本研究主要在於建構公立高中教師教學評鑑指標，以供公立高中教師教學自我評鑑之用，並提供教育行政單位實施教師教學評鑑之參考。
為達到上述目的，本研究透過文獻探討，參考Danielson（2007）教學專業實踐架構（Professional practice－a framework for teaching）、德州（1986）教學視導系統（Texas teacher appraisal system,TTAS）、麻薩諸塞州（2005）中小學教師有效教學原則（Principles of effective teaching），形成評鑑指標初稿，再以半開放式德懷術專家問卷調查法，進行指標審查、修正與刪減。問卷回收後應用SPSS統計軟體中之敘述統計進行分析，以平均數、中位數、眾數判斷評鑑指標之重要性，以四分差判斷專家群看法之一致性。經由前後三次德懷術問卷調查統計分析之結果，獲得以下結論：
一、就教學評鑑領域的重要性而言，其重要性依次為：教學規劃準備、班級經營管理、呈現有效教學、實現專業責任。
二、就「教學規劃準備」指標重要性而言，其排序為「1」者有6項，分別為「1-1-2,1-2-1,1-2-2,1-2-4,1-3-1,1-4-4」；排序為「2」者有9項，分別為「1-1-3,1-1-4,1-2-3,1-3-2, 1-3-4,1-4-2, 1-4-3,1-5-1, 1-5-2」。
三、就「班級經營管理」指標重要性而言，其排序為「1」者有7項，分別為「2-1-3,2-2-2,2-3-1,2-3-3, 2-4-2,2-4-4, 2-5-2」；排序為「2」者有7項，分別為「2-1-1,2-1-2,2-1-4, 2-2-4, 2-3-4,2-4-1,2-5-1」。
四、就「呈現有效教學」指標重要性而言，其排序為「1」者有7項，分別為「3-1-1,3-1-2,3-3-3,3-4-1,3-4-4, 3-5-1, 3-5-2」；排序為「2」者有10項，分別為「3-1-3,3-1-4,3-2-1, 3-2-2,3-2-4,3-3-1,3-3-2,3-3-4,3-4-3, 3-5-3」。
五、就「實現專業責任」指標重要性而言，其重要性等級排序為「1」者有4項，分別為「4-1-3,4-1-4,4-3-1,4-4-1」；排序為「2」者有7項，分別為「4-1-1,4-1-2,4-2-1,4-3-3,4-5-1, 4-5-3,4-5-4」。
六、就專家群看法的一致性而言，其四分差數值介於.000至.500之間，顯示專家群的看法具高度一致性。
七、就教學評鑑指標之建構內容而言，本研究建構之教學評鑑指標包括（一）教學規劃準備；（二）班級經營管理；（三）呈現有效教學；（四）實現專業責任。4個領域，及20個規準、57個指標項目。
關鍵字：教育評鑑、教學評鑑、評鑑指標 / The thesis attempts to build teaching evaluation indicators for senior high school teachers. The indicators will be the reference both for teachers who want to self- assess, and for senior-high school administration which want to evaluate performance of teachers.
The teacher evaluative indicators are derived from famous teaching evaluative indicators: “Professional practice－a framework for teaching”(Danielson, 2007), “Texas teacher appraisal system, TTAS” (1986), and “Principles of effective teaching from Massachusetts Department of Education”(2005). Later, the raw indicators are reviewed, revised, and decreased by “semi-open Delphi”.
After analysed by SPSS, here comes 7 conclusions below, according to analyse the outcomes of questionnaire survey：
1) On importance of teaching evaluation area, the sequence is: planning and preparation, the classroom environment, effective instruction, professional and responsibility.
2) On importance of planning and preparation, the most important indicators are consistent of “1-1-2,1-2-1,1-2-2,1-2-4,1-3-1,1-4-4”, the second important indicators are consistent of “1-1-3,1-1-4,1-2-3,1-3-2, 1-3-4,1-4-2, 1-4-3,1-5-1, 1-5-2”.
3) On importance of the classroom environment, the most important indicators are consistent of “2-1-3,2-2-2,2-3-1,2-3-3, 2-4-2,2-4-4, 2-5-2”, the second important indicators are consistent of “2-1-1,2-1-2,2-1-4, 2-2-4, 2-3-4,2-4-1, 2-5-1”.
4) On importance of effective instruction, the most important indicators are consistent of “3-1-1,3-1-2,3-3-3,3-4-1,3-4-4, 3-5-1, 3-5-2”, the second important indicators are consistent of “3-1-3,3-1-4,3-2-1, 3-2-2,3-2-4,3-3-1, 3-3-2,3-3-4,3-4-3, 3-5-3”.
5) On importance of professional and responsibility, the most important indicators are consistent of “4-1-3,4-1-4,4-3-1,4-4-1”, the second important indicators are consistent of “4-1-1,4-1-2,4-2-1,4-3-3,4-5-1, 4-5-3,4-5-4”.
6) On coherence of professionals, lies between.000 and.500, shows highly coherence among professionals.
7) On content of teaching evaluation indicators, the evaluative indicators for senior high school teachers include 4 areas: 1. Planning and preparation, 2. the classroom environment, 3. Effective instruction, 4. Professional and responsibility. These 4 areas are consistent of 20 standards and 57 indicators.
Keywords: education evaluation, teaching evaluation, evaluation indicators
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0095911018 |
| Creators | 卓子瑛 |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds