跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.235.174.99) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/24 19:00
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:蔡永澤
研究生(外文):Yung-tse Tsai
論文名稱:以學科成績努力度衡量老師教學績效獎金制度的模式分析
論文名稱(外文):MODE ANALYSIS FOR A TEACHING PERFORMANCE REWARDS SYSTEM BASED ON STUDENT ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE
指導教授:陳淼勝陳淼勝引用關係
指導教授(外文):Miao-sheng Chen
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:南華大學
系所名稱:企業管理系管理科學碩博士班
學門:商業及管理學門
學類:企業管理學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2012
畢業學年度:100
語文別:中文
論文頁數:53
中文關鍵詞:教學績效獎金學習潛力教育機會不均等少子化
外文關鍵詞:Potential of the studentsDwindling birth rateUnequal education opportunitiesTeaching performance reward system
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:569
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:143
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
  本文擬透過教學績效獎金制度的設計,改善目前教育資源過度集中在少數菁英學生的不合理現象。前述作為,在目前少子化現象、學生受教機會不均等與現行教師獎金流於形式之今日,格外顯得重要。本文假定諸小學各學科試題皆已建立題庫,且題庫中各試題皆訂定有反應試題難易參考指標,可以將學生學科考試成績,依試題難易程度調整成為正規化後的成績;此外,不同學科正規化成績可以進一步依其上課時數比率,加權成單一綜合成績。為了說明方便,本文所謂學生學科考試成績,皆是指其各學科成績正規化後之加權成績。本模式假設班導師在接受班上學生學習潛力分布不均已成事實的情形下,如何將其教學關照資源做合理的分配,以獲得其最佳的教學績效獎金,為班導師所面臨的問題。在此問題狀況下,發放教學績效獎金之決策者(校長),如何在班上學生學習能力分配不均下,以學生學科成績的努力度為基礎衡量班導師之教學績效,為本數學模式的主要內容。本數學模式具通用性:它不但可應用於誘導全校班導師,重視學科能力較差學生之教學績效獎金制度的設計,亦可應用於誘導全校班導師,重視學科能力較佳學生之教學績效獎金制度的設計。前述不同教學績效獎金制度的屬性比較則為本文主要研究結果。
  In this study, we design a teaching performance reward system to improve the situation whereby unequal education opportunities provide only a minority of elite students with access to educational resources and thus provide a balancing effect on school education. This issue is importance with the dwindling birth rate. We also assume that a database of tests has already been established in primary schools for each subject, and that each question has been rated according to a Difficulty Index for normalizing student test scores. We will also obtain weighted averages for these normalized test scores based on the ratio of teaching hours. On the basis of the aforementioned assumptions, the issue provides the background for the mathematical modeling of a method by which decision makers will be able to measure teacher performance based on student academic performance in the face of unevenly distributed student learning abilities. This model can be applied to the design of a teaching performance reward system in which teachers focus on students with either poorer or higher academic achievements; the main results of this study are comparisons of the different attributes of this system.
中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
目錄 iii
表目錄 v
圖目錄 vi
 
第一章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景 1
1.2 研究動機與目的 1
1.3 研究架構 3
 
第二章 文獻探討 5
2.1 少子化與人力資源短少之關連 5
2.2學校教育面臨的問題 6
2.2.1學校教育 7
2.2.2學生受教機會不均等 8
2.2.3現行之教師獎金制度流於形式 10
2.3學校教學效果之衡量 12
2.3.1教師教學績效 13
2.3.2 教學績效獎金 17
2.3.3 以教學績效獎金取代現行之教師獎金制度 18
2.3.4 教學績效獎金相關研究文獻 20
 
第三章 研究設計 22
3.1 符號說明 22
3.2 數學模式及其最佳解 25
3.2.1 班導師決策模式 26
3.2.2 教育主管機關決策模式 27
 
第四章 衡量班導師教學績效的教育價值觀 31
4.1 教學績效的價值觀 31
4.2 最佳解性質 33
4.3 敏感度分析 36
 
第五章 結論與建議 40
5.1 研究結論 40
5.2 管理意涵 41
5.3 研究建議 42
 
參考文獻 43
一、中文部分 43
二、英文部分 45
三、網路資料 52
 
個人簡歷 53
一、中文部分
 
1.王文科(民76),公立學校教職員成績考核辦法簡評,現代教育,第6期,21-26頁。
 
2.王世英、陳淑麗、熊同鑫(民96),臺東地區弱勢國中學生課輔模式與需求之探究,台北市:國立教育資料館。
 
3.吳清山、林天祐(民94),教育名詞解釋—人口少子化,教育研究月刊,第135期,155-156頁。
 
4.吳清山(民89),全面品質管理在教育評鑑上的應用,北縣教育,第35期,27-31頁。
 
5.吳貞宜(民89),我國中小學實施教師評鑑制度之探討,教師之友,第41卷,第2期,2-9頁。
 
6.邱天助(民87),布爾迪厄的文化再製理論,台北市:桂冠圖書公司。
 
7.胡夢鯨(民83),臺灣地區國民中學教育資源差異之比較,中正大學學報,第5卷,第1期,89-116頁。
 
8.洪儷瑜(民90),義務教育階段之弱勢學生的補救教育之調查研究,師大學報,第46卷,第1期,45-65頁。
 
9.孫志麟(民83),臺灣地區各縣市國民小學教育資源分配之比較,教育與心理研究,第17期,175-202頁。
 
10.孫志麟(民84),師範校院教育資源合理分配之探討,教育研究資訊,第3卷,第4期,106-122頁。
 
11.秦夢群(民78),老師的考績問題,師友月刊,第262期,30-31頁。
 
12.馬信行(民82),台灣地區近四十年來教育資源之分配情況,國立政治大學學報,第67期,19-56頁。
 
13.陳志成(民92),教師成績考核制度之探討,教育資料與研究,第54期,95-102頁。
 
14.陳麗珠(民82),我國中小學教育財政公平之研究,高雄市:復文圖書出版社。
 
15.陳奎憙(民69),教育社會學,台北市:三民書局。
 
16.郭明堂、羅瑞玉(民84),教育機會均等與城鄉差異問題之探討:國民小學教育資源城鄉差異之比較,教育學刊,第11期,245-277頁
 
17.張德銳(民85),國小教師成績考核系統之研究,台北:行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
 
18.張慧淳等(民77),教師考核辦法之檢討及改進,現代教育,第11期,107-118頁。
 
19.黃政傑(民83),教育資源的理念與問題,臺灣教育,第528期,8-19頁。
 
20.黃毅志、陳怡靖(民94),臺灣的升學問題:教育社會學理論與研究的探討,臺灣教育社會學研究,第5卷,第1期,77-118頁。
 
21.曾天韻(民92),台灣地區出身背景對大學及研究所入學機會之影響,教育心理研究,第27卷,第2期,255-281頁。
 
22.曾俊凱(民92),我國中小學教師評鑑之可行性—借鏡澳英美經驗,竹縣文教,第28期,40-44頁。
 
23.傅木龍(民84),英國中小學教師評鑑之研究,教育評鑑,中國教育學會主編,台北市:師大書苑,273-308頁。
 
24.楊艾俐(民94),少子海嘯,天下雜誌,第334期,120-139頁。
 
25.謝登隆、徐繼達(民85),總體經濟理論與政策(修訂版),台北市:智勝文化。
 
二、英文部分
 
1.Advisory Conciliation & Arbitration Service (1986), Teachers Dispute ACAS Independent Panel: Report of the Appraisal and Training Working Group, ACAS CAI, London.
 
2.Alexander, K. & Schofield, J. W. (2006), Expectancy Effects: How Teachers’ Expectations Influence Student Achievement. In J. W. Schofield (Ed.), Migration Background, Minority Group Membership, and Academic Achievement: Research Evidence from Social, Educational, and Developmental Psychology, Berlin, Germany: Social Science Research Center (Wissenshaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung), pp. 43-64.
 
3.Association of Teachers & Lecturers(ATL.) (1993), Appraisal and You, ATL, London.
 
4.Auwarter, A.E. & Aruguete, M.S. (2008), Counselor Perceptions of Students Who Vary in Gender and Socioeconomic Status, Social Psychology of Education, Vol.11, pp.389-395.
 
5.Ballou, D. (1996), Do Public Schools Hire the Best Applicants?, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol.111, No.1, pp.97-133.
 
6.Ballou, D. & Podgursky, M. (1997), Teacher Pay and Teacher Quality, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, MI.
 
7.Baron, R.M., Tom, D.Y.H. & Cooper, H. (1985), Social Class, Race and Teacher Expectations. In J. B. Dusek (Ed.), Teacher Expectancies, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.251-270.
 
8.Berne, R. & Stiefel, L. (1984), The Measurement of Equity in School Finance: Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Dimensions, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
 
9.Blanden, J. & Gregg, P. (2004), Family Income and Educational Attainment: A Review of Approaches and Evidence for Britain, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol.20, No.2, pp.245-263.
 
10.Brown, P. & Hesketh, A. (2004), The Mismanagement of Talent-Employability and Jobs in the Knowledge Economy, Oxford University Press, New York.
 
11.Camp, W.G. & Heath-Camp, B. (2007), The Status of CTE Teacher Education Today, Techniques, Vol.82, No.6, pp.16-19.
 
12.Carlson, S. & Gadio, C.T. (2002), Teacher Professional Development in the Use of Technology. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook On Teacher Education, Macmillan, New York, pp.978-1029.
 
13.Chen, J.K. & Chen, I.S. (2010), A Pro-performance Appraisal System for the University, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol.37, pp.2108-2116.
 
14.Coleman, J.S. (1990), Equality and Achievement in Education, Westview Press, London.
 
15.Coleman, J.S. (1968), The Concept of Equality of Educational Opportunity, Harvard Educational Review, Vol.38, No.1, pp.1-22.
 
16.Collins, A.B. (2002), School-Based Supervision at a Private Turkish School: A Mode for Improving Teacher Evalution, Leadership and Policy in Schools, Vol.12, pp.172-190.
 
17.Danielson, C., & McGreal, T.L. (2000), Teacher Evaluation to Enhance Professional Practice, Alexandria, Aassociation for Supervision and Curriculum Development & Education Testing Service, VA.
 
18.Dee, R.S. & Keys, B.J. (2004), Does Merit Pay Reward Good Teachers? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol.23, No.3, pp.471-488.
 
19.Dincer, M.A. & Uysal, G. (2010), The Determinants of Student Achievement in Turkey, International Journal of Educational Development, Vol.30, No.6, pp.592-598.
 
20.Domina, T. (2005), Leveling the Home Advantage: Assessing the Effectiveness of Parental Involvement in Elementary School, Sociology of Education, Vol.78, No.3, pp.233-249.
 
21.Drago, R. & Turnbull, G. (1988), Individual and Group piece Rates under Team Technologies, Journal of Japanese and International Economics, Vol.2, pp.1-10.
 
22.Dusek, J.B. & Joseph, G. (1983), The Bases of Teacher Expectancies: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.75, pp.327-346.
 
23.Eberts, R., Hollenbeck, K., et al. (2002), Teacher Performance Incentives and Student Outcomes, Journal of Human Resources, Vol.37, No.4, pp.913-927.
 
24.Ferguson, R.F. (2003), What doesn''t Meet the Eye: Understanding and Addressing Racial Disparities in High-Achieving Suburban Schools, Harvard University, M.A.
 
25.Figlio, D.N. & Kenny, L.W. (2003), Do Individual Teacher Incentives Boost Student Performance?, Mimeograph, University of Florida.
 
26.Francisco, L. (1999), Kidding Around, Entrepreneur, Vol.27, No.9, pp.160-162.
 
27.Fuchs, L.S. & Fuchs, D. (1998), Treatment Validity: A Unifying Concept for Reconceptualizing the Identification of Learning Disabilities, Learning Disabilities Research &Practice, Vol.13, No.4, pp.204-219.
 
28.García-Aracil, A. & Palomares-Montero, D. (2008), Changes in Universities’ Efficiency over the Time: Differentials According to the Missions, First ISA Forum, Barcelona.
 
29.Garcia, L.M. & Roblin, N.P. (2008), Innovation, Research and Professional Development in Higher Education: Learning from Our Own Experience, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol.24, No.1, pp.104-116.
 
30.Glewwe, P., Ilias, N. & Kremer, M. (April 2003), Teacher Incentives. Working Paper 9671, National Bureau of Economic Research.
 
31.Hanushek, E.A. & Rivkin, S.G. (2004), How to Improve the Supply of High-Quality Teachers. In D. Ravitch (Ed.), Brookings Papers on Education Policy 2004, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press, pp.7-25.
 
32.Helmke, A. & Schrader, F.W. (1987), Interactional Effects of Instructional Quality and Teacher Judgment Accuracy on Achievement, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol.3, pp.91-98.
 
33.Herman, J.L. & Choi, K. (2008), Formative Assessment and the Improvement of Middle School Science Learning: The role of Teacher Accuracy (CSE Technical Report No. 740), University of California Los Angeles Center for the Study of Evaluation National Center for Research on Evaluation Standards and Student Testing(CRESST), CA.
 
34.Hoge, R.D. & Butcher, R. (1984), Analysis of Teacher Judgments of Pupil Achievement Levels, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.76, pp.777-781.
 
35.Hoge, R.D. & Coladarci, T. (1989), Teacher-Based Judgments of Academic Achievement: A Review of Literature, Review of Educational Research, Vol.59, pp.297-313.
 
36.Hon, C.C., Guh, Y.Y., Wang, K.M. & Lee, E.S. (1996), Fuzzy Multiple Attributes and Multiple Hierarchical Decision Making, Computers Mathematics Applications, Vol.32, No.12, pp.109-119.
 
37.Horne, M. (2010), A New Role for CTE, Techniques, pp.10-11.
 
38.Jencks, C. Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M.J., Cohen, D., Gintis, H., Heyns, B. & Michelson, S. (1972), Inequality, Basic Books, New York.
 
39.Joumady, O. & Ris, C. (2005), Determining the Relative Efficiency of European Higher Education Institutions Using DEA, The Netherlands: Maastricht University Research Centre for Education and the Labour Market.
 
40.Jussim, L., Eccles, J. & Madon, S. (1996), Social Perception, Social Stereotypes, and Teacher Expectations: Accuracy and the Quest for the Powerful Self-fulfilling Prophecy. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol.28, pp.281-388.
 
41.Kamien, M.I. & Schwartz, N.L. (1981), Dynamic Optimization: The Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control in Economics and Management, Elsevier North Holland, New York.
 
42.Lavy, V. (2002), Evaluating the Effect of Teacher Group Performance Incentives on Students Achievements, Journal of Political Economy, Vol.110, No.6, pp.1286-1317.
 
43.Lavy, V. (2003), Paying for Performance: the Effect of Individual Financial Incentives on Teachers'' Productivity and Students'' Scholastic Outcomes, CEPR Discussion Papers 3862.
 
44.Lavy, V. (2004), Performance Pay and Teachers'' Effort, Productivity and Grading Ethics, NBER Working Papers 10622.
 
45.Lazear, E.P. (2003), Teacher incentives, Swedish Economic Policy Review, Vol.10, No.2, pp.179-214.
 
46.Lazear, E.P. (2000), Performance Pay and Productivity, American Economic Review, Vol.90, pp.1346-1361.
 
47.Martin, E.P. (2006), Efficiency and Quality in the Current Higher Education Context in Europe: an Application of the Data Envelopment Analysis Methodology to Performance Assessment of Departments within the University of Zaragoza, Quality in Higher Education, Vol.12, No.1, pp.57-79.
 
48.Maheady, L., Towne, R., Algozzine, B., Mercer, J. & Ysseldyke, J. (1983), Minority Overrepresentation: A Case of Alternative Practices Prior to Referral, Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol.6, No.4, pp.448-456.
 
49.McGuinn, P. (2006), No Child Left Behind and the Transformation of Federal Education Policy, University Press of Kansas, Kansas, pp.1965-2005.
 
50.Meyers, T. (2004), Kids Gaining Voice in How Home Looks, Advert Age, Vol.75, No.13, pp.4-6.
 
51.Monk, D.H. (1990), Educational Finance: An Economic Approach, McGraw Hill Publishing Company, New York.
 
52.Murnane, R.J. & Cohen, D.K. (1986), Merit Pay and the Evaluation Problem: Why Most Merit Pay Plans Fail and a Few Survive, Harvard Educational Review, Vol.56, pp.1-17.
 
53.Mohrman, A.M., Mohrman, S.A. & Odden, A.R. (1996), Aligning Teacher Compensation with Systemic School Reform: Skill-Based Pay and Group-Based Performance Rewards, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol.18, No.1, pp.51-71.
 
54.Podgursky, M.J. & Springer, M.G. (2007), Teacher Performance Pay: A Review, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, Vol.26, No.4, pp.909-949.
 
55.Rawls, J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
 
56.Roy, S. (2004), The littlest Consumers, Disp Des Ideas, Vol.16, No.7, pp.18-19.
 
57.Scriven, M. (1973), Educational Evalution: Theory and Practice, Belmont, Wadsworth, C.A.
 
58.Shanxi Research Center for Secondary Education (2001), Handbook on LTTP Implementation, Taiyuan, China.
 
59.Shera, W. (1992), Educational Evaluation in China: An Analysis of Current Practices, Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol.15, No.1, pp.45-53.
 
60.Staiger, D.O. & Rockoff, J.E. (2010), Searching for Effective Teachers with Imperfect Information, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol.24, No.3, pp.97-118.
 
61.Tenbrink T.D. (1973), Evaluation: A Practical Guide for Teacher, Mc Graw-Hill, New York.
 
62.Tenenbaum, H. R. & Ruck, M.D. (2007), Are Teachers’ Expectations Different for Racial Minority than for European American Students? A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol.99, pp.253-273.
 
63.Toch, T. & Rothman, R. (2008), Rush to Judgment: Teacher Evaluation in Public Education, Education Sector, Education Sector Reports Washington.
 
64.Wagner, J.T., Camparo, L.B., Tsenkova, V. & Camparo, J.C. (2008), Do Anti-Immigrant Sentiments Track into Danish Classrooms? Ethnicity, Ethnicity Salience, and Bias in Children’s Peer Preferences, International Journal of Educational Research, Vol.47, pp.312-322.
 
65.Wei, H., Wang, F., Zhao, C., Jiang, L. & Lu, W. (2009), The Research on Network Teaching Evaluation Based on Fuzzy Synthesis, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Education Technology and Computer Science (ETCS 2009), Wuhan, Hubei, pp.923-926.
 
66.Weisberg, D., Sexton, S., Mulhern, J. & Keeling, D. (2009), The Widget Effect: Our National Failure to Acknowledge and Act on Differences in Teacher Effectiveness (2nd ed.), The New Teachers Project, N.Y.
 
67.Worthen, B.R. & Sanders, J.R. (1987), Educational Evaluation: Alter- native Approaches and Practical Guidences, Longman, NY.
 
68.Yan, L. & Fan, Z. (2009), Study on Performance Appraisal Method of College Teachers, Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium and Computer Network and Multimedia Technology (CNMT 2009), Wuhan.
 
三、網路資料
 
1.經濟部統計處(民100),主要國家平均每人國民生產毛額,參見:http://2k3dmz2.moea.gov.tw/gnweb/Indicator/wFrmIndicator.aspx
 
2.經建會(民95),台灣經濟永續成長會議背景說明會簡報資料-人口高齡化極少子化的衝擊與因應,參見:http://find.cepd.gov.tw/
 
3.銓敘部(民 93),世界各國人事制度,參見:http://www.mocs.gov.tw/get_file.aspx?file_name=2004112382317.doc&folder=per_manage
 
4.行政院主計處,參見:http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=13213&CtNode=3504&mp=1
 
5.美國教育部(U.S. Department of Education),參見: http://www.ed.gov/
 
6.遠見雜誌(民 92),參見:http://www.gvm.com.tw/CatelogCover/index.aspx?go=cover&Yr=2003
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 20.黃毅志、陳怡靖(民94),臺灣的升學問題:教育社會學理論與研究的探討,臺灣教育社會學研究,第5卷,第1期,77-118頁。
2. 19.黃政傑(民83),教育資源的理念與問題,臺灣教育,第528期,8-19頁。
3. 18.張慧淳等(民77),教師考核辦法之檢討及改進,現代教育,第11期,107-118頁。
4. 17.張德銳(民85),國小教師成績考核系統之研究,台北:行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
5. 16.郭明堂、羅瑞玉(民84),教育機會均等與城鄉差異問題之探討:國民小學教育資源城鄉差異之比較,教育學刊,第11期,245-277頁
6. 13.陳志成(民92),教師成績考核制度之探討,教育資料與研究,第54期,95-102頁。
7. 12.馬信行(民82),台灣地區近四十年來教育資源之分配情況,國立政治大學學報,第67期,19-56頁。
8. 10.孫志麟(民84),師範校院教育資源合理分配之探討,教育研究資訊,第3卷,第4期,106-122頁。
9. 8.洪儷瑜(民90),義務教育階段之弱勢學生的補救教育之調查研究,師大學報,第46卷,第1期,45-65頁。
10. 9.孫志麟(民83),臺灣地區各縣市國民小學教育資源分配之比較,教育與心理研究,第17期,175-202頁。
11. 5.吳貞宜(民89),我國中小學實施教師評鑑制度之探討,教師之友,第41卷,第2期,2-9頁。
12. 7.胡夢鯨(民83),臺灣地區國民中學教育資源差異之比較,中正大學學報,第5卷,第1期,89-116頁。
13. 4.吳清山(民89),全面品質管理在教育評鑑上的應用,北縣教育,第35期,27-31頁。
14. 21.曾天韻(民92),台灣地區出身背景對大學及研究所入學機會之影響,教育心理研究,第27卷,第2期,255-281頁。
15. 1.王文科(民76),公立學校教職員成績考核辦法簡評,現代教育,第6期,21-26頁。