本文關(guān)鍵詞：特殊學(xué)校教師教學(xué)效能感及其相關(guān)因素研究　出處：《華東師范大學(xué)》2017年博士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 特殊學(xué)校教師 教學(xué)效能感 相關(guān)因素 質(zhì)性研究 量化研究

【摘要】：教學(xué)效能感一直是研究者重點關(guān)注的領(lǐng)域,大量研究結(jié)果顯示,教學(xué)效能感是影響教師工作狀態(tài)及教學(xué)結(jié)果的重要因素。20世紀(jì)90年代以來,國內(nèi)學(xué)者就教學(xué)效能感的理論建構(gòu)、量表修訂、相關(guān)因素進(jìn)行了一系列研究,然而,到目前為止,關(guān)于教學(xué)效能感的研究絕大部分是在普通學(xué)校進(jìn)行的,很少有研究涉及特殊學(xué)校這一領(lǐng)域。近年來,我國特殊教育日益受到關(guān)注,特殊教育教師的教學(xué)水平亟需提高。對此,本論文選取我國特殊教育的骨干力量——特殊學(xué)校教師進(jìn)行研究,分析了特殊學(xué)校教師教學(xué)效能感的特點,以及對其有影響的重要因素,并依據(jù)實證研究的結(jié)果,提出了相應(yīng)的對策和建議。本研究首先在文獻(xiàn)整理和專家小組討論的基礎(chǔ)上,修訂了教學(xué)效能感量表(TES量表、TSES量表)和工作投入量表(UWES量表),依據(jù)項目分析和信效度檢驗的結(jié)果對項目進(jìn)行了刪減或修改,以保證研究工具適合用于我國特殊學(xué)校教師這一群體。然后使用教師一般資料調(diào)查表、教學(xué)效能感量表、職業(yè)倦怠量表、工作投入量表和社會支持量表進(jìn)行量化研究,在東部、中部和西部地區(qū)采用隨機(jī)整群取樣的方式進(jìn)行調(diào)查,共收回有效問卷1339份,從宏觀層面探討了特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感的特點及其影響因素。在量化研究的基礎(chǔ)上,研究者進(jìn)一步開展質(zhì)性研究,與專家小組共同設(shè)計了半結(jié)構(gòu)化訪談問卷,并對35名特殊學(xué)校教師進(jìn)行了一對一的訪談,通過質(zhì)性編碼,深入分析了教學(xué)效能感的表現(xiàn)及其影響因素。在論文的最后綜合探討了特殊學(xué)校教師教學(xué)效能感的特點,并提出了相應(yīng)的對策和建議。本研究發(fā)現(xiàn)了一些有意義的結(jié)果,如下所示。1.研究一發(fā)現(xiàn):修訂后的TES量表包括一般教學(xué)效能感(GTE)和個人教學(xué)效能感(PTE)兩個維度,適合用于測量特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感。修訂后的TSES量表包括學(xué)生投入、班級管理、教學(xué)策略三個維度,適合用于測量特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感。修訂后的工作投入量表包括活力、奉獻(xiàn)、專注三個維度,適合用于分析特殊學(xué)校教師的工作投入。2.研究二發(fā)現(xiàn):特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感處于中等偏上的水平,在TES全量表(各題目1～6計分)上的平均得分為4.04,在一般教學(xué)效能感維度的平均得分為3.51,在個人教學(xué)效能感維度的平均得分為4.44;在TSES全量表(各題目1～9計分)上的平均得分為6.33,在學(xué)生投入維度上的平均得分為6.07,在教學(xué)策略維度上的平均得分為6.31,在班級管理維度上的平均得分為6.67。特殊學(xué)校教師的一般教學(xué)效能感、個人教學(xué)效能感、學(xué)生投入、教學(xué)策略、班級管理之間存在顯著的相關(guān)關(guān)系。教學(xué)效能感受到學(xué)校和學(xué)生因素影響:盲校和聾校教師的教學(xué)效能感得分高于培智學(xué)校和綜合類特殊學(xué)校教師;高中(高職)教師的教學(xué)效能感得分高于初中(初職)和小學(xué)教師,學(xué)前部特教教師的得分最低;隨著班級中學(xué)生障礙種類的增多,特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感有所降低。教學(xué)效能感受到教師個人特征的影響:特殊學(xué)校女教師在教學(xué)效能感上的得分高于男教師;已婚教師高于未婚教師;有子女教師高于無子女教師;隨年齡和教齡增加,教學(xué)效能感有所提高;隨學(xué)歷的進(jìn)步、專業(yè)知識掌握程度的提高、職稱的上升,教學(xué)效能感有所提高;操作活動類課程的教師在教學(xué)效能感上的得分高于認(rèn)知類課程的教師;班主任教師的教學(xué)效能感高于一般任課教師。教學(xué)效能感受到教育管理因素影響:對收入滿意的教師在教學(xué)效能感上的得分高于對收入不滿意的教師;參加過理論與實操培訓(xùn)的教師在教學(xué)效能感上的得分最高,未參加過任何培訓(xùn)的教師在效能感上的得分最低。特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感表現(xiàn)出區(qū)域差異:總體上,東中部地區(qū)要優(yōu)于西部地區(qū),直轄市、省會和地級市要優(yōu)于縣級市和鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)。教學(xué)效能感受到社會與心理因素的影響:社會支持、工作投入與教學(xué)效能感顯著正相關(guān),職業(yè)倦怠與教學(xué)效能感顯著負(fù)相關(guān);多元分層回歸和結(jié)構(gòu)方程模型表明,社會支持、工作投入與職業(yè)倦怠對教學(xué)效能感具有顯著的預(yù)測作用,工作投入和職業(yè)倦怠在社會支持和教學(xué)效能感之間起中介作用。3.研究三發(fā)現(xiàn):特殊學(xué)校教師反映的影響教學(xué)效能感的因素主要歸納為四個層面,分別是學(xué)生個人層面,包括學(xué)生個體缺陷、學(xué)生障礙類型、班級特征、學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)階段、生源變化;教師層面,包括工作態(tài)度、教學(xué)效果、教學(xué)經(jīng)驗、課程設(shè)置、普通學(xué)校轉(zhuǎn)入特殊學(xué)校;教育管理層面,包括教師培訓(xùn)、教師專業(yè)化、教育機(jī)制;社會支持層面,包括學(xué)生家長支持、家人及社會接納。綜上可見,特殊學(xué)校教師的教學(xué)效能感處于中等偏上的水平,且教學(xué)效能感各維度之間顯著相關(guān)。學(xué)校與學(xué)生因素、教師自身因素、教育管理因素、地域因素、社會與心理因素對教學(xué)效能感均有一定影響。基于上述結(jié)論,本文提出了通過社會、學(xué)校、家庭、教師等相互協(xié)作,共同改善特殊學(xué)校教師教學(xué)效能感的對策與建議。
[Abstract]:Teaching efficacy has been focused in the field, a large number of research results show that teaching efficacy is an important factor affecting the.20 century 90s teachers' working condition and teaching result, scholars teaching construction self-efficacy theory, scale, related factors for a series of studies, however, have so far study on the teaching efficacy, the majority is in ordinary schools, there are few studies involving special schools in this field. In recent years, China's special education has been paid more and more attention, the special education teachers' teaching level needs to be improved. In this regard, this paper selects the backbone of China's special education -- a study of special school teachers and analyzes the characteristics of special school teachers' teaching efficacy, as well as the important factors affecting them, and according to the results of empirical research, the author puts forward the corresponding countermeasures and suggestions . based on literature review and expert panel discussions on the revision of the Teaching Efficacy Scale (TES scale, TSES scale) and work engagement scale (UWES scale), based on the project analysis and validation of the results of the project are deleted or modified, in order to ensure the research tools for for our special school teachers. Teachers of this group and then use the general information questionnaire and teaching efficacy scale, occupation burnout scale, work engagement scale and social support scale quantitative research, in the East, were investigated by random cluster sampling way of the central and western regions, a total of 1339 valid questionnaires and discusses the characteristics and influencing factors of teaching efficacy of special school teachers sense from the macro level. On the basis of quantitative research, qualitative research and further research, and expert group designed the semi-structured interview asked Volume, and 35 special school teachers one-on-one interviews, through qualitative encoding, in-depth analysis of the performance and its influence factors of the sense of teaching efficacy. At last the paper discusses the characteristics of comprehensive special school teachers' teaching efficacy, and put forward the corresponding countermeasures and suggestions. This study found some meaningful results, as follows:.1. research findings: the revised TES scale including general teaching efficacy (GTE) and personal teaching efficacy (PTE) in two dimensions, suitable for measurement of special school teachers' teaching efficacy sense. TSES scale including student input, class management, revised, the three dimensions of teaching strategies, teaching effectiveness is suitable for measurement of special school teachers. The revised work engagement scale including vigor, dedication and focus on three dimensions, suitable for the analysis of special school teachers job involvement in two.2. study found: The sense of teaching efficacy of special school teachers in the middle level, TES in full scale (the subject of 1 ~ 6 score) on average score is 4.04, the average score in the general teaching efficacy dimension is 3.51, the average score in the dimension of personal teaching efficacy was 4.44; in the full scale (TSES on the 1 ~ 9 score) on average score is 6.33, the mean scores in the dimensions of the student input is 6.07, the average scores in teaching strategies on the dimension is 6.31, the average scores in the class management dimension for 6.67. general teaching efficacy of special school teachers sense of personal teaching efficacy, students involved. The teaching strategy, there is a significant correlation between the class management. Teaching effectiveness factors of schools and students feel the effect of teaching efficacy of blind and deaf teachers sense of higher scores than Peizhi school and class of special school teachers; teachers' teaching high school (vocational) Self-efficacy score higher than junior high school (junior vocational) and primary school teachers, preschool special education teachers of the lowest score; with the increasing types of students class barriers, teaching efficacy of special school teachers' sense of teaching efficacy decreases. Feel the influence of teachers' personal characteristics: special school female teachers' score in Teaching efficacy is higher than male teachers; married teachers than unmarried teachers; teachers having children than those without children teachers; increase with age and seniority, teaching efficacy can be improved; with the education progress, improve the degree of master of professional knowledge, professional titles on the rise, teaching efficacy can be improved; the operation activities of class teachers' score in teaching efficacy than the cognitive class teacher; teacher teachers' sense of teaching efficacy is higher than that of ordinary teachers. The teaching efficiency of feeling education management factors: the income satisfaction of the teachers in teaching efficacy Sense score is higher than that of the income is not satisfied with the teachers; in theory and practical training of the teachers' score in teaching efficacy is the highest, did not participate in any training in Teachers' self-efficacy. The minimum teaching efficacy of special school teachers sense showed regional differences: in general, the Middle East is better than western regions, municipalities, provincial capitals and cities better than county-level cities and towns. The teaching effectiveness to feel the effects of social and psychological factors: social support, job involvement and teaching efficacy is significantly related to occupation burnout and teaching efficacy is negatively correlated; multiple hierarchical regression and structural equation model showed that social support, work investment and occupation burnout have significant predictive effect on teaching efficacy, job involvement and occupation burnout between social support and teaching efficacy of.3. three is: the intermediary role of special schools The impact of the school teachers reflect the factors of teaching efficacy are mainly classified into four aspects, respectively is the individual student level, including individual defects, class characteristics of students, students learning disorder type, stage, students change; the teachers' level, including teaching attitude, teaching effect, experience, curriculum, ordinary schools into special schools; management level of education, including teacher training, teacher professionalization, education mechanism; social support level, including the parents of the students, family and social acceptance. Therefore, the teaching effectiveness of the teachers at the middle level, and teaching efficacy was significantly related to the dimensions between school and student factors, teachers' factors regional education, management factors, factors, social and psychological factors have a certain impact on teaching efficacy. Based on the above conclusions, this paper put forward by society, school, family, teacher And other countermeasures and suggestions to improve the teaching efficacy of special school teachers.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：G760

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 諶小猛;;廣東省特殊教育事業(yè)發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀研究——基于粵、京、蘇、浙、滬的數(shù)據(jù)比較[J];教育探索;2016年10期

2 徐添喜;蘇慧;;從學(xué)校到就業(yè):美國殘障學(xué)生就業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)銜模式的發(fā)展及其啟示[J];殘疾人研究;2016年02期

3 李新翠;;中小學(xué)教師工作投入與工作量狀況調(diào)查[J];中國特殊教育;2016年05期

4 王培峰;;我國特殊教育政策:總體結(jié)構(gòu)及其問題——基于特殊教育政策文本的分析[J];基礎(chǔ)教育;2016年02期

5 陳秀敏;王希海;田秋梅;王敏;;特殊教育學(xué)校教師職業(yè)承諾與效能感相關(guān)研究[J];綏化學(xué)院學(xué)報;2016年04期

6 齊亞靜;伍新春;胡博;;教師工作要求的分類——基于對職業(yè)倦怠和工作投入的影響研究[J];教育研究;2016年02期

7 鄧猛;顏廷睿;;西方特殊教育研究進(jìn)展述評[J];教育研究;2016年01期

8 李永占;;特殊教育教師情緒智力與工作投入的關(guān)系研究[J];中國特殊教育;2016年01期

9 趙真;楊福義;;臺灣學(xué)前特殊兒童轉(zhuǎn)銜服務(wù)模式及其啟示[J];綏化學(xué)院學(xué)報;2016年01期

10 王輝;李曉慶;熊琪;琚四化;;多維視野下特殊教育教師職業(yè)素質(zhì)模型的建構(gòu)[J];中國特殊教育;2015年11期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 王廣海;我國學(xué)齡前兒童睡眠問題：特點、影響因素及行為干預(yù)[D];華東師范大學(xué);2015年

2 郭蕊;提高中小學(xué)教師效能策略研究[D];東北師范大學(xué);2014年

3 楊柳;從隔離到全納[D];西南大學(xué);2009年

4 賀菲;教學(xué)效能及其相關(guān)因素研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2008年

5 姜飛月;學(xué)校變革中的教師效能[D];南京師范大學(xué);2005年

6 呂國光;教師信念及其影響因素研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2004年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 徐暉;青少年物質(zhì)主義價值觀、控制點與社會支持的關(guān)系[D];陜西師范大學(xué);2014年

2 何嘉慧;特殊教育教師職業(yè)壓力和工作投入的研究[D];浙江師范大學(xué);2013年

3 胡金萍;大連市特殊學(xué)校教師教學(xué)效能感研究[D];遼寧師范大學(xué);2013年

4 周朝坤;聾校教師職業(yè)倦怠與心理健康狀況的相關(guān)研究[D];西藏大學(xué);2012年

5 劉密;美國教師效能理論研究[D];河北大學(xué);2011年

6 葛曉宇;控制點、家庭支持、學(xué)校支持與職業(yè)決策自我效能的關(guān)系研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

7 楊蓉;中小學(xué)教師效能感量表的編制與應(yīng)用[D];新疆師范大學(xué);2010年

8 趙娜;武漢市特殊學(xué)校教師教學(xué)效能感、工作滿意度、職業(yè)倦怠及其相互關(guān)系的研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2009年

9 隋美榮;羅特的社會行為學(xué)習(xí)理論研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2004年

10 毛春洲;中學(xué)生英語學(xué)習(xí)歸因研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2003年

，

本文編號：1359226