201804_39(1).0001】
连结：
林淑梤、张惠博、段晓林（2009）。促进实习教师教学学习的夥伴式实习辅导。教育科学研究期刊，54（1），23-53。https://doi.org/10.3966/2073753X2009035401002【Lin, S.-F., Chang, H.-P., & Tuan, H.-L. (2009). Partnership mentoring for improving mentees’ teacher learning. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 54(1), 23-53. https://doi.org/10.3966/2073753X2009035401002】
连结：

国际计量

〈TOP〉

E-mail ：

文章公开取用时，将寄通知信至您填写的信箱地址