Journal of Research in Education Sciences - Journal directory listing - Volume 65 (2020) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【65(2)】June (Special Issue: The Innovation and Enhancement of Teacher Professional Development in Taiwan)

Search by article title, author,
keywords, and DOI

CONTRIBUTORS
NOTICE

[Guide for Submission]

[Style for Thesis Writing]

[Review of Research Papers]

[The Copyright]

[Flow of Review System]

[Regulations Governing]

[Editorial Board]

[Advisory Board]

[Form Download]

Call for papers for the special issue “Prevention and Treatment of Addictive Behaviors on Campus” (Final submission deadline: 2021/8/31) The Journal of Research in Education Sciences will no longer provide printed copies Call for papers for the special issue “Educational Research Related to Southeast Asian Countries” (Final submission deadline: 2018/12/31)

Journal directory listing - Volume 65 (2020) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【65(2)】June (Special Issue: The Innovation and Enhancement of Teacher Professional Development in Taiwan)

Back

(Special Issue) Effects of Teacher Education Reform in the Standard-Based Policy Context: Analysis of a Teacher Education Program by Applying the Action Model/Change Model Schema Author: Hui-Ling Wendy Pan (Graduate Institute of Educational Policy and Leadership, Tamkang University), Chiu-Wei Hung (Ciao Cheng Elementary School, Sanyi Township, Miaoli County)

Vol.&No.：Vol. 65, No.2
Date：June 2020
Pages：73-104
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.202006_65(2).0003

Abstract：
The Teacher Professional Master Degree Program launched by the National Taichung University of Education has drastically reformed Taiwanese teacher education in recent years. The Ministry of Education promoted this program in a standard-based policy context. To evaluate its effects, this study used the evaluation approach of action model/change model schema. In the preliminary stage, the program’s action model/change model schema was constructed through literature analysis, document analysis, and interviews. Furthermore, the survey and interview data were collected to evaluate the schema’s change model. Specifically, the implementation of the program and how students’ practical reflection mediated the relationship between curriculum implementation and students’ professional performance were explored. The findings revealed that the scores of curriculum implementation, students’ practical reflection, and professional performance were all at a moderately high level. Additionally, it was found that curriculum implementation exerted main effects on students’ practical reflection and professional performance. However, innovative teaching, as a dimension of practical reflection, partially mediated the effects of curriculum implementation either on professional performance or on its two dimensions (professional practice and professional responsibility). Observation and reflection, another dimension of practical reflection, also had mediated effect but only on professional knowledge. The study suggested that integrated curriculum design is crucial for cultivating students’ professional competence and that skills of innovative teaching, and observation and reflection strengthen the program’s effect on student performance. Those two skills are significant intervening mechanisms that enable teacher education programs to achieve anticipated outcomes, in turn providing a direction for improving teacher education.

Keywords：program theory evaluation, action model, change model, teacher professional master degree program, standard-based teacher education

《Full Text》

References：

王麗雲、徐銘璟（2015）。芬蘭師資培育制度特色及其對臺灣師資培育之啟示。教育實踐與研究，28（1），167-205。【Wang, L.-Y., & Hsu, M.-J. (2015). Features of Finnish teacher education system and its implications for teacher education in Taiwan. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 28(1), 167-205.】
吳淑禎（2011）。中等學校師資培育課程的發展特色與教育專業課程的能力指標分析。教育研究集刊，57（4），1-41。doi:10.3966/102887082011125704001 【Wu, S.-C. (2011). The curriculum development characteristics and competence indicator analysis of the secondary school teacher education programs. Bulletin of Educational Research, 57(4), 1-41. doi:10.3966/1028870820 11125704001】
沈翠蓮（2013）。芬蘭師資培育課程設計之探析。課程與教學，16（2），115-134。【Shen, T.-L. (2013). Exploration of curriculum design of Finnish teacher education. Curriculum and Instruction Quarterly, 16(2), 115-134.】
孫志麟（2011）。未完成的任務：標準本位師資教育政策分析。教育研究與發展期刊，7（1），1-34。【Sun, C.-L. (2011). Mission unfinished: An analysis of the standards-based teacher education policy. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 7(1), 1-34.】
國立臺中教育大學（2010）。精緻師資培育機制實驗計畫暨99學年度執行規劃書。臺中市：作者。【National Taichung University of Education. (2010). Outstanding teacher cultivation experiment project and the annual plan of the 2010 academic year. Taichung, Taiwan: Author.】

» More

王麗雲、徐銘璟（2015）。芬蘭師資培育制度特色及其對臺灣師資培育之啟示。教育實踐與研究，28（1），167-205。【Wang, L.-Y., & Hsu, M.-J. (2015). Features of Finnish teacher education system and its implications for teacher education in Taiwan. Journal of Educational Practice and Research, 28(1), 167-205.】
吳淑禎（2011）。中等學校師資培育課程的發展特色與教育專業課程的能力指標分析。教育研究集刊，57（4），1-41。doi:10.3966/102887082011125704001 【Wu, S.-C. (2011). The curriculum development characteristics and competence indicator analysis of the secondary school teacher education programs. Bulletin of Educational Research, 57(4), 1-41. doi:10.3966/1028870820 11125704001】
沈翠蓮（2013）。芬蘭師資培育課程設計之探析。課程與教學，16（2），115-134。【Shen, T.-L. (2013). Exploration of curriculum design of Finnish teacher education. Curriculum and Instruction Quarterly, 16(2), 115-134.】
孫志麟（2011）。未完成的任務：標準本位師資教育政策分析。教育研究與發展期刊，7（1），1-34。【Sun, C.-L. (2011). Mission unfinished: An analysis of the standards-based teacher education policy. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 7(1), 1-34.】
國立臺中教育大學（2010）。精緻師資培育機制實驗計畫暨99學年度執行規劃書。臺中市：作者。【National Taichung University of Education. (2010). Outstanding teacher cultivation experiment project and the annual plan of the 2010 academic year. Taichung, Taiwan: Author.】
國立臺中教育大學（2012）。國立臺中教育大學精緻師資培育機制實驗計畫101學年度規劃書。臺中市：作者。【National Taichung University of Education. (2012). The 2012 academic year annual plan of outstanding teacher cultivation experiment project at the National Taichung University of Education. Taichung, Taiwan: Author.】
國立臺中教育大學（2015）。「教師專業碩士學位學程」自我評鑑報告。臺中市：作者。【National Taichung University of Education. (2015). The self-evaluation report of the program of master degree in professional education for teaching. Taichung, Taiwan: Author.】
張玉成（2003）。教學創新與思考啟發。載於國立臺灣海洋大學教育研究所（主編），創新教學理論與實務（pp. 31-48）。臺北市：師大書苑。【Zhang, Y.-C. (2003). Innovational instruction and thinking inspiration. In the Graduate Institute of Education, National Taiwan Ocean University (Ed.), Theory and practice of innovational instruction (pp. 31-48). Taipei, Taiwan: Lucky Bookstore.】
教育部（2012）。中華民國師資培育白皮書。取自https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2600/cp.aspx?n=37734BA79B67A89A&s=AF04D533FC93AA8D 【Ministry of Education. (2012). White paper for teacher education of R.O.C. Retrieved from https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2600/cp.aspx?n=37734BA79B67A89A&s=AF04D533FC93AA8D】
教育部（2016）。中華民國教師專業標準指引。取自https://ws.moe.edu.tw/Download.ashx?u=C099358C81D4876CC76BC3215266429688C51908E957AA46905E6341D56A62851A40314B0A05FF07E70DA98A9E44900B9497C0A93BAC587500E24A292E10A6A2BB65507F43766DDB&n=07811C61371B5CA54CBEC56434173F52A8A9D5D76F836A5F3A5AE1424291856B3166B4CDA71986395175AA5CC6480592&icon=..pdf 【Ministry of Education. (2016). Teacher professional standards of R.O.C. Retrieved from https://ws.moe.edu.tw/Download.ashx?u=C099358C81D4876CC76BC3215266429688C51908E957AA46905E6341D56A62851A40314B0A05FF07E70DA98A9E44900B9497C0A93BAC587500E24A292E10A6A2BB65507F43766DDB&n=07811C61371B5CA54CBEC56434173F52A8A9D5D76F836A5F3A5AE1424291856B3166B4CDA71986395175AA5CC6480592&icon=..pdf】
教育部（2018）。中華民國教師專業素養指引─師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準修正規定。取自http://edu.law.moe.gov. tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL001781 【Ministry of Education. (2018). Teacher professional competencies guide of R.O.C. ─ Pre-service teacher education stage and pre-service education teacher curriculum standards. Retrieved from http://edu.law.moe. gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL001781】
符碧真（2018）。素養導向國教新課綱的師資培育：國立臺灣大學「探究式─素養導向的師資培育」理想芻議。教育科學研究期刊，63（4），59-87。doi:10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0003 【Fwu, B.-J. (2018). Teacher preparation in response to competence-based curriculum reform for K-12 education: National Taiwan University’s proposal of inquiry-based and competence-based teacher education. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 63(4), 59-87. doi:10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0003】
黃嘉莉（2013）。標準本位師資培育理念與實踐。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學。【Huang, J.-L. (2013). The idea and practice of standards-based teacher education. Taipei, Taiwan: National Taiwan Normal University.】
黃嘉莉、葉怡芬、許瑛玿、曾元顯（2017）。取得中學教職的關鍵因素：運用決策樹探勘師資培育歷程。教育科學研究期刊，62（2），89-123。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).04 【Huang, J.-L., Yeh, Y.-F., Hsu, Y.-S., & Tseng, Y.-H. (2017). Critical factors of becoming secondary school teachers: Mining the process of teacher education by decision trees. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 62(2), 89-123. doi:10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).04】
楊思偉、陳盛賢、江志正（2008）。日本教師教育改革之研究。教育研究與發展期刊，4（1），27-54。【Yang, S.-W., Chen, S.-H., & Chiang, C.-C. (2008). A study of the Japanese teacher education reform. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 4(1), 27-54.】
潘慧玲（2005）。邁向下一代的教育評鑑：回顧與前瞻。載於潘慧玲（主編），教育評鑑的回顧與展望（pp. 3-36）。臺北市：心理。【Pan, H.-L. W. (2005). Education evaluation for the next generation: Retrospect and prospect. In H.-L. W. Pan (Ed.), Retrospect and prospect of education evaluation (pp. 3-36). Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological.】
潘慧玲（2014）。探思教師專業標準之發展與運用。教育研究月刊，243，5-19。doi:10.3966/168063602014070243001 【Pan, H.-L. W. (2014). Reflecting on the development and utilization of teacher professional standards. Journal of Education Research, 243, 5-19. doi:10.3966/168063602014070243001】
潘慧玲、高嘉卿（2012）。臺北市國民小學試辦教師專業發展評鑑之成效分析：理論導向評鑑取徑之應用。教育政策論壇，15（3），133-166。doi:10.3966/156082982012081503005 【Pan, H.-L. W., & Kao, J.-C. (2012). Assessment of a pilot program of teacher evaluation for professional development in Taipei elementary schools: Application of theory-driven evaluation approach. Educational Policy Forum, 15(3), 133-166. doi:10.3966/156082982012081503005】
潘慧玲、張新仁、張德銳（2008）。臺灣中小學教師評鑑／專業標準之建構：成果篇。載於潘慧玲（主編），教師評鑑理論與實務（pp. 281-298）。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學教育評鑑與發展中心。【Pan, H.-L. W., Chang, S.-J., & Chang, D.-R. (2008). The construction of standards for teacher evaluation and teacher profession. In H.-L. W. Pan (Ed.), Theory and practice of teacher evaluation (pp. 281-298). Taipei, Taiwan: Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, National Taiwan Normal University.】
潘慧玲、陳惠次（2017）。應用行動模式／改變模式之圖式規劃臺灣的學習共同體方案。當代教育研究季刊，25（1），109-131。doi:10.6151/CERQ.2017.2501.04 【Pan, H.-L. W., & Chen, H.-T. (2017). Applying the action model/change model schema in planning the learning community program in Taiwan. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 25(1), 109-131. doi:10.6151/CERQ.2017.2501.04】
謝斐敦（2011）。德國師資培育制度與教師素質。載於楊深坑、黃嘉莉（主編），各國師資培育制度與教師素質現況（pp. 93-120）。臺北市：教育部。【Hsieh, F.-D. (2011). Teacher education system and teacher quality in Germany. In S.-K. Yang & J.-L. Huang (Eds.), Current status of teacher education system and teacher quality in different countries (pp. 93-120). Taipei, Taiwan: Ministry of Education.】
Astika, G. (2014). Reflective teaching as alternative assessment in teacher education: A case study of pre-service teachers. TEFLIN Journal, 25(1), 16-32. doi:10.15639/teflinjournal.V25il/16-32
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
Brouwer, N. (2007). Alternative teacher education in the Netherlands 2000-2005. A standards-based synthesis. European Journal of Teacher Education, 30(1), 21-40. doi:10.1080/02619760601119934
Brouwer, N., & Korthagen, F. (2005). Can teacher education make a difference? American Educational Research Journal, 42(1), 153-224. doi:10.3102/00028312042001153
Carr, D. (2000). Professionalism and ethics in teaching. London, UK: Routledge.
Chen, H.-T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Chen, H.-T. (2005). Practical program evaluation: Assessing and improving planning, implementation, and effectiveness. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781412985444
Chen, H.-T. (2015). Practical program evaluation: Theory-driven evaluation and the integrated evaluation perspective (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Chen, H.-T., & Rossi, P. H. (1983). Evaluating with sense: The theory-driven approach. Evaluation Review, 7(3), 283-302. doi:10.1177/0193841X8300700301
Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Constructing 21st-century teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(3), 300-314. doi:10.1177/0022487105285962
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Teacher education and the American future. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 35-47. doi:10.1177/0022487109348024
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Delandshere, G., & Petrosky, A. (2004). Political rationales and ideological stances of the standards-based reform of teacher education in the US. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 1-15. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2003.09.002
DeLuca, C., & Bellara, A. (2013). The current state of assessment education: Aligning policy, standards, and teacher education curriculum. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(4), 356-372. doi:10.1177/0022487113488144
Department for Education. (2010). The importance of teaching. London, UK: Author.
Donaldson, S. I. (2003). Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium. In S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 109-141). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ellis, V., & Childs, A. (2019). Innovation in teacher education: Collective creativity in the development of a teacher education internship. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 277-286. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.020
Evans, L. (2011). The ‘shape’ of teacher professionalism in England: Professional standards, performance management, professional development and the changes proposed in the 2010 White Paper. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 851-870. doi:10.1080/01411926.2011.607231
Fullan, M. (2011). Whole system reform for innovative teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://www.michaelfullan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Untitled_Document_5.pdf
Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). London, UK: Pearson.
Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., & Shulman, L. (2002). Toward expert thinking: How curriculum case writing prompts the development of theory-based professional knowledge in student teachers. Teaching Education, 13(2), 219-243. doi:10.1080/1047621022000007594
Harfitt, G. J., & Chow, J. M. L. (2018). Transforming traditional models of initial teacher education through a mandatory experiential learning programme. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 120-129. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.021
Hayes, A. F. (2012). Process: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www. afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
Hennissen, P., Beckers, H., & Moerkerke, G. (2017). Linking practice to theory in teacher education: A growth in cognitive structures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 63, 314-325. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.01.008
Koster, B., & Dengerink, J. J. (2008). Professional standards for teacher educators: How to deal with complexity, ownership and function. Experiences from the Netherlands. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31(2), 135-149. doi:10.1080/02619760802000115
Körkkö, M., Kyrö-Ämmälä, O., & Turunen, T. (2016). Professional development through reflection in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 55, 198-206. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.014
Kriewaldt, J. (2012). Reorienting teaching standards: Learning from lesson study. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(1), 31-41. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2011.643761
Peercy, M. M., & Troyan, F. J. (2017). Making transparent the challenges of developing a practice-based pedagogy of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 26-36. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.005
Rogers, P. J., Petrosino, A., Huebner, T. A., & Hacsi, T. A. (2000). Program theory evaluation: Practice, promise, and problems. New Direction for Evaluation, 87, 5-13. doi:10.1002/ev.1177
Sachs, J. (2003). Teacher professional standards: Controlling or developing teaching? Teachers and Teaching, 9(2), 175-186. doi:10.1080/13540600309373
Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14. doi:10.3102/0013189X029007004
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-23. doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
Stein, L., & Stein, A. (2016). Re-thinking America’s teacher education programs. The Clearing House, 89(6), 191-196. doi:10.1080/00098655.2016.1206427
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Torkzadeh, G., Koufteros, X., & Pflughoeft, K. (2003). Confirmatory analysis of computer self-efficacy. Structural Equation Modeling, 10(2), 263-275. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM1002_6
Tuinamuana, K. (2011). Teacher professional standards, accountability, and ideology: Alternative discourses. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(12), 72-82. doi:10.14221/ajte.2011v36n12.8
Valli, L., & Rennert-Ariev, P. (2002). New standards and assessments? Curriculum transformation in teacher education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(2), 201-225. doi:10.1080/00220270110093625
van Ingen, S., & Ariew, S. (2015). Making the invisible visible: Preparing preservice teachers for first steps in linking research to practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 182-190. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2015.07.001
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Weiss, C. H. (2000). Which links in which theories shall we evaluate? New Directions for Evaluation, 87, 35-45. doi:10.1002/ev.1180
Wenger, E. (2009). A social theory of learning. In K. Illeris (Ed.), Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists… in their own words (pp. 209-218). London, UK: Routledge.
Wenger, E. (2012). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In C. Blackmore (Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179-198). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. doi:10.1007/978-1-84996-133-2_11
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206. doi:10.1086/651257
Zhu, C., Wang, D., Cai, Y., & Engels, N. (2013). What core competencies are related to teachers’ innovative teaching? Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 9-27. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2012.753984

APA Format	Pan, H.-L. W., % Hung, C.-W. (2020). Effects of Teacher Education Reform in the Standard-Based Policy Context: Analysis of a Teacher Education Program by Applying the Action Model/Change Model Schema. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 65(2), 73-104. doi: 10.6209/JORIES.202006_65(2).0003

CONTRIBUTORSNOTICE

Journal directory listing - Volume 65 (2020) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【65(2)】June (Special Issue: The Innovation and Enhancement of Teacher Professional Development in Taiwan) Back

CONTRIBUTORS
NOTICE

Journal directory listing - Volume 65 (2020) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【65(2)】June (Special Issue: The Innovation and Enhancement of Teacher Professional Development in Taiwan)

Back