Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131842
|
| Title: | 校長科技領導、教師自我效能與有效教學行為關係之研究：結合後設分析與結構方程式模型
Relationships among Principal Technology Leadership, Teacher Self-Efficacy and Effective Teaching Behavior: Combining Meta-analysis and Structural Equation Modeling |
| Authors: | 蔡介文
Tsai, Jie-Wen |
| Contributors: | 張奕華
Chang, I-Hua
蔡介文
Tsai, Jie-Wen |
| Keywords: | 校長科技領導
教師自我效能
有效教學行為
後設分析
結構方程式模型
Principal technology leadership
Teacher self-efficacy
Effective teaching behavior
Meta-analysis
Structure equation modeling |
| Date: | 2020 |
| Issue Date: | 2020-09-02 12:56:26 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 校長科技領導的核心論述為校長介入教學科技以促進教學成效。而教師效能感中介模式則認為教師自我效能是將外在條件轉化為教學行為的重要中介因素。本研究基於上述理論，提出校長科技領導、教師自我效能與有效教學行為之關係模型，並以過去文獻中提供的數據，驗證此理論模型。
本研究結合後設分析與結構方程式模型二種方法，先依據研究目的，從13筆學位論文與2筆期刊論文（樣本總數6,683人次）資料中，整合11個變數之間的55個相關效應量。再以此相關係數矩陣（11×11）作為觀察矩陣，進行結構方程式模型理論驗證與中介效應分析。
研究結果如下：（一）校長科技領導、教師自我效能與有效教學行為各變數之間的平均效應量皆達到中度或高度水準。（二）觀察資料與校長科技領導、教師自我效能與有效教學行為的關係模型達到良好適配，表示理論獲得支持。（三）教師自我效能在校長科技領導與有效教學行為之間發揮完全中介效應。最後，基於研究結論，提出實務工作及未來研究上的具體建議。
The core theory of principal technology leadership is that the principal introduces instructional technologies to enhance teaching effectiveness. The mediating model of teacher efficacy points out that teacher self-efficacy is an essential factor in translating external conditions into teaching behavior. Based on the above theory, this study proposes a model of the relationship between principal technology leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and effective teaching behavior. The data in the past studies were used to validate the theoretical model.
This study combined meta-analysis (MA) and structural equation modeling (SEM) two methods. First, 55 correlations between 11 variables from 13 theses and two articles (total sample size 6,683) were pooled. Therefore, the pooling matrix (11×11) was used as an observational matrix, then testing theory by SEM and mediation analysis.
The results of the study are as follows: (1) The mean effect sizes among principal technology leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and effective teaching behavior are all at a medium or large size. (2) Observation data are good-fitted with the model, and the theory is supported. (3) Teacher self-efficacy has a mediating effect between principal technology leadership and effective teaching behavior. Finally, based on the conclusion, this study makes recommendations for practical works and future researches. |
| Reference: | （加註星號*者為用於後設分析之論文。）
一、中文部分
余民寧（2006）。潛在變項模式：SIMPLIS的應用。臺北市：高等教育。
吳清山（2018）。教育4.0。教育研究月刊，292，130-131。
吳璧如（2004）。幼稚園職前教師的教師效能感與任教承諾之關係。教育學刊，23，207-229。
李茂能（2015）。傳統整合分析理論與實務：ESS & Excel。臺北市：五南。
李茂能（2016）。當代整合分析理論與實務。臺北市：五南。
李茂能（2019）。結構方程模式理論與實務。臺北市：五南。
*林三維（2006）。桃園縣國民中學體育教師自我效能與教學效能之相關研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立體育學院，桃園市。
*林欣儒（2018）。數學想想教師自我效能與教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立東華大學，花蓮縣。
*林彥輝（2014）。國民小學校長科技領導、學校知識管理與教師教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。
林進材（2000）。有效教學：理論與策略。臺北市：五南。
邱兆宏（2004）。壓力與健康：整合分析與模式驗證之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。高雄醫學大學，高雄市。
*施宏杰（2010）。宜蘭縣國民中小學校長科技領導、教師資訊科技素養與教師教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。
*柯麗卿（2009）。獨立研究指導教師教學效能量表之發展及其相關因素之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
孫志麟（2001）。教師自我效能與教學行為的關係——實徵取向的分析。國立臺北師範學院學報，14，109-140。
孫志麟（2003）。教師自我效能的概念與測量。教育心理學報，34(2)，139-156。
秦夢群、吳勁甫（2011）。國中校長教學領導、學校知識管理與教師教學效能之多層次分析。教育與心理研究，34（2），1-32。
張奕華（2006）。校長科技領導、教師科技素養與教學效能關係之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告（編號：NSC94-2413-H-004-024-），未出版。
*張奕華、吳怡佳（2008）。校長科技領導與教師教學效能關係之研究。教育研究與發展期刊，4（1），171-193。
張奕華、吳權威（2014）。智慧教育：理念與實踐。臺北市：網奕。
張奕華、許丞芳（2009）。國民中小學校長科技領導指標建構之研究。教育行政與評鑑學刊，7，23-48。
陳木金（1997）。國民小學教師教學效能評鑑量表編製之研究。藝術學報，61，221-253。
*陳芃均（2016）。新竹市國民小學校長科技領導與教師教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立新竹教育大學，新竹市。
*陳虹君（2011）。國小教師知覺校長科技領導與教師教學自我效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺北科技大學，臺北市。
陳瑋婷（2011）。自我效能、學習策略與學業成就之關係研究：結合後設分析與結構方程式模型。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，4(2)，83-95。doi:10.6764/JTEPD.201112.0083
*陳藝分（2011）。高雄市國民小學教師自我效能感與有效教學行為之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺南大學，臺南市。
*傅齊榮（2009）。臺北市國民小學校長科技領導與教師教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。淡江大學，新北市。
黃義良、王怡又（2017）。學校行銷組合、學校形象與顧客滿意度之關聯探討：MASEM方法的分析。教育學誌，37，1-61。
黃義良、王怡又（2018）。學校行銷與學校效能關聯之探討：採後設分析結合結構方程模式之驗證。嘉大教育研究學刊，40，63-98。
黃寶園（2004）。結合統合分析與結構方程模式之理論驗證：以壓力調節反應模式之建立與驗證為例（未出版之博士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。
黃寶園、林世華（2007）。人格特質與社會支持對壓力反應歷程影響之研究：結合統合分析與結構方程式模型二計量方法。教育心理學報，39(2)，263-294。doi:10.6251/BEP.20070604
*蔡明政（2014）。校長科技領導、教師資訊素養及教師教學效能關係之研究：以桃園縣國小為例（未出版之碩士論文）。中原大學，桃園縣。
*謝俊煌（2004）。雲林縣國民小學體育教師效能信念及教學效能（未出版之碩士論文）。臺北巿立體育學院，臺北市。
謝進昌、陳敏瑜（2011）。國內教育、心理後設分析研究出版偏誤檢定之實徵分析。測驗學刊，58（2），391-422。
*鍾佳穎（2003）。台北縣國民小學體育教師效能信念與教學行為之相關研究（未出版之碩士論文）。臺北巿立體育學院，臺北市。
*簡玉琴（2002）。桃園縣國民小學教師自我效能與教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台北師範學院，臺北市。
*顏伶娟（2010）。臺南縣國民小學校長科技領導與教師教學效能之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。南台科技大學，台南市。
*羅彣玢（2009）。花蓮縣國民小學校長科技領導與教師教學效能關係之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立花蓮教育大學，花蓮縣。
二、英文部分
Alamolhoda, M., Ayatollahi, S. M. T., & Bagheri, Z. (2017). A comparative study of the impacts of unbalanced sample sizes on the four synthesized methods of meta-analytic structural equation modeling. BMC Research Notes, 10(1), 446. doi: 10.1186/s13104-017-2768-5
Anderson, R. E., & Dexter, S. (2005). School technology leadership: An empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(1), 49-82.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
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.
Becker, B. J. (1992). Using results from replicated studies to estimate linear models. Journal of Educational Statistics, 17(4), 341-362.
Berk, R. A. (2005). Survey of 12 strategies to measure teaching effectiveness. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 48-62.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J. & Rothstein, H. (2009). Introduction to Meta-Analysis. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Bray-Clark, N., & Bates, R. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs and teacher effectiveness: Implications for professional development. Professional Educator, 26(1), 13-22.
Chang, I. (2003). Assessing the dimensions of principals` effective technology leadership: An application of structural equation modelling. Educational Policy Forum, 6(1), 111-141.
*Chang, I. H. (2012). The effect of principals` technological leadership on teachers` technological literacy and teaching effectiveness in Taiwanese elementary schools. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (2), 328–340.
Chang, I. H., Chin, J. M., & Hsu, C. M. (2008). Teachers` perceptions of the dimensions and implementation of technology leadership of principals in Taiwanese elementary schools. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 229-245.
Cheung, M. (2015a). Meta-analysis : A structural equation modeling approach. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Cheung, M. (2015b). metaSEM: an R package for meta-analysis using structural equation modeling. Frontiers in Psychology, 5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01521
Cheung, M., & Chan, W. (2005). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling: a two-stage approach. Psychological Methods, 10(1), 40-64.
Cheung, M., & Jak, S. (2016). Analyzing big data in psychology: A split/analyze/meta-analyze approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 738. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00738
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Deemer, S. A., & Minke, K. M. (1999). An investigation of the factor structure of the teacher efficacy scale. Journal of Educational Research, 93(1) , 3-10.
Dexter, S. (2011). School technology leadership: Artifacts in systems of practice. Journal of School Leadership, 21(2), 166-189.
Flanagan, L., & Jacobsen, M. (2003). Technology leadership for the twenty‐first century principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(2), 124-142.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569–582. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.569
Guskey, T. R., & Passaro, P. D. (1994). Teacher efficacy: A study of construct dimensions. American Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 627-643.
Higgins, J. P., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003). Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. British Medical Journal, 327(7414), 557-560.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
Hoyle, R. H., & Smith, G. T. (1994). Formulating clinical research hypotheses as structural equation models: A conceptual overview. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 62(3), 429-440. doi:10.1037/0022-006x.62.3.429
Hsieh, C. C., Yen, H. C. & Kuan, L. Y. (2014). The relationships among principals’ technology leadership, teaching innovations, and students’ academic optimism in elementary schools. Paper presented in International Conference on Educational Technologies & Sustainability, Technology & Education 2014, New Taipei City, Taiwan.
ISTE (2009). NETS for administrators. Retrieved from https://www.iste.org/docs/pdfs/20-14_ISTE_Standards-A_PDF.pdf
Jak, S. (2015). Meta-analytic structural equation modelling. Dordrecht, Neth.: Springer.
Jak, S., & Cheung, M. (in press). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling with moderating effects on SEM parameters. Psychological Methods. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/ce85j
Jensen, B., Wallace, T. L., Steinberg, M. P., Gabriel, R. E., Dietiker, L., Davis, D. S., Kelcey, B., Minor, E. C., Halpin, P., & Rui, N. (2019). Complexity and scale in teaching effectiveness research: Reflections from the MET Study. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 27(7), 2-21.
Ke, Z., Zhang, Q., & Tong, X. (2019). Bayesian meta-analytic SEM: A one-stage approach to modeling between-studies heterogeneity in structural parameters. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 26(3), 348-370.
Kearsley, G., & Lynch, W. (1992). Educational leadership in the age of technology: The new skills. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(1), 50-60.
MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99-128. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3901_4
Mohamadi, F. S., & Asadzadeh, H. (2012). Testing the mediating role of teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs in the relationship between sources of efficacy information and students achievement. Asia Pacific Education Review, 13(3), 427-433. doi: 10.1007/s12564-011-9203-8.
Richardson, J. W., & Sterrett, W. L. (2018). District technology leadership then and now: A comparative study of district technology leadership from 2001 to 2014. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 589-616.
Richardson, J. W., Bathon, J., Flora, K. L., & Lewis, W. D. (2012). NETS• A scholarship: A review of published literature. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(2), 131-151.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1-36.
Tan, S.C. (2010). Technology leadership: Lessons from empirical research. In Proceedings of ASCILITE - Australian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Annual Conference 2010 (pp. 891-895). Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/45492/.
Tang, R. W., & Cheung, M. W. L. (2016). Testing IB theories with meta-analytic structural equation modeling: The TSSEM approach and the Univariate-r approach. Review of International Business and Strategy, 26(4), 472-492.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202-248.
UNESCO. (2015). Incheon declaration: Education 2030-towards inclusive and equitable quality education and lifelong learning for all. Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/education-2030-incheon-framework-for-action-implementation-of-sdg4-2016-en_2.pdf
Viechtbauer, W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. Journal of Statistical Software, 36(3), 1-48.
Viswesvaran, C., & Ones, D. S. (1995). Theory testing: Combining psychometric meta‐analysis and structural equations modeling. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 865-885.
Weng, C. H., & Tang, Y. (2014). The relationship between technology leadership strategies and effectiveness of school administration: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 76, 91-107.
Wheatley, K. F. (2005). The case for reconceptualizing teacher efficacy research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(7), 747-766.
Wong, A. Y., & Daud, K. (2017). Headmaster Technology Leadership in Malaysia Elementary Schools. Journal of Education and Learning, 11(2), 154-164.
Wright, S. (1934). The method of path coefficients. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 5(3), 161-215. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
教育行政與政策研究所
106171002 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106171002 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202001482 |
| Appears in Collections: | [教育行政與政策研究所 ] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 100201.pdf | | 2109Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 487 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
