一直以來，服務於教育界中的女性，多半集中於基層教師，僅有極少數能在教育組織中嶄露頭角。由於女性主管比例較低，又身處在一直以來以男性為主導在學校組織中，要能勝任這份工作並不容易，因此女性領導者與成員的溝通協調成為女校長工作中重要的議題。因為溝通是組織活動的中樞，組織中的大小事務，都必須透過領導者與組織成員間的互動與對話，方能傳遞訊息，建立共識。因為吾人對國內女性教育主管瞭解仍然相當有限，因此本研究以溝通行為為焦點希望了解國中女校長溝通行為形成的個人發展脈絡與學校組織脈絡、脈絡因素與女校長溝通行為之間的互動關係、女校長的溝通行為與其所遇到的挑戰與因應之道。
本研究首先對回顧相關文獻，探討組織溝通的相關概念、組織溝通研究的理論觀點，包括功能觀點、詮釋觀點、批判觀點與女性主義觀點，以及性別與組織溝通之相關研究，包括溝通行為、溝通障礙與溝通內容相關研究。接下來則以兩位國中女校長為主要研究對象，採質性研究進行校長與各校五位同仁的訪談、會議的觀察與文件的分析。我從民國八十九年四月開始進行前導研究，五月開始正式進入現場蒐集資料，一直到八十九年十一月退出現場。每位校長各接受三次的訪談，此外，平均一星期有兩個半天的現場觀察，觀察內容為例行會議觀察、朝會、其他座談會或不定期的會議，大合國中的觀察次數為十五次，大平國中則為十三次。
在女校長溝通行為形成的個人發展脈絡部分，由於她們的發展歷程中都曾受到重要他人以傳統性別期望來對待，促使她們在這成長的過程中反思，並重新尋出自己的定位。此外她們時常以育兒或家庭經驗來對照學校情境中所發生的事物，母親的經驗對於她們的溝通行為有深刻影響。另一方面組織氣氛、組織的性別文化與組織規模等都是影響女校長溝通行為的組織脈絡因素。在組織氣氛方面，兩位校長勤於利用各種溝通的場合與組織成員交換意見，也表現出樂於傾聽的態度，漸漸地轉變了學校的風氣，成為民主而開放的校園；組織性別文化方面，大合與大平兩所學校內的性別分工仍存在著某些刻板的情形，雖然這樣的模式不斷的複製著性別刻板印象，但是兩位校長並非消極符應刻板印象，而是以行動來證明自己的能力，創造溝通的雙贏局面；組織規模方面，李校長領導的大平國中是中小型的學校，因此比較常使用直接溝通的方式，透過各種聚會互相溝通，復以書面溝通為輔助，而田校長所服務的大合國中屬於中大型的學校，所以她並未發展出明顯的溝通網絡，而是善加利用組織既有的溝通管道來溝通。歸結綜合兩位女校長的溝通行為時，可以發現她們關懷人性且重視實質溝通能力，偏好合議制的決策溝通模式，呈現出亦剛亦柔的特色。
而女校長在溝通時所共同面臨的主要挑戰來自性別刻板印象的負面影響，而她們也有不同的因應之道。她們選擇以積極有效率的辦事能力，來扭轉他人的刻板印象。無論遭受他人怎樣的歧視或誤會，都抱持著樂觀且忠於自我的思想，不以言語直接挑戰，而是提高辦學效率、塑造和諧校風來證明自己的能力，打破他人對於女性無法溝通軟弱無能的迷思。
最後則根據研究發現提出對於女性領導者與後續研究的建議，從女性領導者的角度而言，可於女校長職前教育提供相關之性別課程、由建立女性師徒制開始發展性別平權的組織文化、不放棄在家庭中的溝通並發揮自主性抗拒文化不利的宰制。對後續研究的建議則包括以社會建構的觀點來探究組織中的女性行為、提倡本土化的性別與溝通行為研究、研究各個教育層級的女性行政工作者、並繼續深入學校情境觀察簡單現象背後的複雜含意。

Female educators are the main force of the fundamental level of the education system, however, only few of them can make their way to be leaders. Being a leader in educational organization is not an easy task for women since the percentage of female leader is lower than male leaders , moreover, the whole stage has long been dominated by male leaders. Therefore, communicating with school members will be one of the most critical part of female leaders’ work since it’s the way to exchange opinions and reach consensus. In order to understand more about female leaders, the purpose of this study is to understand the communication behaviors of female principals, including the personal and social context 、 the relationship between context and communication behaviors、the challenges and the strategies.
To achieve this aim, the research firstly undertook the task of literature review. Secondly, under the qualitative research approach, data were collected through interviews, observations and varies kinds of documents. According to the process of data analysis and discussions, research results are as followed. First, both principals’ communication performance were profoundly affected by significant others and the experiences of being a mother. Besides, organization climate, organizational gender culture and organizational size are also the key factors to the female principals communication behaviors. Female principals make good use of every occasion to exchange and listen opinions of members, thus school atmosphere has become more open little by little. As for the organizational gender culture, stereotype still affects the way people think and act. Nevertheless, the female principals try hard to develop ability and create win-win situation. In conclusion, female principals have something in common about their communication. They emphasize caring and solving problems through team work that implicates they are both soft and tough as well. The obstacle they both face is caused by the gender stereotype and they solve it by active and efficient attitude. They are true to themselves so that their behaviors keep challenging the myth that women are weak and vulnerable..
Last but not the least, based on the results above, suggestions were presented.

刁筱華譯（1996）。女性主義思潮（譯自R. Tong著Feminist thought：A comprehensive introduction）。台北：時報文化。
王炎燐（1996）。台灣區高中職校組織溝通方式與組織氣氛相關之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育研究所碩士論文。
王武雄（1985）。縣市教育局－國民中學正式溝通運行之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育究所碩士論文。
王春展（1994）。國民小學組織溝通之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
易玲玲譯（1998）。聰明成功的職業婦女（譯自J. Hauter著The smart woman’s guide to career success）。台北：唐漢文化。
吳幸宜譯（1993）。男女親密對話（譯自D. Tannen 著You just don’t understand）。台北: 遠流。
吳芝儀與李奉儒（1995）。質的評鑑與研究（譯自M. Q. Patton著Qualitative evaluation and research methods）。台北：桂冠。
吳清山（1995）。學校行政。台北：五南。
吳清基（1985）。教育與行政。台北：師大書苑。
李玉惠（1996）。國民小學女性校長工作壓力與社會支持需求之研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育所碩士論文。
林曜聖（1996）。國民小學校長行政決定方式、溝通型式及其效能之研究。國立台北師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
侯怡楓（1999）。一位國小女性校長領導實際之個案研究。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文。
洪志美譯（1995）。你好，我也好（譯自T. A. Harris著I’m OK，You're OK）。台北：遠流。
秦夢群（1995）。教育行政理論與應用。台北：五南。
張明輝（1991）。巴納德組織理論與教育行政。台北：五南。
張明輝（1997）。教育鬆綁與學校自主改革。輯於中華民國課程與教學學會主編：課程與教學改革實務，頁1-24。台北：師大書苑。
張明輝（1998）。學校行政革新專題。台北：師大。
張金鑑（1985）。管理學新論。台北：五南。
張慧鶯譯（2000）。柔軟對話（譯自G. J. Thompson與J. B. Jenkins著Verbal judo）。台北：精美。
劉麗雯（1989）。台灣省政府女性主管事業生涯發展之研究。東海大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
畢恆達（1996）。詮釋學與質性研究。輯於胡幼慧主編：質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例，頁27-45。台北：巨流。
莊安祺（2000）。第一性（譯自H. Fisher 著The first sex：The natural talents of women and how they are changing the world）。台北：先覺。
許川濠（1998）。台北市國民小學組織溝通行為與教師工作滿意關係之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
郭瑾瑜（1996）。台灣女性主管管理風格、人際關係、決策型態與領導行為之相關研究。國立成功大學企業管理所碩士論文。
陳怡錚（2000）。國中女教師生涯之研究。國立台灣師範大學公民訓育研究所碩士論文。
吳定、陳德禹、張潤書與賴維堯等（1995）。行政學（一）。台北：空大。
黃宗顯（1999）。學校行政對話研究：組織中影響力行的為微觀探討。台北：五南。
黃昆輝（1988）。教育行政學。台北：東華。
黃瑞琴（1991）。質的教育研究方法。台北：心理。
黃嘉琳譯（1996）。辦公室男女對話（譯自D. Tannen 著 Talking from 9 to 5）。 台北：天下文化。
黃麗蓉（1996）。組織中的女性領導。國立政治大學公共行政研究所碩士論文。
楊雀（1982）。我國女性教育主管性別角色、自我概念、社會支持與工作適應之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
溫淑真譯（1998）。沒有人要聽女人講話（譯自P. Mindell著A woman’s guide to the language of success）。台北：商智文化。
萬新知（1998）。國民小學校長行政溝通行為、組織溝通氣氛與校長領導效能之關係研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
歐陽子、楊美惠與楊翠屏譯（1992）。第二性（譯自Beauvoir, Simone de著Le deuxieme sexe）。台北：志文。
歐源榮（1995）。國民中學校長組織溝通與行政決定合理性關係之研究。國立台中師院國民教育所碩士論文。
潘慧玲（1999）。Belenky等人的女性知識論。文章發表於國立師範大學教育系性別與教育論壇中。台北：台灣師大。
潘慧玲、梁文蓁與陳宜宣（2000）。台灣近十年教育領導碩博士論文分析：女性主義觀點。婦女與兩性學刊，11，151-190
蔡金田（1996）。國民小學組織溝通與組織氣氛之關係：以中部地區國小為例。國立嘉義師範學院國民教育所碩士論文。
蔡美儀（1992）。我國女性教育主管性別角色、自我概念、社會支持與工作適應之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭至慧、劉毓秀與葉安安譯（1997）。女性新心理學（譯自M. J. Baker著Toward a new psychology of women ）。台北：女書。
鄭淑敏譯（1994）。成功的專業女性（譯自P. A. McBroom著The third sex）。台北：遠流。
戴照煜（1980）。談判與管理。台北：長河。
謝文全（1991）。教育行政：理論與實際。台北：文景。
謝文全（1993）。學校行政。台北：五南。
謝文豪（1987）。國民中學組織結構與組織溝通之關係。國立師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
韓培爾（1998）。應用社會科學研究法。台北：商務。
簡成熙（1997）。關懷倫理學與教育－姬莉根與諾丁思想初探。輯於簡成熙主編：哲學和教育，頁197-232。高雄：復文。
顏火龍（1981）。台北市國民小學校長與教師意見溝通問題之調查研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
Acker, J. (1987, April). Hierarchies and jobs: Notes for a theory of gendered organizations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Chicago.
Adamson, N., Briskin, L., & McPhail, M. (1988). Entering the world of the
women’s movement. In N. Adamson, L. Briskin, & M. McPhail (Eds.),
Feminist organizing for change: The contemporary woman’s movement in
Canada. (pp.3-26). Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Andrews, R., & Basom, M. (1990). Instructional leadership: Are women principals better? Principal, 23, 38-40.
Baird, J. E., & Bradley, P. H. (1979). Styles of management and communication: A comparative study of men and women. Communication Monographs, 46 (2), 101-111.
Baker, M. A. (1991). Gender and verbal communication in professional settings. Management Communication Quarterly, 5(1), 37-63.
Battle, M. (1982). Teacher perception of male and female principal communication style. Ann Arbor, MI: Bell & Howell.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B., Golderberg, N., & Tarule, J. (1997). Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor Books.
Berryman-Fink, C., & Wheeless, V. E. (1984, February). Effects of attitudes toward men and women in management on perceived communication competencies of women managers. Paper presented at the Western Speech Communication Association Convention, Seattle.
Birdsall, P. (1980). A comparative analysis of male and female managerial communication style in two organizations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 16, 183-196.
Brass, D. J. (1985). Men’s and women’s network: A study of interaction
patterns and influence in an organization. Academy of Management
Journal, 28(2), 327-343.
Brunner, C. C. (1997, April). Searching the silent smile of women superintendents: Did you say something? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
Buker, E. A. (1990). Feminist social theory and hermeneutics: An empowering dialectic? Social Epistemology, 4 (1), 23-29.
Buzzanell, P. M. (1994). Gaining a voice: Feminist organizational communication theorizing. Managerial Communication Quarterly, 7(3), 339-383.
Calas, M. B., & Smircich, L. (1992). Reviewing gender into organizational theorizing: Directions from feminist perspectives. In I. M. Reed, & M. Hughes (Eds.), Rethinking organizations (pp. 227-253). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Conrald, C., & Ryan, M. (1985). Power, praxis, and self in organizational theory. In R. D. McPhee, & P. K. Tompkins (Eds.), Organizational communication: Traditional themes and new directions (pp.235-257). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Constance, C. S. (1984, Decmember). The communication power of women managers: Doubts, dilemmas, and management development programs. Paper presented at the Western Woman’s Alliance, Kentucky.
Edelsky, C. (1981). Who’s hot the floor? Language and Society, 10, 383- 421.
Featherson, O. J. (1988). Case study of female secondary school principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Washington University.
Fine, M. G. (1993). New voices in organization communication: A feminist commentary and critique. In S. P. Bowen, & N. Wyatt (Eds.), Transforming visions: Feminist critiques in communication studies (pp.125-166). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Gilbertson, M. (1981). The influence of gender on the verbal interactions among principals and staff members: An exploratory study. In P. A. Schmuck, W.W. Charters, R. O. Carlson (Eds.), Educational policy and management: Sex differentials (pp. 297-306). New York: Academic Press.
Gilliagn, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gougeon, T. D. (1991, April). Cross gender effects in principal-teacher communication: Using survey and field study techniques. Paper presented in the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Granier, A. (1991). The Woman in the principal’s office (communication strategies).
Unpublished doctoral dissertation of University of Northern Colorado.
Haddock, P. (1995). Communicating personal power. Supervision, 56, 20.
Harding, S. (1987). Feminism and methodology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Hass, A., & Sherman, A. M. (1982). Reported topics of conversation among same-sex adults. Communication Quarterly, 30(1), 341.
Helgessen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women’s ways of leadership. New York: Doubleday.
Hennig, M., & Jardim, A. (1978). Managerial women. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Hersi, D. T. (1993). Factors contributing to job satisfaction for women in higher education administration. CUPA Journal, 44(2), 29-35.
Hill, M., & Ragaland, J. (1995). Women as educational leaders. Thounsand oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hodgetts, R. M. (1982). Organizational behavior: Theory and practice. New York: Macmillan .
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (1987). Educational administration: Theory, research and practice (4th. ed.). New York: Random House.
Gougeon, T. D., Hutton, S. I., & McPherson, J. L. (1993, April). A
phenomenological study of leadership: Social control theory. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
Boston.
Hyman, B. (1980). Responsive leadership: The woman manager’s asset or liability? Supervisory Management, 25(8), 40-43.
Josefowitz, N. (1980). Management men and women: Closed vs. open doors. Harvard Business Review, 58, 56-60.
Kolb, D. M. (1992). Women’s work: Peacemaking in organizations. In D. M. Kolb, & J. M. Bartunek (Eds.), Hidden conflict in organizations: uncovering behind-the-scenes disputes (pp. 63-91). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lamude, K. G., & Daniels, T. D. (1984). Perceived managerial communicator style as
a function of subordinate and manager gender. Communication Research
Report, 1, 91-98.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Loden, M. (1985). Feminine leadership, or how to succeed in business without being one of the boys. New York: Time Books.
Lunenburg, F. C., & Ornstein, A. C. (1996). Educational administration: Concepts and practices( 2nded.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
McCluskey, K. C. (1997). Gender at work. Public Management, 79(5), 5-11.
Milkos, E. (1988). Administrator selection, career patterns, succession, and socialization. In N. J. Boyan (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational administration (pp.151-163). New York: Longman.
Miller, L. D. (1981, December). Communication effectiveness and the professional woman. Paper presented at the Western Woman’s Alliance, Kentucky.
Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and narrative. Cambridge, MA: Haravrd University Press.
Montenegro, X. (1993). Women and racial minority representation in school administration. Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators.
Mumby, D. K., & Putnam, L. L. (1992). The politics of emotion: A feminist reading of bounded rationality. Academy of Management Review, 17, 3, 465-486.
Mumby, D. K. (1987). The political function of narrative in organizations. Communication Monographs, 54, 113-127.
Mumby, D. K. (1996). Feminism, postmodernism and organizational communication studies. Management Communication Quarterly, 9(3), 259-295.
Mumby, D. K., & Putnam, L. L. (1992). The politics of emotion: A feminist reading of
bounded rationality. Academy of Management Review, 17, 465-486.
Oakley, A. (1982). Subjecting women. London: Fontna.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Pearson, J. C., & Trent, J. S. (1985). Successful women in speech communication: A national survey of strategies and skills, contributions and conflicts. ACA Bulletin, 56, 70-76.
Pitner, N. J. (1981). Hormones and herms: Are the activities of supertending different for a woman? In P. A. Schmuck, W. W. Charters, & R. O. Carlson (Eds.), Educatoanl policy and management: Sex differentials (pp.273-295). New York: Academic Press.
Putnam, L. L. (1982). In search of gender: A critique of communication and sex roles research. Women’s Studies in Communication, 5, 1-9.
Putnam, L. L. (1983). The interpretive perspective: An alternative to functionalism. In L. L. Putnam, & M. E. Pacanowsky (Eds.), Communication and organizations: An interpretive approach (pp.63-86). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Regan, H. B., & Brooks, G. H. (1995). Out of women’s experience. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rosener, J. (1990). Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec, 119-125.
Scott, K. P. (1980). Perceptions of communication competence: What’s good for the goose is not good for the gender. Women’s Studies International Quarterly, 3, 199-208.
Shakeshasft, C. (1989). Women in educational administration. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Sheeler, K. (1997, November). Leadership, communication style and gender: A prepositional analysis. Paper presented at the Commission on training and development Natioanl Communication Association Convention, Chicago.
Shockley-Zalabak, P. (1995). Fundamentals of organizational communication. New York: Longman.
Simon, H. A. (1976). Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization. New York: Free Press.
Skrla L. (1998, April). The social construction of gender in superintendency. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego.
Staley, C. C., & Shockley-Zalabak, P. (1986, Feburary). A communication profile of the female professional: An exploratory study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western Speech Communication Association, Tucson.
Tannen, D. (1990). You just don’t understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: Morrow.
Tingley, J. C. (1993). Genderflex. New York: Amacom.
Turner, C. S., & Thompson, J. R. (1993). Socializing women doctoral students: Minority and majority experiences. Review of `Higher Education, 16(3), 355-370.
Valentine, J. W. (1981). Effective communication: Do your teachers really understand you? NASSP Bulletin, 65(445), 34-38.
Wilkins, B. M., & Andersen, P. A. (1991). Gender differences and similarities in management communication: A meta-analysis. Managerial Communication Quarterly, 5, 6-35.
Wyatt, N. (1988). Shared leadership in the weavers’ guild. In B. Bate, & A. Taylor (Eds.), Women communication: Studies of women’s talk (pp.147-175). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.