中、彰、投地區國民小學校長兼顧有效性與倫理性決定的影響因素探討

The Investigation of Elementary Schools Principals' Effectiveness and Ethical Decision-Making in Changhua County, Taichung County, Taichung City and Nantou County

10.7044/NHCUEA.200906.0093

蔡金田(Chin-Tian Tsai)

有效決定 ； 倫理決定 ； 領導倫理 ； effective decision ； ethical decision ； the ethics of leadership

新竹教育大學教育學報

26卷1期（2009 / 06 / 30）

93 - 126

繁體中文

學校領導者每天的工作都面對著數量不一、程度高低不同的道德價值衝突，而這些道德價值衝突亦時時影響學校領導者如何在眾多的行爲中做有效的決定。本研究透過問卷調查，了解臺中市、臺中縣、南投縣及彰化縣四個縣市國民小學校長在面對行政倫理時，如何做出有效的決定。研究結果發現： 一、有效倫理決定各因素之平均數介於4.15至4.54間，在五點量表中表現尚佳。 二、校長服務年資、教育程度、學校所在地及服務縣市在有效倫理決定情境層面之得分上有顯著差異。 三、校長性別、服務年資、教育程度及服務縣市在有效倫理決定過程層面之得分上有顯著差異。 四、校長性別、服務年資、教育程度、學校班級數及服務縣市在有效倫理決定行爲層面之得分上有顯著差異。 五、有效倫理決定情境、過程及行爲三個層面之相關系數介於.542至.685之間，顯示有顯著相關存在。 六、有效倫理決定情境與過程層面能有效解釋決定行爲層面，其總解釋力爲48.9%。

School leaders face different amount and intensity of moral value conflicts in their daily work. In addition, the moral value conflicts affect school leaders how to make effective decision among numerous alternative behaviors. The research study adopts questionnaire survey to investigate the elementary schools principals in Taichung City, Taichung County, Changhua County and Nantou County how to make effective and ethical decision in the process of administrational decision. The results are as follows: 1. The average scores of the factors of effective ethical decision fall on 4.15 to 4.54. The factors appear in the 5-point Liker Scale. 2. The seniority, educational level of the principals, and the location of school in the setting of effective ethical decision-making are significant different. 3. The sex, seniority, educational level of the principals, and the location of school in the process of effective ethical decision-making are significant different. 4. The sex, seniority, educational level of the principals, school enrolment size, and the location of school in the behavior dimension of effective ethical decision-making are significant different. 5. Significant correlations are covered among effective ethical decision setting, process and behaviors. The correction coefficients fall on .542 to .685. 6. The setting and process of effective ethical decision-making can explain the dimension of behaviors effectively. The proportion of explanation is 48.9%.

1. 李佳玲(2002)。國小校長決定行為分析。學校行政雙月刊，21，28-40。
   連結：
2. Making ethical decisions
3. How we make ethical decisions
4. Blanke, V.(1993).Organization theory.Columbus, OH:The Ohio State University.
5. Ethical decision-making quick test
6. The global leader of the future: New competencies for a new era
7. Greenfield, W. D.,C. A. Capper (Ed.)(1993).Educational administration in a pluralistic society.Albany, NY:SUNY.
8. Making ethical decisions booklet-from the Josephson Institute of Ethics
9. Irene, W.,Cathleen, X.(2002).Decision-making procedures and ethics rules: The practical enablers of integrity and impartiality in telecommunication regulation.New York:Federal Communications Commission International Bureau.
10. Forum on educational and social cohesion
11. A framework for thinking ethically
12. Senge, P.(1994).The fifth discipline field book: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization.New York:Doubleday.
13. Sergiovanni, T. J.(1995).The principalship: A reflective practice perspective.San Francisco:Allyn and Bacon.
14. Starratt, R. J.(1994).Building an ethical school: A practical response to the moral crisis in schools.London:The Falmer.
15. Shiring the glory: Educational leadership in the future will emanate not from positions, but from knowedge, wisdom, the ability to persuade and a personal commitment to fairness and justice-education
16. Leadership across cultures: Aattachment style influences
17. Velasquez, M.,Andre, C.,Meyer, J. M.(1987).What is ethics.Silicon, CA:Santa Clara University.
18. Velasquez, M.,Andre, C.,Meyer, J. M.(1996).Thinking ethically: A framework for moral decision making.Silicon, CA:Santa Clara University.
19. Ethical decision
20. Wittmer, D. P.,T. L. Copper (Ed.)(1994).Handbook of administrative ethics.NY:Marcel Dekker, Inc.
21. 何志平(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺中市，國立臺中師範學院國民教育研究所。
22. 吳清山(2001)。教育行政人員專業倫理內涵之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（計畫編號：NSC89-2413-H133-010-S）。
23. 周百崑(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺中市，國立臺中師範學院國民教育研究所。
24. 林明地(1999)。重建學校領導的倫理學觀念。教育政策論壇，2(2)，129-157。
25. 張鈿富(2002)。新世紀教育行政績效責任的建構。商業職業教育，78，17-21。
26. 黃琬婷(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北縣，私立輔仁大學教育領導與發展研究所。
27. 楊振昇、王如哲合著(1999)。教育行政。高雄市:麗文文化公司。
28. 蘇芊遐(2007)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺南市，國立臺南大學教育經營與管理研究所。

1. 馮丰儀(2012)。中小學校長行政倫理議題知覺及其倫理決定影響因素之研究。臺北市立教育大學學報：教育類，43(2)，27-53。
2. (2017)。學校領導德行：組織權力的影響與才智成長對濫權病態的控制。教育政策論壇，20(2)，37-81。