教師互動之微觀政治分析：以初任教師為例

Micropolitical Analysis of Teacher Interactions: Beginning Teachers as an Example

10.6474/NCUJER.201109.0113

林奕成(I-Cheng Lin)

教師互動 ； 初任教師 ； 微觀政治 ； teacher interaction ； beginning teacher ； micropolitics

嘉大教育研究學刊

27期（2011 / 09 / 30）

113 - 140

繁體中文

本文藉由微觀政治學透鏡的檢視下，從意識型態分歧、利益爭奪之微觀政治觀點來探究初任教師與教師互動情況，並分析初任教師與其他教師互動時，所採取之微觀政治策略。研究結果（1）教師互動之科層體制與教學專業兩者意識型態分歧，需要有不同的策略來因應；（2）初任教師傾向學生中心與資深教師傾向教師本位之意識型態衝突，並使雙方互動會採取不同的策略；（3）初任教師與行政人員之利益搶奪關係，在於排課時段的事件而雙方採用不同的政治策略來因應之；（4）在有限資源、敬老文化之利益搶奪事件中，初任與資深教師各運用不同策略來爭搶利益；（5）初任教師可在公開協商的策略占有利發聲位置，若太過順從可能讓歷史重演而變成學校文化。

Through the scope of micropolitics, this study investigated interactions between beginning teachers and other teachers with a focus on their ideological discrepancies and competitions of interest and further analyzed the micropolitical strategies adopted by beginning teachers in their interactions with other teachers. Based on the qualitative research method, in-depth interviews with five elementary school teachers in urban areas of northern Taiwan were conducted. Through the micropolitical approach, this study clearly dissected teacher interactions to derive the following conclusions: (1) different strategies are needed to address ideological discrepancies between bureaucracies and teaching professionalism in teacher interactions; (2) ideological conflicts occur between beginning teachers who tend to be more student-centered and senior teachers who tend to be more teacher-centered and will compel both sides to adopt different strategies in their interactions; (3) competition of interest between beginning teachers and administrative staff occurs mainly over class scheduling, and both sides adopt different micropolitical strategies to cope with the competition; (4) in a resource-limited and seniority-prioritized context, beginning teachers and senior teachers adopt different strategies in competition of interest; (5) beginning teachers can take advantages of public negotiation to voice their opinions, and over-compliance may only let a history repeats itself and become a part of school culture.

1. 吳耀明、馮厚美(2007)。國小教師對九年一貫課程的看法及其實施狀況之比較研究。花蓮教育大學學報，24，225-251。
   連結：
2. 林曜聖(2003)。權力運作與衝突處理中的學校政治行為─校園微觀政治之概念、分析架構與方法。學校行政雙月刊，25，64-76。
   連結：
3. 范慶鐘(2008)。一所參與教師專業發展評鑑試辦計畫學校的微觀政治分析。教育科學期刊，7(2)，45-67。
   連結：
4. 陳玉玫(2009)。親師互動之微觀政治分析：教師專業主義VS 家長彰權益能。中正教育研究，8(2)，35-74。
   連結：
5. 陳幸仁(2008)。學校教師會運作之微觀政治分析：一所小學之個案研究。屏東教育大學學報，30，23-54。
   連結：
6. Abbott, A.(1988).The system of professions.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
7. Achinstein, B.(2006).New teacher and mentor political literacy: Reading, navigating and transforming induction contexts.Teachers and Teaching,12(2),123-138.
8. Ball, S. J.(1987).The micropolitics of the school: Towards a theory of school organization.London:Methuen.
9. Blase, J.(1989).The micropolitics of the school: The everyday political perspective of teachers toward open school principals.Educational Administrative Quarterly,25(4),377-407.
10. Blase, J.(1987).Political interaction among teachers: Sociocultural contexts in the schools.Urban Education,22(3),286-309.
11. Blase, J. (ed.)(1991).The politics of life in schools: Power, conflict, and cooperation.Newbury Park, CA:Corwin Press.
12. Blase, J.,Anderson, G. L.(1995).The Micropolitics of Educational Leadership: From Control to Empowerment.New York:Teacher College Press.
13. Brock, B. L.,Grady, M. L.(1997).From first-year to first-rate: Principals guiding beginning teacher.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin.
14. Burns, T.(1961).Micropolitics: mechanism of institutional change.Administration Science Quarterly,6,257-281.
15. Eagleton, T.(1991).Ideology.London:Verso.
16. Fenwick, T. J.(2001).Teacher supervision through professional growth plan: Balancing contradictions and opening possibilities.Educational Administration Quarterly,37(3),401-424.
17. Gagne, E. D.,Yekovish, C. W.,Yekovish, F. R.(1993).The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning.Harper Collins College.
18. Gilbert, L.(2005).What Helps Beginning Teachers?.Education Leadership,62(8),36-39.
19. Gordon, S. P.(1991).How to help beginning teachers succeed.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
20. Hargreaves, A.(ed.),Fullan, M.G.(ed.)(1992).Understanding teacher development.N.Y.:Teachers College Press.
21. Holye, E.(1986).The politics of school management.London:Hodder & Stroughton.
22. Hoy, W. K.,Miskel, C. G.(2001).Educational administration :theory, research, and practice.Boston:McGraw-Hill.
23. Hoyle, E.(1982).Micropolitics of educational organizations.Educational Management and Administration,10(2),87-98.
24. Huling-Austin, L.(ed.),Odell, S. J.(ed.),Ishler, P.(ed.),Kay, R. S.(ed.),Edelfelt, R. A.(ed.)(1989).Assisting the beginning teacher.Reston, VA.:Association of Teacher Educators.
25. Lindle, J. C.(1999).What can the study of micropolitics contribute to the practice of leadership in reforming schools?.School Leadership and Management,19(2),171-178.
26. Marshall, C.,Scribner, J.(1991)."It's all political": inquiry into the micropolitics of education.Education and Urban Society,23(4),347-355.
27. Mawhinney, H.(1999).Reappraisal: The problems and prospects of studying the micro-politics of leadership in reforming schools.School Leadership and Management,19(2),159-170.
28. Morgan, G.(1986).Image of organizations.Beverley Hills, CA:Sage.
29. Pfeffer, J.(1981).Power in Organizations.Marshfield, MA:Pitman.
30. Prawat, R. S.(1991).Conversations with self and settings: A framework for thinking about teacher empowerment.American Educational Research Journal,28(4),737-757.
31. Rebecca, L. W.、陳佩正譯(2006)。初任教師手冊。台北:心理。
32. Robertson, M.,Hancock, D.,Allen, L. A.(2006).Why Novice Teachers Leave.Principal Leadership (Middle School Ed.),6(8),33-6.
33. Ruane, J. M.(2005).Essentials of Research Methods : a guide to social research.Malden, Mass.:Blackwell.
34. Schempp, P. G.,Graber, K. C.(1992).Teacher socialization from a dialectical perspective: Pretraining through induction.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,11(4),329-348.
35. Schempp, P. G.,Sparkes, A.C.,Templin, T. J.(1993).The Micropolitics of Teacher Induction.American Educational Research Journal,30(3),447-472.
36. Scott, W. R.(2003).Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open System.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Education.
37. Scribner, J.(ed.),Layton, D. H.(ed.)(1995).The study of educational politics.London:Falmer Press.
38. Veeneman, S.(1984).Perceived problems of beginning teachers.Review of Educational Research,54(2),143-178.
39. Westerman, D. A.(1991).Expert and novice teacher decision making.Journal of Teacher Education,42(4),292-305.
40. Willower. D. J.(1991).Micropolitics and the sociology of school organizations.Education and Urban Society,23(4),442-454.
41. Wirt, F. M.,Kirst, M. W.(2001).The political dynamics of American education.CA:McCutchan.
42. Woods, P.(1996).Researching the art of teaching: Ethnography of educational use.London:Routledge.
43. Yukl, G. A.(1994).Leadership in organizations.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
44. 白青平(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北，國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所。
45. 吳宗立(2006)。國民小學學校行銷策略之研究：以高雄縣為例。初等教育學刊，24，13-35。
46. 吳清山(2004)。學校行銷管理的理念與策略。北縣教育，47，23-34。
47. 李春芳(1992)。協同教學法。中等教育，43(3)，54-59。
48. 李新鄉(2003)。從學校文化整合觀點看學校組織再造。現代教育論壇，9，87-91。
49. 林天祐編(2004)。教育政治學。台北:心理。
50. 林君齡(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北，國立師範大學教育研究所。
51. 林佳靜(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。嘉義，國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所。
52. 林信榕(2007)。校長領導與學校文化探究。台北:師大書苑。
53. 胡士琳(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北，國立台灣師範大學教育學系。
54. 張宜芳(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。屏東，國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所。
55. 陳幸仁(2008)。家長參與校務決策之微觀政治分析。國民教育研究學報，21，91-114。
56. 陳幸仁(2007)。微觀政治學：一個學校行政的新興研究領域。教育行政與評鑑學刊，3，67-86。
57. 陳奎憙(2007)。教育社會學。台北:三民。
58. 陳美玉(1999)。教師專業學習與發展。台北:師大書苑。
59. 陳意榕(2010)。家長選擇教師的作為之微觀政治分析。國民教育研究學報，24，89-112。
60. 蔡璧煌(2008)。教育政治學。台北:五南。

1. 吳雅玲(2021)。幼兒園教師美的和諧觀及其在人際互動的實踐。嘉大教育研究學刊，46，1-30。
2. (2021)。後疫情時代校長領導新思維與微觀政治策略。教育研究月刊，323，59-75。