Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/39153
|
| Title: | 臺北市立國民中學教師輔導與管教學生現況與問題之研究 |
| Authors: | 朱賡忠 |
| Contributors: | 秦夢群
朱賡忠 |
| Keywords: | 輔導與管教
零體罰
解除髮禁
guidance and discipline
zero corporal punishment
lifting the ban on hairstyle |
| Date: | 2005 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-04-25 15:48:36 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究旨在探討臺北市立國民中學自訂「教師輔導與管教學生辦法」的過程，瞭解其實施的現況，學校處理學生問題時所遭遇的困境，實施「零體罰」及「解除髮禁」所造成的衝擊，並提出改善策略與建議，俾供教育主管機關、學校行政與教師參考。
研究內容包含文獻分析與深度訪談等兩種方法。其中文獻分析的部分，首先探究輔導與管教之法規與適用及其內涵與救濟，然後以英、美為例，探究其他國家之輔導與管教辦法，對照我國過去在相關議題部分之研究文獻。至於深度訪談部分，則以教育主管單位及臺北市各型學校抽樣，選出與本研究問題之業務有直接相關的教育工作者共39人進行深入訪談，將訪談內容加以分析並提出建議。
本研究主要發現如下：
一、 各校訂定本辦法時，均能夠遵循國民教育法、行政命令等相關法規，依法定程序與精神辦理。
二、 學校學生常發生之偏差行為可分為四類，包括：學習態度不佳、生活常規不良、違規行為、違法行為等四大類型。
三、 學校在實施本辦法時所面臨的困擾，主要來自：辦法本身的不週延、學生人格特質、家庭因素或學區環境影響、家長的態度、學校行政的效能、以及教師的專業知能等。
四、 「零體罰」政策部分，教育主管單位、校長、訓導人員、輔導人員、教師、家長等，角色職責不同，其看法分歧，亟待整合。
五、 「解除髮禁」政策部分，教師期待學生自律與自愛，能自我澄清髮禁的意義與價值，不要為追求外表的特色而迷失了自我。
六、 受訪者提出多項看法，針對不同困擾的因素，提供各種改進的意見與建議，以提供各相關業務人員參考使用。
This research focuses on the process in which junior high schools in Taipei develop individual “regulations of student guidance and discipline by teachers,” in an attempt to understand the current execution of those regulations, the predicament that the school administrators might encounter when dealing with students’ problems, and the impact of implementing “zero corporal punishment” and “lifting of the ban on hairstyle,” at the same time proposing strategies and suggestions for improvement, which may serve the educational administration, school administrators, and teachers for future reference.
This study adopts two approaches—the review of literature and an in-depth interview. In terms of literature review, we first examine current regulations of guidance and discipline, also exploring their inherent compensatory mechanisms. Then, in the light of our studies on some cases of guidance and discipline methods in such western countries as Britain and the US, we re-examined research on relevant issues done by scholars in Taiwan in the past. And for the in-depth interview, we choose among education authorities and junior schools of all sizes in Taipei, and base our study on a sample of totally 39 educators directly related to our research question. An analysis of the result of the interviews is made, and suggestions offered accordingly.
The main findings of this research are as follows:
1. In making the aforementioned regulations, the school administrations are able to abide by the Statute of Civil Education and related governmental codes, executing such regulations within the confines of legality and justice.
2. Common deviant behaviors among junior high students can be categorized into 4 major types—bad learning attitudes, awful daily routines, behavior against regulations, and behavior against the law.
3. The problems schools face when executing such regulations are mainly due to: the inadequacy of the regulation per se, the students’ personalities, the influence of family or learning environment, parents’ attitude, effectiveness of school administrations, and the teachers’ professional knowledge and abilities.
4. In terms of “zero corporal punishment,” there are separate roles to play for education administrators, principals, school discipline staff, school guidance staff, teachers, and parents, and their ideas about this policy differ greatly and need to be integrated.
5. As for he policies on lifting the ban on hairstyle, the teachers expect their students not only to exhibit self-discipline and self-respect, but also to appreciate the meanings and values of the ban on hairstyle instead of blindly seeking beautiful appearances while losing their selves.
6. The interviewees offer various viewpoints on how different kinds of problematic situations can be improved, thus providing related educational administrators with future references. |
| Reference: | 一、 中文部分
邢泰釗（2004）。教師法律手冊（二版）。臺北：教育部。
李介至、林美伶（2000）。國中教師管教現況與問題。中等教育，51(2)，67-76。
杜正勝（2004）。創意臺灣，全球佈局，培育各盡其才新國民。學生輔導，93，176。
林斌（2005）。國民中小學教師輔導管教權法制化方案之規劃研究。
吳武典（1980）。學校輔導工作。臺北：張老師。
吳武典（1990）。輔導原理。臺北：心理。
吳錫鑫（2003）。教學、訓導、輔導三合一方案試辦學校輔導文化之研究。國立新竹師範學院，教育研究所輔導教學碩士班碩士論文。
秦夢群（2004）。美國教育法與判例。臺北：高等教育文化。
傅木龍（2002）。在九年一貫教改列車中做一個快樂的教育工作者。認真學習快樂成長—九年一貫課程理論與實做經驗分享。臺北：國立台北師範學院。29-60。
傅木龍（2004）。從輔導與管教談教師作為的迷思與突破。學生輔導，93，25-29。
曾大千（2003）。學生法制之研究—以中小學校規為取向。國立政治大學教育學系教育行政組織博士論文。未出版，臺北。
黃榮村（2004）。老師你也可以這樣做：校園法律實務與理念。民間司法改革基金會著。臺北：五南。
劉焜輝（1983）。輔導原理與實施。臺北：天馬出版社。
簡文敏（1987）。高中高職學校輔導工作行政決策之研究。碩士論文。
顏國樑（2001）。教師輔導與管教學生辦法的內容分析、特色及建議。學校行政，13，89-100。
二、 西文部分
Alexander, K. & Alexander, M. D. (2003). The law of schools, students and teachers. MN: West, Thomson.
Bethel School District 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S.675 (1986).
Cambron-Mc Cabe, N. H., Mc Carthy, M. M., & Thomas, S. B. (2004). Public school law: Teacher’s and strdent’s right (5th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Dorsey v. Bale. 521 S. W. 2d76 (ky. Ct. App. 1975).
Hall v. Tawney, 621 F. 2d607 (4th Cir. 1980)
Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U. S. 261 (1988).
Honing v. Doe, 484 U. S. 305, 108 S. Ct., 529 (1988).
Ingraham v. Wright, 420 U. S. 651 (1977).
Jackson v. Board of Education of Oktibbeha County, 349 So. 2d550. (Miss. 1977).
Katzman v.Cumberlandvalley School District, 479 A. 2d671 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1984).
Mc Carthy, M. M., & Cambron-Mc Cabe, N. H. (1992). Public school law: Teachers’ and students’ rights. (3rd ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia, 348 F. Supp. 816 (D. D. C. 1972).
New Jersey v. T. L. O., 469 U. S. 325 (1985).
Simpson, J. A., & Weiner E. S. C. (Eds.) (1989). The Oxford English Dietionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Vernonia School District, 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995). |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
學校行政碩士在職專班
92911002
94 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0092911002 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [學校行政碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
