研究生: |
汪微萍 Wei-Ping Wang |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
師與生、拉與扯─學生眼中的師生互動之個案研究 A case study on teacher-student interaction: Students' perspective |
指導教授: |
卯靜儒
Mao, Chin-Ju |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
教育學系 Department of Education |
論文出版年: | 2011 |
畢業學年度: | 99 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 135 |
中文關鍵詞: | 師生互動 、師生關係 |
英文關鍵詞: | teacher-student interaction, teacher-student relationship |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:223 下載:75 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
班級是教學活動的基本場域,由二個主要角色—教師及學生擔綱演出,然而,班級中的師生互動實屬一複雜及動態之歷程,許多影響因素摻雜於其中,本研究係以個案場域中幾則師生互動事件出發,探究學生眼中的師生互動,即學生是如何看待教師這帶著權威性的角色,是如何決定採取怎樣的策略與教師互動,而又是如何看待自身與教師們的互動?此外,經歷導師的更換,是否對師生互動亦有所影響。
本研究採質性的個案研究,以一個八年級的教室為研究場域,藉由現場參與觀察及訪談來蒐集資料,進行為期一年的研究,所得研究結論如下:
一、 師生互動是不斷協商的歷程。
二、 影響師生互動的制度面因素為升學主義、獎懲制度。
三、 影響師生互動的教師面因素為教師身份。
四、 影響師生互動的學生面因素為同儕團體。
最後,基於研究發現及結論,進行研究反思。
This case study was to depict the relationship between teacher-student interaction and the factors affecting the interaction between students and teachers. In addition, to investigating if the altering of homeroom teacher would influence teacher-student interaction.
The viewpoints of students were preferred to draw more and to fulfill the above-mentioned purposes, in-depth interview, and participant observation are employed to collect empirical data in this qualitative case study.
The major findings are as follows:
1.The process of teacher-student interaction is dynamic and negotiable.
2.Credentialism and system of rewards and penalties are the factors to influence teacher-student interaction.
3.The role of teachers influences teacher-student interaction.
4.The peer group members influence teacher-student interaction.
中文部份
方德隆(2002)。班級社會體系。載於陳奎憙(主編),現代教育社會學(頁139-177),台北市:師大書苑。
石文宜(2006)。國中生人格特質、師生互動關係與偏差行為之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
李政賢(2007)。質性研究的關聯性、歷史與特點。載於李政賢、廖志恒、林靜如(譯)。U. Flick著。質性研究導論(Qualitative Sozialforschung)(頁1-22)。台北市:五南。
李昆翰(2003)。教師之學生分類架構。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
杜永泰(2005)。華人師生關係測量之研究。國立台北師範學院教育心理與諮商學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
任凱、王佳煌(譯)(2005)。J. Lofland, & L. H. Lofland著。質性研究法:社會情境的觀察與分析。台北市:學富。
江麗蘭(2006)。國小數學高低成就生師生互動之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義市。
汪微萍、許殷宏(2009)。我喜歡英語課,但不喜歡英語-當「師生互動」遇上「學習興趣」。 教育研究月刊,182,56-70。
吳建華、謝發昱、黃俊峰、陳銘凱(2003)。個案研究。載於潘慧玲(主編),教育研究的取徑:概念與應用(頁199-236)。台北市:高等教育。
吳康寧(1998)。教育社會學。高雄市:復文。
徐也淨(2006)。學生之教師分類架構。國立臺灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
郭榮澤(1985)。國中高、低成就學生師生互動關係之分析研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
張建成(2002)。批判的教育社會學研究。台北市:學富。
黃裕城(1993)。當前師生關係的省思。學生輔導通訊,25,19-23。
黃瑞琴(1994)。質的教育研究方法。台北市:心理出版社。
許殷宏(1999)。師生互動策略之探究。中等教育,50(6),62-80。
陳奎憙、王淑俐、單文經、黃德祥(1996)。師生關係與班級經營。台北市:三民書局。
陳奎憙(2001)。教育社會學導論。台北市:師大書苑。
陳奎憙(2002)。現代教育社會學。台北市:師大書苑。
楊憲明(1988)。國中學生家庭社經地位、父母管教方式及學業成就與師生互動關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。全國博碩士論文資訊網,076NKNU2331004。
溫麗雲(2002)。師生互動中的性別差異─一所國小一年級生活課程教室觀察。國立台東師範學院教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台東市。
賴月心(2008)。教師性別刻板印象與師生互動之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義市。
廖志恒(2007)。半結構式訪談法。載於李政賢、廖志恒、林靜如(譯)。U. Flick著。質性研究導論(Qualitative Sozialforschung)(頁121-156)。台北市:五南。
歐素汝(1999)(譯)。D. W. Stewart & P. N. Shamdasani著。焦點團體:理論與實務(Focus Groups: Theory and Practice)。台北市:弘智文化。
西文部份
Apple, M. (1982). Education and power. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Ball, S. J. (1980). Initial encounters in the classroom and the process of establishment. In P. Woods (Ed.), Pupil strategies (pp. 143-161). London, UK: Croom Helm.
Bourdieu, P. (1973). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In R. Brown(Eds). Knowledge, education and cultural change (pp. 71-112). London, UK: Tavistock.
Cohen, E.(1972). Sociology and the classroom: Setting the conditions for teacher-student interaction. Review of Educational Research, 42(4), 441-452.
Delamont, S. (1983). Interaction in the classroom (2nd ed.). London, UK: Methuen.
Delamont, S., & Hamilton, D. (1984). Revisiting classroom research: A continuing cautionary tale. In M. Hammersley (Ed.), Controversies in classroom research: A reader (2nd ed.) (pp. 25-43). Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
Denscombe, M. (1980). Pupil strategies and the open classroom. In P. Woods (Ed.), Pupil strategies (pp. 50-73). London, UK: Croom Helm.
Einarsson, C. & Granström, K. (2002). Gender-biased interaction in the classroom: The influence of gender and age in the relationship between teacher and pupil. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46, 117-127.
Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (1995). Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Furlong,V.J.(1984). Interaction sets in the classroom:Towards a study of pupil knowledge. In M. Hammersley & P.Woods(Eds.), Life in school:The sociology of pupil culture(pp.145-160).Milton Keynes, England:Open University Press.
Gannaway, H. (1984). Making sense of school: In M. Hammersley & P. Woods (Eds), Life in school: The sociology of pupil culture (pp. 191-203). Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.
Hammersley, M. (1980). Classroom ethnography. Education Analysis, 2(2), 47-74.
Hammersley, M. & Turner, G. (1980). Conformist pupils? In P. Woods (Ed.), Pupil strategies (pp. 29-49). London, UK: Croom Helm.
Hargreaves, D. H. (1967). Social relations in a secondary school. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Ivinson, G. & Murphy, P. (2006). Boys don’t write romance: The construction of knowledge and social gender identities in English classroom. In M. Arnot & M. Mac an Ghaill(Eds.). The RoutledgeFalmer reader in gender and education(pp. 163-179). London, UK: RoutledgeFalmer.
Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
Keddie, N. (1971). Classroom Knowledge. In M. F. D. Young (Ed.), Knowledge and control: New directions for the sociology of education (pp. 133-160). London, UK: Collier-Macmillan.
Lacey, C. (1970). Hightown Grammar. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
McIntyre, D. (1980). Systematic observation of classroom activities, Educational Analysis, 2(2), 3-30.
Morgan, D. L. (2002). Focus group interviewing. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 141-159). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage Publications
Rist, R. C. (1970). Student social class and teacher expectations: The self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto education. Harvard Educational Review, 40(3), 411-451.
Spindler, G. (1982). Doing the ethnography of schooling: educational anthropology in action. Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press.
Spindler, G. & Spindler, L. (1987) Ethnography: An anthropological view. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Education and cultural process: Anthropological approaches. (2nd ed.) (pp. 151-156). Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press.
Waller, W. (1932). The sociology of teaching. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. Farnborough, UK: Saxon House.
Woods, P. (1983). Sociology and the school: An interactionist viewpoint. London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Woods, P. (1990a). Teacher skills and strategies. London, UK: The Falmer Press.
Woods, P. (1990b). The happiest days? How people cope with schools. New York : Falmer Press.
Yi, Chun-Chin, & Wu Chyi-In (2004). Taiwan. In J. J. Slater(Ed.).Teen Life in Asia(pp. 223-241). Westport, CT : Greenwood Press.
Younger, M., Warrington, M. & Williams, J. (1999). The Gender Gap and Classroom Interactions: Reality and Rhetoric? British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(3), 325-341.