臺灣與芬蘭中學教師對公民教育目標的認知與類群分析：以ICCS 2016資料為例

Abstract

公民教育不僅能培養學生成為民主社會公民所需具備的基本能力外，亦是讓民主社會穩定發展的根基。若是想要讓學生擁有優質的公民教育，教師扮演著關鍵角色。教師對於公民教育信念會在教學的過程當中顯現，並將公民概念傳遞給學生，進而影響著學生對於公民的理解。目前，臺灣針對公民教育的研究中，鮮少利用大規模的教師數據來探討教師對於公民教育目標的認知。本研究採用ICCS資料庫之教師數據，分析臺灣與芬蘭教師對公民教育目標的認知，探討不同教師背景變項是否對於公民教育目標的選擇上存在差異，並透過潛在類別分析將教師認知分門別類，使同一類群的教師具有高度相似性，而不同類群之間存在著明顯差異。本研究得到以下五點結論：首先，臺灣與芬蘭教師均最多人選擇批判思考作為公民教育目標；其次，教師的性別、年齡、任教科目以及是否有任教公民科會在選擇公民教育目標有顯著差異，像是數學科的教師有較高的比例認為校園參與是公民教育前三的目標；第三，使用潛在類別分析，將兩國教師樣本分為五個類群，各個類群都有各自著重的目標，像是環保使者類群的教師會選擇批判思考、衝突解決以及環境保護作為公民教育前三重要目標；第四，臺灣教師年齡在40歲以上與以下有顯著差異存在，40歲以下的教師更傾向將批判思考作為公民教育主要的目標。最後，兩國的教師有不同的特性，像是芬蘭的自然科教師相比於台灣自然科教師有較多人會選擇批判思考作為公民教育目標。Civic education not only helps students develop the essential skills needed to be citizens in a democratic society but also serves as the foundation for the stable development of democracy. To provide high-quality civic education, teachers play a crucial role. Their beliefs about civic education are reflected in their teaching practices and in how they convey civic concepts to students, thus influencing students' understanding of citizenship. Currently, research on civic education in Taiwan rarely utilizes large-scale teacher data to explore teachers' endorsements of the aims of civic education. This study uses teacher data from the ICCS database to analyze the endorsements of Taiwanese and Finnish teachers regarding the aims of civic education. It investigates whether different teacher background variables influence the choice of aims of civic education and employs latent class analysis to categorizeteachers' endorsements into distinct profiles, ensuring high similarity within each profile and clear differences between profiles. The study yields the following five conclusions: First, both Taiwanese and Finnish teachers most frequently select critical thinking as a primary aim of civic education. Second, significant differences exist in the choice of aims of civic education based on teachers' gender, age, teaching subjects, and whether they teach civics; for example, a higher proportion of mathematics teachers consider school participation to be one of the top three aims of civic education. Third, latent class analysis divides the teacher samples from both countries into five profiles, each with distinct focuses, such as the Environmental Steward profile, where teachers prioritize critical thinking, conflict resolution, and environmental protection as the top three aims of civic education. Fourth, a significant age-related difference exists among Taiwanese teachers, with those under 40 more likely to emphasize critical thinking as a primary aim of civic education. Finally, there are differing characteristics between teachers from the two countries; for instance, Finnish science teachers are more likely than their Taiwanese counterparts to select critical thinking as an aim of civic education.