師資養成公費制度之歷史探究 A Historical Approach on the Government-Funded System for Teacher Preparation

• Main Author: 黃嘉莉 Jia-Li Huang
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: National Taiwan Normal University 2019-06-01
• Series: Journal of Research in Education Sciences
• Subjects: 公費制度; 師資培育公費制度; 師範教育公費制度; government-funded system; government-funded system of normal education; government-funded system of teacher education
• Online Access: http://jories.ntnu.edu.tw/jres/PaperContent.aspx?cid=238&ItemId=1703&loc=tw#

本研究以 1994 年《師資培育法》為準，區分為國家以公費培育整體師資的「師範教育公費制度」，以及公費培育部分師資的「師資培育公費制度」，探究公費制度發展之設計目的、演進及其限制。經過歷史探究後，歸納之結論如下：一、公費制度設計目的從養成國家教師 再到均衡區域師資，其功能包括吸引優秀人才穩定教師素質與促進社會流動；二、隨著社會環境變遷，師資培育公費制度包括公費待遇、服務義務、賠償公費等規定，與師範教育公費制度的原先設計差異不大；三、師範教育公費制度的舊問題延續至師資培育公費制度，包括公費制度未因師資培育模式不同而免其存在受到質疑、培養教師專業知能與態度功能有限及公費制度吸引優秀人才有限，使其新制度是否能解決均衡區域師資的目的，仍有待檢驗。 This study used Taiwan’s Teacher Education Act of 1994 as a cut-point for distinguishing normal education (fully funded) and teacher education (partially funded) government-funded systems, examining the design concept and limitation of government-funded systems. This study’s findings of a historical approach analysis are: (1) The objective of developing the government-funded systems is to prepare national teachers during normal education stage and strive for regional equity in the context of teacher education openness; the function of government-funded is to attract talents and promote social mobility. (2) The treatment, obligation, and compensation of government-funded of teacher education were little difference in time between normal education and teacher education with social change. (3) Limitations on the design of the government-funded system during normal education to current in diversity teacher education are the existence of government-funded system is questioned, the limitation to prepare perspective teachers’ professional knowledge and competence, and the limitation of attraction to talent. The goal of new institution to equalize the teacher quality between different regional is still be reviewed in the future. As a result, the paper offers some suggestions that focus on the limits of government-funded teacher education through perspectives after historical analysis to be as reference for revising relative institution.