摘 要 本研究旨在探討國民中學教師甄選制度問題，嘗試發展出四種甄選制度，包括校長同意聘任制、統一甄試介聘制、學校自辦甄選制及委任辦理甄選制等四種方案，並建構出教師甄選制度的評估準則，以做為評析比較四種方案之依據。 綜合國民中學校長、教務主任、學校行政人員、教師實習教師或代課教師、教育學者專家及教育行政人員等類群體所填的問卷，對國中教師甄選制度不同方案評估準則之優劣得失等問題之意見，並獲致以下結論：一、國中教師甄選制度應考慮背景、輸入、過程及產出方面之適切性，評估準則包括要能符應教育思潮與現實環境、能吸引人才參與競爭、甄選人員具有專業知識、甄選內容能反映學校及社區特殊需要、甄選人員具有代表性、使用有效的甄選方法、甄選過程客觀公平公開、甄選流程簡便可行有效率、能獲致學校最適當人選及能增進教師專業素養。二、不同的關注點上各有其不同適當方案，不同的教師甄選制度各有其優劣得失。三、不同受訪者對各方案各有偏好。就整體而言，調查結果顯示，偏好統一甄試介聘制及委任辦理甄選制，而目前施行之學校自辦甄選制，顯然並未得到最多受訪者之支持，至於校長同意聘任制則評價甚低，不適合用於教師甄選。四、統一甄試介聘制與學校自辦甄選制，在十項評估準則上，雖各有所長，但其間之優劣得失差異性甚大，顯示這兩種制度有較大之爭議性，而委任辦理甄選制，在十項評估準則中，均顯示不錯的評價，爭議亦少，應是最被接受之教師甄選制度。依據研究發現，本研究對於教育行政機關、國民中學、師資培育機構以及未來的相關研究，分別提出若干建議事項。關鍵字：國中教師甄選、教師甄選、甄選、介聘 Abstract This study tries to investigate the issues about the system of teacher selection of public junior high schools in Taiwan. Four programs are developed as the alternatives for system of teacher selection, they are principal-agreed employment program, united-assessment assignment program, school-based teacher selection program, delegated selection program. And ten criteria for assess the strength and weakness about the system of teacher selection are offered. In order to inquiry the opinion of some groups about these issues states above, a questionnaires is developed to gather data from principals, deans, teachers, student teacher, substitute teacher, educational administration professors, and educational administration officials. The findings of this study includes: 1. The system of teacher selection must consider if it is appropriate on the dimensions of context, input, process, and product. The criteria for evaluation include: it must fit the real education situation and the trend of thought of; it must attract people to serve as the teacher; it must invite the evaluator who has expertise about teacher selection; it must meet the different needs between schools and communities; it must invite the evaluator who represent every stakeholder; it must gather effective information and apply discriminating method to analysis these information; its selection process must be objective, fair and open; its selection process must be simple, feasible and differentiate; it must select and promote appropriate candidate; it must promote teachers to achieve more merits and contribution. 2. The weightiness of each criteria is different . Each program has some strength and weakness. 3. The appraisals for four programs on the criteria and the favorite program are different among every groups. The united-assessment assignment program and the delegated selection program are both the most favorite program for the entire participators, and the school-based teacher selection program which is the most popular in schools is not satisfied by the participators, the principal-agreed employment program is the unaccepted one in teacher selection system. 4. There are great differentiate between the united-assessment assignment program and the school-based teacher selection program. Although they both have some strength, but they are not available. The delegated selection program is the most available one in teacher selection system, because it has some strength and less weakness assessed by ten criteria. According to the findings of this study, some suggestions are offered for the office of educational administration, the junior high school, the teacher training institution and the researches about teacher selection in future. Keyword: junior high school teacher selection，teacher selection assessment，assessment，teacher selection assignment.

This study tries to investigate the issues about the system of teacher
selection of public junior high schools in Taiwan. Four programs are developed
as the alternatives for system of teacher selection, they are principal-agreed
employment program, united-assessment assignment program, school-based teacher
selection program, delegated selection program.
And ten criteria for assess the strength and weakness about the system of
teacher selection are offered.
In order to inquiry the opinion of some groups about these issues states
above, a questionnaires is developed to gather data from principals, deans,
teachers, student teacher, substitute teacher, educational administration
professors, and educational administration officials. The findings of this
study includes:
1. The system of teacher selection must consider if it is appropriate on the
dimensions of context, input, process, and product. The criteria for
evaluation include: it must fit the real education situation and the trend of
thought of; it must attract people to serve as the teacher; it must invite the
evaluator who has expertise about teacher selection; it must meet the
different needs between schools and communities; it must invite the evaluator
who represent every stakeholder; it must gather effective information and
apply discriminating method to analysis these information; its selection
process must be objective, fair and open; its selection process must be
simple, feasible and differentiate; it must select and promote appropriate
candidate; it must promote teachers to achieve more merits and contribution.
2. The weightiness of each criteria is different .
Each program has some strength and weakness.
3. The appraisals for four programs on the criteria and the favorite program
are different among every groups. The united-assessment assignment program and
the delegated selection program are both the most favorite program for the
entire participators, and the school-based teacher selection program which is
the most popular in schools is not satisfied by the participators, the
principal-agreed employment program is the unaccepted one in teacher selection
system.
4. There are great differentiate between the united-assessment assignment
program and the school-based teacher selection program. Although they both
have some strength, but they are not available. The delegated selection
program is the most available one in teacher selection system, because it has
some strength and less weakness assessed by ten criteria.
According to the findings of this study, some suggestions are offered for the
office of educational administration, the junior high school, the teacher
training institution and the researches about teacher selection in future.
Keyword: junior high school teacher selection，teacher selection assessment
，assessment，teacher selection assignment.

一、中文部分：
石弘毅（民89）。如何辦好教師甄試。師友，400，44-47。
李燕綺（民89）。國中教師選聘過程之研究。未出版碩士論文國立臺灣師範大學：臺北市
。
吳平（民80）。改進空間還很大。師說，110，30-33。
吳定（民79）。行政學。臺北縣：國立空中大學。
吳清基（民88）：我國學校行政的政策新取向。學校行政，創刊號，3-11頁。
林奇佐（民88）。基隆市國民中小學校長遴用制度之研究。國立臺北師範學院國民教育研
究所。未出版碩士論文。
林俊成（民80）。教師甄選面面觀。師說，110，92-95。
金振鏞（民87）國民小學教師聘任制之研究。未出版碩士論文國立嘉義師範學院：嘉義。
林清江（民80）。教育社會學。臺北：東華書局。
教育部（民89）。國民教育法規選輯。
秦夢群（民86）。教育行政理論與實際。臺北：五南書局。
許必耕（民80）。國小教師甄試北市現場特寫。師說，110，34-36。
許濱松（民79）。人事行政。臺北：華視出版社。
國立臺灣師範大學實習輔導處（民88）。教師甄選座談會活動紀要。
http//www.ntnu.edu.tw
張芳全（民86）。教評會設立的精神。中央日報。
張炫吉、許舜華（民88）。以彰中為例，談教師甄選。高中教育,4,
33-34。
張清良（民82）。臺灣省立高級中等學校校長甄選制度之研究。未出版碩士論文政治大學
：臺北市。
陳曼玲（民90.3.1）。縣市可辦教師甄試介聘。中央日報,13版。
陳曼玲（民90.3.1）。中小學教師七月統一甄選。中央日報,13版。
張喬媚（民87）。國小教師甄試制度之研究。未出版碩士論文臺南師範學院：臺南市。
張瑞庚（民88）。國民小學教師聘任制度實施狀況及其改進途徑之研
究……以臺北市為例。國立臺北師範學院國民教育。
陳瑩如（民89）。國民小學教師甄試之研究。未出版碩士論文臺北市師範學院：臺北市。
張潤書 （民79）。行政學。臺北：三民書局。
張德銳 （民89）。從中美兩國教師證照之制度比較談如何提升我國教師素質。臺北市立師
範學院學報, 31, 1-16。
湯梅英 （民88）。比利時教育制度及其改革趨勢。臺北市立師範學院學報，30，79-102。
傅肅良（民79）。人事管理。臺北：三民書局。
詹志禹（民89）。中小學教師甄聘專業判準。
http://parents.yam.org./tw/.care/c3.html
楊思偉（民88）。日本教育。臺北:商鼎文化出版社。
葉連祺 （民86）。我國中小學教師甄試之研究。教育資料文摘，39(6)，
54-64。
葉連祺 （民86a）。日本中小學教師甄試之簡介。研習資訊，14(3)，88-93。
葉連祺（民86b）。日本中小學教師甄試之探析。教育研究集刊39。
77~111。
葉連祺（民87）。設置中小學教師甄選委員會之研究，兼論其與教評會之關係。教育資料
文摘,41(6), 118-129。
葉連祺 （民88）。簡介日本小學教師甄選方法。研習資訊，16(4)，
55-63。
雷國鼎（民55）。教育行政。臺北：國立編譯館。
楊雅淑（民87）。臺北市國民中學教師聘任指標之研究─階層分析程序法之應用。未出版
碩士論文國立東華大學：花蓮。
臺北市政府教育局（民64）。教育人事法令彙編。
臺北市政府教育局（民84）。中等學校教育法令彙編。
蔡清華（民76）。「美國各州小學教師培育課程培育課程比較研究」。
國教天地第73，17-21。
蔡清華（民76）。美國1980年代以來師範教育改革之研究—兼論其對
　　　　　　　　臺灣地區師範教育改革之啟示。
蔡清華（民86）。美國師資培育改革研究。高雄:復文圖書出版社。
謬全吉（民78）。人事行政。臺北縣：國立空中大學。
顏素霞（民80）。「美國教師教育政策計劃之評析」。臺灣省第二屆教
育學術論文發表會宣讀論文，民國80年6月8日新竹師範學院。
鄺執中（民87）。我國小學教師任用制度之研究。未出版碩士論文國立高雄師範大學：高
雄市。
顏慧萍 （民81）。國民中學校長甄選制度之研究。未出版碩士論文臺灣師範大學：臺北市
。
蕭錦利（民89）。國民小學校長選用制度之研究。未出版碩士論文國立臺灣師範大學：臺
北市。
二、英文部分：
Apple, M.W.（1987）.〝Gendered Teaching , Gendered Labor ed.〞By T.S.
Popkewitz , In Critical Studies in Teacher Education: Its Folklore , Theory
and Practice ,　pp.57-83. London: The Falmer Press .
Castetter, W. B.（1986）.The personnel function in educational administration.
New York：Macmillan Publish Company.
Cenzo, D. A.（1994）.Human resoure management-Concepts and practices（4 th ed.
）John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Dreeben , R. S.（1970）. The Nature of Teaching. Glenview, I11:
Scott-Foresman.
Feistritzer, C. E.（1990）. Alternative Teacher Certification: A State-by-State
Analysis 1990.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Information.
Herbst, J.（1989）. And Sadly Teach: Teacher Education and Profess
ionization in American Culture. Madison, Wisconsin: The University of
Wisconsin Press.
Mastain, R. K.（1991）. Manual on Certification and Preparation of
Education Personnel in the United State. Dubuque, Iowa: Nasdtec/Kendall/Hunt.
Morrison, G. S.（1997）.Teaching in America.Boston：Allyn and Bacon.
Roth, R. A. （1996）. Teaching and teacher Education: Implementing
Reform. Bloomington, Indiana: The Phi Delta kappa Educational Foundation.
Roth, R. A.（1996）. 〝Dichotomous Paradigms for Teacher Education: The Rise
or Fall of the Empire.〞Action in Teacher Education 14(Spring 1992):1-9.
Roth, R. A.（1996）.standards for certification，licensure，and
accreditation. In J.sikula,T.J.Buttery,&E.Guyton（eds）,Handbook of rease on
teacher education（2nd ed.）.（PP.242-278）.New York：Macmillan.
Sedlak, M. S. & Schlossman.（1986）. Who Will Teach? Historical
Perspectives on the Changing Appeal of Teaching as a Profession.
Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.
Tryneski, J.（1993）.Requiments for certification of teachers, counselors,
librarians, administrators for elementary and secondary schools.
（5th ed.）Chicago：The University of Chicago press.