中文摘要
本研究旨在探討國小教育相關人員對美國PDS的意見，及其在我國國民小學實施的可行性，並據以提出建議，期能有助於國小教師專業成長與實習教師導引之規劃與實施。
本研究兼採文獻分析、訪談，以及問卷調查法進行研究。並根據文獻探討、研究目的以及待答問題，編製「專業發展學校在我國國民小學實施可行性之調查問卷」，調查台北縣特約實習學校中國小學校人員、台北縣市、桃園縣教育局、教育部中教司等教育行政人員及九所師範學院教授，總計抽樣調查260名教育相關人員，有效回收問卷215份。並將所得資料透過平均數、百分比、單因子變異數分析、Scheffe''事後比較、χ2等統計方法考驗，獲得下列結論：
一、 專業發展學校在我國國民小學實施具有相當可行性
根據本研究調查結果，國小學校人員、教育行政人員和師資培育機構人員全體受試者對PDS的實施意見是傾向贊成的；同時，在訪談中，受訪者對PDS的理念亦表達了相當程度的認同。因此，PDS在我國國民小學實施具有相當程度的可行性。
二、 PDS的實施宜由師資培育機構主動和國民小學建立平等互惠的伙伴關係。
三、 PDS在國內國民小學實施有其限制因素，這些限制因素包括：國民小學教師負擔沈重、缺乏經費支援、教師對PDS概念認識不足、教育政策多變、國小文化保守、大學教授時間、臨床教學能力不足、酬賞誘因缺乏等。
四、 PDS若要在國民小學實施，需有具體的配套措施，包括：加強教師評鑑、提供參與PDS誘因、修訂師資培育法、給予PDS較高員額編制及預算之獨立等。
根據上述結論，本研究提出下列建議：
一、 強調每個人都是學習者合作者的PDS值得在國內推廣。
二、 審慎修訂政策與法規，堅持理想性與一致性。
三、 師資培育機構應延攬小學中優秀且具高學歷之教師，兼任實習指導教師。
四、 師資培育機構應鼓勵教授進入小學現場做「臨床教學」，並與想學教師共同合作進行教學研究。
五、 師資培育機構應鼓勵實習教師在師資培育機構輔導區內集中化實習。
六、 國小學校行政應規劃「小組合作學習」的實習導引方案，並提供實習輔導教師減授鐘點或超鐘點的待遇誘因。
七、 國小學校行政應加強與師資培育機構的合作，共同規劃實施現職教師的進修方案。
八、 加強對教師教學的視導、評鑑與考核。

Abstract
The purpose of this research was to investigate the feasibility of American Professional Development Schools (PDS) to be implemented into Taiwan''s elementary schools. This study tried to provide some suggestions that could be help professional development of elementary teachers and induction of student teachers.
The research included the review of related literature, survey method and interview method. A questionnaire was conducted to gather the data from 260 educational related peoples who include elementary teachers, educational administrators and teachers of Teacher College. Data analyzed through spss 7.0 for Windows, including frequency, one-way ANOVA and Chi-square and Scheffe'' posteriori comparisons(α=.05). The results of this study included the following:
1. PDS of American was to be implemented into elementary in Taiwan that has the feasibility.
2. The Teacher College should active the equal, symbiotic partnership of PDS for elementary school.
3. There will be some restrictions to carry out PDS in Taiwan''s elementary schools. Such as: more burdens of the elementary teachers, little expenditure of support PDS, the teacher''s insufficient cognition of PDS, inconsistent education policy, conservation of the culture of elementary schools, more time constraints and less capabilities of clinical teaching of the professors, lack of reward system.
4. Making PDS in Taiwan, we need concrete package as follows: Reinforcing the evaluation system to maintain school''s quality and teacher''s performance; provide some reward system for participating PDS, PDS ought to have more faculties and independent finance.
Finally, according to the conclusion of this study, the researcher made following suggestions:
1. The PDS which everyone is learner and collaborationors are worthy of spread.
2. The Teacher Prepared Law should be amended by the education administrative department to increase partnership concept of PDS.
3. Teacher College should employed elementary teachers who have Master and performance of quality of teaching as part-time cooperating teachers.
4. Teacher College should encourage professors to do clinical teaching and work cooperative action study of teaching with elementary teachers in elementary clinical sites.
5. Elementary schools should program "learning of team" for intern, and provide mentor teacher less class burden.
6. Elementary schools should reinforce collaboration with Teacher College, and together program professional development actions of experienced teachers.

美國「PDS」在我國國民小學實施可行性之研究
目 次
第一章緒論1
第一節研究動機與目的1
第二節研究待答問題3
第三節重要名詞釋義4
第四節研究範圍與限制5
第二章文獻探討8
第一節PDS的源起與發展8
第二節PDS的功能與組織14
第三節PDS的型態與特徵23
第四節PDS的運作與成效34
第三章研究方法58
第一節概念架構58
第二節研究工具60
第三節研究對象68
第四節研究程序70
第五節資料處理與分析71
第四章結果與討論72
第一節國小教育相關人員對PDS的意見72
第二節三類教育人員對PDS意見的差異79
第三節教育相關人員對PDS實施方式與配合措施之意見94
第四節訪談意見與討論114
第五章結論與建議143
第一節主要研究發現143
第二節結論151
第三節建議153
參考文獻159
中文部份159
英文部份161
附錄：167
附錄一：PDS發展指標與例子167
附錄二:「專業發展學校」在國民小學實施可行性之調查問卷（初稿）171
附錄三：預試問卷訪問摘要表177
附錄四：「專業發展學校」在國民小學實施可行性之調查問卷178
附錄五：其他意見選項表184
表 次
表2-1PDS特徵Ⅰ：學習社群的指標及其例子29
表2- 2PDS特徵Ⅱ：合作的指標與例子30
表2- 3PDS特徵Ⅲ：績效責任和品質保證的指標及其例子31
表2- 4PDS特徵Ⅳ：組織、角色和結構的指標及其例子32
表2- 5PDS特徵Ⅴ：公義的指標及其例子33
表3-1「PDS」在國民小學實施可行性之研究專家效度61
表3-2「PDS」各向度與題目之間項目分析摘要表63
表3-3題目與總問卷之α值64
表3-4問卷題目分類表66
表3-5問卷總數與回收率一覽表68
表3-6訪談對象背景摘要一覽表69
表4-1國小學校人員對PDS各向度的贊成程度73
表4-2教育行政人員對PDS各向度的贊成程度75
表4-3師資培育機構人員對PDS各向度的贊成程度76
表4- 4整體國小教育相關人員對PDS功能贊成程度77
表4- 5整體國小教育相關人員對PDS行政組織贊成程度77
表4- 6整體國小教育相關人員對PDS運作贊成程度78
表4-7不同性別國小學校人員對PDS意見差異之單因子變異數分析79
表4-8不同性別國小學校人員對PDS各面向意見差異之平均數、標準差及單因子變異數分析80
表4-9不同最高學歷之國小學校人員對PDS意見差異之單因子變異數分析與事後比較80
表4-10不同最高學歷之國小學校人員對PDS各面向意見差異之平均數、標準差及單因子變異數分析81
表4-11不同任教年資之國小學校人員對PDS意見差異之單因子變異數
分析82
表4-12不同任教年資之國小學校人員對PDS各面向意見差異之平均數、標準差及單因子變異數分析83
表4-13不同職務國小學校人員對PDS意見差異之單因子變異數分析84
表4-14不同職務之國小學校人員對PDS各面向意見差異之平均數、變異數分析與事後比較84
表4-15擔任實習輔導教師之國小學校人員對PDS意見差異之單因子變異數分析85
表4-16擔任實習輔導教師之國小學校人員對PDS各面向意見差異之平均數、變異數分析86
表4-17三類教育人員別對PDS意見差異之平均數、單因子變異數分析與事後比較87
表4-18三類教育人員對PDS功能面向意見差異之變異數分析與事後比較88
表4-19三類教育人員對PDS運作面向意見差異之變數分析與事後比較88
表4-20三類教育人員對PDS運作策略意見上的平均數及標準差89
表4-21三類教育人員對PDS運作策略意見差異的變異數分析及事後比較90
表4-22三類教育人員對PDS行政組織面向意見差異之變異數分析與事後比較91
表4-23三類教育人員對PDS行政組織架構意見的平均數及標準差92
表4-24三類教育人員對PDS行政組織架構意見差異之變異數分析及事後比較93
表4-25三類教育人員對PDS建立方式之χ2考驗95
表4- 26三類教育人員對伙伴關係型態意見之χ2考驗97
表4-27三類教育人員對PDS實習輔導教師服務年資意見之χ2考驗100
表4-28三類教育人員對PDS實習輔導教師學歷意見之χ2考驗101
表4-29三類教育人員對PDS聯絡員遴選方式意見之χ2考驗103
表4-30三類教育人員對PDS決策委員會代表意見之χ2考驗105
表4-31三類教育人員對PDS參與人員待遇之χ2考驗107
表4-32三類教育人員對於PDS實施限制之χ2考驗109
表4-33三類教育人員對PDS實施配合措施意見之χ2考驗111
表4-34國小學校人員參與PDS意願次數分配百分比112
表4-35教育行政人員參與PDS意願次數分配百分比112
表4- 36師資培育機構人員參與PDS意願次數統計百分比113
圖 次
圖2-1PDS的緣起、功能18
圖2- 2建構PDS六原則的關係圖35
圖2-3影響PDS運作的因素57
圖3-1本研究之概念架構59
圖4-1三類教育人員對PDS建立方式意見之次數分配百分比長條圖94
圖4-2三類教育人員對PDS伙伴關係型態意見之次數分配百分比長條圖96
圖4-3三類教育人員對PDS中實習輔導教師服務年資意見之次數分配百分比長條圖98
圖4-4三類教育人員對PDS中實習輔導教師學歷意見之次數分配百分比長條圖98
圖4-5三類教育人員對PDS中聯絡員遴選方式之次數分配百分比長條圖102
圖4-6三類教育人員對PDS決策委員會成員意見之次數分配百分比長條圖104
圖4-7三類教育人員對PDS參予者待遇意見次數分配百分比長條圖106
圖4-8三類教育人員對於PDS實施限制次數分配長條圖108
圖4-9三類教育人員對PDS實施配套措施意見之次數分配長條圖110

參考文獻
中文部份
中華民國教育報告書：邁向二十一世紀的教育遠景（民國84年）。教育部編印。
王朝茂（民國80年）。「美國Holmes Group報告」對我國師資培育改革的啟示。高市鐸聲，1期，頁71-80。
楊深坑、劉文蕙（民國83年）。我國實習教師制度之規劃研究。國立台灣師範大學專案研究。
行政院教育改革審議委員會（民85年）。教育改革總諮議報告書。台北：作者。
吳明清（民國83年）。教育研究﹍基本觀念與方法分析。台北：五南圖書出版公司。
吳明清（民國86年）。我國師資培育制度現代化的展望。載於國立教育資料館（編印）教育資料集刊22輯：師資培育專輯（頁256-267）。
林寶山譯（民73年）。國家在危機之中：美國的教育改革計畫。高雄：復文書局。
邱兆偉（民國83年）。美國師資培育改革的主導趨勢﹍PDS的發展與成果。比較教育通訊，33期，頁4-21。
邱兆偉（民國85年）。美國PDS理念的誕生與成長。比較教育通訊，39期，頁1-12。
師資培育法（民國83年公布，86年修正）。
師資培育機構從事地方教育輔導辦法（民國85年公布）。
高級中等以下學校及幼稚園教師資格檢定及教育實習辦法（民國84年公佈，民國87年修訂）。
教育實習合作契約（民國87年）。國立台北師範學院。
張紹勳、林秀娟（民國84年）。SPSS for windows 統計分析﹍初等統計與高等統計（上下冊）。台北：松岡電腦圖書。
符碧真（民國86年）。美國PDS對我國新制師資培育制度之啟示。教育研究資訊，5期，頁31-44。
報告與論文撰寫手冊（民國86年）。新竹：國立新竹師範院。
楊思偉（民國83年）。美國Holmes Group小組『教師專業發展學校』之探討。載於中華民國師資培育學會（主編），師資培育多元化與師資素質（頁17-33）。台北：師大書苑。
歐用生（民85年）。加強實習教師輔導。國立台北師範學院主辦：八十四學年度「師資培育」座談會資料。
蔡清華（民國86年）。美國師資培育改革研究。高雄：復文圖書出版社。
謝文英、胡悅倫（民85年）。特約實習國民小學實習指導教師遴選標準之研究。新竹師院學報。9期：411-447。
饒見維等（民國82年）。師範學院教育實習理論模式。輯於教育部編「八十學年度師範學院學術論文發表會（初等教育組）」（頁1-33）。教育部中教司。
饒見維（民國85年）。教師專業發展：理論與實務。台北：五南圖書。
饒見維（民國86年）。從「臨床教學」邁向「專業發展學校」。國立屏東師範學院主辦：85學年度「師範教育臨床教學」學術研討會論文。
英文部份
Abdal-Haqq,I（1989）. The nature of professional development schools. [On-line]http:www.aacte.org/dig489.html
Abdal-Haqq,I.(1992). Professional development schools and educational reform: Concepts and concerns. [On-line] http://www.aacte.org/dig912.html
Abdal-Haqq,I(1992). Professionalizing: Is there a role for professional development schools? [On-line] http://www.aacte.org/dig913.html
Arends,R. & Winitzky,N.(1996). Program structures and learning to teach. In F.B.Murray(Ed.), The teacher educator''s handbook:Building a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers. pp.526-556. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Auger,F.K. & Odell,S.J.(1992). Three School-University partnerships for teacher development. Journal of Teacher Education. 43(2). 262-268.
Beattie,K.I.(1993).Professional development school teachers'' perceptions of collaboration (staff development).[CD_ROM].DAI-A 53/08.
Bullough,R., Kauchak,D., Crow,N., Hobbs,S., Stokes,D.(1997). Professional development schools: Catalysts for teacher and school change. Teaching & Teacher Education, 13(2). 153-169.
Case,C,W., Norlander,K.A. & Reagan,T.G.(1993). Cultural transformation in an urban professional development center: Policy implication for school-university collaboration. Education Policy. 7(1). 40-60.
Carnegie Corporation of New York(1986). A Nation prepared:Teachers for the 21st century. The Report of the Task Force on Teaching as a Profession. (ERIC ED268120.)
Charter of Kansas University Professional Development School Alliance.(1998). Approved by the Executive Council.
Christine,E. & Don,W.(1995). Professional development schools: Do they have anything to offer to teacher education in Australia? (ERIC No_ED399218).
Colburn,A.(1993). Creating professional development schools. Fastback 352. Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. Indiana: Bloomington.
Clark,R.W. & Plcki,M.L.(1997). Professional development schools: Their costs and financing. In M.Levine & R.Trachtrman.(Ed.), Making professional development schools work(pp.134-158). New York: Teachers College Press.
Darling-Hammond,L., Bullmaster,M.L., Cobb,V.L. (1995). Rethinking teacher leadership through professional development schools. The Elementary School Journal.96(1). pp87-106.
DeWitt,P., Birrell,J.R., Egan,M.W., Cook,P.F., Ostlund,M.F. & Young,J.R.(1998). Professional development schools and teacher educators'' beliefs: Challenges and changes. Teacher Education Quarterly. pp.63-80
Dewmpsey,V., Hart,T. & Lynch,S.(1997) The story of two principals: Constructing leadership, balancing tensions, and creating relationships. In N.E.Hoffman, W.M.Reed & G.S.Rosenbluth(Ed.). lessons from restructuring experiences: Stories change in professional development schools.(pp.141-166). Albany: State University of New York press.
Gilstrap,R.L. & Beattie,K. (1996). The multiple roles of clinical faulty. Fastback 397.(ERIC No ED406370).
Goodlad,J.I.(1995). School-university partnerships and partner schools. In H.G.Petrie(Ed.). Professionalization, partnership, and power. (pp.7-22). Albany: State University of New York.
Goodlad,J.I.(1995). Foreword. In R.T.Osguthorpe, R.C.Harris, S.Black, & M.F.Harris(Ed.), Partner schools.(foreword). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Harris,R.C. & Harris, M.F.(1995). Launching and Suntaining a partner school. In R.T.Osguthorpe, R.C.Harris, S.Black, & M.F.Harris(Ed.), Partner schools.(foreword). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hawthorne,R.D.(1997). Impact on colleges of education. In N.E.Hoffman, W.M.Reed & G.S.Rosenbluth(Ed.). lessons from restructuring experiences: Stories change in professional development schools.(pp.295-322). Albany: State University of New York press.
Hayes,H.A., Wetherill,K.S., Tyndall,R.E., Hayes,A., Calhoun,D., Nolan,J., Grissett Z., Midgett,C., Dudley,M., & Brinkley,B.(1996). A new vision for schools, supervision, and teacher education: The professional development system and model clinical teaching project.(ERIC No. ED400229)
Herman,S.J., Dowhower,S.L., Killian,D.L. & Badiali,B.J. (1994). Liaisons: A journey in nurturing university-school partnerships. Record in Educational leadership. 14(2). 63-66.
Holmes Group.(1986). Tomorrow''s teachers. East Lansing, Michigan: Holmes Group.
Holmes Group.(1990). Tomorrow''s schools:Principles for the design of professional development school. East Lansing, Michigan: Holmes Group.
Holmes Group.(1995). Tomorrow''s schools of education. East Lansing, Michigan: Holmes Group.
Huang,A.M.(1998). Reforming teacher education: A simultanesous renewal model for school teachers and university professors.師範教育之課程與教學改革研討會(curriculum and teaching improvement in teacher education):台北市立師範學院主辦。
Huffman-Joley,G.(1993). Professional development schools: Meeting the challenge of change. Contemporary Education. 64(4). 208-209.
Karlsberger,H.C.(1993). Perceptions of teachers involved in the creation of professional development schools.[CD_ROM]. DAI-A 54/05.
King,K.M.(1992). The case of Montana High School: Professionalizing teacher development.[CD_ROM]. DAI-A 53/05.
Levine,M.(1988). Practice schools; Building a model.(ERIC No-ED313344)
Levine,M. & Trachtman,R.(Ed.).（1997）. Making professional development schools work: Politics, practice and policy. New York: Teachers College Press.
McDevitt,M.A.(1995). A virtual view: Classroom observations at a distance. Journal of Teacher Educatin. 47(3),191-195.
Murray,F.B.(1995). Design principles and criteria for professional development schools. In H.G.Petrie(Ed.), Professionalization, partnership, and power(pp.23-38). Albany: State University of New York Press.
NCATE Professional Development Schools Standards Project.(1998).[on-line]. http:/www.ncate.org/projects/pas/pasasatt.html.
Nevins,R.J.(1993). Classroom teachers as mentors: Their perspectives on helping novices learn to teach (novice teachers, learning to teach).[CD-ROM]. DAI-A 54/05.
Osguthorpe,R.T., Harris,R.C., Black,S., Cutler,B.R., & Harris,M.F.(1995). Understanding school-university partnerships. In R.T.Osguthorpe, R.C.Harris, S.Black, & M.F.Harris(Ed.), Partner schools.(pp.1-19). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rafferty,C.(1993). Animal, Vegetable, or Mineral: What is a professional development school?. Contemporary Education. 64(4). 223-225.
Rosselli,H., Perez,S., Piersall,K., Pantridge,O.(1993). Evolution of a professional development school: The story of a partnership. Teacher Education and Special Education. 16(2). 124-136.
Scales professional development school(1998).[on-line]. http://www.tempe3.k12.az.us/Scales.html
Sedlak,M.W.(1987). Tomorrow''s teachers: The essential arguments of the Holmes Group report. Teachers College Record. 88(3).pp.314-325. (ERIC No-EJ350136).
Shive,J.(1997). Collaboration between K-12 schools and universities. In N.E.Hoffman, W.M.Reed & G.S.Rosenbluth(Ed.). lessons from restructuring experiences: Stories change in professional development schools.(pp.33-50). Albany: State University of New York press.
Stallings,J.A., Kowalski,T.(1990). Research on professional development schools. In W.R Houston, Handbook of research on teacher education(chap15).New York: Macmillan.
Steel,S., Jenkins,R. & Colebank,D.(1997). The story of two changing teachers. In N.E.Hoffman, W.M.Reed & G.S.Rosenbluth(Ed.). lessons from restructuring experiences: Stories change in professional development schools.(pp.81-107). Albany: State University of New York press.
Stoddart,T.(1993). The professional development school: Building bridges between cultures. Educational Policy.7(1),5-23.
Teitel,L.(1997). Changing teacher education through professional development school partnerships: A five-year follow-up study. Teachers College Record,99(2),311-334.
Teitel,L.(1997).The organization and governance of professional development schools.In M.Levine. & R.Trachtman(Ed.). Making professional development schools work: politics, practice, and policy.(chap 6). New York: Teacher college Columbia University.
The professional development schools program. (1998).[on-line] http://www.uttyl.edu/~edc1/PDS.HTML.
Theobald,N.D.(1991). Staffing, financing, and governing professional development schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 13(2). 87-101.
What is a professional development school.(1998)[on-line].http://www.lee.k12f1.us/dept/sdc/grants/pds.html.
Willians,R.O.(1993). A professional development school initiative: Indiana State University''s story. Contemporary Education. 64(4).211-214.
Zeichner,K. & Miller,M.(1997). Learning to teach in professional development schools. In M.Levine & R.Trachtman.(Ed.), Making professional development schools work(pp.15-32). New York: Teachers College Press.