政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/49812

政大典藏 > College of Education > Master of Education in School Administration > Theses > Item 140.119/49812

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/49812

Title:	臺北縣國民小學分散式領導對學生學習態度影響之研究 Research on the influence of distributed leadership on students’ learning attitude in elementary schools in taipei county
Authors:	方慶林 Fang, Ching Lin
Contributors:	張奕華 Chang, I Hua 方慶林 Fang, Ching Lin
Keywords:	分散式領導學習態度國民小學 distributed leadership learning attitude elementary school
Date:	2009
Issue Date:	2010-12-09 09:57:17 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	本研究旨在探討國民小學分散式領導對學生學習態度之影響，研究採用調查研究法，以臺北縣國民小學三至六年級級任教師為調查對象，預試問卷，共寄出210份預試問卷，回收199份問卷，回收率94.8%，扣除無效問卷5份，有效問卷為194份，，有效問卷比率92.4%，並以項目分析，二階驗證性因素分析、信度分析進行研究工具之研發。正式問卷發出748份問卷，回收665份問卷，回收率88.9%，扣除無效問卷42份，有效問卷為623份，有效問卷比率83.3%。並分別以平均數、標準差之描述性統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾森積差相關及結構方程模式等統計方式進行資料分析。本研究獲致以下結論：一、國民小學整體分散式領導的現況介於符合和有些符合之間。各層面以成員的參與層面教師知覺程度最好，成員的動力層面較低。二、國民小學整體學生學習態度的現況介於符合和有些符合之間。各層面以社會科教師知覺程度最好，英語科較低。三、教師人口變項年齡、服務年資不同，知覺校長整體分散式領導達顯著差異。年齡越大，知覺校長分散式領導程度越高。服務年資的組間未達顯著差異。四、學校環境變項學校規模、學校區域、校長年資不同，教師知覺校長整體分散式領導達顯著差異。學校規模越小、學校區域偏遠、校長年資越小，知覺校長分散式領導程度越高。五、教師人口變項年齡、服務年資不同，教師知覺整體學生學習態度達顯著差異。年齡越大、服務年資越長，知覺整體學生學習態度越高。六、學校環境變項學校規模不同，教師知覺整體學生學習態度達顯著差異，事後比較，組間未達顯著差異。七、分散式領導與學生學習態度具有中度正相關。八、分散式領導對學生學習態度具有正向影響性。關鍵詞：分散式領導、學習態度、國民小學 This study aims to explore the relationship between the distributed leadership and students’ learning attitude in the elementary schools. The Survey Research Method is adopted, and the research objects are the third to sixth grade elementary school teachers in Taipei. A total of 210 pre-test questionnaires were distributed, with 194 invalid questionnaires. The effective rate was 92.4%. In this study, item analysis, second-order confirmatory factor analysis, and the reliability analysis are applied. 748 formal questionnaires are distributed, with 665 valid, representing 83.5% effective. With the use of SPSS 17.0 for Windows and LISREL 8.80 statistical software for analysis, descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way analysis of variance, and Person product-moment correlation, and Structural Equation Models were employed in this study, and obtain the conclusion as follows: 1. The overall current conditions of distributed leadership in the elementary schools are good. Objects perform the best in the teacher’s perception of the member’s participation aspect while the member’s motivation performs the worst. 2. The overall current conditions of students’ learning attitude in the elementary schools are good. Among them, teachers in the Social Studies perceived the distributed leadership the best while the ones in the English the worse 3. There is significant difference for different teacher characteristics such as ages, years of service to perceived the principals’ distributed leadership. The older the age, the level of the principal distributed leadership perception the higher. There is no significant difference among the four different year-of-service groups. 4. With the different environmental variables in the school scale, school area, and principal’s years of service, the teachers significantly perceived the principal distributed leadership differently. The smaller the school, the level of principal distributed leadership perception the higher. The same results are obtained if the remoter the school, and the smaller the principal’s years of service, which means the level of principal distributed leadership perception is higher. 5. There is significant difference in the teacher perception of students’ learning attitude with different teacher characteristics such as ages, years of service. The older the teachers’ age, the level of students’ learning attitude perception the higher. 6. With the different scales of schools, the difference achieves significance in the way of teachers sensing the students’ learning attitude. Through post-hoc comparison, there is no difference among groups. 7. Distributed leadership has a significant positive correlation with students’ learning attitude. 8. Distributed leadership has a significant positive impact on students’ learning attitude. Keywords: distributed leadership, learning attitude, elementary school
Reference:	壹、中文部分 Maxwell（2008）。360°全方位領導。臺北市：創見文化。方婷妮（2006）。不同入學背景學生學習態度及學習策略對專業科目學業成就之影響-以二年制工業設計系學生為例。國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。王文科、王智弘（2007）。教育研究法（第十一版）。臺北市：五南。王世英、溫明麗、謝雅惠、黃乃熒、黃嘉莉、陳玉娟等（2006）。我國新移民子女學習成就現況之研究。教育資料與研究雙月刊，68，137-170。王家珍（2001）。管理領域學生學習態度研究。輔仁大學應用統計研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。王瑞壎（2002，5月）。OECD組織PISA評量對國小數學與科學教育之啟示。論文發表於國立中正大學教育學研究所，嘉義縣。王福林（1990）。新竹師院學生與師專學生家庭社經地位及其行為學習成就之調查。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。石中英（2006）。哲學視野中的學習成就。教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，1-10。江滿堂（2003）。國民小學校長領導策略與學校氣氛對教師知識分享意願影響之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。余民寧（2006）。影響學習成就因素的探討。教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，11-24。余民寧（2008）。心理與教育統計學。臺北市：三民。何建霖（2008）。國民小學學校分佈式領導、教師同僚專業互享與學生學習表現關係之研究。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義市。余昭（1992）。人格心理學(及人格之培育)。臺北市：桂冠。佘豐賜（2008）。我國學生學習成就評量政策執行之研究。高雄師範大學博士論文，未出版，高雄市。吳明隆（1997）。國小學生數學學習行為與其電腦焦慮、電腦態度關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學類研究所博士論文，未出版，高雄市。吳明隆（2006）。結構方程模式-SIMPLIS的應用。臺北市：五南。巫有鎰（2005）。學校與非學校因素對台東縣國小學生學業成就的影響：結合教育機會均等與學校效能研究的分析模式。國立屏東師範學院教育行政研究所博士論文，未出版，屏東縣。吳泓泰（2006）。國中生學習風格、數學學習態度與數學學業成就關係之研究。大葉大學教育專業發展研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。吳悅如（2009）。文化資本對國小學童的學習態度與學業成就之影響-以宜蘭地區六年級國小學童為例。佛光大學社會教育學研究所碩士論文，未出版，宜蘭縣。吳登坤（2008）。嘉義縣市九年級學生校外數學補習經驗、學習態度、學習策略與學業成就之相關研究。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。李文益、黃毅志（2004）。文化資本、社會資本與學生成就的關聯性之研究-以台東師院為例。台東大學教育學報，15 (2)，23-58。李清榮（2004）。高雄市國小教師領導類型、班級氣氛與學習態度之研究。國立高學師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。周佳樺（2005）。國中學生國語文學習態度、學習行為與學業成就之相關研究。國立雲林科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，雲林縣。官淑如（1997）。綜合高中學生學習態度及其相關因素之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。林千惠、郭惠君（1997）。同儕個別教學對高職智能障礙學生學業表現與學習態度效果之研究。特殊教育季刊，12，125-152。林倩瑜（2008）。國小學童師生關係與學習態度、幸福感之相關研究。國立新竹教育大學教育心理與諮商學系輔導教學碩士班碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。林清財（1986）。國中學生對學習態度之調查分析。輔導月刊，22(5)，31-36。林榮聰（2000）。設計科系學生學習態度之探討。國立台灣科技大學設計研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。林慧玉（2005）。國小高年級學童物慾觀、學習態度、成就動機與學業成就之相關研究：兼論性別差異。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。林寶貴、錡寶香（1992）。高職階段聽障學生學習態度、成就動機及其學業成就之相關研究。特殊教育學刊，8，17-32。邱佳樁（2004）。高職電機電子群學生學習態度與學業成就之路境模式研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。徐吉春（2008）。分散式領導。輯於黃宗顯（主編），學校領導新理論與實踐（頁63-88）。臺北市：五南。秦夢群（1992）。高中教師管理心態、學生內外控與學生學習習慣與態度之關係研究。教育與心理研究，15，129-172。秦夢群（2004）。教育行政—理論部分。臺北市：五南。馬明、于學友（2008）。從分佈式領導看我國學校組織領導變革。當代教育論壇，2，24-26。張明輝（2000）。中小學學校行政領導的發展趨勢。師友月刊，401，11-14。張明輝（2004）。幾項領導新議題對學校領導的啟示。教育研究月刊，119，26-34。張芳全（2006）。影響數學成就因素在結構方程式模型檢定：以2003 年台灣國二生TIMSS 資料為例。國立臺北教育大學學報，19(2)，163-196。張芳全（2007）。論文就是要這樣寫。臺北市：心理。張芳全（2009）。臺灣城鄉學生的科學成就差異分析。國民教育，50(1)，96-106。張奕華（2007）。學校科技領導與管理：理論及實務。臺北市：高等教育。張奕華（2009）。分散式領導、教師學術樂觀與學生學習成就關係之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究（98-2410-H-004-011）。張奕華、許正妹（2008）。研究方法與軟體應用：概念及實例。臺北市：心理。張春興（1989）。張氏心理學辭典。臺北市：東華。張春興（1991）。現代心理學。臺北市：東華。張郁雯（2006）。不同評量層次成就分數的解釋與使用。教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，41-56。張嘉亨 (2005)。學校組織領導對教師團隊學習與學生學習之影響。國立中正大學成人及繼續教育所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。張德銳（1986）。台北市國民中學三年級學生次級文化與違規犯過行為的關係研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。張德銳、丁一顧（1999）。情境領導及其在國小班級領導之應用研究。臺北市立師範學院學報，30，103-106。教育部電子報（2008）。PISA成績放異彩台灣學生受肯定。2009年7月28日，取自http://epaper.edu.tw/e9617_epaper/ topical.aspx?period_num=294&topical_sn=157&page=0 教育廣播電臺（2008）。TIMSS 2007結果公布臺灣國二生數學國際第1。2009年7月28日，取自 http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/ jw!6IdwGxaXEQW05y2KQ5tBKw--/article?mid=239 陳正昌、張慶勳（主編）（2007）。量化研究與統計分析。臺北市：新學林。陳怡卉（2010）。國民中學校長分散式領導與教育成效相關之研究。國立政治大學教育系碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。陳青達、鄭勝耀（2008）。文化資本與學習成就之相關研究：以雲林縣國民小學六年級學生為例。新竹教育大學學報，25 (1)，79-98。陳建州、劉正（2001）。重探學校教育功能-家庭背景因素影響力變化之研究。台東師院學報，12，115-144。陳碧祥（2006）。國小學生學習成就評量問題之探究-教學現場角度。教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，57-74。曾玉玲（1993）。台北市高智商低成就國中學生學習信念與相關因素之探討。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。黃宗顯（主編）（2008）。學校領導新理論與實踐。臺北市：五南。黃芳銘（2007）。結構方程模式：理論與應用。臺北市：五南。黃恆(1980)。國中教室師生關係現況及其影響因素。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。楊宜芳（2009）。新住民學童家庭因素對其英語學習成就與學習態度的影響-以桃園縣某國小為例。國立臺北教育大學英語教育學系英語教育碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。楊朝祥（1984）。技術職業教育辭典。臺北：三民。溫明麗（2008）。教育101：教育理論與實踐。臺北市：高等教育。葉重新、簡茂發（1993）。臺中師範學院師專與師院結業生教學態度之比較研究。行政院國科會專題研究計畫成果報告(81-0301-H-142-503)。廖茂村（2002）。高低成就學生學習活動之研究~以高雄市英明國中為例。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。臺灣學生學習成就評量資料庫網站（2009）。TASA建置背景。2009年7月28日，取自http://tasa.naer.edu.tw/brief.htm 鄭增財（1995）。台北市國中技藝教育班學生學習態度與其相關因素之研究。國立臺灣大學工業教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。鄭耀嬋、何華國（2004）。國小融合班學生學習態度及其相關因素之探討。國民教育研究學報，13 ，215-260。盧雪梅（2005）。淺析寫作測驗的重要課題。國中基本學力測驗專刊-飛揚， 35。2009年11月3日，取自http://www.bctest.ntnu.edu.tw/ 楊憲明（2006）。認知能力、認知歷程與學習成就關係探究。教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，25-40。賴志峰（2008a）。分佈式領導理論之探究-學校領導者、追隨者和情境的交互作用。國民教育研究學報，20，87-113。賴志峰（2008b）。分佈式領導的意義、構面與主張。教育研究月刊，171， 28-40。賴志峰（2009）。學校領導新議題研究。臺北市：高等教育。賴鑫城（1992）。國中學生自我概念、學業成就、師生關係對學校態度之研究。高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。簡紅珠（2006）。以學習成就為主的教師效能研究與教師評鑑。教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，75-90。簡茂發（1991）。教育研究法。輯於黃光雄、簡茂發（主編），測驗的編製（頁141-178）。臺北市：師大書苑。簡惠閔、高家斌（2007）。提升學校效能之具體策略-學習型學校的觀點。教育資料與研究雙月刊，79，155-168。貳、英文部分 Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. American Educational Research Journal, 25(4), 5-11. Barry, D. (1991). Managing the bossless team: Lessons in distributed leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 20(1), 31-47. Bennett, N., Harvey, J. A., Wise, C., & Woods, P. (2003a). Distributed leadership: Summary report. Retrieved August 6, 2009, from http://forms.ncsl.org.uk/mediastore/image2/bennett-distributed-leadership-summary.pdf Bennett, N., Harvey, J. A., Wise, C., & Woods, P. (2003b). Distributed leadership: Full report. Retrieved August 6, 2009, from http://forms.ncsl.org.uk/mediastore/image2/bennett-distributed-leadership-full.pdf Bennis, W., & Heenan, D. A. (1999). Co-leader: The power of great partnerships. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Brooks, J. S., Jean-Marie, G., Normore, A. H., & Hodgins, D. W. (2007). Distributed leadership for social justice: Exploring how influence and equity are stretched over an urban high school. Journal of School Leadership, 17(4), 378-408. Burke, P. H. (2003). Organizational learning a necessity for sharing and distributing leadership to bring about real change for teachers and students: One principal`s story. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. Bush, T. (2003). Theories of educational leadership and management (3rd ed.). London: Paul Chapman. Camburn, E., Rowan, B., & Taylor, J. E. (2003). Distributed leadership in schools: The case of elementary schools adopting comprehensive school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4), 347-373. Distributed Leadership Web (2007a). Introduction. Retrieved July 29, 2009, from http://forms.ncsl.org.uk/mediastore/image2/ introduction.htm Distributed Leadership Web (2007b). The five pillars of distributed leadership. Retrieved July 29, 2009, from http://forms.ncsl.org.uk/mediastore/image2/ distributedleadership_web/textonly/hay.htm Distributed Leadership Web (2007c). Future planning. Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://forms.ncsl.org.uk/mediastore/image2/ distributedleadership_web/textonly/future.htm Duignan, P. (2007, August). Distributed leadership: Critique from a catholic perspective. Paper presented at Fourth International Conference on Catholic Educational Leadership: Directions for Catholic Educational Leaders in the 21st Century on Sofitel - Wentworth Hotel of Sydney, Australia. Duignan, P., & Bezzina, M. (2006, October). Distributed leadership: The theory and the practice. Paper presented at CCEAM Annual Conference on Hilton Cyprus Hotel of Lefkosia, Cyprus. E-Learning Queen (2007). Distributed leadership in the E- Learning organization. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from http://elearnqueen.blogspot.com/2005/09/distributed-leadership-in-e-learning.html Elmore, R. F. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. Washington, DC: Albert Shanker Institute. Fink, D., & Hargreaves, A. (2003). Sustaining leadership. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(9), 693-700. Fink, D., & Hargreaves, A. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership. Educational Leadership, 61(7), 8-13. Fink, D., & Hargreaves, A. (2006). Sustaining leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gordon, Z. V. (2005). The effect of distributed leadership on student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Central Connecticut State University, New Britain. Gronn, P. (2008). The future of distributed leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 141-158. Hargreaves, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: Democracy or delivery? Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 229-240. Harris, A. (2002). Distributed leadership in schools: Leading or misleading? Paper presented at the British Educational Leadership Management & Administration Society Conference, Birmingham, England. Harris, A. (2005a). Leading or misleading? Distributed leadership and school improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(3), 255-265. Harris, A. (2005b). Distributed leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.) The essentials of school leadership ( pp. 160-172). London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Harris, A. (2007). Distributed leadership: Conceptual confusion and empirical reticence. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(3), 315-325. Harris, A. (2008). Distributed leadership: According to the evidence. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 172-188. Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Day, D., Sammons, P., & Hopkins, D. (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), 337-347. Hartley, D. (2007). The emergence of distributed leadership in education: Why now? British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 202-214. Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2006). Academic optimism of school: A force for student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 425-446. Kratzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2001). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop as leader. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Lashway, L. (2003). Distributed leadership. Alexandria, VA: National Association of Elementary School Principals. Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529-561. Leithwood, K., Mascall, B., Straus, T., Sacks, R., Memon, N., & Yashkina, A. (2007). Distributed leadership to make schools smarter: Taking the ego out of the system. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 37-67. Lucia, R. T. (2004). Distributed leadership: An exploratory study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton. Mascall, B., Leithwood, K., Straus, T., & Sacks, R. (2008). The relationship between distributed leadership and teachers’ academic optimism. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 214-228. MIT Leadership Center Web (2009). Distributed leadership modle. Retrieved July 30, 2009, from http://sloanleadership.mit.edu/r-dlm.php Oduro, K. T. (2004). Distributed leadership in schools: What english headteachers say about the pull and push factors. Paper presented at the English Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Manchester. Ritchie, R., & Woods, P. A. (2007). Degrees of distribution: Towards an understanding of variations in the nature of distributed leadership in schools. Journal of School Leadership and Management, 27(4), 363-381. Robinson, V. M. J. (2008). Forging the links between distributed leadership and educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 241-256. Smyle, M. A., Conley, S., & Marks, H. M. (2002). Exploring new approaches to teacher leadership for school improvement. In J. Murphy (Ed.). The educational leadership challenge: Redefining leadership for the 21st Century(pp. 162-188). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education. Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future academic achievement. Tennessee: University of Tennessee Value Research and Assessment Center. Sherer, J. Z. (2007). The practice of leadership in mathematics and language arts: The Adams case. In J. P. Spillane & J. B. Diamond (Eds.), Distributed leadership in practice (pp. 106-128). New York: Teachers College Press. Smith, P. A., & Hoy, W. K. (2007). Academic optimism and student achievement in urban elementary schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 45(5), 556-568. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisoc: Jossey-Bass. Spillane, J. P. (2005a). Primary school leadership practice: How the subject matters. School Leadership and Management, 25(4), 383-397. Spillane, J. P. (2005b). Distributed leadership. The Educational Forum, 69(2), 143-150. Spillane, J. P., & Diamond, J. B. (2007). A distributed perspective on and in practice. In J. P. Spillane & J. B. Diamond (Eds.), Distributed leadership in practice (pp. 146-166). New York: Teachers College Press. Spillane, J. P., & Scherer, J. P. (2004). A distributed perspective on school leadership: Leadership practice as stretched over people and place. Draft prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Education Association, San Diego. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher 30(3), 23-28. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. B. (2004). Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 36(1), 3-34. Starcher, S. L. (2006). The relationship between the leadership practices of principals and student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Marshall, West Virginia. Stolp, S. (1994). Leadership for culture. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, University of Oregon. (No. EDO-EA-94-6). VPAdminFiscal. (2007). Distributed leadership. Retrieved July 31, 2009, from http://www.wcupa.edu/_information/afa/VPAdminFiscal/Distlead.htm West Chester University. (2004). An introduction to distributed leadership. Retrieved August 6, 2009, from http://www.wcupa.edu/_information/Distlead.htm Wikipedia (2009). Structural equation modeling. Retrieved November 28, 2009, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_equation_modeling Woods, P. A. (2005). Democratic leadership in education. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學學校行政碩士在職專班 96911009 98
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096911009
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Master of Education in School Administration] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
100901.pdf		6874Kb	Adobe PDF2	2000	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...