臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

摘要
本研究旨在探討基隆國民小學教師信任知覺與教師自我效能之關係，並比較不同背景變項對教師信任知覺與教師自我效能的影響。
本研究以文獻分析及問卷調查法為主。以分層隨機抽樣的方式抽取基隆市16所公立國民小學教師233位，問卷回收有效樣本共215份，回收率為92.27﹪；所得資料以SPSS統計軟體進行描述統計分析、t考驗、單因子變異數分析及積差相關分析、多元迴歸分析等統計方法處理。歸納實證研究的發現，本研究獲致以下結論：
一、基隆市國民小學整體而言，具有良好的信任知覺與教師自我效能。
二、基隆國小教師在信任知覺各向度得分皆高於量表中數，其中以「善意關切」、「教學可靠」得分最高，其次是「開放接納」，而在「專業能力」、「誠實可信」得分較低，仍有待加強。
三、基隆國小教師在教師自我效能各向度得分皆高於量表中數，教師自我效能的得分，也皆超過量表中數，以「班級管理」得分最高，其次為「學習評量」與「教學執行」，而在「教學革新」、「環境轉化」、「親師溝通」信心較低，可以得知教師對外在的因素降低自我效能信念。
四、教師信任知覺會因年齡、職務、服務年資、學校規模不同而在某些因素層面達顯著差異。
五、教師自我效能會因性別、職務、學校規模、班級規模不同而在某些因素層面達顯著差異。
六、教師信任知覺與教師自我效能呈正的相關（r＝.46），並具預測能力。
根據本研究結果對教育行政機關、師資培育機構、學校行政人員及國民小教師提出建議。
關鍵詞：教師信任知覺、教師自我效能、國民小學

Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore the relation between teachers’ trust perception and teachers’ self-efficacy of the elementary schools in Keelung, and to examine the effects of teachers’ backgrounds variables.
The methods of this study are literature review and questionnaire survey. Copies of the questionnaire were distributed to 233 teachers from 16 public elementary schools randomly selected in Keelung and 215 of the distributed copies were returned as valid. The return rate was 92.27%. The data collected from the valid questionnaires are analyzed by SPSS program such as descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson correlation analysis, and multiple regression.
The major conclusions of this study are listed as following:
1. Teachers’ trust perception and teachers’ self- efficacy are above the average level.
2. The ratings of various aspects about teachers’ trust perception are higher than the median scores. The ratings of “benevolent regards” and “teaching reliability” are the highest and the second one is “open-minded”. However, the ratings of “professional capability” and “honesty & credibility” are relatively low.
3. The ratings of various facets about teachers’ self-efficacy are higher than the median scores . “Class management” obtains the highest rating. The facets of “learning assessment” and “teaching practics” get the second high rating. But the facets of “teaching reform”, “environment transformation” and “teacher-parent communication” obtain relatively low ratings. It displays that teachers lower their self-efficacy conviction when they face the extrinsic factors.
4. There are significant differences in some aspects of teachers’ trust perception due to the influences of teachers’ background variables such as : ages, positions, service years and the size of schools.
5. There are significant differences in some aspects of teachers’ self-efficacy perception due to the influences of teachers’ background variables such as : genders, positions, the size of schools and class size.
6. Teachers’ trust perception and teachers’ self-efficacy are positively correlated
(r = .46) with each other.
Based on the above results, some suggestions are proposed for education authorities, teacher education institutions, school administrators and teachers in elementary schools.
Key words:teacher trust perception, teacher self-efficacy, elementary schools

目次
第一章 緒論 -------------------------------------------- 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 ------------------------------- 1
第二節 研究問題-------------------------------------- 3
第三節 名詞解釋-------------------------------------- 4
第四節 研究方法與步驟-------------------------------- 5
第五節 研究範圍與限制-------------------------------- 7
第二章 文獻探討---------------------------------------- 9
第一節 教師信任知覺---------------------------------- 9
第二節 教師自我效能----------------------------------22
第三節 教師信任知覺與教師自我效能相關研究------------39
第三章 研究設計-----------------------------------------47
第一節 研究架構--------------------------------------47
第二節 研究假設--------------------------------------49
第三節 研究對象--------------------------------------50
第四節 研究工具--------------------------------------54第五節 資料處理--------------------------------------72
第四章 研究結果與討論-----------------------------------77
第一節 教師信任知覺的現況與分析----------------------77
第二節 教師自我效能的現況與分析---------------------107
第三節 教師信任知覺與教師自我效能的相關與多元迴歸分析
---------------------------------------------136
第五章 結論與建議--------------------------------------145
第一節 研究發現-------------------------------------145
第二節 結論-----------------------------------------147
第三節 建議-----------------------------------------150

參考文獻
壹、中文部分
王為傑（2000）。國際教師教育的模式取向、發展趨勢與相關研究。
上海：教育科研008，34-37，2000。
尹萍（民94）。為什麼現在要信任。台北市：天下雜誌，第324期。
方鈺如（民91）。「人際信任、社會資本與工作滿意度之相關性研究」，碩士論文，國立台灣海洋大學航運管理學系研究所。
王文科（民89）。教育研究法（4版）。台北市：五南。
王受榮（民81）。我國國民中小學教師效能感及其影響因素之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，臺北。
王怡琦（民90）一位高教師效能感之國中教師。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
王湘栗（民86）。國民小學教師關注與教師效能感之研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
白雲霞、蘇淑嫣（民82）。國小學童對教師信任態度量表之編製及研究。台南師院學生學刊，14，13-38。
Robbins S.P.原著 李青芬、李雅婷、趙慕芬 編譯，（民91）組織行為。台北市 ，華泰書局。
李俊湖（民81）。國小教師專業成長與教學效能關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
李國瑜（民90）。知識移轉的整合模式--知識特性、吸收能力與社會資本。國立政治大學企業管理研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
李駱遜（民90）。紐西蘭生活相關課程實施的教育經驗。 2001年教育改革與檢討會議 ，國立教育研究院，台北市。
李粵強（民90）。團隊績效管理導向對組織信任及組織團隊績效影響之研究。未出版之碩士論文。朝陽科技大學企業管理研究所。
何郁玲（民88）。中小學教師職業倦怠、教師效能感與生命意義感關係之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
林明地等譯(民92)。教育行政學。W.Hoy & C.G.Miskel原著。高雄：麗文文化事業。
林惠真(民84)。家長如何走進老師教學之中。台北：小暢書房。
林惠真（民88）。海闊天空開放教育。台北市：聯經。
周新富(民80)。國民小學教師專業承諾、教師效能信念與學生學業成就關係之研究。未出版之碩士論文。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所。
吳明隆（民89）。SPSS統計應用實務。台北市，松崗。
吳明隆（民94）。統計應用學習實務。台北市，知城數位科技股份有限公司。
吳清山（民86）。學校行政。台北：心理。
M.E.Gredler原著。吳幸宜譯(民83)。學習理論與教學應用。台北：心理出版社。
吳璧如(民 89) 。教師效能感之內涵分析。教育研習資訊，第17卷第5期。國立教育研究院。
胡小慧（民92）。台南市國中補校學生對教師信任感與學習成就關係之研究。碩士論文，國立中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所。
洪瑞峰（民89）。台北縣巿國小教師效能感與家長參與班級教育活動關係之研究。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
洪莉竹（民93）。學校輔導人員專業倫理困境的文化脈絡—關係與角色。第七屆華人心理與行為科際學術研討會。臺灣大學心理學系暨研究所主辦。
邱柏翔（民90）。國民小學教師效能之研究：以桃園縣為例。國立臺北師範學院國民教育。
戚樹誠、羅新興、黃敏萍（民87）。「組織成員的人際信任與言論禁忌之關聯性—以國軍軍官為研究樣本」。台大管理論叢，9（1），pp.177-200。
孫志麟(民80)。國民小學教師自我效能及其相關因素之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
孫志麟（民88）。教師自我效能：有效教學的關鍵。教育研究資訊，７(６)，170-187。
孫志麟（民92）。教師自我效能的概念與測量。教育心理學報
，34（2），139-156。
孫志麗（民93）。從社會資本的概念入手分析社會資本的性別差異。
　　民95年3月28日，取自「中國社會學網」：http://www.sociology.cass.cn/trsweb/search.wct?channelid=1951
基隆市政府（民94）。基隆市政府暨所屬各機關學校職員通訊錄。
基隆市，人事室。
陳怡靖、鄭燿男（民89）。台灣地區教育階層化之變遷—檢證社會資本論、文化資本論及財物資本論在台灣的適用性。人文及社會科學，10（3），416～434。
陳蘭馨（民87）。教師人格特質、自我效能、學生行為與班級經營風格之相關研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
陳慧敏(民92)。國民小學教師之校長教學領導知覺與自我效能關係之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
許道然（民91）。組織公民行為之研究。空大行政學報，第12期，頁113-145。
郭明德（民90）。班級經營：理論、實務、策略與研究。台北:五南。
郭宣之（民87）。中等學校教育學程之課程與教學和職前教師教師效能關係之研究。淡江大學教育資料科學學系碩士論文（未出版）。
彭玉珍(民90)。高職餐飲管理科教師專業與教師效能之研究。中國文化大學生活應用科學研究所碩士。
彭泗清 （民89）。關係與信任: 中國人人際信任的一項本土研究。《中社會學年鑒(1995-1998)》，290-297，社會科學文献出版社。
北京大學。Retrieved July 8,2003,from 203.93.24.66/shxw/shgz/shgz9/P020041026312070629926.pdf
馮丹白，林炎旦(民83)。 專科學校技職教師教學倦怠、成因及其因應策略之研究。教育研究資訊 2卷5期73-89
馮莉雅（民86）。國中教師角色衝突、專業成長與其教師效能感關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
黃蓉美（民88）。社區是學校的後院。載於張啟隆主編：學校、家長、社區合作教學。台北：聯經。
李世昌（民 88）師鐸獎得主訪問。高雄：國立中山大學教育學程。民92年9月13日，取自：http://www2.nsysu.edu.tw/education/classmanagement/techer-a/a16.htm
趙梅如（民78）。國中學生教師信任感與生活適應、學業成就關係之研究。國立高雄師範學院教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
教育部(民87)　發展小班教學精神計畫，第354次部務會報。
劉奕權（民90）。小班教學理念與未來。小班教學通訊，第十六期。
劉麟書(民90)。人際信任整合模型之研究。銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
劉慶仁（民 89）。美國教育改革研究。國立教育資料館編印。台北市。
韓春屏（民89）。國中補校教學取向、學生批判思考與學習滿意相關之研究。國立高雄師範學院教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
蔡進雄（民93）。校長自我效能感之模式建構及其提升策略。國教學報，第10期。
蔡進雄（民94）。社會資本的意涵及其對學校經營領導的啟示。研習
資訊，第22卷，第2期。

























貳、西文部分
Allensworth,E., (2005). Graduation and dropout trends in Chicago: A look at cohorts of students from 1991 to 2004
Retrieved July 8 2005, from http://www.consortium-chicago.org/
Aldridge,S., Halpern,D. and Fitzpatrick,S. (2002). Social Capital. A Discussion Paper. London: Performance and innovation unit.Retrieved July 7,2002,from http://www.strategy.gov.uk/su/ social%20capital/socialcapital.pdf.
Armor, D., Conry-Osequera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., et ac. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading program in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED130243)
Anonymous（1998）,Reducing class size: What do we know? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED420108).
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy:Towards a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84: 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Barlow, V. (2001). Trust and the principalship. Unpublished manuscript, University of Calgary, BC. Retrieved August 19, 2003,from www.ucalgary.ca/~cll/resources/trustandtheprincipalship.pdf.
Bassani, C. (2001). Changing family values and social capital in Japan, 2001 Annual meeting abstracts/papers, American sociological association. Retrieved August 21, 2003, from <http://abstracts.asanet.org/view.cfm?start=1&num=2740690&search2=&search=Bassani&selection=all&meetingYear=2001>.
Bassani, C.（2003）.Social capital theory in the context of Japanese children article 1 in 2003. The electronic journal of contemporary japanese studies First published in ejcjs Retrieved may 21 2003, from <http://www.japanesestudies.org.uk/articles/Bassani.html .
Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1977). Programs supporting educational change:Federal Vol. VII. Factors affecting implementation and continuation. (Rep. No. R-1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 140432).
Benveniste, G. (1994). The twenty-first century organization. san Francisco: Jossey Bass Inc.
Brennan, Michael D.,Robison, Cheri（1995）Gender comparison of teachers' sense of efficacy . ED384288.
Bryk, A.S. & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for Improvement. New York: Russell Sage.
Bullen, P., Onyx, J. (2000), Measuring social capital in five communities in NSW, onyx and bullen - journal of applied behavior science, Vol 36 No 1 March 2000 pp23-42.
Butler, J.K. (1991). Toward understanding and measuring conditions of trust: Evolution of a conditions of trust inventory. Journal of management, 17: 643-663.
Cohen, D., & Prusak, L. (2001). In good company: How social capital makes organizations work. Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American journal of sociology , 94, 95-120.
Coleman, J. S. & Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and private schools: The impact of communities. New York: Basic Books.
Celep, C.（2000）The correlation of the factors:The prospective teachers' sense of efficacy and beliefs, and attitudes about student control ED451157.
da Costa, J. L. (1993). A study of teacher collaboration in terms of teaching-learning performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association, (Atlanta,GA: April 12-16, 1993).ED362472
da Costa, J. L., & Riordan, G. P. (1996). Teacher efficacy and the capacity to trust . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association, New York, NY: april, 1996.
Fives, H. (2003). What is teacher efficacy and how does it relate to teachers’ knowledge? A theoretical review. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association, Chicago.Retriedoctober23,2003,fromhttp://www.education.umd.edu/EDHD/faculty2/Alexander/ARL/fives2003.doc.
Fives, H. & Buehl, M. M. (2004). What Teachers Believe: Exploring Beliefs about Pedagogical Knowledge. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Hawaii.
Forsyth, P.（2003）.Building social capital as the work of school administrators: Demonstrating practice knowledge for the preparation of school leaders.” Paper presented at the International conference on school leader. Preparation, licensure, and certification, september 26, 2003, Taipei, Taiwan.
Fox, A. (1974). Beyond contact: Work power and trust relations. London: Faber and Faber.
Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust:The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press.
Fukuyama, F. (1999). Social capital and civil society
The institute of public policy .George Mason University.
Retrieved October11,2003,from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ ft/seminar/1999/reforms/fukuyama.htm.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of educational psychology, 76(4), 568-582.
Glasser, W. (1992). The quality school. New York: Perennial
Library.
Goddard, R.D. & Goddard, Y.L. (2001). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between teacher and collective efficacy in urban schools. Teaching and teacher education, 17, 807-818.
Goddard, R. D. (2003). The impact of schools on teacher beliefs, influence, and student achievement: The role of collective efficacy. In J. Raths & A. McAninch (Eds.), Advances in teacher education (Vol.6), pp.183–204. Westport, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Goddard, R., Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, W. (2001). Teacher trust in students and parents: A multilevel examination of the distribution and effects of teacher trust in urban elementary schools. Elementary school journal, 102 (1), 3-17.
Goddard, R.（1999）. The effects of collective teacher efficacy on student achievement in urban public elementary schools, dissertation, Ohio State University.
Goddard, R.D., Hoy, W.K., & Hoy, A.W. (2004). Collective efficacy beliefs: Theoretical developments, empirical evidence, and future directions. Educational Researcher, 33(3), 3-13. PDF
Guskey, T. R., & Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher efficacy: A study of construct dimensions. American educational research journal, 31, 627-643.
Henson, R. (2001):Teacher self-efficacy: Substantive implications and measurement dilemmas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the educational research exchange. Texas.
Heyneman, S. P. (1998). From the Party/State to Multi-Ethnic Democracy: Education and its influence on social cohesion in europe and central asia region. Paper sponsored by international child development central, United nations children's fund. Florence: Italy.
Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Bassler, O.C., & Brissie, J.S. (1987). Parent involvement:Contributions of teacher efficacy, school socioeconomic status, and other schoolcharacteristics. American educational research Journal, 24, 417-435.
Hoy W. K. & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of school leadership. 9(3), 184-208.
Hoy, W. K. & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trust in schools. In W.K. Hoy & C. Miskel (Eds.), Studies in leading and organizing schools. Greenwich, CT: information age publishing. Retrieved May 6, 2003, from: www.coe.ohio-state.edu/whoy. (Omnibus T-Scale is under research instruments).
Hoy, W. K., Hannum, J., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1998). Organizational climate and student achievement: A parsimonious and longitudinal view. Journal of school leadership, 8, 336-359.
Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1990). Organizational socialization of student teachers. American educational research journal, 27, 279-300.
Louis, K. S.,（2000）.Trust and improvement in schools.
presented at the annual meeting of the American educational research association, New Orleans, April 25, 2000.
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., Chervany, N. L. (1998). Initial trust formation in new organizational relationships. Academy of management review, 23, 473-490.
McKnight, D. H., Cummings, L. L., Chervany, N. L. (1996). Meanings of trust. University of Minnesota. Retrieved May 7, 2003, from misrc.umn.edu/wpaper/WorkingPapers/9604.pdf.
Mishra, A.K. （1996）. Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Newman, F.M., Rutter, R.A. & Smith, M.S. (1989). Organizational factors that affect school sense of efficacy, community and expectations. Sociology of education, 62, 221-238.
Pajares, F. (2002). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic contexts: An outline. Retrieved December 7, 2003, from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/efftalk.html.
Pigge, F. y Marso, R. (1993): “ Outstanding teachers´ sense of teacher efficacy at four stages of career development”. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the association of teacher educators. Los Ángeles: California.
Putnam, Robert, with Robert Leonardi and Raffaella Y. Nanetti. (1993)Making Democracy Work. Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Journal of democracy, 6, 65-78.
Qianhong,F.(2004). Trust, social capital, organizational effectiveness maste rof public and international affairs blacksburg,VAlib.vt.Retrieved October 23,2003,from http://edu/theses/available/etd-05122004-155926/unrestricted/qhfumajorpaper.pdf.
Raywid, Mary Anne.（1996）Taking stock: The movement to create mini-schools, schools-within-schools, and separate small schools. Urban diversity series no. 108. ED396045
Rotter, J. B. (1967). A new scale for the measurement of interpersonal trust. Journal of personality, 35, 651-665.
Rotter, J. B. (1971). Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust. American psychologist, 26, 443-452.
Shapiro, S. P. (1987). The social control of impersonal trust. American journal of sociology, 93(3), 623-658.
Shaughnessy. Michael E（2004）An Interview with Anita Woolfolk:The Educational Psychology of Teacher Efficacy [J].Educational Psychology Review, (6).
Shaw, R. B. (1997). Trust in the balance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stronge, J.H. (2002). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tarter, C.J., Sabo, D., & Hoy, W. K. (1995). Middle school climate, faculty trust and effectiveness: A path analysis. Journal of research and development in education, 29(1), 41-49.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W.K. (1998).Trust in schools: A conceptual and empirical analysis. Journal of educational administration, 36(3/4), 334–352.
Tshannen-Moran, M. Hoy, A.& Hoy, W.K（1998）. Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and Measure, review of educational research, 68(2), 202-248.
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, W. K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, and measurement of trust. Review of educational research, 70, 547-593.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing and elusive construct.Teaching and teacher education, 17, 783-805.
Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Collaboration and the need for trust. Journal of educational administration, 39 (4), 308-331.
Walsh,K.(2001). Teacher certification reconsidered: Stumbling for quality. Baltimore. MD: Abell Foundation. (ED 460 100).
Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than
metacognition: A social cognitive perspective.Educational
Psychologist, 30, 217-221.