台灣、英國與澳大利亞中小學校長培育制度之比較研究

Abstract

本研究旨在探究台灣、英國與澳大利亞中小學校長培育制度之實施現況，從 校長專業標準、校長證照、對象資格、權責單位、培育模式、課程內容、培育時 程、實務實習與師傅教導等面向，深入比較分析三國中小學校長培育制度之特色 與異同點，以規劃合理可行之我國國民中小學校長培育制度，並提出對於我國校 長培育制度之改進與進一步研究之建議。 本研究之主要結論如下： 一、校長專業標準：英國和澳大利亞的校長專業標準築基於校長角色及任務上，具明確指引作用；而我國則缺少一套校長培育的依循準則。 二、校長證照：英國實施校長證照制度與換證設計；澳大利亞正在研擬校長證照制度與課程；而我國在校長證照上尚未付諸行動。 三、培育模式：英國採取「先訓後選」模式；澳大利亞偏好「專業學習」；臺灣則屬於「先選後訓」模式。 四、資格對象：英國以審查為主，開放給非教育人員申請；澳大利亞各州有各自訂定的遴選標準；台灣校長資格的立法規範最為詳細。 五、權責單位：英國依地區分布，由 NCTL 授權給 28 個公私機構負責培訓；澳大 利亞由各州遴選優質公私立機構負責培訓；台灣校長培育的權責單位為縣市政府，亦可委託國家教育研究院或大學院校辦理。 六、課程內容：英國校長培育課程有統一的基本能力養成，富彈性且重視個別差異；澳大利亞各州教育行政部門量身訂做符應不同地區及校長需求的課程；臺灣校長培育課程依各權責單位的規畫不盡相同，偏向瑣碎且深度不足。 七、培育時程：英國採取長時間、彈性分散式的培育；澳大利亞公私立機構培育的時間長短不一；台灣的校長儲訓班以短期密集的方式實施，通常為八到十週，培育班則耗時約一年。 八、實務實習：英國重視在任職學校和實習學校的實務學習課程規劃；澳大利亞有影子培訓課程可體驗專家校長的辦學精神與方法；台灣的實習課程流於參觀，缺少實務操作的體驗。 九、師傅教導：英國設置師傅教導及推動地方學校領導人方案，投入校長生涯各階段協助專業成長及改善校務；澳大利亞重視需求領域的師徒配對，以增進適才適性的輔導效能；台灣目前尚未有完整的師傅教導課程規畫。

根據上述結論，研究者對中央教育行政機關的建議如下： 一、英國與澳大利亞之校長培育制度值得我國規劃校長培育制度之借鏡與參考。 二、教育部應制定專屬法令規章，建立校長培育制度的法源依據。 三、由國家籌設專責機構統籌辦理校長培育及評鑑機制。 四、訂定校長專業能力指標作為校長培育依據，奠定校長專業發展之基石。 五、建立校長專業證照制度，藉以提升校長的專業形象。 六、校長培育制度宜結合三向度模式規劃，以健全校長培育體系。 七、立基於提升學生學習成效之領導，規劃周延性課程並符應個別學習需求。 八、建置校長的專業成長網路系統，發揮學習社群能量。This research aims to probe into the primary and junior high school principal preparation systems in Taiwan, the UK, and Australia. Dimensions such as principal professional standard, principal certification, applicant qualification, principal preparation authority, principal preparation model, curriculum design, length of principal preparation, and principal internship, and mentor principal system are generalized in order to further compare and analyze the characteristics and differences of the primary and junior high school principal preparation systems. Finally, suggestions are proposed for improvement and further research of principal preparation.

The conclusions are as follows: I. Principal professional standard: The principal professional standards in the UK and Australia are founded on a principal’s roles and missions, which has definite functions of guidance. As for Taiwan, there is a shortage of principal preparation standards for us to follow. II. Principal certification: The UK implements the principal licensure and license renewal system, while Australia is still developing the principal licensure system and programs. As far as Taiwan is concerned, there is no practice here so far. III. Principal preparation model: The UK adopts "training before selection" model; Australia prefers "professional learning" model; in Taiwan, principle preparation belongs to local matters, so each county/city takes charge of it on its own or entrusts it to the National Academy for Educational Research, mostly applying "selection before training" model. IV. Applicant qualification: It is mainly based on document review in UK with open qualification, which offers non-educational personnel to apply for. In each state of Australia, there are different selection standards regulated by the state itself. In Taiwan, we have clear and detailed principal qualification regulation. V. Principal preparation authority: In the UK, a total of 28 public and private sectors are authorized by NCTL to take charge of principal preparation. In Australia, the education administration department in each state takes responsibility for establishing the content and method of principal professional training. The authorities concerned in Taiwan come to the county/city governments. VI. Curriculum design: The principal preparation programs in the UK are developed on the base of unified fundamental abilities, which are flexible and focuse on individual differences. Each state in Australia designs the programs that meet the needs of specific regions and individual principals. In Taiwan, the principal preparation programs vary according to different local governments, and they tended to be trifle and lack of depth. VII. Length of principal preparation: The UK applies a long-term, flexible, and distributed time frame, while the public and private preparation sectors have divergent preparation periods in Australia. As for Taiwan, it is put into practice by short-term and compact mode that basically last 8 to 10 weeks. VII. Principal internship: UK emphasizes the practical learning in a trainee’s working school and intern school; Australia has shadowing programs for the trainees to experience the expert principals' ethos of a school; the internship programs in Taiwan are limited to school visiting. VIII. Mentor principal system: The UK sets up mentor-principal system and promotes leadership programs in local schools. Australia values the mentoring pairing in different territories to enhance the efficacy of mentoring that makes the best use of one's abilities and is the most suitable for one's nature. Currently, there is a shortage of complete mentoring programs in Taiwan.

Based on the above conclusions, for the authorities concerned, the researcher suggests that: 1. The principal preparation systems in the UK and Australia are worthy of learning in planning our own principal preparation system. 2. The Ministry of Education should make laws and regulations to serve as the legal basis of the principal preparation system. 3. The government should establish a national institute to take responsibility for coordinating and tackling with principal preparation and evaluation mechanism. 4. The government should set up our own principal professional standards to serve as the cornerstone of principals’ professional development. 5. The principal certificate system should be built up in order to raise principals’ professional image. 6. It is better for the principal preparation system to combine the three-dimensional model and therefore make the system sound and complete. 7. The content of principal preparation programs should focus on leadership that can improve students' learning outcomes. 8. Principals’ professional growth network system should be set up to bring the energy of learning communities to a full play