從歷史制度論觀點剖析教師專業發展評鑑的政策變遷與延續

An Analysis of the Policy Changes and Continuities of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development - from the Perspective of Historical Institutionalism

10.3966/207136492018121103003

林思騏(Szu-Chi Lin)；陳盛賢(Sheng-Hsien Chen)

教師專業發展評鑑 ； 歷史制度論 ； 政策變遷 ； teacher evaluation for professional development ； historical institutionalism ； policy changes

師資培育與教師專業發展期刊

11卷3期（2018 / 12 / 01）

61 - 81

繁體中文

本研究採取歷史制度論的觀點，檢視教師專業發展評鑑政策變遷之內外生因素，探討教師專業發展評鑑政策之施行如何帶動教師專業發展，分析該政策各階段建構和影響因素，將整個教師專業發展評鑑執行變遷的路徑呈現。研究顯示教育部內部組織改造、教師專業發展評鑑轉型等因素為造成政策執行變遷的二個關鍵時期，而在各種危機與不可意料的非制度性因素中，擴大了我們對於教師專業發展的想像。其重點為：一、不同利益團體間對於教師專業發展評鑑的看法存在高度落差，進而以各種手段對該政策執行過程產生影響。二、雖然教師專業發展評鑑的執行過程暗潮洶湧，但受到教師必須要不斷成長且教師是專業等意識型態影響，該政策執行十年變易不大，對教師成長的意涵是一種無形的制度與典範的轉移。三、轉型後的教學革新模式與教師專業發展實踐方案並行不悖。唯實踐方案出現各縣市承辦人與教師對其純熟度與清晰度差異很大，恐造成「熟稔/陌生」及「熱衷/敷衍」兩極化現象出現，未來也可能還有虛應的問題出現。

From the viewpoint of historical institutionalism, this paper explored the internal and external factors influencing policy changes of teacher evaluation for professional development, TEPD, and the question as to how TEPD policies were implemented to trigger teachers' professional development. By looking into how TEPD policies were formed structurally at each phase and what factors impacted the policy during its implementation, this study presents the changing paths of the TEPD's implementation as a whole. The results indicate that changes in policy implemtation took place at two vital phases induced by the factors of the internal re-organization of the Ministry of Education and the transformation of TEPD. There are also climacteric, unpredictable non-structural factors during this period of time that inflate our understanding of teacher professional development. In short, the main findings are as follows. (1) With a huge gap between their understandings of TEPD, different interest groups tried various ways to influence policy implementation. (2) In spite of the periods of ups and downs, the policy has been implemented over the past ten years without major changes or revisions. The policy has created a paradigm and systematic shift for teacher professional development, because it highlights crucial ideologies such as ＂continuous growth as a teacher＂ and ＂teacher as a profession.＂ (3) The newly transformed teaching methodologies can be conducted concurrently with TEPD practices. However, it appears in each county/city that different teachers and different staff members in charge of the plan are not equally acquainted with the plan and that their comprehension of the plan varies significantly. In the future, a polarized predicament in terms of being familiar/unfamiliar and enthusiastic/perfunctory might arise, as could the problem of merely pretending to do the work yet not making any substantial progress.

1. 黃宗昊(2010)。歷史制度論的方法立場與理論建構。問題與研究，49(3)，145-176。
   連結：
2. Dagley, D. L.,Orso, J. K.(1991).Integrating summative, formative modes of evaluation.National Association of Secondary School Principals,75(536),72-82.
3. Egelson, P.(1994).,未出版
4. Ellen, M. I.(1998).The Theoretical Core of the New Institutionalism.Olitics & Society,26(1),5-34.
5. Gorges, M.J.(2001).New Institutionalist Explanations for Institutional Change: A Note of Caution.Politics,21(2),137-145.
6. Guba, E. G.,Lincoln,Y. S.(1989).Fourth generation evaluation.Newbury Park, Calif:Sage Publications.
7. Koeble, T.A.(1995).The new institutionalism in political science and sociology.Comparative Politics,27(2),231-243.
8. Pierson, P.(2000).Increasing return, path dependence, and the study of politics.The American Political Science Review,94(2),251-267.
9. Scriven, M.(1973).Educational evaluation: Theory and practice.Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.
10. Stronge, J. H.,Tucker, P. D.(2003).Handbook on teacher evaluation: Assessing and improving performance.Larchmont, NY:Eye On Education.
11. Worthen, B. R.,Sanders, J. R.(1987).Educational evaluation alternative approaches and practical guidelines.New York, NY:Longman.
12. 王金國(2015)。創造正向的教師研習經驗。臺灣教育評論月刊，4(10)，55-58。
13. 全國法規資料庫（2014b）。教師法。取自：https://law.moj.gov.tw/Law/LawSearchResult.aspx?p=A&t=A1A2E1F1&k1=%E6%95%99%E5%B8%AB%E6%B3%95 [Law-and-Regulation Database of the Republic of China （2014a）. Teachers' Act. Retrieved from https://law.moj.gov.tw/Law/LawSearchResult.aspx?p=A&t=A1A2E1F1&k1=%E6%95%99%E5%B8%AB%E6%B3%95]
14. 全國法規資料庫（2014a）。師資培育法。取自：https://law.moj.gov.tw/Law/LawSearchResult.aspx?p=A&t=A1A2E1F1&k1=%E5%B8%AB%E8%B3%87%E5%9F%B9%E8%82%B2%E6%B3%95[Law-and-Regulation Database of the Republic of China （2014a）.Teacher Education Act . Retrieved from https://law.moj.gov.tw/Law/LawSearchResult.aspx?p=A&t=A1A2E1F1&k1=%E5%B8%AB%E8%B3%87%E5%9F%B9%E8%82%B2%E6%B3%95]
15. 余致力編(2006)。新世紀公共政策理論與實務。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:世新大學=Shih Hsin University。
16. 吳俊憲（2009）。教師專業發展評鑑的推動與省思。教師專業發展評鑑專題演講。桃園農工。取自http://home.ntcu.edu.tw/~TEC/e_paper/e_paper_c.php?SID=90[Wu, C. H. （2009）. Promot ion and ref lection on teacher evaluation for professional development. Keynote speech on teacher evaluat ion for professional development, the Affiliated Tao-yuan Agricultural and Industrial Senior-High School. Retrieved from http://home.ntcu.edu.tw/~TEC/e_paper/e_paper_c.php?SID=90]
17. 呂炳寬、張峻豪(2009)。制度深化或制度演化：我國中央與地方政府覆議權的比較。臺灣民主季刊，6(4)，169-206。
18. 李明怡、范熾文(2008)。學校本位的教師評鑑制度。師友月刊，492(6)，27-31。
19. 林思騏、陳盛賢(2018)。教師專業發展：過去與未來。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:五南=Wu-Nan。
20. 胡婉玲(2001)。論歷史制度論的制度變遷理論。新世紀智庫論壇，16，86-95。
21. 孫志麟(2004)。師範學院通識教育的教學品質：評鑑的觀點。國立臺北師範學院學報，17(1)，329-354。
22. 翁福元(2009)。英國師資培育改革趨向。中華民國師範教育學會 20 週年會慶活動論文集，臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:
23. 張素女(2010)。臺中市=Taichung, Taiwan，私立逢甲大學=Feng Chia University。
24. 張晨、何華玲(2008)。新制度論與政治學：緣起、整合及其中國語境。廣西青年幹部學院學報，18(1)，80-83。
25. 教育部（2016）。教師專業發展評鑑將於106學年度起轉型為教師專業發展支持系統。取自：http://epaper.edu.tw/news.aspx?news_sn=51019[Ministry of Education（2016）. Teacher evaluation for professional development transformed into teacher professional development support sys tem since academic year 106. Retrieved from http://epaper.edu.tw/news.aspx?news_sn=51019]
26. 教育部(2008)。教師專業發展評鑑工作參考手冊。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education。
27. 教育部（2017）。教育部中小學教師專業發展支持系統規劃方向說明。2017 年04 月13 日， 取自https://ws.moe.edu.tw/001/Upload/8/relfile/7844/51815/be4db826-d04a-4c5a-8820-91c7991a4cde.pdf[Ministry of Education （2017）.Instructions of the teacher evaluation for professional development support sys tem in elementary and juniorhigh schools. Retrieved from https://ws.moe.edu.tw/001/Upload/8/relfile/7844/51815/be4db826-d04a-4c5a-8820-91c7991a4cde.pdf]
28. 曹勝(2009)。制度與行為關係：理論差異與交流整合。中共天津市委黨校學報，4，57-61。
29. 陳木金、邱馨儀、陳宏彰(2005)。從教師專業發展模組談教師進修研習系統建構。教師專業發展與規劃學術研討會論文集，臺北縣=Taipei, Taiwan:
30. 蔡相廷(2010)。歷史制度論的興起與研究取向─政治學研究途徑的探討。臺北市立教育大學學報，41(2)，39-76。
31. 簡紅珠、林進材、侯惠澤、張國恩、宋曜廷、林志成、莊蕙瑛(2012)。教師專業學習社群與教師專業發展。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:高等=Higher Education Publishing。

1. 李天申(2020)。臺灣行政法人制度推動歷程的歷史制度分析。政治科學論叢，86，151-190。
2. 林政逸(2019)。師資培育白皮書發布後師資職前培育和教師專業發展之省思。教育研究與發展期刊，15(1)，1-28。
3. (2022)。為民主服務：論中小學教師專業學習社群政策的挑戰與可能。教育行政與評鑑學刊，31，85-122。
4. (2023)。美國教師同儕協助與審查方案及其對我國教師評鑑與輔導之啟示。教育行政與評鑑學刊，34，1-38。