| Summary: | 碩士 === 臺北市立師範學院 === 國民教育研究所 === 90 === The purpose of this study was to investigate the performance of Taipei County private kindergarten teachers in the 20 indicators determining teachers’ reflection abilities. The study will also analyze the difference in teachers’ reflective thinking abilities by the teachers’ individual backgrounds and the type of classroom managements.
Literature review and questionnaire methods were conducted in this study. Two research tools are used: the “Kindergarten classroom managements measurement table,” formulated by this researcher and the thesis advisor (table includes consideration-orientation and initiating structure-orientation); and the “Kindergarten teachers’ reflection measurement table” formulated with Hwang YieSu (1999) (this includes the 20 reflection ability indicators). The respondents in the research are 175 kindergarten teachers from private kindergartens based in Taipei County. Results from questionnaires were arrived at through averaging, standard deviation, t-Test and single factor variable analysis. Conclusions are as follows:
1. On the average, in the performance of respondent teachers in the 20 indicators determining teachers’ reflection abilities, the respondents performed well in two indicators: “continually reflects to improve” and “tends to be self-examined.” Relative reflection ability includes “allows time for new thinking.” Of the 17 other indicators, the subjects had positive scores on: “reaches a technical rationality,” “tends to be concrete,” “ideas can be integrated and explained,” “focus in the significance of children’s development,” “decides independently,” “thinks alternatively,” “maintains a focus on important effects,” “tolerant of uncertainty,” “make sure children are learning,” “focuses on thinking,” “accepts individual differences,” “judges for process,” “children-oriented,” and “takes easy and enjoyable.” They had negative scores on: “is practical and makes ideas work,” “integrates varied settings,” and “steady and consistent.” Of all the indicators, those, which belong to the decision-making level within the classroom, show that the average reflection ability consistently displays a tendency towards reflection ability with positive orientation.
2. There are no significant differences in the twenty indicators measuring teachers’ reflective thinking abilities in terms of the teachers’ varying ages, except in three indicators namely, “steady and consistent,” “thinks alternatively,” and “children-oriented.”
3. There are also no significant differences in the twenty indicators measuring teachers’ reflective thinking abilities in terms of varying levels of seniority, except in the “ideas can be integrated and explained” element of “curriculum management” and “tends to be concrete” element of “clarify teachers’ personal educational ideas and educational goals.”
4. There are significant differences in the twenty indicators measuring teachers’ reflective thinking abilities in terms of varying educational backgrounds. Teachers who are university graduates perform better than their colleagues who graduated from college or senior high school in indicators such as, “ideas can be integrated and explained,” “steady and consistent,” “continually reflect to improve,” “focus in the significance of children’s development,” “make sure children are learning,” “focuses on thinking,” “accepts individual differences,” “judge for process,” and “children oriented.” Furthermore, teachers who have graduated from university have better reflection abilities in the decision making level within the classroom than those who graduated from junior college and senior high school and are more inclined to make use of those reflection abilities.
5. There are no significant differences in the twenty indicators measuring teachers’ reflective thinking abilities in terms of varying types of classroom managements except in indicators such as “tends to be self-examined,” “thinks alternatively,” and “judge for process,” and “children oriented.” Teachers who teach in classrooms with more democratic atmosphere did better than those who teach in classrooms with an indifferent atmosphere in four indicators: “tends to be self-examined,” “think alternatively,” “judge for process,” and “children oriented.” Teachers who teach in classrooms with a more loving protective atmosphere did better than their colleagues who teach in authoritarian settings in two indicators, namely, judge for process” and “children oriented.”
6. There are significant differences in the level of reflection ability displayed in classroom decision-making of high-consideration and low-consideration classrooms. Those teaching in high-consideration classrooms did better than their colleagues teaching in low-consideration classrooms in indicators such as “thinks alternatively,” “maintains a focus on important effects,” “tolerant of uncertainty,” “leaves room for thinking,” ‘focuses on thinking,” “ children oriented,” and “judge for process.”
7. There are no significant differences in the teachers’ reflective thinking abilities of teachers from high-initiating structure and low-initiating structure classrooms except for the following indicators: is practical and makes ideas work,” “tends to be self-examined,” “thinks alternatively,” “judge for process,” and “children oriented.”
Based on the results of the study, the following recommendations are made:
1. For classroom managements of kindergartens:
Teacher-student interaction is the heart of classroom managements; both teacher and students are major players inside the classroom. How teacher and students interact will ultimately decide what the classroom atmosphere will prevail. Moreover, classroom managements should focus on the needs of the children and in turn, have better teachers’ reflection abilities.
2. For teachers developing reflection abilities:
Teachers should have good powers of observation inside the classroom; moreover, they should be able to think on their feet in order to match their actions to their thoughts. They can also use the twenty indicators measuring teachers’ reflective thinking abilities to study their educational philosophy or to evaluate themselves to see if reflective action is reasonable or not. Another is to raise the educational levels of these teachers, which can improve teachers’ reflection abilities.
3. For organizations doing teacher-training
Education should be a combination of theories and practical applications. Organizations involved in teacher training should incorporate classes on practical educational reflection in their programs. Universities should begin offering their students courses on practical reflection methodology and training, allowing theses students to do their own reflection activities inside the classroom or to get together with their peers to do team reflection.
4. For future researchers
Expand the scope of the research, comparing the business situations of kindergartens from different areas inside Taiwan as well as the teachers’ reflection abilities. This study also recommends that future researchers may also dig deeper into high-consideration classrooms to see how this type of classroom managements influence the reflection abilities of the teachers as well as to see how teachers’ reflection can be developed. In addition, from teacher training programs, future studies can further explore the differences in teachers’ reflective thinking abilities among teachers with a masters’ degree, a bachelor degree, junior college, and senior high school graduates.
|
|---|
