本研究旨在探討四技二專英文科測驗與高職英文課程綱要之互動，分別從以下三方面來探討: 一、四技二專英文試題的發展歷程。二、高職英文課程綱要在不同階段的特色。三、四技二專英文科試題與高職英文課程綱要之互動。 本研究採試題定性分析法，以分析81年至97年四技二專英文科試題及76、87、95年教育部所頒布之高職英文課程綱要，同時參考相關之測驗、教學研究論文，探討四技二專英文科測驗與高職英文課程綱要之互動。主要發現如下： 第一， 81-87年四技二專英文科測驗的重點在於僅測驗學生單項的語言知識，且偏重學生的記憶力而非綜合分析的能力，題幹也較少提供足夠的情境及線索供受試者參考。測驗的重點與課程綱要在某方面有相呼應之處，例如著重文法及單項的語言知識；閱讀測驗的取材雖多樣化，設計卻有不當之處；另外, 課程綱要雖重視聽說讀寫技巧, 但測驗僅能測出讀的能力。 第二，88-89 年試題轉變為漸漸著重整合式試題及語言的使用，例如，發音及拼字不再出現，且因課程綱要鼓勵老師使用溝通式教學法，所以測驗的特質亦略具溝通式語文學習，取材的內容著重與生活相關。當時的課程綱要亦有此特色。然聽、說、寫能力並沒有被測驗出來，題幹所提供的線索不足，文法測驗停留於單句的測驗，都是與課程綱要不符合之處。 第三，90-97年為試題產生最大變革的階段，90年教育部成立技專校院入學測驗中心，負責命題、建立題庫、分析試題、開發新題型等工作。因此90年度之後考試題型固定，溝通式語文教學及測驗目標確定，多為整合式題型，題幹有足夠的線索及情境，整體理解重於局部理解。例如：文法測驗併入克漏字測驗, 閱讀測驗需應用閱讀策略。此時的課程綱要著重後設認知理論，要學生培養有效的學習策略，測驗有反應此特色。但聽、說、寫能力並沒有被測驗出來,這違反課程綱要的目標。 此研究結果對於四技二專英文科測驗及高職英文教學有相當的啟示，是值得投注更多關注與研究的領域。

有鑑於近年來教育當局對於提升教師教育專業能力的重視以及陸續於一般中等學校計劃實施教師專業評鑑的努力，本研究旨在建構高中英語教師之教學專業能力指標，瞭解279位現職於22所公立高中之新北市高中英文教師對於各指標重要性看法之差異，並針對性別、學歷、學校規模、教學年資等社會背景的教師分析其看法之不同。依據文獻探討與專家效度實施之結果，共建立5大能力層面、13個向度、以及47個指標。問卷分析採用階層程序分析法(AHP)，得出各向度之權重值，排序結果如下： 1.規劃能力：教學規劃比課程規劃重要；這兩項中分別又以規劃適當教學活動及規劃教學程序為重要指標。 2.教學能力：溝通能力與英文能力尤其重要；這兩項中分別又以良好口頭溝通技巧及自我表達能力為重要指標。 3.管理能力：班級管理比資源管理重要；而班級管理中又以良好師生互動為重要指 標。 4.專業成長：掌握學習機會比進行教學研究與革新重要；而掌握學習機會中又以反思個人教學與追求專業成長為重要指標。 5.教學道德：工作態度比專業精神重要；而工作態度中又以與學校同事、學生家長、與附近社區建立良好工作關係為重要指標。 在各向度的指標中，與教學有關係者較受青睞。各背景的教師與所有教師的看法傾 向於一致，只顯示些微的差別。 依據研究結果，本研究亦針對教育當局及高中英文教師提出建議，對於未來研究方 向也提出一些看法，以期對英文教學有些許貢獻。 / Academic authorities have recently laid their prominence on upgrading teachers’ professional competence with the reform efforts of implementing evaluating professional competence on teachers in middle schools. The current study aimed to explore the indicators for evaluating senior high school English teachers’ professional competence, and at the same time, to provide English teachers access to improve and increase teaching efficiency by showing the rankings of indicators under each sub-criterion investigated from 279 English teachers with 4 social background variants in 22 public senior high schools in New Taipei City. The social background variants included gender, educational backgrounds, school size, and total teaching years. In accordance with literature review and expert validity, 5 criteria, 13 sub-criteria, and 47 indicators were established as evaluating standards. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) was employed and the results indicated that: 1. Planning competence: Teaching planning was more important than course planning. Planning appropriate teaching activities and developing teaching procedures were considered to be the most important in the two sub-criteria respectively. 2. Teaching competence: Communicative competence and English language competence were the first two priorities, but presentation of teaching materials the last. Good oral communicative skills and self-expressive ability were labeled as the most essential indicators respectively. 3. Management competence: Classroom management was rather prominent than resources management. Good teacher-student interaction was especially viewed as important in classroom management. 4. Professional development: Grasping opportunities to learn was taken more significant than conducting teaching research and teaching innovation. In grasping opportunities to learn, reflecting on one’s teaching and seeking professional development were seen as more important than others. 5. Teaching ethics: Working attitude was of higher significance than professionalism, especially establishing good working relationship with school staff, students’ parents, and surrounding communities. In conclusion, indicators which were more helpful to teaching were more favored. Despite their different social backgrounds, teachers tended to show similar opinions on the development of their professional competence. According to the results of the study, some suggestions were provided for professional development of English teachers, teacher training, gender differences of English teachers, teaching experiences, and future studies.