| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣師範大學 === 教育政策與行政研究所 === 99 === Earlier studies on educational policy in Taiwan usually focused on policy implementation or evaluation, instead of the process of policy making. Concerning the policy of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development, it was put into trial in 2006. The policy is not favored by some interest groups. And a number of researchers are devoted to study the policy. However, mostly concentrate on surveys of policy opinions and comprehension, policy implementation and effects, without paying attention to policy-making process. Hence, the present study aimed to explore the historical background and policy-making process of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development, using the analytical framework of multiple streams. The research methods were semi-structured interviews and document analysis. The concepts of the three stream flows, policy entrepreneur, and policy window were employed to investigate the policy-making process of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development.
The present study concluded the findings as follows:
1.Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development is resulted from the increasing social concerns about students’ education right and teachers’ benefits. The public believe that there is need for a professional evaluation system for teacher in Taiwan.
2.The professional evaluation system for teacher was then proven not feasible. In response to the public opinions, the Ministry of Education in Taiwan on one hand began to deal with relevant public issues and on the other hand tried to promote other teacher evaluation system as an alternative.
3.The establishment of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development is propelled by the international trend of teacher evaluation system, the accomplishment of the first reading of Teacher’s Act draft, regional pilot experiences, and the social expectation for the promotion of teachers’ profession.
4.The variables for policy making of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development includes interaction among different interest groups, least improper influences from political parties, and the dilemma in drafting Teacher’s Act.
5.The development of policy advising for Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development includes four models of change: quantum, emergent, convergence, and gradualist change.
6.The agenda setting and alternatives development for Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development appears two models of change; one is emergent while the other is gradualist change
7.The three streams of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development influence one another during the process and stably evolve into maturity.
8.The policy window of Teacher Evaluation for Professional Development is opened when the stream flows meet one other, because of the long-term efforts of many policy entrepreneurs. In the process, the window has gone through the stages of disappearing and re-appearing.
Suggestions were made to the government, interest groups, incumbent teachers, legistrators, other policies and further researches in the future.
|
|---|
