| Summary: | 本研究旨在探討幼托園所主管教學領導行為與教師教學效能之關係。首先瞭解幼托園所主管教學領導行為與教師教學效能之內涵及現況；其次分析不同背景變項在幼托園所主管教學領導行為與教師教學效能之差異情形；接著探討幼托園所主管教學領導行為與教師教學效能之相關，以及瞭解幼托園所主管教學領導行為對教師教學效能各層面之預測力。
本研究方法除了以文獻探討，分析教學領導行為與教師教學效能之理論與相關研究外，並兼採問卷調查法及訪談調查法。問卷調查之對象以基隆市、臺中縣、臺中市、彰化縣、南投縣，已立案之公、私立幼稚園及托兒所教師為母群體，採兩階段抽樣法進行取樣，共發出720份問卷，總計回收有效問卷493份（有效回收率68.47%）。使用之研究工具為自編之「幼托園所主管教學領導行為與教師教學效能關係調查問卷」，問卷回收後，採描述性統計、信度分析、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾森積差相關、典型相關、逐步多元迴歸及薛費法多重比較，進行資料分析。在訪談調查部分，乃針對十位幼托園所主管及教師，進行電話訪談。本研究所獲致之主要結論如下：
壹、幼托園所主管教學領導行為方面
一、幼托園所主管教學領導行為表現積極，其中以「發展支持的工作環境」表現最好。
二、「園所主管年資」在幼托園所主管教學領導行為達顯著影響；而「園所所處地區」、「園所性質」、「園所規模」及「園所主管最高學歷」在幼托園所主管教學領導行為未達顯著影響。
貳、教師教學效能方面
一、幼托園所教師教學效能表現良好，其中以「教學互動」表現最好。
二、「園所性質」、「園所主管年資」、「教師年齡」、「教師任教年資」及「兼任行政職務」在幼托園所教師教學效能達顯著影響；而「園所所處地區」、「園所規模」、「園所主管最高學歷」及「教師最高學歷」在幼托園所教師教學效能未達顯著影響。
參、幼托園所主管教學領導行為與教師教學效能兩者之關係方面
一、「幼托園所主管教學領導行為」與「教師教學效能」呈現正相關。
二、「幼托園所主管教學領導行為」對「教師教學效能」具有預測力。
最後研究者根據研究結果，分別對幼兒教育行政機關、幼托園所主管培育機構、幼教師資培育機構、幼托園所主管、幼托園所教師以及後續相關研究提出相關建議，以期對未來幼教的發展有所助益。
=== The main purpose of this study was to: (1) Investigate current situation of directors’ instructional leadership behaviors and teachers’ teaching effectiveness. (2) Explore the different influence effect of different variables on these two areas. (3) Analyze the relationships between directors’ instructional leadership behaviors and teachers’ teaching effectiveness. (4) Explore the predictive power of directors’ instructional leadership behaviors on the part of teachers’ teaching effectiveness.
To accomplish these purposes, literature review was adopted in addition to questionnaire and interview (telephone survey). In questionnaire aspect, the teacher subjects were included public and private kindergartens and nursery schools in Taiwan, specifically Keelung City, Taichung County, Taichung City, Changhua County, Nantou County by means of stratified two-stage simple sampling. “The Kindergarten and Nursery Directors’ Instructional Leadership Behavior and Teachers’ Teaching Effectiveness Questionnaire” was designed to collect the data. 720 questionnaires were delivered, and 493 were retrieved with an effective return rate of 68.47%. The questionnaire data analysis included description statistics, reliability analysis, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson-moment correlation analysis, canonical correlation, multiple stepwise regression analysis, and Scheffé’s posteriori comparison through the use of SPSS 10.07 for Windows. Ten directors and teachers from the sample of questionnaire interviews were selected for the telephone interviews. The major results were summarized as follows:
A. In the aspect of director’s instruction leadership:
a. Instruction leadership behavior of director is above average. For directors, the best dimension is to “develop a supporting environment”.
b. Directors’ service years have a significant effect on director’s instruction leadership. Kindergarten location, kindergarten category of public or private, school size, and highest educational degree of the director do not have a significant effect on director’s instruction leadership.
B. In the aspect of teachers’ teaching effectiveness:
a. Teachers’ teaching effectiveness is above average. For teacher, the best dimension is to “instructional interaction”.
b. Kindergarten category of public or private, directors’ years of service, teachers’ age, teachers’ years of service, part-time administrative position have significant influences on teachers’ teaching effectiveness. Kindergarten location, school size, highest educational degree of the director and highest educational degree of the teacher do not have significant effect on teachers’ teaching effectiveness.
C. In the aspect of relationships between directors’ instructional leadership behaviors and teachers’ teaching effectiveness:
a. There was a positive correlation between directors’ instruction leadership and teachers’ teaching effectiveness.
b. Directors’ instruction leadership was predictive of teachers’ teaching effectiveness.
In the last part, based on the findings, the researcher proposes some suggestions for the education authorities, the director training institutions, the teacher training institutions, the preschool directors and teachers, and the future researchers, hoping to benefit the development of preschool education in the future.
|
|---|
