(3.215.183.251) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/22 10:28
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:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:薛慶友
論文名稱:國小高年級學生尊重與責任品德評量建構歷程之研究
指導教授:李琪明博士
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:公民教育與活動領導學系
學門:教育學門
學類:普通科目教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2013
畢業學年度:101
語文別:中文
論文頁數:375
中文關鍵詞:品德品德評量品德教育班級評量
外文關鍵詞:character or moral charactercharacter or moral character assessmentmoral and character educationclassroom assessment
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:9
  • 點閱點閱:323
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
本研究旨在建構國小學生品德評量的深層理論基礎與具體實施方式,並透過多元評析與反思,以彰顯其教育價值與應用發展的可能性。研究者為達前述目的,分別透過文獻分析、焦點團體、量表發展與行動研究等,針對國小高年級學生尊重與責任品德,進行為期一學期的品德評量,最後又歷經理論回顧、專家學者意見徵詢、教師、家長與學生的問卷與訪談,以及研究者反思等多元評析,故得致主要結論如下:.
一、本研究之品德評量發展是立基「品德教育」與「班級評量」理念,包括符應德育原理、體現品德價值、營造道德社群、縝密計畫安排、融入日常生活、強化道德實踐、回歸班級情境、強調批判思辨、兼顧評量時機、運用多元方法、與呈現質量結果等特點。
二、本研究之品德評量實施涵括「計劃」、「實施」與「回饋」三個階段,並包含「確認品德評量目的」、「擬定品德評量目標」、「界定品德評量範圍與內容」、「決定品德評量時機」、「選擇品德評量方法與工具」、「蒐集、分析和紀錄品德評量資料」、「綜合與運用品德評量結果」,以及「提出品德評量報告」等八大彼此關連且完整之內涵。
三、本研究之品德評量實施前能做好親師生的溝通與師生評量程序的說明與認識;實施歷程則依學期初、學期間與學期末等三個階段不同重點接續進行。學期初評量旨在提供診斷性評量的基礎,蒐集有關學生品德發展的「初步」資料;學期間評量在於提供形成性評量的基礎,蒐集有關學生品德發展「變化情形」的資料;學期末評量在於提供總結性評量的基礎,蒐集有關學生品德發展「改變情形」的資料。
四、本研究之品德評量實施歷程的特色與優點能夠發揮「評量為學習」的諸多功效,包括檢視、反省、提醒、督促、改進、遷移、溝通等功能。
五、本研究之品德評量實施歷程的限制與不足,乃受到學生品德價值體認不夠、外力干擾(如家長體罰)、評量過程費時費力、學生行為問題處理不易、學生偏差行為改善有限、與內外部溝通(師生、親師或親子之間)仍待提升等因素影響所致。
六、本研究之品德評量未來持續推展之關鍵,包括:(一)評量參與者須體認品德評量本質,既是鉅觀(關注學生成長過程中的道德發展)亦是微觀(觀察學生在班級生活中的道德言行)的工程。(二)改變品德評量思維,導正以分數評價個人品德好壞的迷失。(三)樹立基層教師專業,改善過去為人詬病的品德評量做法。(四)檢討品德評量實施方式,如評量歷程能深化品德評量概念、建立清楚明確的評量行為準則等。(五)營造學校或班級成為道德社群,透過各式課程或活動推動品德教育。(六)尋求家長支持配合,協同參與品德評量的實施過程。
根據前述結論,研究者針對教育行政單位推動品德教育、教師進行品德評量,以及進一步研究分別提出若干建議。

The purpose of this study is to construct the theoretical foundations and concrete useful methods for character or moral character assessment for elementary school students. It also attempts to through multiple-analysis and reflection to emphasize the educational value and developing applications. In order to achieve these goals, the study adopted literature review, focus groups, scale development, and action research to conduct one term’s character or moral character assessment on the respect and responsibility of fifth and sixth graders in elementary school. Finally, through the theory review, opinions from experts and scholars, interviews and questionnaires from teachers, parents, and students, and the reflections of the researcher were used to arrive at the following conclusions.
1.Development of character or moral character assessment is based on the ideals of “moral and character education” and “classroom assessment,” including conformity to moral education principles, moral and character values manifestation, moral communities construction, careful plan arrangements, incorporaiton into daily life, enhancement of moral practice, return to classroom context, emphasis on critical thinking, accommodation of assessment opportunities, usage of diverse methods, and presentation of qualitative and quantitative results.
2.Implementation of character or moral character assessment includes the three stages of “planning,” “implementation,” and “feedback,” including eight areas that are interconnected and complete, which are: “verify the purpose,” “establish the objectives,” “delineate the scope and content,” “determine times,” “select methods and tools,” “collect, analyze, and record data,” “integrate and apply results,” and “propose reports” on character or moral character assessment.
3.Before implementation of character or moral character assessment in this study, this study conducts communication among parents, teachers, and students, as well as explanations and understanding for the teacher-student evaluation procedures. The implementation process is conducted continuously at the three junctures of beginning of term, middle of term, and end of term. At the beginning of term, assessment seeks to provide a basis for diagnostic assessment, collecting the “preliminary” data on the development of students’ character or moral character. In the middle of term, assessment seeks to provide a basis for formative assessment, collecting data on “changing” in the development of students’ character or moral character. At the end of term, assessment seeks to provide a basis for summary assessment, collecting data on “changed” in the development of students’ character or moral character.
4.The features and advantages the implementation process of character or moral character assessment in this study were the realization of various benefits of “assessment as learning,” including functions such as evaluation, reflection, reminder, supervision, improvement, transference, and communication.
5.The limitations and shortcomings the implementation process of character or moral character assessment in this study were caused by students’ insufficient understanding of values in character or moral character, external interference (such as parental physical punishment), time- and energy-consuming assessment process, difficulty in dealing with behavioral problems of students, limited improvement on delinquent behavior of students, and internal and external communication (between teachers and students, parents and teachers, or parents and children) that still needs improvement.
6.The keys for continued future promotion in character or moral character assessment include: (1) participants must understand that the nature of character or moral character assessment is a macro (concern for the moral development of students in the development process) as well as micro (observation of moral speech and behavior in the campus life of students) task ; (2) change the consideration of character or moral character assessment, improve upon the shortcoming of using scores to evaluate personal character or moral character ; (3) establish professionalism of teachers, improve upon past character or moral character assessment methods that have drawn criticism; (4) evaluate implementation of character or moral character assessment, such as the assessment process can deepen the concept of character or moral character assessment and establish clear and definitive principles for assessment; (5) construct schools or classrooms into moral communities, promote moral and character education through various courses or activities; (6) seek support and accommodation from parents, jointly participate in the implementation process of character or moral character assessment.
Based on these conclusions, this study proposed several suggestions for educational administrative authorities in promoting moral and character education, for teachers conducting character or moral character assessment, as well as further research.

謝 誌 ….…………………………………………..……..Ⅰ
中文摘要 ..……………………..………………………….….Ⅲ
英文摘要 ..…..……………………………………………..…Ⅴ
目 次…....…………..…………………………………......Ⅸ
表 次 ..……………..…………………………………...XI
圖 次.………………….…………...…………….....…XIII
第一章 緒論………………………………………...……..….1
第一節 研究背景與動機……………...……………………………1
第二節 研究目的……………………………………………….......8
第三節 名詞釋義……………………………………………...…....9
第四節 研究範圍與限制 ………………………………………....11
第二章 文獻探討………………………………….………....13
第一節 品德教育的理念與發展…..……..………………………..13
第二節 班級評量的意涵與實施………………..…………………39
第三節 品德評量的發展與建立…………………………………..89
第三章 研究設計與實施..………………………….........…115
第一節 研究架構與流程..……………………………………......115
第二節 研究方法與步驟 …..…………………………………....117
第三節 研究工具信效度之建立 …..…………………………....139
第四章 研究結果與討論….………………………...……...159
第一節 品德評量之內涵與關係 ..………………………………159
第二節 品德評量之實施歷程與結果 …..………………………171
第三節 品德評量之多元反思與評析 ………………………....195
第五章 結論與建議….……………………………...…...…285
第一節 結論 ..…………………………………………………....285
第二節 建議 ..…………………………………………………....291
參考書目.…………………………………...………..……….297
中文部分 …………………………………………………………..297
英文部分 …………………………………………………………..302
附錄 .………………………………………………………....313
附錄一:焦點團體訪談大綱 ……………………………………..313
附錄二:焦點團體結果分析與回應………..……………………..314
附錄三:邀請函……………………………..……………………..318
附錄四:學期初「尊重」與「責任」行為檢核單 ……………..319
附錄五:學期初「尊重」與「責任」行為觀察檢核表…………323
附錄六:每週「尊重」與「責任」行為檢核單 ………………..325
附錄七:「尊重」與「責任」行為觀察紀錄……………………..328
附錄八:「尊重」與「責任」行為反省日誌……………………..330
附錄九:學期末「尊重」與「責任」行為檢核單 ……………..332
附錄十:學期品德評量通知單……………..……………………..335
附錄十一:品德評量學生問卷……………..……………………..337
附錄十二:品德評量教師問卷……………..…………………..…340
附錄十三:品德評量家長問卷………….….……………………..343
附錄十四:家長訪談大綱……………….….…………………..…344
附錄十五:學生訪談大綱………….………….…………………..345
附錄十六:專家效度問卷…………………………..…………..…346
附錄十七:專家效度問卷修正表………………..………………..354
附錄十八:「尊重」與「責任」品德行為表現檢核單(預試)..366
附錄十九:品德評量實施計畫……………………..……………..369
附錄二十:品德評量的實施說明(學生用)…..………………..372
附錄二十一:品德評量的實施說明(教師用) ………………..374

壹、中文部份
山崎國小(2001)。新竹縣新豐鄉山崎國小成績單。新竹縣:山崎國小。
王文科(2002)。教育研究法(七版)。臺北市:五南。
王怡靜(2000)。赫爾巴特教育思想之探究及其對我國國小道德教育之啟示。教育研究(高師),8,239-250。
王苓如(2007)。高雄市國民小學教師對品德教育知覺與實施之研究。高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
江文慈(1997)。整合與超越:多元智力取向的評量。測驗與輔導,143,44-52。
但昭偉、邱世明(2000)。多元文化主義觀點之下的道德教育與評量~一項初步的觀察。教育資料集刊,25,225-241。
吳財福(2004)。國民中學道德教育調查研究-以台南巿為例。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
吳毓瑩(1995)。德育評量的困境與可能解決的方法。教育資料與研究,2,10-13。
李坤崇(1999)。多元化教學評量。臺北市:心理出版社。
李奉儒(2004)。九年一貫課程中實施道德教育的困境與突破。學生輔導,92,38-55。
李奉儒(2005)。尊重與關懷作為學校品德教育的核心。國教天地,159,20-29。
李奉儒(2006)。美國品格教育、價值教育與道德教育的轉向。載於國立教育資料館舉辦之「現代教育論壇(十四)」會議論文集(179-192),臺北市。
李素貞、蔡金鈴(2004)。中小學品德教育之實施與評量。教育研究月刊,120,53-68。
李琪明(1999)。我國國民中小學學校層次德育課程評鑑指標之建構,公民訓育學報,8,197-230。
李琪明(2000)。德育課程之理想與建構—我國國民中小學德育課程之研究。臺北市:師大書苑。
李琪明(2003)。德行取向之品德教育理論與實踐。哲學與文化,351,153-174。
李琪明(2006)。新品德教育的興起與發展-美國經驗在臺灣的反思與轉化。課程與教學季刊,9(2),55-74。
李琪明(2008)。國中小品德校園文化營造實徵研究。師大學報:教育類,53(3),153-178。
周慧菁(2004)。品格:新世紀的第一堂課。載於何琦瑜、鄭一青等(合著),品格決勝負:未來人才的祕密(14-21)。臺北市:天下雜誌。
林素卿(2001)。學校行動研究在九年一貫課程統整與實施上的應用。載於中華民國課程與教學學會(主編),行動研究與課程教學革新(51-74)。臺北市:揚智文化。
林曉芳(2008)。統計學 : SPSS之應用。臺北市:鼎茂。
邱皓政(2000)。量化硏究與統計分析 : SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析。臺北市:五南。
俞懿嫻(1995)。德育評量的商榷。教育資料與研究,2,14。
翁毓旋(2007)。臺北市國小低年級教師實施品格教育課程之個案研究。臺北市立教育大學課程與教學研究所課程與教學碩士學位班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
國立教育資料館(譯)(2000)。「教育改革國民會議」最終報告書。 臺北市:國立教育資料館。
國立教育資料館(譯)(2008)。教育振興基本最初計畫註明推動道德教育。讀賣新聞, 2010年2月18日,取自http://search.nioerar.edu.tw/edu_message/data_image/AB/2008/0064J.PDF
張秀雄(2002)。九年一貫課程「社會學習領域」中的公民道德教育。公民訓育學報,11,39-52。
張春興、林清山(1993)。教育心理學。臺北市:東華書局。
張效齊(2008)。中部四縣市品德教育促進方案實施之研究。暨南國際大學教育政策與行政學系碩士論文,未出版,南投市。
教育部(1993)。國民小學課程標準。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(1998)。國民教育階段九年一貫課程綱要總綱。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(1999)。國民中小學學生成績考查辦法。2010年2月6日,取自http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawContent.aspx?PCODE=H0070012
教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要社會學習領域。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2004)。品德教育促進方案。2008年12月6日,取自http://ce.naer.edu.tw/index3-1.html
教育部(2005)。2005-2008教育施政主軸。2009年1月6日,取自http://www.edu.tw/pages/list1.aspx?Node=1265&;Type=1&;Index=5&;WID=45a6f039-fcaf-44fe-830e-50882aab1121
教育部(2006)。教育部品德教育促進方案。2008年12月6日,取自http://ce.naer.edu.tw/index3-1.html
教育部(2010,9月)。第八次全國教育會議中心議題壹至拾結論建議。教育部電子報,425。2012年11月10日,取自http://epaper.edu.tw/topical.aspx?topical_sn=482
教育部(2012)。國民小學及國民中學學生成績評量準則。2012年11月10日,取自http://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=H0070019
莊明貞(1995a)。從變通式測驗的發展談國小德育評量的可行途徑。教育資料與研究,2,15-16。
莊明貞(1995b)。在國小課程的改進與發展-真實性評量。教師天地,79,21-25。
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的硏究。臺北市:五南。
陳秀敏(2006)。台南縣市國民中學品德教育實施現況及其可行策略之調查研究。高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
陳明印(2004)。英國國定課程學生成就評量制度。研習資訊,21(6),90-109。
陳惠邦(1998)。教育行動研究。臺北市:師大書苑。
彭海燕(1995)。一筆算不清的帳-談國小德育評量的現況與困境。教育資料與研究,2,21-23。
黃光雄、柯華葳、張震東、李奉儒、許漢(2001)。整合型學校道德教學改進方案:國民小學階段。教育部委託專案報告。嘉義縣:國立中正大學教育學院。
黃健一、余作輝(1996)。國民小學道德課程與教學。臺北市:師大書苑。
黃德祥、謝龍卿(2004)。品格與道德教育的內涵與實施。教育研究,120,35-43。
楊世瑩(2005)。SPSS統計分析實務。臺北市:旗標。
葛樹人(1987)。心理測驗學。臺北市:桂冠。
詹志禹(1995)。德育評量:觀念與方法的突破。教育資料與研究,2,2-9。
詹棟樑(1997)。德育原理。臺北市:五南。
熊同鑫(2002)。淺談行動研究的方法與書寫-代本書緒論。載於國立台東師範學院(主編),教育行動研究與教學創新(1-17)。臺北市:揚智文化。
福林國小(2001,9月)。台北市士林區福林國小成績單(乙式)。2012年10月30日,取自http://leepinfa.sg1006.myweb.hinet.net/96net/
劉約蘭(1991)。國中德育評量之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
歐用生(1995)。「道德與健康」新課程理念。載於臺灣省國民教師研習會編印,國民小學新課程標準的精神與特色(56-68)。臺北縣:板橋。
歐陽教(1985)。德育原理。臺北市:文景書局。
歐滄和(2002)。教育測驗與評量。臺北市:心理出版社。
蔡清田(2000)。行動研究及其在教育研究上的應用。載於國立中正大學教育研究所(主編),質的教育研究法(307-333)。高雄市:麗文文化。
鄭春女(2007)。臺中縣市國民中學實施品德教育之探討。逢甲大學公共政策所碩士論文,未出版,臺中市。
盧雪梅(2005)。九年一貫課程成績通知單模式探究:現況與展望。教育研究與發展期刊,1(3),177-212。
薛慶友、李彥慧、陳韻如(2009)。大中小學教師對於品德教育之省思。學生輔導季刊,107,66-82。
鍾聖校(1998)。小學教師學習評量信念與實踐之跨國比較研究-澳洲小學教師評量信念與實踐之研究(一)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究報告(NSC87-2413-H-152-001-F14)。臺北市:台北教育大學心理與諮商學系。
簡成熙(2004)。缺德的教育如何實施。教育研究月刊,121,94-109。
簡成熙(2005)。品格教育與人權教育的衝突與和解。當代教育研究,13(3),91-114。
嚴祥鸞(1996)。參與觀察法。載於胡幼慧(主編),質的研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(195-221)。臺北市:巨流。
貳、英文部分
Ainsworth, L. &; Christinson, J. (1998). Student-generated rubrics: an assessment model to help all students succeed. Orangeburg, N.Y.: D. Seymour Publications.
Airasian, P. W. &; Russell, M. (2008). Classroom assessmen: concepts and applications (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education
Alberta Education. (2005). The heart of the matter: character and citizenship education in Alberta schools. Alberta. Alberta Education.
Alberta Teachers’ Association. (1999). Toward a safe and caring curriculum-ATA resources for integration, Kindergarten to grade six. Edmonton, AB: The Alberta Teachers’ Association.
Altrichter, H., Posch, P., &; Somekh, B. (1993). Teachers investigate their work-An Introduction to the methods of action research. NY: Routledge.
Anderson, L. W. (2003). Classroom assessment: enhancing the quality of teacher decision making. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Angell, A. V. (1991). Democratic climates in elementary classrooms: A review of theory and research. Theory and Reasearch in Social Education, 14(3), 241-266.
Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (1999). The National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty–first Century. Retrieved February 17, 2010, from http://www.civicsandcitizenship.edu.au/cce/background,8985.html
Banks, S. R. (2005). Classroom assessment: issues and practices. Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon.
Battistich, V. D., Solomon, M., Watson, J., & Schaps, E. (1989). Effects of an elementary school program to enhance prosocial behavior on children’s cognitive-social problem-solving skills and strategies. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 10, 147-169.
Bednar, A. K., Cunninghan, D., Duffy, T. M. &; Perry, J. D. (1993). Theory into practice: How do we link? In G. Anglin (Ed.), Instructional technology: Past, present, and future. Denver, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Berg, B. L. (2007). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Berkowitz, M. W. (1998). Obstacles to teacher training in character education. Action in Teacher Education, 20 (4), 1-10.
Berkowitz, M.W., &; Bier, M.C. (2004). Research-based character education. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 591, 72-85.
Blake, C. R., &; Binko, J. B. (2000). E pluribus unum: American educational values and the struggle for cultural identity. In M. Leicester, C. Modgil, &; S. Modgil (Eds.), Education, culture, and values: Vol. 4. Moral education and pluralism (193-204). New York: Palmer Press.
Borba, M. ( 2001). Building moral intelligence : the seven essential virtues that teach kids to do the right thing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brooks, J. G., &; Brooks, M. G. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Burke, K. (1999). The mindful school: how to assess authentic learning (3rd ed.). Arlington Heights, Ill.: SkyLight Training and Publishing Inc.
Butler, S. M. &; McMunn, N. D. (2006). A teacher's guide to classroom assessment: understanding and using assessment to improve student learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Campbell, L., Campbell, B., &; Dickinson, D. (1996). Teaching &; learning through multiple intelligences. Needham Heights, Mass.: Allyn &; Bacon.
Carr, D. (1991). Educating the virtues. London: Routledge.
Center for the 4th and 5th Rs. (2004). The Comprehensive Approach to Character Education. Retrieved January 31, 2010 from http://www.character.org/charactereducationquestionsandanswers
Character Education Partnership. (2007). CEP’s eleven principles of effective character education. Retrieved January 31, 2010 from http://www.character.org/elevenprinciples
Character Education Partnership. (2008). character education quality standards. Retrieved January 31, 2010 from http://www.character.org/elevenprinciples
Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? constructivist and sociocultural Perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13-20.
Colby, A. &; Kohlberg, L. (1987). The measurement of moral judgment. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Davis, C. K. (2003). Motivated to serve, Motivated to learn: theorizing care in the composition service-learning classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, PA.
DeRoche, E. F. (2004). Evaluating Character Development: 51 Tools for Measuring Success. Character Development Group, Inc.
Developmental Studies Center. (2000). The Child Development Project, Retrieved February 17, 2010, from http://www.devstu.org/cdp
Durkheim, E. (1961). Moral Education: A Study in the Theory and Application of the Sociology of Education. New York: The Free Press.
Earl, L. M.(2003). Assessment as learning: using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press,.
Elharrar, Y. (2006). Teacher Assessment Practices and Perceptions: The Use of Alternative Assessments Within the Quebec Educational Reform. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Universite du Quebec a Montreal, Quebec, QC.
Elias, M. J., Wang, M. C., Weissberg, R., P., Zins, J. E., & Walberg. H. J. (2002). The other side of the report card: Student success depends on more than test scores. American School Board Journal, 189(11), 28-30.
Farrelly, T. M. (1993). Anew approach to moral education: The integrated character education model. Journal of Correctional Education, 44(2), 69-82.
Fogarty, R., &; Stoehr, J. (1995). Integrating curricula with multiple intelligences: teams, themes, and threads. Palatine, Ill.: IRI/Skylight Pub.
Fraser, B. J. (1999). Using Informal and Formal Measures to Creat Classroom Profiles. In H. Jerome Freiberg (Ed.), School climate : measuring, improving, and sustaining healthy learning environments. London; Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
Frey, B. B., &; Schmitt, V. L. (2007). Coming to terms with classroom assessment. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(3), 402-423.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic Books.
Gibbs, J. C. (2006). Should Kohlberg’s cognitive developmental approach to morality be replaced with a more pragmatic approach? Comments on Krebs and Denton (2005). Psychological Review, 113 (3), 666-671.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Glasser, W. (1990). The quality school: managing students without coercion. New York : Perennial Library.
Glaze, A. (2004). Character education and citizenship development: a public education imperative. Paper presented March 5, 2004 to Alberta School Boards Association, Red deer, Alberta.
Goldberg, J. C. (2003). The Effects of a Character Education Program on Teacher and Students Perceptions of Classroom Climate and Prosocial Development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Denver, Denver, CO.
Goldthwait, J. (1996). Values and education: helping history along. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 30, 19-23.
Great Britain. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (1999). The national curriculum. London: HMSO.
Gredler, M. E. (1999). Classroom assessment and learning. New York: Longman.
Gresham, R. H. (1999). Teacher’ and Students’ Pereceptions Regrading School and Classroom Climate: A Pre- and Post Test of Character Education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL.
Guskey, T. R., &; Bailey, J. M. (2001). Developing grading and reporting systems for student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press, Inc.
Hales, L. W., &; Marshall, J. C. (2004). Developing children's behaviour in the classroom: a practical guide for teachers and students. London; Washington, D.C.: Falmer Press.
Hogan, T. P. (2007). Educational assessment : a practical introduction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Howell, K. W. &; Nolet, V. (1998). Curriculum-based evaluation: teaching and decision making. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Hunt, M. (1993). The story of psychology. New York: Anchor Books.
Johns, J. S. (2001). Utah Community Partnership for Character Development Final Evaluation Report 1995-1999. U.S. Department of Education.
Jorgenson, G. (2006). Kohlberg and Gilligan: duet or duel? The Journal of Moral Education, 35 (2), 179-196.
Josephson Institute for Ethics. (2007). Making Ethical Decisions: The Six Pillars of Character. Retrieved January 31, 2010 from http://josephsoninstitute.org/MED/MED-2sixpillars.html
Kemmis, S., &; Mctaggart, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed.). Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Kilpatrick, W. K. (1992). Why Johnny can't tell right from wrong. New York: Simon &; Schuster.
Kohlberg, L. (1981). Essays on moral development (Vol. One): The philosophy of moral development. San Francisco: Harper &; Row.
Kohlberg, L. (1985). The Just Community in theory and practice. In M. Berkowitz &; E. Oser (Eds.), Moral education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kohn, A. (1987). How not to teach values: A critical look at character education. Phi Delta Kappan, 429-439.
Lapsley, D. K. (1996). Moral Psychology. New York: Longman.
Leming, J. S. (1993). In search of effective characyer education. Educational Leadership, 63-70.
Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., &; White, R. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-299.
Lewis, A. E. (2007). The Moral Judgment of Gifted Adolescents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minnesota: MN.
Lickona, T. (1976). Moral development and behavior: theory, research, and social issues. New York, N.Y.: Bantam.
Lickona, T. (1991). Educating for character: how our schools can teach respect and responsibility. New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Loehrer, M. C. (1998). How to change a rotten attitude: a manual for building virtue and character in middle and high school students. Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Corwin Press.
London, P. (1987). Character education and clinical intervention: A paradigm shift for US schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 667-673.
Loyd, B. H. & Loyd, D. E. (1997). Kindergarten through Grade 12 Standards: A Philosophy of Grading. In Gary D. Phye (Eds.) Handbook of Classroom Assessment (481-489).
Markman, L. B. (2002). The impact of school culture on adolescents’ prosocial motivation. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Science &; Engineering, 62, 60.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McCabe, S. P. (1992). Moral reasoning. In Knowles, R. T. and McLean, G. F. (Eds), Psychological foundations of moral education and character development: An integrated theory of moral development (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: The Council for Research in Values and Philosophy.
McDonald, N. B.(2002). Character Counts at John’s: A Case Study of The Experiences of Eleven Middle School Teachers While Implementing A Character Education Program into Curriculum. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM.
McMillan, J. H. (2007). Classroom assessment: principles and practice for effective standards-based instruction (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn &; Bacon.
Miller, M. D., Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (2009). Measurement and assessment in teaching (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill/Pearson.
Milson, A. J., &; Mehlig, L. M. (2002). Elementary school teachers’ sense of efficacy for character education. The Journal of Educational Research, 96(1), 47-53.
Murphy, M. M. (1998). Character education in America's blue ribbon schools : best practices for meeting the challenge. Lancaster. PA: Technomic Publishing.
Neuman, W. L. (2003) . Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative. (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Nitko, A. J. (2001). Educational assessment of students (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Merrill.
Noddings, N. (1984). Caring, a feminine approach to ethics &; moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Noddings, N. (2002). Educating Moral People: A Caring Alternative to Character Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL). (1991). Alternative assessment: Policy beliefs. No. 15 &; 16. Oak Brook. IL.
Osterman, K., &; Siris, K.(2004). Interrupting the cycle of bullying and victimization in the elementary classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(4), 288-289.
Overton, T. (2009). Assessing learners with special needs : an applied approach (6nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill/Pearson.
Patterson, W. (2003). Breaking out of our boxes. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(8), 562-575.
Peterson, R. L. &; Skiba, R. (2001). Creating School Climates That Prevent School Violence. The Clearing House, 74(3), 155-163.
Phye, G. D. (1997). Handbook of classroom assessment: Learning, achievement, and adjustment. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Piaget, J. (1965). The Moral Judgement of the Child. London: Free Press.
Popham, W. J. (2008). Classroom assessment : what teachers need to know. Boston: Pearson Allyn and Bacon
Power, C. & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2008). The just community approach to moral education and the moral atmosphere of the school. In L. Nucci and Narvaez, D. (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (230-247). New York, London, Routledge.
Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Rest, J., Narvaez, D., Bebeau, M., &; Thoma, S. (1999). A Neo-Kohlbergian Approach: The DIT and Schema Theory. Educational Psychology Review, 11(4), 291-323.
Revell, L., & Arthur, J. (2007). Character education in schools and the education of teachers, Journal of Moral Education, 36(1), 79-92.
Reynolds, C. R., Livingston, R. B., &; Willson. V. (2009). Measurement and assessment in education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson.
Rose, C. M., &; Sharon, W. W. (2001). Classroom idea-sparkers. Childhood Education, 77, 222-227.
Rusnak, T. (1998). An integrated approach to character education. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Ryan, K., &; Bohlin, K. E. (1999). Building character in schools : practical ways to bring moral instruction to life. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Schutt, R. K. (2004). Investigating the social world : the process and practice of research (4th ed). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge Press
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Moral leadership: getting to the heart of school improvement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Taylor, R. L. (2009). Assessment of exceptional students: educational and psychological procedures (8th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
TenBrink, T. D. (1974). Evaluation: a practical guide for teachers. New York : McGraw-Hill.
Thomas, R. S. (1991). Assessing Character Education: Paradigms, Problems, and Potentials. The Clearing House, 65(1), 51-55.
Tigner, S. S. (1993). A Seven-Point Program. Journal of Education, 174(2), 14-22.
Tileston, D. W. (2004). What every teacher should know about student assessment. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Tivinan, E.(1995). The moral imagination. New York: Simon &; Schuster.
Trice, A. D. (2000). A handbook of classroom assessment. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
U. S. Department of Education. (2002). U. S. Department of Education Strategic Plan, 2002-2007. Retrieved February 17, 2010, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&;_&;ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED466025&;ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&;accno=ED466025
Vashist, S. R . (2004). Theory of educational evaluation. New Delhi: Anmol.
Vessels, G. G. (1998). Character and community development: a school planning and teacher training handbook. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.
Ward , A. W. &; Murray-Ward, M. (1999). Assessment in the classroom. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub.
Watson, M. (2008). Developmental discipline and moral education. In L. Nucci and Narvaez, D. (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (175-230). New York, London, Routledge.
Wellman, C. (1988). Morals and ethics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wiley, L. S. (1998). Comprehensive Character Building Classroom: A Handbook for Teachers. DeBarry, FL: Longwood Communications.

連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 王怡靜(2000)。赫爾巴特教育思想之探究及其對我國國小道德教育之啟示。教育研究(高師),8,239-250。
2. 江文慈(1997)。整合與超越:多元智力取向的評量。測驗與輔導,143,44-52。
3. 但昭偉、邱世明(2000)。多元文化主義觀點之下的道德教育與評量~一項初步的觀察。教育資料集刊,25,225-241。
4. 李奉儒(2004)。九年一貫課程中實施道德教育的困境與突破。學生輔導,92,38-55。
5. 李奉儒(2005)。尊重與關懷作為學校品德教育的核心。國教天地,159,20-29。
6. 李素貞、蔡金鈴(2004)。中小學品德教育之實施與評量。教育研究月刊,120,53-68。
7. 李琪明(1999)。我國國民中小學學校層次德育課程評鑑指標之建構,公民訓育學報,8,197-230。
8. 李琪明(2006)。新品德教育的興起與發展-美國經驗在臺灣的反思與轉化。課程與教學季刊,9(2),55-74。
9. 李琪明(2008)。國中小品德校園文化營造實徵研究。師大學報:教育類,53(3),153-178。
10. 張秀雄(2002)。九年一貫課程「社會學習領域」中的公民道德教育。公民訓育學報,11,39-52。
11. 莊明貞(1995b)。在國小課程的改進與發展-真實性評量。教師天地,79,21-25。
12. 陳明印(2004)。英國國定課程學生成就評量制度。研習資訊,21(6),90-109。
13. 黃德祥、謝龍卿(2004)。品格與道德教育的內涵與實施。教育研究,120,35-43。
14. 歐用生(1995)。「道德與健康」新課程理念。載於臺灣省國民教師研習會編印,國民小學新課程標準的精神與特色(56-68)。臺北縣:板橋。
15. 盧雪梅(2005)。九年一貫課程成績通知單模式探究:現況與展望。教育研究與發展期刊,1(3),177-212。
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔