本研究採多元質性研究方法，探討學校本位自然科實習輔導計劃的成效。研究中邀請台北市區一所小型班群式學校參與，對該校三年級三位自然實習輔導教師、三位實習教師、校長及師資培育大學兩位教授所組成的實習輔導團體，分別使用課室觀察、會議記錄及小故事訪談的方式，探討此計畫對實習教師、實習輔導教師、實習學校的影響。其中課室觀察使用STAM-Sci作為分析教學表現之架構，會議紀錄按文獻中所提的實習輔導教師輔導策略編碼後做質性分析，小故事訪談使用敘說探究之類別-內容方式分析。研究資料指出本計劃：一、對實習教師的影響：(一)學會使用兒童語言呈現難易適中的教材，(二)學會運用引起動機的技巧，(三)學習進行探究式教學，(四)加深自然學科知識了解，(五)使用正回饋經營班級學習氣氛，(六)學習使用問答技巧和課程內容重點融入，(七)學習使用活潑、節奏明快的教學步調，(八)藉由共同教學進行教學驗證，(九)獨立教學機會。二、對實習輔導教師的影響：(一)開放教學現場，促進共同輔導趨勢，(二)提供與實習教師雙向互動管道，提升班級經營品質，(三)增加與其他輔導教師交流機會，(四)重新審視自我教學特點並反省教學，(五)建立co-teaching模式，(六)與實習教師產生正向感情支持，(七)汲取其他教師的教學經驗與活動，改善自我教學，(八)增進與導師之間的互動。三、實習輔導計畫策略成效：(一)組成教師學習社群，促成互動省思教學，(二)帶入導師、行政及研究資源，協助教師辯證觀看教學的視野，(三)帶入當前師資培育及專業成長之議題，釐清師資培育機構與實習學校合作的新契機，(四)教學、行政、研究三方人力集思廣益，共同探尋如何進一步落實專業發展學校之理念。
依據研究結果研究者得到以下五點結論：一、本自然科實習輔導計畫幫助實習教師從三位自然輔導教師教學優勢中尋找合適的學習典範，增強對學科知識、教材教法與班級經營的實力，並獲得自然科獨立教學與檢討教學的機會。二、本自然科實習輔導計畫幫助自然輔導教師建立與輔導教師和實習指導教授之間的連結，獲得取得新知管道和開放教學現場接受批判的機會，並與實習教師形成共同教學、感情支持的助力。三、本自然科實習輔導計畫協助學校提升校內自然教師的教學品質、培育實習教師的實力。四、本實習輔導計畫推動宜鎖定於小型國民小學，營造開放而全校總動員的氣氛，並配合專業發展學校與專業輔導教師的認證進行。五、本實習輔導計畫成效良好，對於實習教師與自然輔導教師專業成長均有助益，唯班導師與本計畫的連結出現斷層，為不可避免之人力因素。

This research applied multiple qualitative techniques to explore the effects of a school-based mentoring program. Three science mentors, three student teachers of the third grade, and the principal in a small urban school in Taipei and two professors of teacher education institutes were invited to participate. Classroom observations, meeting records, and interviews about teaching vignettes were collected and analyzed to generate the program’s impacts on student teachers, mentors, and the mentoring school. STAM-Sci was used to describe the participant teachers’ teaching performance. The mentors’ guidance strategies in the meeting records were coded before doing further qualitative analysis. Mentors’ responses to teaching vignettes were analyzed by category-content of narrative analysis. The results revealed that the program facilitates student teachers in: (1)learning to use children’s language to present teaching materials, (2)learning to use motivation strategies, (3)learning to carry on inquiry teaching approaches, (4)understanding science content knowledge, (5)using positive feedbacks to manage classroom learning environment, (6)learning to use questioning skills and focus on core science content, (7)adjusting to lively and rhythmic teaching steps, (8)carrying on and learning from co-teaching, and (9)gaining opportunities to teach independently, and encourages mentors to: (1)practice coaching, (2)increase interaction with student teachers and enhance quality of classroom management, (3)exchange experiences with other mentors more frequently, (4)reflect upon teaching performances, (5)establish co-teaching patterns, (6)build positive emotional support to student teachers, (7)learn from peer teachers’ teaching practice, and (8)promote interaction with homeroom teachers. This program was effective in: (1)establishing teacher learning community, and facilitating teacher interaction toward reflecting on teaching, (2)bringing in administrative and research resources, and leading to extended teaching vision, (3)raising issues in teacher professional development, and clarifying new turning points of school-university cooperation, and (4)bringing together manpower in teaching, administration, and research to brainstorm about ways to enact professional development schools.
Based on the findings, five conclusions are generated. First, the school-based mentoring program helps student teacher to seek for appropriate teaching models from science mentors, strengthens their competences in disciplinary knowledge, instructional skills and classroom management, and obtains more science teaching and reflection opportunities. Second, the program helps mentors in establishing linkage between mentors and science educators, obtaining opportunities to learn current issues, to accept critique, and to co-teach and support each others. Third, the program assists in promoting quality teaching and competences of teachers in training interns, and moving the school toward authentication of professional development school. Fourth, the program could be suitably for small elementary schools in practicing whole school professional development and exemplifying authentication of professional development school and professional mentors. Fifth, the program has positive effects on all participant teachers, but lacking linkage with homeroom teachers is recognized as an inevitable manpower factor.

一、中文部分
李奉儒(2001)。英國實習輔導教師的輔導模式、策略與評鑑。英國教育政策與制度，366-395。
李水源(1997)。實習輔導教師對實習教師之輔導。國教月刊，44(1)，27-31。
李惠婷(2005)。學校本位實習教師輔導制度之研究。國立台北教育大學國民教育學系碩士班碩士論文(未出版)。
李雅婷(1998)：實習輔導教師之輔導措施探討。教育實習輔導季刊，3(3)，31-34。
阮凱利(2001)。理論與實踐的辯證--國小教師實踐知識之敘說性研究。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
林素芬(1997)。教師專業實踐知識的發展歷程：一位研究生/國小教師的自述。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
林懿德(2001)。國小實習輔導教師輔導策略與實習教師專業發展之研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
教育部(2005)。師資培育法。台北：教育部。
教育部(2005)。師資培育法。台北：教育部。
陳利玲(2001)。國民小學實習教師輔導制度之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
張德銳(2003)。實習輔導的三個利器。實習輔導：培育明日的專業良師，2-18。
洪志成(1998)。實習輔導教師輔導知能：理念與實際。人力資源，55，42-56。
梁瑞安(1999)。實習教師對實習輔導教師的角色期望初探。中等教育，50(5)，26-38。
歐用生(1996)。教師專業成長。台北： 師大書苑。
黃婉萍(1999)。新實習輔導制度下國小實習輔導教師角色與實習教師專業發展之探討。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
楊思偉(1997)。中日學校經營之比較研究。台北：師大書苑。
蔡秉倫(1998)。國民中學實習輔導教師專業成長之研究。國立台東師範學院教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
鍾瓊如（2000）。國民小學實習教師教育實習內容與實習困擾之探究。國立台北師範學院教育研究所論文(未出版)。
盧富美(1992)。結業身分不同之國小實習教師現況與困擾之比較研究。嘉義：紅豆。
二、英文部分
Brooks, V., & Sikes, P. (1997). The good mentor guide: Initial teacher education in secondary schools. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Castle, S., Fox, R. K., & Souder, K. O. (2006). Do Professional Development Schools (PDSs) Make a Difference? A Comparative Study of PDS and Non-PDS Teacher Candidates. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(1), 65-80.
Cladinin , D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. San Francisco: Jossey-bass Press.
Fetter, M. K., & Vellom, P. (2001). Linking schools and universities in partnership for science teacher preparation. In D.R. Lavoie and W-M. Roth (Eds), Models of Science Teacher Preparation, 67-88. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Furlong, J., & Mayard , T. (1995). .Mentoring student teacher-the growth of profession knowledge. London: Routledge.
Gallagher, J., & Parker, J. (1995). Secondary teaching analysis matrix. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University
Guillaume, A., & Rudney, G. (1993). Student teachers growth toward independence: An analysis of their changing concerns. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(1), 65-80.
Huling-Austin, L. (1992). Research on learning to teach: Implication for teacher induction and mentoring programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 173-180
Ridley, D. S., Hurwitz, S. Hackett, M. R. D., & Miller, K. K. (2006). Comparing PDS and campus-based preservice teacher preparation: Is PDS-based preparation really better? Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 46-56.
Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative analysis. London: Sage.
Roth, W-M., & Tobin, K. (2005). Teaching together, Learning together. Counterpoints, studies in the postmodern theory of education, Volume 294. New York: Peter Lang Publishers.
Shank, M., (2006). Teacher storytelling: A means for creating and learning within a collaborative space. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 711–721.
Teitel, L. (1997). Changing teacher education through professional development school partnerships: A five-year follow-up study. Teachers College Record, 99(2), 311-334.
Tomlinson, P. (1995). Understanding mentoring: Reflective strategies for
school-based teacher preparation. London: Open University Press.
Tellez, K. (1992). Mentors by choice, not design: Help-seeking by beginning teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 214-221.
Wildman, T. M., Magliaro, S. G., Niles, R. A., & Niles, J. A. (1992). Teachermentoring : An analysis of roles, activities, and conditions. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 205-213.
Yeomans, R., & Sampson, J. (1994). .Mentorship in the primary school. London: The Falmer Press.