The content analysis of action research reports published by Bureau of Education in Taipei City

• Main Author: 郭詩宇
• Other Authors: 王保進
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2009
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/58288597715875256254

碩士 === 臺北市立教育大學 === 課程與教學研究所碩士班 === 97 === The purpose of this study is to analyze the content of action research published by bureau of education in Taipei city. By the method of content analysis, the researcher attempts to investigate the situation that the elementary school teachers participate in the action research, and compare the sameness and differences among these materials between various analysis categories. The subjects of this study included 208 articles which are from the second session to the ninth session of the action research reports published by bureau of education in Taipei city, including the category of the action research thesis and the innovation teaching activity research. Basing upon evaluation standard, the researcher develops the research instrument “Content Analysis Table of the action research thesis.” and “Content Analysis Table of the innovation teaching activity research.” Qualitative as well as quantitative analysis are both adopted to accomplish research purpose. Conclusions of this study are as follows: 1.The number of the innovation teaching activity research are more than the action research thesis; The number of the works are growing from the beginning, but decreasing after. 2.Surpassed more than half Taipei public or private elementary school action research works once to be elected superior especially or the optimal work, demonstrating that the ability of action research has promoted generally. 3.48 redundant prize's teachers are come from 16 schools, demonstrating that these 16 schools promote the action research well. 4.Many thesis of the action research, conform well the evaluation standard, but some work’s APA form are incomplete. The collection of the English literature is insufficiency. The reliance and the validity of the researcher develops the research instrument is insufficiency .The correction of research is not complete and lacks the discussion. 5.Many research of the innovation teaching activity, conform well the evaluation standard ,but some works lack the integration chart .Lacking the complete teaching activity process and the incomplete self-criticism discussion. 6.The especially superior and superior works are remarkable different in the material collection way of the discussion and the activation record, the other category are not remarkable different. 7.The especially superior and superior works of the innovation teaching activity research are not remarkable different in every categories.