請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69695完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 戚樹誠(Shu-Cheng, Chi) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Pao-Chen Wu | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 吳寶珍 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T03:24:10Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2019-06-21 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2018-06-21 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2018-06-06 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文部分
江欣霓（2002 ）。國小教師工作壓力、情緒智慧與身心健康之相關研究 （碩士論文）。取自 http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=_Do38l/webmge?mode= basic 伍爾本Hal Urban(2014)，劉如菁譯。好老師會做的20件事。格子外面。 余玉眉，田聖方，蔣欣欣，1991。質性研究：田野研究法於護理學之應用。巨流 圖書公司。 李家安，郭昭佑(2014)，教師工作滿意度的新觀點—從第三域的視角出發。臺灣教育評論月刊，頁101-105 孫志麟（1991）。國民小學教師自我效能及其相關因素之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所 碩士論文（未出版）。 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。台北教育大學學報，14，109-140。 張鈿富、林松柏與周文菁（2012）。台灣高中學生學習投入影響因素之研究。教育資料集刊，54，23-57。 湯仁燕（1993）。國民小學教師教學信念與教學行為關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。 趙珮伃，房美玉(2009)。主管領導行為與員工工作滿意之關聯性探討。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。未出版。 王月雲、張永富 (2003) 工作特性與組織承諾之關係研究：以社會資本為調節變項。遠東學報第二十卷第四期。第983頁至第989頁。 張同廟、陳昭雄(2007) 組織溝通、工作滿意、組織承諾與工作績效之關係模式研究─以我國大學校院學生社團幹部為例。弘光學報52期。第145頁至第174頁。 李春長，沈姵君 (2007)。組織結構、員工工作滿意度與組織承諾對工作績效之影響－以不動產經紀人員為例。台灣土地研究，民國九十七年五月 第十一卷 第一期 第65頁至第103頁 檢自：維基百科，自由的百科全書https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/內容分析法(2017) 檢自：MBA智庫百科wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/内容分析法 二、英文部分 Alexander, R. J. (1984). Primary teaching. Eastbourne: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18. Angell, L. R. (2009). Construct validity of the community college survey of student engagement (CCSSE). Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 33, 564-570. Angle, H. L., & Perry, J. L.(1981). An empiric assessment of organizational effectiveness, Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 1-14. Ashton, P.（1984）. Teacher efficacy：A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5), 28-32. Bandura, A.（1977）. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. New York, NY, US: Free Press. Blau, G. J. ＆ Boal, K. R.（1987）.Conceptualizing How Job Involvement And Organizational Commitment Affect Turnover And Absenteeism. Academy of Management Review,12（2）,288－300. Bogler, R. （2002）. Two profiles of schoolteachers: a discriminant analysis of job satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 665-673. Brookde,P.P.,Russell,J.L.,(1988).Discriminant validity of measure of job satisfaction, job involvement andorganizational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology,73:139-145. Buchanan, B. III. (1974). Government Manager, Business Executive, and rganizational Commitment. Public Administration Review, 34, 339-47. Buchanan, B(1974). Building Organizational Commitment: The Socialization of Managers in Work Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly,19,533－546. Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 13(8), 1-7. Clark, C. M. & Peterson P. L.（1986）. Teachers' thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.). Handbook of research on teaching (pp.255-296). New York: Macmillan. Cole, R. E. (1979). Work, Mobility, and Participation. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Davis, K. , 1984. Human Relation and Organizational Behavior, New York： Free Press. Davis, R. C. , 1951. The Fundamental of the Top Management, New York：Happer & Row, pp522. Dinham, S., & Scott, C. （1996）. Teacher satisfaction, motivation and health: Phase one of the teacher 2000 project. American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting. AERA, NY. Dinham, S., & Scott, C. （1998）.A three domain model of teacher and school executive career satisfaction. Journal of Educational Administration, 36（4）, 362-378. Dinham, S., & Scott, C.（2000）.Moving into the third, outer domain of teacher satisfaction. Journal of Educational Administration, 38（4）, 379-396. Fredricks, J. A., Phyllis, B., & Parks, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109. Fuller, F. F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207-226. Gibson, J. L., J. M. Ivancevich and J. M. Donnelly , 1991. Organizations : behavior, Structure, Process, Richard. D Irwin , Inc. Goffin RD, Gellatly I. E.（2001）. A multi-rater Assessment of Organizational Commitment: Are Self-Report Measures Biased？OrganizationalBehavior, 22, 437－451. Greene, T. G., Marti, C. N., & McClenney, K. (2008). The effort-outcome gap: Differences for African American and Hispanic community college students in student engagement and achievement. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 513-539. Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 98, 184-192. Hoppock, R. , 1935. Job Satisfaction, New York: Harper Brothers. Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Retrieved from http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm Jered Borup, Charles R. Graham and Jeffery S. Drysdale.(2004). The nature of teacher engagement at an online high school.45, 793-806. Kantor R. M.（1968）. Commitment And Social Organization. American Sociological Review,33,499－517. Kuh, G. D. (2001). Assessing what really matters to student learning: Inside the National Survey of Student Engagement. Change, 33(3), 10-17, 66. Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change, 35(2), 24-32. Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5-20. McCormick,E .T.,&Ilgen,D. (1980).Industrial Psychology . New Jersey. Engleword Cliffs. Meyer, J. P. and N. J. Allen（1990）, “The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment,” Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63: 1-18. Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J.(1991). A three Component Conceptualization of Organizational Commitment, Human Resource Management Review, 1(1), 61-89. Mowday, R. T., R. M. Steers, and L. W. Porter（1979）, “The Measurement of Organizational Commitment,” Journal of Vocational Behavior, l4: 224-247 Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. M., & Steers, R.M.（1982）.Employee Organization Linkages: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, And Turnover. New York: Academic Press. Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory, New York: McGraw-Hill. Parasuraman, S., & Alutto, J. A. (1984). Sources of outcomes of stress in organization settings: Toward the development of a structural model. Academy of Management Journal, 27 (2), 330-350.Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V.(1974). Organizationalcommitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians, Journal ofApplied Psychology, 59(5), 603-609. Ross, J. A.（1998）. The antecedents and consequences of teacher efficacy. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in Research on Teaching（vol.7, pp.49-73）. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004) Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Preliminary manual, Version 1.1. Retrieved from http://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/ Schaufeli/Test%20Manuals/Test_manual_UWES_English.pdf. Seashore S.E. & Taber, T.D. , 1975. Job Satisfaction and Their Correlation, American Behavior & Scientist, 18: 346. Sims,RL.,& Kroeck,K.C.(1994).The influence of ethical fit on employee satisfaction, commitment and turnover. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 939-947. Skaalvik, E.M, ＆Skaalvik S.(2007) Dimensions of Teacher Self-Efficacy and relations with strain factors,perceived colletive teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educationl Psychology,99,611-625. Skaalvik, E.M,＆ Skaalvik S. Teacher Self-Efficacy and Perceived Autonomy: Relations with Teacher Engagement, Job Satisfaction, and Emotional Exhaustion 2014;114(1):68-77. Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 571-581. Smith, P. C. & Kendall, L.M.& Hullin, C.L. , 1969. The measurement of Satisfaction in Work & Retirement, Chicago: Rand Ncnally. Steers, R. M.(1977). Antecedents And Outcomes of Organizational Commitment, Administrative Science Quarterly, 3(1), 46-56. Stevens, J. M., Beyer, J. M., Trice, H. M. (1978), Assessing Personal Role, Organizational Predictions of Managerial Commitment, Academy of Management Journal, 21(3), 380-396. Vroom, V. H. 1962. Ego-involvement, job satisfaction, and job performance. Personnel Psychology, 15：159-177. Walker, C. O., & Greene, B. A. (2009). The relations between student motivational beliefs and cognitive engagement in high school. Journal of Educational Research, 102(6), 463-472. Wernimont, P. F. (1972). A system view of job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56 (2), 173-176.Williams, T., Williams, K., Kastberg, D., & Jocelyn, L. (2005). Achievement and affect in OECD nations. Oxford Review of Education, 31, 517-545. Williams, L.J.,& Hazer,J.T.(1986) .Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfactionand Commitment in Turnover Models: A Reanalysis Using Latent Variable Structural Power in Organizations. Journal of Nursing Administration, 71(2), 219-31. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/69695 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究旨在探討教師的教師敬業與教師自我效能在國內教育系統之實際意涵，以及兩者與教師工作滿足感與組織承諾之關聯性。首先，透過質化研究方法，以教師撰寫的教學故事做內容分析，並根據內容分析結果檢視教師敬業與教師自我效能之理論構面在教學實務中之展現。其次，透過量化研究方法，以個案學校教師為樣本，發出調查問卷75份，回收66份，有效回收率為88%，以描述性統計、獨立樣本t檢定、變異數分析、積差相關、結構方程式模型進行統計分析，研究結果顯示背景變項與研究變項存在部分關聯性，並且教師敬業與教師自我效能存在正向關聯性，此二變項與教師工作滿足感及教師自我效能亦呈現正向關聯性，此結果驗證本研究探討之教師敬業、教師自我效能兩構念具有構念效度。
。最後，研究者從個案資料中推導出八個命題。例如：教師敬業與教師自我效能對於學生學習成效有正向影響效果，教師年齡、教師團隊合作分別與教師敬業有正向關聯性，職務輪調、挑戰與變革分別與教師自我效能有正向關聯性，組織氣候可強化教師工作滿足與組織承諾。這些現象可能來自於個案學校的獨特性或是台灣的教育體系，研究建議未來可擴及幼兒園到高中全面性的研究，將研究層面擴及各級學校與公私立學校，做更廣泛的比較研究。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The aims of this research are to examine the real-life meanings of teachers’ engagement and self-efficacy in Taiwan’s educational system, and the relationships between each variable and job satisfaction and organizational commitment. First, the researcher conducted a qualitative approach utilizing the content analysis method to analyze narratives in stories by teachers to examine how the concept of teacher’s engagement and self-efficacy appears in actual teaching contexts.
In addition, the researcher conducted a quantitative approach and collected a sample of 75 anonymous questionnaires from teachers in a school, with 66 returned and an 88% response rate. Techniques of descriptive statistics, t-test, ANOVA, correlation, and Structural Equation Modeling were used for the analysis. Our results showed that several demographic variables significantly correlated with the study variables, and teacher’s engagement was positively correlated with teacher’s self-efficacy. The two variables were also related to teacher’s job satisfaction and organizational commitment, verifying the construct validity of teacher’s engagement and self-efficacy. Lastly, the resesarcher proposed eight propositions from the study results. Examples are: Teachers’ age and team cooperation is each positively related to teacher’s engagement; job rotations, challenges and changes is each positively related to teacher’s self-efficacy; school climate has an effect on teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. These propositions are partly derived from the uniqueness of our case school or from the characteristics of Taiwan’s education system. Recommendations for future studies include increasing the sample size by extending to different grade levels and covering both public and private schools. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T03:24:10Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-107-P05e41008-1.pdf: 1565983 bytes, checksum: e80707d6f105c95400c5a522e582822f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 謝辭 …………………………………………………………………… i
中文摘要 ……………………………………………………………… iii 英文摘要 ……………………………………………………………… iv 第一章 緒論 ………………………………………………………… 1 第一節 研究動機 ………………………………………………………………… 1 第二節 研究問題與研究目的 …………………………………………………… 5 第三節 研究流程 ………………………………………………………………… 7 第二章 文獻探討 …………………………………………………… 8 第一節 教師敬業 ………………………………………………………………… 8 第二節 教師自我效能 …………………………………………………………… 18 第三節 教師工作滿足感 ………………………………………………………… 26 第四節 組織承諾 ………………………………………………………………… 31 第三章 研究1-質化研究 …………………………………………… 35 第一節 個案學校背景簡介 ……………………………………………………… 35 第二節 研究設計 ………………………………………………………………… 37 第三節 研究方法 ………………………………………………………………… 40 第四節 教學故事分析 …………………………………………………………… 44 第四章 研究2-量化研究 …………………………………………… 56 第一節 研究架構與研究設計 …………………………………………………… 56 第二節 資料分析與結果 …………………………………………………………… 61 第五章 命題推導與討論 …………………………………………… 79 第一節 教師敬業的建立與影響效果 …………………………………………… 79 第二節 教師自我效能之建立與影響效果 ……………………………………… 86 第三節 教師工作滿足感、組織承諾之提升與影響效果 ……………………… 94 第四節 命題推導結果 …………………………………………………………… 97 第六章 結論 ………………………………………………………… 99 第一節 研究結論 ………………………………………………………………… 99 第二節 建議與結語 ……………………………………………………………… 102 參考文獻 ……………………………………………………………… 106 中文部分 …………………………………………………………………………… 106 英文部分 …………………………………………………………………………… 108 附錄 施測問卷 …………………………………………………………………… 114 | |
| dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
| dc.title | 以質化與量化研究法探討教師敬業與教師自我效能：F學校教師為研究對象 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | A Qualitative and Quantitative Investigation on Teacher Engagement and Teacher Self-efficacy: Taking Teachers in F-School as Study Samples | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 106-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃家齊,許碧芬 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 教師敬業,教師自我效能,組織承諾,工作滿足感, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Teacher Engagement,Teacher Self-efficacy,Organizational Commitment,Job Satisfaction, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 117 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201800912 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2018-06-06 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 進修推廣學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 事業經營碩士在職學位學程 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 事業經營碩士在職學位學程 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-107-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 1.53 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。