變革能動者在學校持續改進中之角色

The Role of Change Agents in Continuous School Improvement

10.6384/CIQ.201601_19(1).0006

黃琳(Lam Wong)；霍秉坤(Ping-kwan Fok)

學校持續改進 ； 變革能動者 ； 能量建構 ； continuous school improvement ； change agent ； capacity building

課程與教學

19卷1期（2016 / 01 / 01）

135 - 170

繁體中文

學校持續改進是位教育工作者及研究者的夢想，且越來越受重視。筆者一直關注：學校持續改進的基礎是甚麼？學校持續改進的內涵是甚麼？本文嘗試從「變革能動者」這個視角，探討其在學校持續過程中的角色和影響。本研究集中探討一個研究問題：變革能動者在持續學校改進中扮演什麼樣的角色？本研究採用質性研究取向，因為持續的學校改進是一個過程，質化研究更容易探究其動態、不斷變化的過程。再者，本研究的對象是變革能動者，包括校外的Q計畫學校發展主任、校長、中層領導、具影響力的前線教師。筆者認為，質化研究能夠深入描述具有特殊性和複雜性的真實場景，也能加入研究者之理解與詮釋。研究結果表明：變革能動者在持續改進不同階段扮演不同角色；第一類變革能動者（校長）信念的形成是受到外在變革能動者所影響；外在變革能動者和第一類變革能動者能夠互相配合，推動學校實現持續改進；變革能動者還會根據不同情境採取不同策略增加能量。

Continuous school improvement is a dream for all educators and researcher. This issue has been getting increasingly attentions as time goes by. What the authors concern are: What is the foundation of continuous school improvement? What is the essence of continuous school improvement? This article attempts to inquire into the role and influence of change agents in continuous school improvement. This study focuses on one question: What are the roles of change agents in continuous school improvement? This study adopts qualitative research approach. As continuous school improvement is a process, qualitative research is appropriate to inquire into the dynamic and evolving process. Moreover, this study targets the change agents like school curriculum officers as external agents and school principal, middle management leaders and influential frontline teachers as internal agents. The authors believe that qualitative research may provide in-depth description for specialty and complexity of real contexts, as well as understanding and interpretation of researchers. There are four major findings in this study. First, change agents play different roles in different stages of continuous school improvement. Secondly, the formation of educational beliefs from principals as first tier change agents is influenced by external change agents. Thirdly, collaboration of external change agents and first tier internal change agents help to facilitate the continuous school improvement. Finally, change agents could adapt strategies for different contexts to build strong capacity.

1. Stoll, L. (2001). Enhancing internal capacity: Leadership for learning. National College for School Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org.uk/
2. Barker, J.(1990).Discovering the future: The business of paradigms.Burnsville, MN:ChartHouse International Learning Corporation.
3. Bradley, L. H.(2004).Curriculum leadership: Beyond boilerplate standards.Lanham, MD:Scarecrow Education.
4. Chiu, C. S.(2006).School improvement through a university-school partnership: A case study in a Hong Kong primary school.School Improvement and University-school Partnership Conference,Hong Kong:
5. Copland, M. A.(2003).Leadership in inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,25(4),375-395.
6. Creswell, J. W.(2014).Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.London:Thousand Oaks.
7. Datnow, A.,Hubbard, L.,Mehan, H.(2002).Extending educational reform: From one school to many.London:Routledge.
8. Fullan, M.(2014).The principal: Maximizing impact.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
9. Fullan, M.(1993).Change forces: Probing the depth of educational reform.London:Falmer Press.
10. Fullan, M.(2007).The new meaning of educational change.New York, NY:Teacher College Press.
11. Geertz, C.(1973).The interpretation of cultures.New York, NY:Basic Books.
12. Hale, E.,Rollins, K.(2010).Leading the way to increased student learning principal leadership.School Administrative,63(10),10-14.
13. Hall, G. E.,Hord, S. M.(2011).Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes.Boston, MA:Pearson.
14. Hall, G. E.,Hord, S. M.(2001).Implementing change: Patterns, principles, and potholes.Boston, MA:Pearson.
15. Hall, G. E.,Wallace, R. C.,Dossett, W. A.(1973).A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions.Austin, TX:Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, The University of Texas at Austin.
16. Hargreaves, A.,Fink, D.(2000).The three dimensions of reform.Educational Leadership,57(7),30-34.
17. Hargreaves, A.,Fink, D.(2006).Sustainable Leadership.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
18. Harris, A.(Ed.),Chrispeels, J. H.(Ed.)(2006).Improving school and educational systems: International perspectives.London:RoutledgeFalmer.
19. Harris, A.(Ed.),Day, C.(Ed.),Hopkins, M.(Ed.),Hadfield, M.(Ed.),Hargreaves, A.(Ed.),Chapman, C.(Ed.)(2003).Effective leadership for school improvement.London:RoutledgeFalmer.
20. James, K. T.(Ed.),Collins, J.(Ed.)(2008).Leadership perspectives: Knowledge into action.New York, NY:Palgrave Macmillan.
21. Kirtman, L.(2013).Leadership and teams: The missing piece of the education reform puzzle.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson Education.
22. Lee, J. C. K.(2004).Accelerated schools for quality education: Initial experiences of school change.Partnership and change: Toward school development,Hong Kong:
23. Lee, J. C. K.,Chung, S. Y. P.,Lo, L. N. K.,Wong, H. W.,Chiu, C. S.,Ho, E. S. C.,Leung, A. S. M.,Pang, N. S. K.,Sze, P. M. M.,Walker, A.,Xiao, J.(2002).The accelerated schools for quality education project: Final report.Hong Kong:Faculty of Education and the Hong Kong Institute of Educational Research, The Chinese University of Hong Kong.
24. Lee, J. C. K.,Levin, H.,Solar, P.(2005).Accelerated schools for quality education: A Hong Kong perspective.The Urban Review,37(1),63-81.
25. Leithwood, K.,Day, C.,Sammons, P.,Harris, A.,Hopkins, D.(2006).Seven strong claims about successful school leadership.Nottingham, UK:National College of School Leadership.
26. Li, Y. Y.(2004).Issues encountered by program facilitators during comprehensive school reform: The first year of the Quality Schools Project in Hong Kong.Educational Research Journal,19(1),93-120.
27. Lichtman, M.(2006).Qualitative research in education: A user's guide.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.
28. MacBeath, J.,Clark, B.(2006).The impact study on the effectiveness of external school review in enhancing school improvement through school self-evaluation in Hong Kong. Phase II report: Executive summary.Hong Kong:Quality Assurance Division, Education and Manpower Bureau.
29. Mitchell, C.,Sackney, L.(2011).Profound improvement: Building capacity for a learning community.New York, NY:Routledge.
30. Morris, P.,Adamson, R.,Chan, K. K.,Che, M. M. W.,Chik, P. P. M.,Ko, P. Y.,Kwan, T. Y. L.,Lo, M. L.,Mok, A. C.,Ng, F. P.,Tong, A. S. Y.(1999).Target oriented curriculum: Feedback and assessment in Hong Kong primary schools Final report.Hong Kong:Education Department.
31. Muijs, D.,Harris, A.(2006).Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the UK.Teaching and Teacher Education,22,961-972.
32. Murphy, J.(2005).Connecting teacher leadership and school improvement.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
33. O'C. Rust, F.(Ed.),Freidus, H.(Ed.)(2001).Guiding school change: The role and work of change agents.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
34. Perry, C.,Komesaroff, L.,Kavanagh, M.(2002).Providing space for teacher renewal: The role of the facilitator in school-university partnerships.Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,30(3),243-257.
35. Punch, K.(2014).Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
36. Riley, K. A.(Ed.),Louis, K. S.(Ed.)(2000).Leadership for change and school reform: International perspectives.London:Routledge.
37. Robinson, V.(2011).Student-centered leadership.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
38. Spillane, J. P.,Camburn, E. M.,Pareja, A.(2007).Taking a distributed perspective to the school principal's work day.Leadership and Policy in Schools,6(1),103-25.
39. Spillane, J. P.,Healey, K.(2010).Conceptualizing school leadership and management from a distributed perspective.The Elementary School Journal,111(2),253-281.
40. Strauss, A.(1987).Qualitative analysis for social scientists.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
41. Tajik, M. A.(2008).External change agents in developed and developing countries.Improving Schools,11(3),251-271.
42. Tung, R.,Feldman, J.(2001).Promoting whole school reform: A closer look at the role of external facilitators.International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement (ICSET),Toronto, Canada:
43. West, M.(2000).Supporting school improvement: Observations on the inside, reflections from the outside.School Leadership & Management,20(1),43-60.
44. West, M.,Ainscow, M.,Stanford, J.(2005).Sustaining improvement in schools in challenging circumstances: A study of successful practice.School Leadership and Management,25(1),77-93.
45. Wikeley, F.,Stoll, L.,Murillo, J.,De Jong, R.(2005).Evaluating effective school improvement: Case studies of programmes in eight European countries and their contribution to the Effective School Improvement Model.School Effectiveness and School Improvement,16(4),387-405.
46. 吳清山、王令宜(2012)。校長學習領導的理念與實踐策略。教育行政研究，2(2)，1-21。
47. 唐麗芳、馬雲鵬(2013)。以學校文化建設為視角的學校改進策略探索。教育理論與實踐，33(23)，14-16。
48. 張佳偉(2009)。博士論文(博士論文)。香港，香港中文大學。
49. 張佳偉、盧乃桂(2010)。學校改進的教師領導研究述評。教育學報，6(3)，35-40。
50. 梁歆、黃顯華(2010)。學校改進：理論和實證研究。上海:華東師範大學出版社。
51. 陳健生、霍玉英(2012)。學校管理層及教師對「能力導向」新高中中國語文科課程的理解：個案研究。教育學報，40(1-2)，95-114。
52. 陳聖謨(2013)。教育政策與學校對策－偏鄉小學轉型優質計畫實施之個案研究。教育研究學報，47(1)，19-38。
53. 趙志成、麥君榮(2012)。「優質學校改進計畫」在香港教育改革下的作用：學校領導的視角。教育學報，39(1-2)，39-66。
54. 盧乃桂(2007)。能動者的思索－香港學校改進協作模式的再造與更新。教育發展研究，12B，1-9。

1. 陳柳如、陳佩英、林佳慧(2018)。香港優質學校改進計劃對臺灣課程協作之啟示。課程與教學，21(3)，59-90。
2. 陳心怡,唐宜楨(2022)。從教師觀點來探討校園兒童參與權實踐之研究。聯大學報，19(2)，53-76。
3. (2021)。權力觀及課程觀對學校中層領導者課綱變革行為意向之影響。教育政策論壇，24(2)，107-139。
4. (2024)。學校中層領導者之領導與被領導期待──以臺北市國小主任為例。學校行政，152，59-92。