淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-0702201222133800
中文論文名稱 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群現況調查
英文論文名稱 A Research on Professional Learning Communities in Taipei Public Primary Schools
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 教育科技學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Educational Technology
學年度 100
學期 1
出版年 101
研究生中文姓名 莊智驛
研究生英文姓名 Chih-I Chuang
學號 698730016
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2012-01-06
論文頁數 142頁
口試委員 指導教授-何俐安
委員-朱益賢
委員-蔡秉燁
委員-何俐安
中文關鍵字 教師專業學習社群  教師專業發展 
英文關鍵字 professional learning communities (PLCs)  teacher professional development 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學教育學
中文摘要 本研究旨在探討臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群發展之現況,研究問題包括:一、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群經營之特徵的現況為何?二、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群目前之發展階段為何?三、臺北市公立小學教師、社群與學校背景是否對教師專業學習社群特徵認知造成顯著差異?期望透過調查結果,提出國民小學教師專業學習社群發展之建議。本研究利用問卷調查法,針對參與臺北市政府補助之教育部 99 學年度教師專業發展社群之 427 位公立小學在職教師進行普查,調查問卷依據 Olivier, Antoine, Cormier, Lewis 與 Minckler 等人(2009)編制之教師專業學習社群評量表(再編版)(Professional Learning Community Assessment-Revised, PLCA-R)經翻譯、專家效度檢測修改後作為研究工具。
本研究結論如下:
一、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群經營特徵以「合作式的學習與應用」最為明顯,「支持性的環境」最不明顯。
二、年資五年以內之新手教師參與臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群程度不高。
三、臺北市教師專業學習社群類型多為「專業發展主題型式」與「學科(學群)領域型式」;「年級型式」與「學校任務型式」社群數目相對較少。
四、兼任行政階級之教師參與臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群程度高。
五、男性社群教師面臨社群社群目標上、下不符的矛盾。
六、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群目前發展程度於準備期與創建期中期之間。
七、教師、社群與學校背景皆對臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群特徵認知程度造成差異。
文末並依據研究結果,提出對於社群教師、行政機關,及未來研究提出具體建議。
英文摘要 This study aims to investigate the current status of the professional learning communities (PLC) which are sponsored by the department of Education of Taipei city government. The research questions include (1) What is the current status of the characteristics in PLCs in Taipei public primary schools? (2) What developmental stage is PLCs in Taipei public primary schools currently in? (3) How do primary teachers’ personal background, different PLCs’ type and school background influence teachers’ perceptions of the characteristics shown in PLCs?
The study adopts a quantitative research method using a survey questionnaire to collect data. The survey was adapted from Olivier, Antoine, Cormier, Lewis, and Minckler’s (2009) Professional Learning Community Assessment – Revised (PLCA-R). The original questionnaire was translated into Chinese and was further validated through expert and user reviews to ensure content as well as face validity.
Study results are surmmerized as below:
1. Collective learning had the highest awareness level as well as surpportive environment had the lowest awareness level among the five dimensions.
2. Novice teachers with less than 5 years of ecperience had a low participation rate in PLCs in Taipei public primary schools.
3. Major types of PLC in Taipei public primary schools were professional development communites and subject field omunities.
4. Teachers with part-time executive posts had a high participation rate in PLCs in Taipei public primary schools.
5. Male teachers encounted the dilemma of inconsistency of visions between school and community levels.
6. The current stages of PLCs in Taipei public primary schools are between preparation stage and establishment stage.
7. There were gnificant perceptual differences among techers from different backgrounds as well as communities and schools with different backgrounds.
Based on the research results, the study provided several suggestions for community teachers, administrators, and future research directions.
論文目次 目 次
圖次………………………………………………………………………………………… vii
表次………………………………………………………………………………………… viii

第一章、緒論
第一節、研究背景與動機………………………………………………………………… 1
第二節、研究目的與問題………………………………………………………………… 4
第三節、研究範圍與限制………………………………………………………………… 5
第四節、名詞解釋………………………………………………………………………… 7

第二章、文獻探討
第一節、專業學習社群的意涵…………………………………………………………… 9
第二節、教師專業學習社群的發展內涵………………………………………………… 18
第三節、教師專業學習社群相關研究…………………………………………………… 31

第三章、研究設計
第一節、研究方法………………………………………………………………………… 37
第二節、研究架構與流程………………………………………………………………… 38
第三節、研究對象………………………………………………………………………… 41
第四節、資料搜集方法與工具…………………………………………………………… 43
第五節、研究信度與效度………………………………………………………………… 47
第六節、研究資料分析…………………………………………………………………… 53

第四章、研究結果與討論
第一節、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群基本資料分析…………………………… 54
第二節、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群特徵之整體分析………………………… 58
第三節、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群各特徵面向與發展階段分析…………… 68
第四節、不同教師、社群或學校背景變項對教師專業學習社群特徵認知程度分析… 77

第五章、結論與建議
第一節、研究結論………………………………………………………………………… 87
第二節、研究建議………………………………………………………………………… 90
第三節、未來研究建議…………………………………………………………………… 94

參考文獻
一、中文部份……………………………………………………………………………… 95
二、外文部份……………………………………………………………………………… 96

附錄
附錄一、建立內容效度問卷…………………………………………………………… 100
附錄二、建立表面效度問卷…………………………………………………………… 118
附錄三、預試問卷……………………………………………………………………… 130
附錄四、正式問卷……………………………………………………………………… 134
附錄五、臺北市九十九年度教師專業學社群核定名單……………………………… 138
附錄六、臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群特徵各題項平均數與答題次數統計表 140

圖 次
圖 3-2-1 研究架構圖………………………………………………………………… 38
圖 3-2-2 研究流程圖………………………………………………………………… 40

表 次
表 2-1-1 教師專業學習社群定義…………………………………………………… 11
表 2-1-2 教師專業學習社群成員…………………………………………………… 15
表 2-2-1 教師專業學習社群發展階段……………………………………………… 23
表 2-2-2 教師專業學習社群五大基本特徵與其特性……………………………… 26
表 2-2-3 教師專業學習社群特徵…………………………………………………… 28
表 2-3-1 國內針對教師專業學習社群之背景變相與社群發展相關程度彙整表… 36
表 3-3-1 本研究研究母群體統計表………………………………………………… 41
表 3-4-1 本問卷面向與題項………………………………………………………… 45
表 3-5-1 本研究內容效度檢測專家名單…………………………………………… 47
表 3-5-2 本研究內容效度修改建議………………………………………………… 48
表 3-5-3 表面效度教師名單………………………………………………………… 50
表 3-5-4 表面效度結果建議………………………………………………………… 50
表 3-5-5 本研究預試問卷與修改後各特徵構面信度係數………………………… 52
表 3-5-6 本研究原始問卷與中譯版之預試與正式問卷題項數目………………… 52
表 4-1-1 本研究樣本教師、社群於學校背景資料分佈統計表…………………… 54
表 4-2-1 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群特徵各題項平均數與統計表……… 58
表 4-2-2 平均得分排名前10項之題項……………………………………………… 61
表 4-2-3 平均得分排名後10項之題項……………………………………………… 62
表 4-2-4 男、女教師平均得分排名前10項之題項………………………………… 63
表 4-2-5 男、女教師平均得分排名後10項之題項………………………………… 64
表 4-2-6 有、無參與行政職之教師平均得分排名前10項之題項………………… 65
表 4-2-7 有、無參與行政職之教師平均得分排名後10項之題項………………… 66
表 4-3-1 臺北市教師專業學習社群各面向得分排序……………………………… 68
表 4-3-2 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群之分享與支持性的領導面向平均數
統計表……………………………………………………………………… 69
表 4-3-3 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群之共同的信念、價值與願景面向平
均數統計表………………………………………………………………… 70
表 4-3-4 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群之合作式的學習與應用面向平均數統
計表………………………………………………………………………… 71
表 4-3-5 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群之個人實務的分享面向平均數統計表
……………………………………………………………………………… 72
表 4-3-6 臺北市公立小學教師專業學習社群之支持性的環境面向平均數統計表 73
表 4-4-1 教師性別對專業學習社群特徵認知程度之T檢定分析表……………… 77
表 4-4-2 教師年紀對專業學習社群特徵認知程度的差異之面向分析表………… 78
表 4-4-3 教師年資對專業學習社群特徵認知程度的差異之面向分析表………… 79
表 4-4-4 教師職務對專業學習社群特徵認知程度之T檢定分析表……………… 79
表 4-4-5 教師最高學歷對專業學習社群特徵認知程度之面向分析表…………… 80
表 4-4-6 社群類型對專業學習社群特徵認知程度之面向分析表………………… 81
表 4-4-7 學校規模對專業學習社群特徵認知程度之面向分析表………………… 83
表 4-4-8 學校位置對專業學習社群特徵認知程度差異之面向分析表…………… 83
表 4-4-9 學校歷史對專業學習社群特徵認知程度差異之面向分析表…………… 85
表 4-4-10 研究結果各背景因素與各特徵面向差異統計表……………………… 86
參考文獻 丁琴芳(2008)。國民小學教師專業學習社群發展之研究。國立臺北教育大學教育政策與管裡研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。

王文科、王智弘(2009)。教育研究法。臺北市:五南。

吳清山(2010)。師資培育研究。臺北市:高等教育。

林思伶、蔡進雄(2005)。凝聚教師學習社群的有效途徑。學術研究。132,99-109。

李美葺(2010)。國民小學教師專業學習社群之推動與成效分析。逢甲大學公共政策研究所碩士論文,未出版,台中市。

周宏欣(2009)。台中市國民小學教師學習社群發展之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義市。

沈靜濤(2008)。教師專業發展評鑑與專業學習社群之個案研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。

施心梅(2010)。台北縣國民中學教師專業學習社群與教師專業發展關係之研究。輔仁大學教育領導與發展研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。

陳向明(2009)。社會科學質的研究。台北:五南。

陳如意(2009)。臺北縣國民小學教師學習社群之研究。國立臺北教育大學教育政策與管裡研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。

教育部(2009)。中小學教師專業學習手冊。臺北市:作者。

張淑宜(2010)。台中縣市國民小學學習社群與教師專業表現關係之研究。國立台中教育大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台中市。

廖俞青(2010)。臺中縣國民小學教師專業社群與專業發展關係之研究。中台科技學文教事業經營研就所碩士論文,未出版,台中縣。


Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Stoll, L., Thomas, S., Wallace, M., Gireenwood, A. et al (2005), Creating and sustaining effective professional learning communities. London, UK: DfES.

Bulter, D. L., Lauscher, H. N., Jarvis-Selinger, S. & Beckingham, B. (2004). Collaboration and self-regulation in teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 435-455.

Buysse V., Sparkman K. L. & Wesley P. W. (2003). Communities of Practice: Connecting What We Know With What We Do. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 263-277.

Cormier R. & Olivier D. F. (2009). Professional Learning Committees: Characteristics, Principals, and Teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Louisiana Education Research Association. Lafayette, LA.

Clausen, K. W., Aquino, A.-M., & Wideman, R. (2009). Bridging the real and ideal: A comparison between learning community characteristics and a school-based case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(3), 444-452.

Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597-604.

DuFour, R. & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practice for enhancing student achievement. Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

DuFour, R. (2004), What is a “professional learning community”?. Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6-11.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Eaker, R., & DuFour, R. (2002), Getting started: Reculturing schools to become professional learning communities. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.

Elbousty, Y. & Bratt, K. (2010). Team Strategies for School Improvement: The Ongoing Development of the Professional Learning Community, MASCD. Retrived September 10, 2010, from http://www.mascd.org/17311071491435113/blank/browse.asp?A=383&BMDRN=2000&BCOB=0&C=54833

Hord, S. M. (2004), Learning together leading together: Changing schools through professional learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Hord, S. M. (1997a), Professional Learning Communities of Continuous Inquiry and Improvement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. Texas.

Hord, S. M. (1997b). Outcomes of Professional Learning Communities for Students and Staffs. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.

Hord, S. M. (1997c), Professional learning communities: What Are They and Why They Important?. Issues about change, 6, 1-8.

Hord, S. M. & Sommers William A. (2008). Leading Professional Learning Communities: voices from research and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Hipp, K. K., Stoll L., McMahon A. & Huffman J. B. (2003). An International Perspective on the Development of Learning Communities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

Huffman, J. B., & Hipp, K. K. (2003). Reculturing schools as professional learning communities. Lamham. MD: ScarecrowEducaaghtion.

Huffman, J. B. & Hipp, K. K. (2003), Professional learning community organizer., In J. B. Huffman & K. K. Hipp (Eds.), Professional learning communities: Initiation to implementation. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Ingersoll, R. M. & Smith T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30-33.

Jackson, D. & Tasker, R. (2002). Professional Learning Communities. Cranfield, UK: National College for School Leadership.

Kilbane, J. F. (2009). Factors in Sustaining Professional Learning Community. NASSP Bulletin, 93(3), 184-205.

Levine, T. H., Marcus, A. S. (2010). How the structure and focus of teachers’ collaborative activities facilitate and constrain teacher learning, Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 389-398.

Newmann, F. M. & Associates (1996), Authentic Achievement – Restructuring Schools for Intellectual Quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc., Publishers.

Norwood, J. R. (2007), Professional Learning Communities to Increase Student Achievement., Essays in Education, 20, 33-42.

Leo, T. & Cowan, D. (2000). Launching Professional Learning Communities: Beginning Actions. Issues…About change, 8(1).

Leonard, L. & Leonard, P. (2003). The Continuing Trouble with Collaboration: Teachers Talk. Current Issue in Education [On-line], 6(15), Retrived August 13, 2010, from http://cie.asu.edu/volume6/number15/

McLaughlin, M. W. & Talbert, J. E. (2006). Building School-Bassed Teacher Learning Communities: Professional Strategies To Improve Student Achevement. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Miller, Q., & Kritsonis, W. A. (2010). Implementation of the ways of knowledge through the realms of meaning as a conceptual framework in professional learning communities as they impace/influence strategic planning in education. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal, 23(1 and 2), 2010.

Olivier, D. F., Antoine, S., Cormier, R., Lewis E., Minckler C., et. Al (2009). Assessing Schools As Professional Learning Communities Symposium. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Louisiana Education Research Association, Lafayette, LA.

Semadeni, J. F. (2009). Thinking change of professional development: a practical model of your school. Alexandria, VA: ASCD Publications.

Servage, L. (2008). Critical and transformative practices in professional learning communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(1): 63-77.

Stoll, L., Bolam, R., Mcmahon A., Wallace, M. & Thomas, S. (2006). Professional Learning Communities: A Review of The Literature. Journal of Educational Change, 7, 221-258.

Thompson, S. C., Gregg, L., & Niska, J. M. (2004). Professional learning communities, leadership, and student learning. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 28(1). Retrived June 4, 2010, From http://www.nmsa.org/Prublications/RMLEOnine/tabid/101/Default.aspx

U.S. Department of Education. Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology, National Education Technology Plan 2010. Retrieved May 10, 2010, from http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010.

Vescio, V., Ross, D. & Adams, A. (2006). A review of research on the impact of professional learning communities on teaching practice and student learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 81-90.

Wenger, E. (2007). Communities of practice: a brief introduction. Retrieved June 6, 2010, from http://www.library.nhs.uk/KnowledgeManagement/ViewResource.aspx?resID=270814

Wenger, E. & Snyder, W. M. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139-145.

Wenger E., McDermott R., Snyder W. W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2012-02-16公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2012-02-16起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信