標準本位政策脈絡下師資培育改革成效之評估：應用「行動模式／改變模式圖式」分析師資培育學程

Effects of Teacher Education Reform in the Standard-Based Policy Context: Analysis of a Teacher Education Program by Applying the Action Model/Change Model Schema

10.6209/JORIES.202006_65(2).0003

潘慧玲(Hui-Ling Wendy Pan)；洪秋瑋(Chiu-Wei Hung)

方案理論評鑑 ； 行動模式 ； 改變模式 ； 教師專業碩士學位學程 ； 標準本位師資培育 ； program theory evaluation ； action model ； change model ； teacher professional master degree program ； standard-based teacher education

教育科學研究期刊

65卷2期（2020 / 06 / 01）

73 - 104

繁體中文

國立臺中教育大學的「教師專業碩士學位學程」可說是臺灣近年來一項重大的師資培育改革方案，其在教育部倡議專業標準本位的脈絡下形成。為瞭解此一變革之成效，以及影響成效的中介機制，本研究以「行動模式／改變模式圖式」作為評鑑取徑。在前置作業中，採取文獻分析、文件分析與訪談方法，建立「教師專業碩士學位學程」之「行動模式／改變模式圖式」，本研究進而採問卷調查與訪談，檢視圖式中「改變模式」三個要素（課程實施、實踐反思、專業表現）之落實情形，以及該學程的課程實施成效（專業表現）受到實踐反思的中介情形。研究結果顯示，學程之課程實施、師資生之實踐反思與專業表現，均達中高標程度。另課程實施對於實踐反思與專業表現均有直接效果，惟實踐反思中的創新教學，不論對於整體的專業表現或專業表現的構面（專業實踐與專業責任）均產生顯著的部分中介作用；而實踐反思中的觀察反省，則對專業知能產生部分的中介作用。此意謂要造就一位專業表現良好的師資生，除了要有統整的課程設計外，尚須致力於提升師資生創新教學與觀察反省能力，方有助於專業表現效果的強化。上述的研究結果點出創新教學、觀察反省是師培方案要產生預期成果所需的中介機制，而此提供了師資培育改進之重要參考方向。

The Teacher Professional Master Degree Program launched by the National Taichung University of Education has drastically reformed Taiwanese teacher education in recent years. The Ministry of Education promoted this program in a standard-based policy context. To evaluate its effects, this study used the evaluation approach of action model/change model schema. In the preliminary stage, the program's action model/change model schema was constructed through literature analysis, document analysis, and interviews. Furthermore, the survey and interview data were collected to evaluate the schema's change model. Specifically, the implementation of the program and how students' practical reflection mediated the relationship between curriculum implementation and students' professional performance were explored. The findings revealed that the scores of curriculum implementation, students' practical reflection, and professional performance were all at a moderately high level. Additionally, it was found that curriculum implementation exerted main effects on students' practical reflection and professional performance. However, innovative teaching, as a dimension of practical reflection, partially mediated the effects of curriculum implementation either on professional performance or on its two dimensions (professional practice and professional responsibility). Observation and reflection, another dimension of practical reflection, also had mediated effect but only on professional knowledge. The study suggested that integrated curriculum design is crucial for cultivating students' professional competence and that skills of innovative teaching, and observation and reflection strengthen the program's effect on student performance. Those two skills are significant intervening mechanisms that enable teacher education programs to achieve anticipated outcomes, in turn providing a direction for improving teacher education.

1. 王麗雲, L.-Y.,徐銘璟, M.-J.(2015)。芬蘭師資培育制度特色及其對臺灣師資培育之啟示。教育實踐與研究，28(1)，167-205。
   連結：
2. 吳淑禎, S.-C.(2011)。中等學校師資培育課程的發展特色與教育專業課程的能力指標分析。教育研究集刊，57(4)，1-41。
   連結：
3. 沈翠蓮, T.-L.(2013)。芬蘭師資培育課程設計之探析。課程與教學，16(2)，115-134。
   連結：
4. 符碧真, B.-J.(2018)。素養導向國教新課綱的師資培育：國立臺灣大學「探究式─素養導向的師資培育」理想芻議。教育科學研究期刊，63(4)，59-87。
   連結：
5. 黃嘉莉, J.-L.,葉怡芬, Y.-F.,許瑛玿, Y.-S.,曾元顯, Y.-H.(2017)。取得中學教職的關鍵因素：運用決策樹探勘師資培育歷程。教育科學研究期刊，62(2)，89-123。
   連結：
6. 潘慧玲, H.-L. W.,陳惠次, H.-T.(2017)。應用行動模式／改變模式之圖式規劃臺灣的學習共同體方案。當代教育研究季刊，25(1)，109-131。
   連結：
7. Astika, G.(2014).Reflective teaching as alternative assessment in teacher education: A case study of pre-service teachers.TEFLIN Journal,25(1),16-32.
8. Baron, R. M.,Kenny, D. A.(1986).The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,51(6),1173-1182.
9. Blackmore, C.(Ed.)(2012).Social learning systems and communities of practice.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
10. Brouwer, N.(2007).Alternative teacher education in the Netherlands 2000-2005. A standards-based synthesis.European Journal of Teacher Education,30(1),21-40.
11. Brouwer, N.,Korthagen, F.(2005).Can teacher education make a difference?.American Educational Research Journal,42(1),153-224.
12. Carr, D.(2000).Professionalism and ethics in teaching.London, UK:Routledge.
13. Chen, H.-T.(1990).Theory-driven evaluation.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
14. Chen, H.-T.(2015).Practical program evaluation: Theory-driven evaluation and the integrated evaluation perspective.Los Angeles, CA:Sage.
15. Chen, H.-T.(2005).Practical program evaluation: Assessing and improving planning, implementation, and effectiveness.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
16. Chen, H.-T.,Rossi, P. H.(1983).Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach.Evaluation Review,7(3),283-302.
17. Darling-Hammond, L.(2006).Constructing 21st-century teacher education.Journal of Teacher Education,57(3),300-314.
18. Darling-Hammond, L.(2010).Teacher education and the American future.Journal of Teacher Education,61(1-2),35-47.
19. Darling-Hammond, L.(Ed.),Bransford, J.(Ed.)(2005).Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
20. Delandshere, G.,Petrosky, A.(2004).Political rationales and ideological stances of the standards-based reform of teacher education in the US.Teaching and Teacher Education,20(1),1-15.
21. DeLuca, C.,Bellara, A.(2013).The current state of assessment education: Aligning policy, standards, and teacher education curriculum.Journal of Teacher Education,64(4),356-372.
22. Department for Education(2010).The importance of teaching.London, UK:Author.
23. Donaldson, S. I.(2003).Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium.Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium,Mahwah, NJ:
24. Ellis, V.,Childs, A.(2019).Innovation in teacher education: Collective creativity in the development of a teacher education internship.Teaching and Teacher Education,77,277-286.
25. Evans, L.(2011).The ‘shape’ of teacher professionalism in England: Professional standards, performance management, professional development and the changes proposed in the 2010 White Paper.British Educational Research Journal,37(5),851-870.
26. Fullan, M. (2011). Whole system reform for innovative teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://www.michaelfullan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Untitled_Document_5.pdf
27. Hair, J. F., Jr.,Black, W. C.,Babin, B. J.,Anderson, R. E.(2014).Multivariate data analysis.London, UK:Pearson.
28. Hammerness, K.,Darling-Hammond, L.,Shulman, L.(2002).Toward expert thinking: How curriculum case writing prompts the development of theory-based professional knowledge in student teachers.Teaching Education,13(2),219-243.
29. Harfitt, G. J.,Chow, J. M. L.(2018).Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme.Teaching and Teacher Education,73,120-129.
30. Hayes, A. F.(2012).,未出版
31. Hennissen, P.,Beckers, H.,Moerkerke, G.(2017).Linking practice to theory in teacher education: A growth in cognitive structures.Teaching and Teacher Education,63,314-325.
32. Illeris, K.(Ed.)(2009).Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists… in their own words.London, UK:Routledge.
33. Körkkö, M.,Kyrö-Ämmälä, O.,Turunen, T.(2016).Professional development through reflection in teacher education.Teaching and Teacher Education,55,198-206.
34. Koster, B.,Dengerink, J. J.(2008).Professional standards for teacher educators: How to deal with complexity, ownership and function. Experiences from the Netherlands.European Journal of Teacher Education,31(2),135-149.
35. Kriewaldt, J.(2012).Reorienting teaching standards: Learning from lesson study.Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,40(1),31-41.
36. Peercy, M. M.,Troyan, F. J.(2017).Making transparent the challenges of developing a practice-based pedagogy of teacher education.Teaching and Teacher Education,61,26-36.
37. Rogers, P. J.,Petrosino, A.,Huebner, T. A.,Hacsi, T. A.(2000).Program theory evaluation: Practice, promise, and problems.New Direction for Evaluation,87,5-13.
38. Sachs, J.(2003).Teacher professional standards: Controlling or developing teaching?.Teachers and Teaching,9(2),175-186.
39. Shepard, L. A.(2000).The role of assessment in a learning culture.Educational Researcher,29(7),4-14.
40. Shulman, L. S.(1987).Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform.Harvard Educational Review,57(1),1-23.
41. Stein, L.,Stein, A.(2016).Re-thinking America’s teacher education programs.The Clearing House,89(6),191-196.
42. Strauss, A.,Corbin, J.(1998).Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
43. Torkzadeh, G.,Koufteros, X.,Pflughoeft, K.(2003).Confirmatory analysis of computer self-efficacy.Structural Equation Modeling,10(2),263-275.
44. Tuinamuana, K.(2011).Teacher professional standards, accountability, and ideology: Alternative discourses.Australian Journal of Teacher Education,36(12),72-82.
45. Valli, L.,Rennert-Ariev, P.(2002).New standards and assessments? Curriculum transformation in teacher education.Journal of Curriculum Studies,34(2),201-225.
46. van Ingen, S.,Ariew, S.(2015).Making the invisible visible: Preparing preservice teachers for first steps in linking research to practice.Teaching and Teacher Education,51,182-190.
47. Weiss, C. H.(2000).Which links in which theories shall we evaluate?.New Directions for Evaluation,87,35-45.
48. Weiss, C. H.(1998).Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.
49. Zhao, X.,Lynch, J. G., Jr.,Chen, Q.(2010).Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis.Journal of Consumer Research,37(2),197-206.
50. Zhu, C.,Wang, D.,Cai, Y.,Engels, N.(2013).What core competencies are related to teachers’ innovative teaching?.Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,41(1),9-27.
51. 孫志麟, C.-L.(2011)。未完成的任務：標準本位師資教育政策分析。教育研究與發展期刊，7(1)，1-34。
52. 國立臺中教育大學=National Taichung University of Education(2012).國立臺中教育大學精緻師資培育機制實驗計畫 101 學年度規劃書.臺中市=Taichung, Taiwan:作者=Author.
53. 國立臺中教育大學=National Taichung University of Education(2015)。,臺中市=Taichung, Taiwan:作者=Author。
54. 國立臺中教育大學=National Taichung University of Education(2010)。國立臺中教育大學（2010）。精緻師資培育機制實驗計畫暨 99 學年度執行規劃書。臺中市：作者。【National Taichung University of Education. (2010). Outstanding teacher cultivation experiment project and the annual plan of the 2010 academic year. Taichung, Taiwan: Author.】。
55. 國立臺灣海洋大學教育研究所（編）, National Taiwan Ocean University(Ed.)(2003).創新教學理論與實務.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:師大書苑=Lucky Bookstore.
56. 教育部（2016）。中華民國教師專業標準指引。取自 https://ws.moe.edu.tw/Download.ashx?u=C099358C81D4876CC76BC3215266429688C51908E957AA46905E6341D56A62851A40314B0A05FF07E70DA98A9E44900B9497C0A93BAC587500E24A292E10A6A2BB65507F43766DDB&n=07811C61371B5CA54CBEC56434173F52A8A9D5D76F836A5F3A5AE1424291856B3166B4CDA71986395175AA5CC6480592&icon=..pdf 【Ministry of Education. (2016). Teacher professional standards of R.O.C. Retrieved from https://ws.moe.edu.tw/Download.ashx?u=C099358C81D4876CC76BC3215266429688C51908E957AA46905E6341D56A62851A40314B0A05FF07E70DA98A9E44900B9497C0A93BAC587500E24A292E10A6A2BB65507F43766DDB&n=07811C61371B5CA54CBEC56434173F52A8A9D5D76F836A5F3A5AE1424291856B3166B4CDA71986395175AA5CC6480592&icon=..pdf】
57. 教育部=Ministry of Education(2012).中華民國師資培育白皮書.
58. 教育部（2018）。中華民國教師專業素養指引─師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準修正規定。取自 http://edu.law.moe.gov. tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL001781 【Ministry of Education. (2018). Teacher professional competencies guide of R.O.C. - Pre-service teacher education stage and pre-service education teacher curriculum standards. Retrieved from http://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL001781】
59. 黃嘉莉, J.-L.(2013).標準本位師資培育理念與實踐.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:國立臺灣師範大學=National Taiwan Normal University.
60. 楊思偉, S.-W.,陳盛賢, S.-H.,江志正, C.-C.(2008)。日本教師教育改革之研究。教育研究與發展期刊，4(1)，27-54。
61. 楊深坑（編）, S.-K.(ed.),黃嘉莉（編）, J.-L.(ed.)(2011).各國師資培育制度與教師素質現況.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education.
62. 潘慧玲（編）, H.-L. W.(ed.)(2005).教育評鑑的回顧與展望.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:心理=Psychological.
63. 潘慧玲（編）, H.-L. W.(ed.)(2008).教師評鑑理論與實務.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:國立臺灣師範大學教育評鑑與發展中心=Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, National Taiwan Normal University.
64. 潘慧玲, H.-L. W.(2014)。探思教師專業標準之發展與運用。教育研究月刊，243，5-19。
65. 潘慧玲, H.-L. W.,高嘉卿, J.-C.(2012)。臺北市國民小學試辦教師專業發展評鑑之成效分析：理論導向評鑑取徑之應用。教育政策論壇，15(3)，133-166。

1. 陳美如(Mei-Ju Chen);郭昭佑(Chao-Yu Guo);曾莉婷(Li-Ting Tseng)(2023)。國際課程評鑑研究課題與趨勢分析：2000－2020年。教育研究與發展期刊。19(1)。107-140。 
2. 黃嘉莉(Jia-Li Huang);武佳瀅(Chia-Ying Wu)(2022)。Content and Language Integrated Learning for Teaching the Theoretical Language of Sociology of Education to Preservice Teachers: A Quasi-Experimental Study。教育科學研究期刊。67(2)。243-268。