本研究方向在探究臺北市公立幼兒園班級共同領導相關因素之研究。本研究方法為文獻分析法、問卷調查法及訪談法，問卷調查樣本以臺北市公立幼兒園教師為研究對象，共441人，樣本回收353份，回收率達80.05%；樣本可用332份，可用率75.28%。研究工具採用自編之「臺北市公立幼兒園班級共同領導調查問卷」。本研究統計方法為描述性統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾森積差相關分析、多元逐步迴歸分析等方法進行深入分析探討。最後，依研究結果進行討論與結論建議。研究主要發現如下： 一、班級共同領導與班級共同教學內涵及其現況： 班級共同領導包括形塑目標、實施協作及班級共同教學；依序為實施協作88.3分、形塑目標87.9分、班級共同教學86分，其中以實施協作獲得分最高。 二、不同背景變項在班級共同領導之差異情形： 研究發現在性別、服務年資、園所所在地區有顯著差異，年齡、最高學歷、園所班級數沒有顯著差異。 三、班級共同領導之相關情形： 班級共同領導與班級共同教學間，呈顯著的高度正相關，班級共同教學各分向度中，以共同討論幼兒的事情，與班級共同領導之相關程度最高。 四、班級共同領導的預測情形： 達成班級共同領導四個預測變項，對整體班級共同教學，具有顯著的預測力。 / The main purpose of this research is to study in the classroom co-leadership relevant factors of public kindergarten in Taipei. The research methods used was literature review, questionnaires investigation, and interview. The research instrument was distributed to 441 kindergarten teachers in Taipei City and 332 valid samples were used in this study.The data obtained was interpreted by using descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Scheffé posteriori comparison, Pearson’s product-moment correlation and Multiple Regression.This study finds reaches the following results： A. In the aspect of classroom co-leadership: 1. The teacher classroom co-leadership include : (1)Shape classes of common goal. (2)Implementation of the collaborative. (3)Classroom co-teaching. The perception of teachers were above average agreement of the three parts. For teachers, the best dimension is “Implementation of the collaborative” 2. Teachers’ sexual, years of service and location of school have significant influences on the teacher’s class co-leadership. But teachers’ age、highest educational degree and class number not have any significant influences. B.In the aspect of relationships among class co-leadership and classroom co-teaching: 1. There was positive correlation and regression existed among class co-leadership behavior and Reach classroom co-leadership. In the last part, the researcher, based on the findings, proposes some suggestions for the education authorities and the kindergarten teachers, and the future researchers, hoping to benefit the development of kindergarten education in the future.

自《幼稚教育法》推動以來，我國幼兒園開始採用每班安置教師二人，由兩位教師共同經營一個班級的做法。過去不少研究發現，合班關係有其效能及其必要性。因此，合班的教師如何建立有效的合班關係，並從中得益自我實踐成為重要的研究課題。 　　因為幼兒園工作環境充滿變化性、不確定性與壓力，加上教師們皆具有專業的背景以及在工作執行上擁有許多的彈性與自主權，學者們認為幼兒園合班關係，可以採用協力工作塑造的概念，進一步昇華幼兒園合班關係。Leana,Appelbaum,& Shevchuk (2009)就提出，幼兒園教師的協力工作塑造，有助於確保幼教現場的教學品質，除了對生手教師來說，有助於提升其工作成效，對熟手教師來說，也能夠協助提升其工作附加價值。 　　因此，本研究以質性研究方法，立意取樣三對獲得「教學卓越獎」的合班教師搭檔進行半結構式訪談，了解幼兒教師在合班關係中協力工作塑造的樣貌，包含幼兒園面臨問題時的解決與創新、工作職責與人際溝通之間的協調，以及自我認同等實務及歷程；待回收研究相關資料後，運用質化資料分析軟體MAXQDA進行訪談資料的分析，並進行編碼、整理與分析，以了解並探究本研究之待答問題。最後，透由訪談內容以質性研究方式歸納剖析其協力工作塑造之歷程與實務內涵。 　　研究結果發現，在協力工作塑造的歷程，可以分為四階段，分別為第一階段關係塑造、第二階段團隊建立、第三階段職責塑造與創新階段、第四階段為認同塑造。各個階段皆有其關鍵要件，在關係塑造的關鍵有四（含歷程性），為相互尊重、了解、欣賞、互信與學習；團隊建立階段為從個人至協力合作；職責塑造與創新階段為一動態歷程，視幼兒、雙方與班級學習情況而萌發；認同塑造的關鍵為自我認同的再強化、從自我認同到團隊認同。進而討論，協力工作塑造之概念於組織、團隊及個人之關係。

本論文旨在探究在台灣社會變遷的整體脈絡下，幼兒園教師身份認同境況與轉化的可能性，期能為台灣幼教體制的改革，提供倫理、社會與政治性層面之參考，並實踐批判教育學的核心目標：個體自我與社會集體的增權益能。 論文分為五大章節：第壹章從研究者身為一位師培者的經驗做為出發點，針對台灣教育改革與幼教現場特有的文化現象，以及在此現象中幼兒園教師的存在境況進行文化反思。第貳章分別從「認同的意義與基本性格」，「論述、權力與身分認同間的辯證關係」，以及「批判教育學的宗旨」等理論蘊意與相關學術研究與普查資料，耙梳幼兒園教師認同危機之可能的路徑，尋求出路。第參章則概述目前相關研究狀況，並說明「批判論述分析」之理論基礎與具體研究策略。第肆章為資料分析。經文本分析產出：「為什麼幼教要做到這個樣子」、「幼稚園變成我的興趣 就是我的工作」、「想要『真的』去帶班」、「在那邊 我會覺得說 好像被綁手綁腳的」、「『它不我要的』生活」與「想『回家』的代課老師」等六種幼師身份認同圖像。然後從「幼兒園組織氛圍」、「師資培育課程架構與施行方式」、「幼兒教育政策體制」與「傳統文化價值觀」等面向，分析潛藏於這六教師身份認同圖像底層的論述秩序與意識型態，以凸顯幼師主體權能與社會文化脈絡間的辯證關係。最後，第伍章則從今試從「重建幼兒園師資培育課程架構與施行方式」、「尋找國家介入的合理基點」與「啟動各階層間的『對話』機制」等三個觀點進行討論與建議。 / This dissertation attempts to fully describe Taiwanese preschool teachers’ identity and explores the possibility of their transformation in a changing society. It is hoped that this study provides ethical, social and political information for the reform of early childhood policy and achieves the core objectives of critical pedagogy, that is, the empowerment of individuality and society. This dissertation includes five chapters. The first chapter starts with the researcher’s personal experience as a teacher trainer, followed by her cultural reflections on being a preschool teacher under the educational reform movement and from the preschool site. The second chapter explains the theoretical framework from the perspectives of “the meaning and significance of identity”, “the dialogue among discourse, power, and identity”, “the political implications in education”, “the development of early childhood education in Taiwan”, and “the objectives of critical pedagogy”. Chapter Three reviews the related literature and explicates the theoretical frameworks of critical discourse analysis and specific research strategies as well. Chapter Four delineates data analyses and highlights the dialectical relationship between the subjectivity of preschool teachers and sociocultural context of Taiwan. Six modes of preschool teachers’ identity were emerged from text analysis. They were: (1) Why is the preschool education so tough? (2) Preschools interest me and so I work there. (3) I want to be a devoted teacher, (4) At the current workplace, I don't feel as carefree as I did at the previous workplace. (5) I don’t want to live this way, (6) Substitute teachers want to go “home”. These six modes were then analyzed in terms of different dimensions including “the organizational climate of daycare center”, “the framework and implementation of curriculum for preschool teacher education”, “the policy of early childhood education”, and “traditional cultural values”. The analysis was to explore the order of discourse and ideology underlying the preschool teachers who narrated their stories. Finally, Chapter Five presents discussions and suggestions for educational practice with three issues, namely, “reconstruction the framework and implementation of teacher education curriculum”, “the role of government in early childhood education”, and “activation of the mechanism for dialogue between all classes”.