Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 國民小學雙語教師專業能力指標建構與應用之研究
The Construction and Application of Professional Competence Indicators for Bilingual Teachers in Elementary Schools作者 郭姿君
Kuo, Tzu-Chun貢獻者 郭昭佑
Guo, Chao-Yu
郭姿君
Kuo, Tzu-Chun關鍵詞 雙語教師專業能力
指標建構
模糊德懷術
概念構圖
重要性及表現情形分析法
Professional Competence of Bilingual Teachers
Indicators Construction
Fuzzy Delphi Method
Concept Mapping
Importance-performance Analysis日期 2023 上傳時間 1-Dec-2023 10:37:45 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著臺灣走向雙語教育的道路，建立臺灣雙語教師專業能力指標尤為重要，然而相關研究尚付闕如。本研究經國內外文獻探討初擬國民小學雙語教師專業能力指標，再以模糊德懷術問卷及概念構圖問卷分析，建構國民小學雙語教師的專業能力指標（包含9個構面、34項指標），後續針對臺北市立國民小學51所雙語教育學校313名雙語教師，就指標的重要性及表現情形（IPA）進行分析。研究結果顯示「雙語教學教材科技資源運用」為雙語教師認為是最重要且表現最佳的構面；而「雙語教學跨域整合」則是急需強化的構面，且不同背景變項的雙語教師在這些指標的重要性及表現上亦有所差異。是以，就本研究發現與結果之相關建議如下： 一、職前培訓及在職進修應著重於強化「雙語教學跨域整合」的專業知能，政府應持續挹注雙語教育學校相關資源，包含人力、經費、教材教法、專業發展社群等，以確保雙語教學的順利實施。 二、深入了解不同背景變項下亟待改善的指標，針對不同的雙語教師所面臨的困境，提供其個別化的專業發展計畫，以便更能符應雙語教師的需求。 三、重新評估國民小學雙語教師的英語CEFR等級標準，在雙語教育推行初期，應思考不同領域雙語教學需求的可行性，提供雙語教師適合的支援及培訓。
With the ongoing evolution toward bilingual education in Taiwan, the establishment of professional competence indicators for bilingual teachers becomes crucial. Despite the significance of this endeavor, there is a noticeable gap in existing research. This study aims to address this gap by initially formulating the professional competency index for bilingual teachers in national primary schools through an extensive review of both domestic and international literature. Subsequently, the study conducted an analysis using Fuzzy Delphi Method and Concept Mapping questionnaires to construct the professional competency index, comprising 9 aspects and 34 indicators, for bilingual teachers in national primary schools. A follow-up study of the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) was performed, involving 313 bilingual teachers in 51 bilingual education schools in Taipei Municipal Primary Schools. The research results findings reveal that among the identified aspects, "use of technological resources in bilingual teaching materials" is considered by the bilingual teachers as the most crucial and is performed at the highest level. Conversely, "cross-domain integration of bilingual teaching" emerges as an area requiring immediate enhancement. Furthermore, variations in the importance and performance of these indicators were noted among bilingual teachers with different background variables. Based on these findings, several key suggestions are proposed: 1. Both pre-service and in-service training programs should emphasize strengthening the professional knowledge and skills related to "cross-domain integration of bilingual teaching". The government should continue investing in resources for bilingual education schools, encompassing manpower, funding, teaching materials and methods, and professional development communities, etc., to ensure the seamless implementation of bilingual teaching. 2. Recognize the specific indicators that need improvement based on different background variables. Provide individualized professional development plans for bilingual teachers, considering the challenges they face, to better cater to their unique needs. 3. Reassess the English Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) level standards for bilingual teachers in national primary schools. During the early stages of bilingual education, consider the feasibility of bilingual teaching needs in various fields and provide appropriate support and training to bilingual teachers based on the identified requirements.參考文獻 壹、中文部分 行政院研究發展考核委員會 (2009)。提升國人英語力建設計畫(行政院98年9月23日院臺教字第 0980093279 號函核定)。 吳政達 (2005)。我國地方政府層級教育課責系統建構之評估：模糊德菲法之應用。教育與心理研究，28(4)，645-665。 吳英成 (2010)。新加坡雙語教育政策的沿革與新機遇。臺灣語文研究，5(2)，63-80。 http://www.twlls.org.tw/jtll/documents/5.2-4.pdf 吳清山 (2020)。迎向師資培育4.0世代的教師角色與責任。師友雙月刊，622，8-12。 https://doi.org/10.3966/266336712020080622002 吳清基 (1995)。各師資類科教師專業表現之標準訂定計畫。教育部(委託研究單位：中華民國師範教育學會)。 http://education.xcom.tw/research/200603132121.doc 呂美慧 (2012)。雙語教育。國家教育研究院樂詞網。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/e294e66f8457eb0536eee5fe6625143d/?startswith=zh&seq=3 林子斌 (2022)。跨文化溝通的基礎：臺灣雙語教育的實踐與挑戰。課程研究，17(1)，1-13。 https://doi.org/10.53106/181653382022031701001 施又瑀 (2021)。打造未來人才的國際力—國小雙語教育之探討。南投文教，38，88-96。 http://163.22.172.17/p038/088-打造未來人才的國際力—國小雙語教育之探討.pdf 洪如玉 (2014)。跨越語言疆界的教育-盧森堡多語教育實踐及其啟示。教育研究與發展期刊，10(3)，125-146。https://doi.org/10.3966/181665042014091003005 紀惠英與范熾文 (2013)。中小學教師專業能力與專業發展：知識經濟的觀點。學校行政雙月刊，85，190-207。https://doi.org/10.3966/160683002013050085010 國家發展委員會 (2018)。2030雙語國家政策發展藍圖(行政院107 年 12 月 10 日 院授發綜字第 1070802190 號函頒)。 https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/b7a931c4-c902-4992-a00c-7d1b87f46cea 國家發展委員會 (2021)。2030雙語政策整體推動方案。https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xNDUzMi83NDBlMTY5Ny1lZmIwLTRjZGItYjYxMi03M2UzMTVhMTM5ZjIucGRm&n=MjAzMOmbmeiqnuaUv%2Betli5wZGY%3D&icon=.pdf 教育部 (2016a)。國民教育法。全國法規資料庫。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=H0070001 教育部 (2016b)。中華民國教師專業標準指引(教育部105年2月15日臺教師(三)字第1050018281號函核)。定)https://ws.moe.edu.tw/001/Upload/8/relfile/7834/45668/d4f269e3-96cf-4eac-b038-9a9cda8912f2.pdf 教育部 (2018a)。即時新聞-全面啟動教育體系的雙語活化、培養臺灣走向世界的雙語人才。教育部全球資訊網。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9E7AC85F1954DDA8&sms=169B8E91BB75571F&s=B7D34EA3ED606429 教育部 (2018b)。全英語教學師資培育實施計畫。教育部全球資訊網。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9E7AC85F1954DDA8&sms=169B8E91BB75571F&s=BE94948F0D339502 教育部 (2020)。中小學國際教育白皮書2.0。中小學國際教育 2.0 全球資訊網。https://ws.moe.edu.tw/Download.ashx?u=C099358C81D4876C725695F2070B467E8B81ED614D7AF43EF55FFFF8E382F49230FBFEBE3FBA67410E3D088235FCEFF8A33CA54BD67D7DFD957229DE7F658AFACA347539D32BA23B9A142AA2B7545659&n=260CF99641E8382A1BED23C70A14D4360FFA25EF159D1B19F966E1C98FBC313ADE66237F87CDF55C2003096F7477E0E7D121FDBA1A06975D&icon=..pdf 教育部 (2021)。中華民國教師專業素養指引－師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準。 https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContentHistory.aspx?hid=194463&id=GL002163 教育部 (2022a)。中華民國教師專業素養指引－師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準修正規定。教育部主管法規查詢系統。 https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL002163 教育部 (2022b)。補助國民中小學部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫。高級中等教育階段部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫網站。https://pro.k12ea.gov.tw/k12eagt/theme/themeAction!themeCourseTitle.so;jsessionid=1D7621FAF06EE52746FBB25AB36B4072?themeCourseCode=4YCQ3W 教育部師資培育及藝術教育司 (無標示)。在職教師雙語教育增能。https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2600/Content_List.aspx?n=2DFA1EA62E9A0262 郭玉霞 (1996)。教師在課程實施中所扮演的角色。國民教育研究集刊，4，53-59。https://doi.org/10.7038/BREE.199606_(4).0003 郭為藩 (1971)。角色理論在教育學上之意義。師友月刊，50，16-20。https://doi.org/10.6437/EM.197107.0006 黃彥文 (2021)。雙語教育在師資培育課程的問題之探析。台灣教育研究期刊, 2(6), 157-183。https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fivnuZTHv945fzlZpIIfPKiaZKefYP2Q/view 黃政傑 (2022)。從雙語政策看中小學雙語師資培育。臺灣教育評論月刊，11(6)，1-10。 http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/11-6/topic/01.pdf 臺北市政府教育局 (2019)。臺北市政府教育局新聞稿―臺北市雙語大教室―各領域 CLIL 教給你看! 臺北市政府教育局網站。 https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=B3DDF0458F0FFC11&sms=72544237BBE4C5F6&s=0AAF462783829118 臺北市政府教育局 (2022a)。重大施政成果-臺北市雙語課程學校。臺北市政府教育局網站。https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=2ADAF137A801E4D2&sms=C04230CB75259A56&s=8E17591F678ED1B5 臺北市政府教育局 (2022b)。臺北市雙語教育白皮書。 https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzQyL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTM2OTUvZDhmZDUxZGItMzI5ZS00ZWQyLWI4N2UtNjg1MWM4MGQwNGM1LnBkZg%3D%3D&n=6Ie65YyX5biC6ZuZ6Kqe5pWZ6IKy55m955qu5pu4LnBkZg%3D%3D&icon=..pdf 臺北市政府教育局 (2022c)。臺北市立高級中等以下學校教師甄選作業要點。臺北市法規查詢系統。https://www.laws.taipei.gov.tw/Law/LawSearch/LawArticleContent?lawId=P05K2028-20220128&realID=05-11-2028&lawArticleContentButton= 臺北市政府教育局 (2023)。111學年度臺北市高級中等以下學校概況表。臺北市政府教育局網站。https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=596E0D35F1581985&sms=69B4E6B26379EE4E&s=FB890C92546FF822 駐波士頓辦事處教育組 (2017)。麻州議會通過雙語教學法案。國家教育研究院-臺灣教育研究資訊網。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/ct?ctNode=647&mp=teric_b&xItem=2000141&resCtNode=454&OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=IO66-BTMR-0SQM-GI1K-SMWT-3PQC-F505-CRWZ 蔡政宏與謝文惠 (2011)。應用科技內容教學知識(TPACK)理論架構發展資訊科技融入教學創新教學模式之啟示。新竹縣教育研究集刊，11，43-76。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/DoDownload?xmlId=1992967&fileName=1512638362605&format=pdf 羅文杏 (2022)。臺灣雙語教師知能及增能課程規劃。臺灣教育評論月刊，11(8)，12-15。 http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/11-8/topic/03.pdf 羅恩冕與郭昭佑 (2018)。我國大學學生評鑑教師教學指標之研究：概念構圖法的調整應用。教育研究與發展期刊，14(1)，1-34。https://doi.org/10.3966/181665042018031401001 貳、外語部分 Airey, J. (2016). EAP, EMI or CLIL? The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 71-83. Aliev, R. A., Aliev, R. R., Ahmedov, I. Z., & Aliyeva, K. R. (2004). Fuzzy Delphi Method. Society of Azerbaijan Republic Journal, 3-4. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299510278_Fuzzy_Delphi_Method Almudena, F. (2012). CLIL in the Foreign Language Classroom: Proposal of a Framework for ICT Materials Design in Language-Oriented Versions of Content and Language Integrated Learning. Alicante Journal of English Studies, 25, 317-334. Babbie, E. R. (1973). Survey research methods. Wadsworth Publ. Co. Inc. Belmont. Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism(3rd edition). Multilingual Matters LTD. Beardsmore, H. B. (2002). The Significance of CLIL/EMILE. University of Jyväskylä. Beatriz, C. P., & Pino Rodríguez, A. M. (2021). Analysing CLIL Teacher Competences in Pre-service Preschool Education. A Case Study at the University of Granada. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 670-688. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1890021 Bertaux, P., Coonan, C. M., Frigols-Martín, M. J., & Mehisto, P. (2010). The CLIL Teacher’s Competences Grid. http://tplusm.net/CLIL_Competences_Grid_31.12.09.pdf Bialystok, E. (2018). Bilingual education for young children: review of the effects and consequences. Int J Biling Educ Biling, 21(6), 666–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1203859. Brown, H., & Bradford, A. (2016). EMI, CLIL, & CBI- Differing Approaches and Goals. Transformation in Language Education, 328-334. Cazden, C. B., & Snow, C.E. (1990). English Plus: Issues in Bilingual Education. Sage Publications, Inc., 9-11. Commission of the European Communities. (1995). White Paper:teaching and learning towards the learning society. Commission of the European Communities. Cortina-Pérez, B., & Pino Rodríguez, A. M. (2021). Analysing CLIL Teacher Competences in Pre-service Preschool Education. A Case Study at the University of Granada. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 670-688. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1890021 Coyle, D. (2002). Relevance of CLIL to the European Commission’s Language Learning Objectives. In D. Marsh (Ed.), CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension. Action, trends and foresight potential, 27-30. University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Coyle, D. (2007). Content and Language Integrated Learning: Towards a Connected Research Agenda for CLIL Pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-562. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0 Coyle, D. (2010). Preface in CLIL in Spain: Implementation Results and Teacher Training. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. R. de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation Results and Teacher Training. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1998). Bilingualism in Education Aspects of theory, research and practice. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Cummins, J., Bismilla, V., Chow, P., Cohen, S., Giampapa, F., Leoni, L., Sandhu, P., & Sastri, P. (2005). Affirming Identity in Multilingual Classrooms. Educational Leadership, 63(1), 38–43. Darn, S. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning(CLIL): A European Overview. ERIC Education Resources Information Center. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED490775.pdf Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction – a growing global phenomenon. British Council. DelliCarpini, M. (2021). Developing the C in Content and Language Integrated Learning: Teacher Preparation That Builds Learners’ Content Knowledge and Academic Language Through Teacher Collaboration and Integrated Pedagogical Training. In Hemmi, C., Banegas, D. L., International Perspectives on English Language Teaching, 217-238. Palgrave Macmillan. Dixon, L. Q. (2005a). Bilingual Education Policy in Singapore: An Analysis of its Sociohistorical Roots and Current Academic Outcomes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 8(1), 25-47. Dixon, L. Q. (2005b). The Bilingual Education Policy in Singapore: Implications for Second Language Acquisition. In Cohen, J., McAlister, K. T., Rolstad, K., & MacSwan, J., International Symposium on Bilingualism (4th), 625-635. Escobar, L., & Moreno, A. I.(eds). (2021). Mediating specialized knowledge and L2 abilities New Research in Spanish:English bilingual models and beyond. Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87476-6 Eurydice Report. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. the Eurydice European Unit. Eurydice Report. (2017). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe – 2017 Edition. European Commission. Fleta Guillén, M. T. (2019). Practices to Scaffold CLIL at Transition to Primary. Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts, 59-90. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6_4 Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). Issues in EAP: A preliminary perspective, 8-24. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524766.004 Genesee, F., & Gándara, P. (1999). Bilingual education programs: A Cross-National Perspective. Journal of Social Issue, 55(4), 665-685. Gutiérrez, G., Durán, R., & Beltrán, F. (2012). CLIL in teacher training: A Nottingham Trent University and University of Salamanca experience. Encuentro, 21, 48–62. Hillyard, S. (2011). First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.1 Holmes, B., Tangney, B., FitzGibbon, A., Savage, T., & Mehan, S. (2001). Communal Constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others. 12th International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE 2001), 1-7. Hurajová, A. (2015). An overview of models of bilingual education. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(6), 186-190. Kardaras, D. K., Karakostas, B., & Mamakou, X. J. (2013). Content presentation personalisation and media adaptation in tourism web sites using Fuzzy Delphi Method and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(6), 2331-2342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.10.031 Langé, G. (2001). Teaching through a foreign language: A guide for teachers and schools to using foreign languages in content teaching. TIE-CLIL. http://www.ub.edu/filoan/CLIL/teachers.pdf Lin, H., Lai, W. & Wu, B. (2020). How to Determine the Critical Ratios for Fuzzy Delphi Method? International Journal of Intelligent technologies and applied statistics, 13(3), 257-266. Llinares, A., Milne, E. D., & Morton, T. (2010). CLIL across contexts: A scaffolding Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. Special Issue: Current Research on CLIL3, 19, 12-20. Luo, W. H., & Chen, Y. C. (2022). Constructing a teaching capability maturity model for content and language integrated learning teachers in Taiwan. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00928-1 Magdalena, C. E. (2019). CLIL Teacher Education in Spain. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6 Marsh, D. (2006). The CLIL Quality Matrix. European Centre for Modern Languages, 1-3. https://archive.ecml.at/mtp2/CLILmatrix/pdf/CLIL_pdescE.pdf Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., Aliaga, R., Asikainen, T., Frigols-Martin, M. J., Hughes, S., & Langé, G. (2009). CLIL:Practice Perspectives from the Field. CCN. Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols-Martin, M. J. (2011). European Framewok for CLIL Teacher Education. Council of Europe. https://www.english-efl.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/CLIL-EN.pdf Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension. Action, trends and foresight potential. University of Jyväskylä. https://www.ecml.at/Portals/1/resources/Articles%20and%20publications%20on%20the%20ECML/CLIL_EMILE.pdf Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-Performance Analysis. Journal of Marketing, 41(1), 77-79. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1250495?typeAccessWorkflow=login May, S. (2017). Bilingual Education: What the Research Tells Us. Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 81-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02258-1_4 Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality CLIL: Successful planning and teaching strategies. Pulso, 33, 11-29. Mishra, M. K., M. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. Ng, P. (2011). Language Planning in Action: Singapore‟s Multilingual and Bilingual Policy. Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific Journal. https://secure.apu.ac.jp/rcaps/uploads/fckeditor/publications/journal/RJAPS_V30_Ng.pdf Orazbayeva, K. O. (2016). Professional Competence of Teachers in the Age of Globalization. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(9), 2659-2672. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2016.714a Paschalidou, G. (2018). Content and Language Integrated Learning(CLIL) in Europe and Greece: Common practices and effectiveness, limitations and suggestions. Faculty of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki & Polydromo Group. Pavón, V. (2014). Enhancing the quality of CLIL: making the best of the collaboration between language teachers and content teachers. Encuentro, 23, 115-127. https://blog.ufes.br/kyriafinardi/files/2017/10/Enhancing-the-Quality-of-CLIL-Making-the-Best-of-the-Collaboration-between-Language-Teachers-and-Content-Teachers-2014.pdf Pavón, V., & Fernando, R. (2010). Teachers' Concerns and Uncertainties about the Introduction of CLIL Programmes. Porta LInguarum, 14, 44-58. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.30827/Digibug.31943 · Source: OAI Pavón, V., Callejas, L. N., & Bretones, C. (2020). Keys issues in developing teachers’ competences for CLIL in Andalusia: training, mobility and coordination. The Language Learning Journal, 48(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1642940 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2016). Are teachers ready for CLIL? Evidence from a European study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 202-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2018). Innovations and Challenges in CLIL Teacher Training. Theory Into Practice, 57(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1492238 Pokrivčáková, S. (2013). Bilingual education in Slovakia: A Case Study. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 2(5), 10-19. Quezada, M., Wiley, T. G., & Ramirez, J. D. (1999). How the reform agenda shortchanges English learners. Educational Leadership, 57(4), 57-61. Rossell, C. H., & Baker, K. (1996). The Educational Effectiveness of Bilingual Education. Research in the Teaching of English, 30(1), 7-74. Sampson, S.E., & Showalter, M.J. (1999). The Performance-Importance Response Function: Observations and Implications. The Service Industries Journal, 19(3), 1-25. Sasajima, S. (2019). Teacher Development: J-CLIL. In K. Tsuchiya, & Pérez Murillo, M. D.(eds) (Ed.), Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan. Sever, I. (2015). Importance-performance analysis: A valid management tool? Tourism Management, 48, 43-53. Swain, M. (1998). Manipulating and Complementing Content Teaching to Maximize Second Language Learning. TESL Canada Journal, 6(1), 68-83. Tan, Y. Y. (2003). Reading the census: Language use in Asia. In Lindsay, J., Tan, Y. Y., Babel or Behemoth: Language Trends in Asia, 175-210. NUS Press. Trochim, W. M. (1989). An Introduction to Concept Mapping For Planning And Evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 1-16. Trochim, W. M. (1993). The reliability of concept mapping. Annual Conference of the American Evaluation Association. Dallas, Texas. Trochim, W. M., & Kane, M. (2005). Concept Mapping: An introduction to structured conceptualization in health care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzi038 Tsuchiya, K. (2019). CLIL and Language Education in Japan. In K. Tsuchiya, & Pérez Murillo, M. D. (Eds.), Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan. Tsuchiya, K., & Pérez Murillo, M. D. (2019). Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6 Wächter, B., & Maiworm, F. (2014). English-taught programs in European higher education: The state of play in 2014. Bonn: Lemmens. Widodo, W., Gustari, I., & Chandrawaty, C. (2022). Adversity Quotient Promotes Teachers' Professional Competence More Strongly Than Emotional Intelligence: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Intelligence, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10030044 描述 博士
國立政治大學
教育學系
108152504資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108152504 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 郭昭佑 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Guo, Chao-Yu en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 郭姿君 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Kuo, Tzu-Chun en_US dc.creator (作者) 郭姿君 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Kuo, Tzu-Chun en_US dc.date (日期) 2023 en_US dc.date.accessioned 1-Dec-2023 10:37:45 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 1-Dec-2023 10:37:45 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Dec-2023 10:37:45 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108152504 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/148479 - dc.description (描述) 博士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 教育學系 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 108152504 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著臺灣走向雙語教育的道路，建立臺灣雙語教師專業能力指標尤為重要，然而相關研究尚付闕如。本研究經國內外文獻探討初擬國民小學雙語教師專業能力指標，再以模糊德懷術問卷及概念構圖問卷分析，建構國民小學雙語教師的專業能力指標（包含9個構面、34項指標），後續針對臺北市立國民小學51所雙語教育學校313名雙語教師，就指標的重要性及表現情形（IPA）進行分析。研究結果顯示「雙語教學教材科技資源運用」為雙語教師認為是最重要且表現最佳的構面；而「雙語教學跨域整合」則是急需強化的構面，且不同背景變項的雙語教師在這些指標的重要性及表現上亦有所差異。是以，就本研究發現與結果之相關建議如下： 一、職前培訓及在職進修應著重於強化「雙語教學跨域整合」的專業知能，政府應持續挹注雙語教育學校相關資源，包含人力、經費、教材教法、專業發展社群等，以確保雙語教學的順利實施。 二、深入了解不同背景變項下亟待改善的指標，針對不同的雙語教師所面臨的困境，提供其個別化的專業發展計畫，以便更能符應雙語教師的需求。 三、重新評估國民小學雙語教師的英語CEFR等級標準，在雙語教育推行初期，應思考不同領域雙語教學需求的可行性，提供雙語教師適合的支援及培訓。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) With the ongoing evolution toward bilingual education in Taiwan, the establishment of professional competence indicators for bilingual teachers becomes crucial. Despite the significance of this endeavor, there is a noticeable gap in existing research. This study aims to address this gap by initially formulating the professional competency index for bilingual teachers in national primary schools through an extensive review of both domestic and international literature. Subsequently, the study conducted an analysis using Fuzzy Delphi Method and Concept Mapping questionnaires to construct the professional competency index, comprising 9 aspects and 34 indicators, for bilingual teachers in national primary schools. A follow-up study of the Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) was performed, involving 313 bilingual teachers in 51 bilingual education schools in Taipei Municipal Primary Schools. The research results findings reveal that among the identified aspects, "use of technological resources in bilingual teaching materials" is considered by the bilingual teachers as the most crucial and is performed at the highest level. Conversely, "cross-domain integration of bilingual teaching" emerges as an area requiring immediate enhancement. Furthermore, variations in the importance and performance of these indicators were noted among bilingual teachers with different background variables. Based on these findings, several key suggestions are proposed: 1. Both pre-service and in-service training programs should emphasize strengthening the professional knowledge and skills related to "cross-domain integration of bilingual teaching". The government should continue investing in resources for bilingual education schools, encompassing manpower, funding, teaching materials and methods, and professional development communities, etc., to ensure the seamless implementation of bilingual teaching. 2. Recognize the specific indicators that need improvement based on different background variables. Provide individualized professional development plans for bilingual teachers, considering the challenges they face, to better cater to their unique needs. 3. Reassess the English Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) level standards for bilingual teachers in national primary schools. During the early stages of bilingual education, consider the feasibility of bilingual teaching needs in various fields and provide appropriate support and training to bilingual teachers based on the identified requirements. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究背景與動機 1 第二節 研究目的與待答問題 4 第三節 名詞釋義 5 第四節 研究方法與步驟 7 第五節 研究範圍與限制 14 第二章 文獻探討 17 第一節 雙語教學之理論基礎 17 第二節 雙語教師專業能力之意涵 35 第三節 雙語師資政策與臺灣雙語師資現況 48 第四節 雙語教師專業能力指標探究 63 第五節 雙語教師專業能力指標初構 92 第三章 研究設計與實施 97 第一節 研究流程與架構 97 第二節 研究對象 99 第三節 研究工具 105 第四節 資訊處理與統計分析 106 第四章 研究結果分析與討論 111 第一節 專家適合度問卷結果分析 111 第二節 模糊德懷術問卷結果分析 123 第三節 概念構圖問卷結果分析 131 第四節 重要性及表現情形問卷結果分析 142 第五節 研究發現與討論 190 第五章 結論與建議 199 第一節 結論 199 第二節 建議 204 參考文獻 209 zh_TW dc.format.extent 5559676 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108152504 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 雙語教師專業能力 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 指標建構 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 模糊德懷術 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 概念構圖 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 重要性及表現情形分析法 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Professional Competence of Bilingual Teachers en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Indicators Construction en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Fuzzy Delphi Method en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Concept Mapping en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Importance-performance Analysis en_US dc.title (題名) 國民小學雙語教師專業能力指標建構與應用之研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Construction and Application of Professional Competence Indicators for Bilingual Teachers in Elementary Schools en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 壹、中文部分 行政院研究發展考核委員會 (2009)。提升國人英語力建設計畫(行政院98年9月23日院臺教字第 0980093279 號函核定)。 吳政達 (2005)。我國地方政府層級教育課責系統建構之評估：模糊德菲法之應用。教育與心理研究，28(4)，645-665。 吳英成 (2010)。新加坡雙語教育政策的沿革與新機遇。臺灣語文研究，5(2)，63-80。 http://www.twlls.org.tw/jtll/documents/5.2-4.pdf 吳清山 (2020)。迎向師資培育4.0世代的教師角色與責任。師友雙月刊，622，8-12。 https://doi.org/10.3966/266336712020080622002 吳清基 (1995)。各師資類科教師專業表現之標準訂定計畫。教育部(委託研究單位：中華民國師範教育學會)。 http://education.xcom.tw/research/200603132121.doc 呂美慧 (2012)。雙語教育。國家教育研究院樂詞網。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/e294e66f8457eb0536eee5fe6625143d/?startswith=zh&seq=3 林子斌 (2022)。跨文化溝通的基礎：臺灣雙語教育的實踐與挑戰。課程研究，17(1)，1-13。 https://doi.org/10.53106/181653382022031701001 施又瑀 (2021)。打造未來人才的國際力—國小雙語教育之探討。南投文教，38，88-96。 http://163.22.172.17/p038/088-打造未來人才的國際力—國小雙語教育之探討.pdf 洪如玉 (2014)。跨越語言疆界的教育-盧森堡多語教育實踐及其啟示。教育研究與發展期刊，10(3)，125-146。https://doi.org/10.3966/181665042014091003005 紀惠英與范熾文 (2013)。中小學教師專業能力與專業發展：知識經濟的觀點。學校行政雙月刊，85，190-207。https://doi.org/10.3966/160683002013050085010 國家發展委員會 (2018)。2030雙語國家政策發展藍圖(行政院107 年 12 月 10 日 院授發綜字第 1070802190 號函頒)。 https://www.ey.gov.tw/Page/448DE008087A1971/b7a931c4-c902-4992-a00c-7d1b87f46cea 國家發展委員會 (2021)。2030雙語政策整體推動方案。https://ws.ndc.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9hZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yLzEwL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xNDUzMi83NDBlMTY5Ny1lZmIwLTRjZGItYjYxMi03M2UzMTVhMTM5ZjIucGRm&n=MjAzMOmbmeiqnuaUv%2Betli5wZGY%3D&icon=.pdf 教育部 (2016a)。國民教育法。全國法規資料庫。https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=H0070001 教育部 (2016b)。中華民國教師專業標準指引(教育部105年2月15日臺教師(三)字第1050018281號函核)。定)https://ws.moe.edu.tw/001/Upload/8/relfile/7834/45668/d4f269e3-96cf-4eac-b038-9a9cda8912f2.pdf 教育部 (2018a)。即時新聞-全面啟動教育體系的雙語活化、培養臺灣走向世界的雙語人才。教育部全球資訊網。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9E7AC85F1954DDA8&sms=169B8E91BB75571F&s=B7D34EA3ED606429 教育部 (2018b)。全英語教學師資培育實施計畫。教育部全球資訊網。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9E7AC85F1954DDA8&sms=169B8E91BB75571F&s=BE94948F0D339502 教育部 (2020)。中小學國際教育白皮書2.0。中小學國際教育 2.0 全球資訊網。https://ws.moe.edu.tw/Download.ashx?u=C099358C81D4876C725695F2070B467E8B81ED614D7AF43EF55FFFF8E382F49230FBFEBE3FBA67410E3D088235FCEFF8A33CA54BD67D7DFD957229DE7F658AFACA347539D32BA23B9A142AA2B7545659&n=260CF99641E8382A1BED23C70A14D4360FFA25EF159D1B19F966E1C98FBC313ADE66237F87CDF55C2003096F7477E0E7D121FDBA1A06975D&icon=..pdf 教育部 (2021)。中華民國教師專業素養指引－師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準。 https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContentHistory.aspx?hid=194463&id=GL002163 教育部 (2022a)。中華民國教師專業素養指引－師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準修正規定。教育部主管法規查詢系統。 https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=GL002163 教育部 (2022b)。補助國民中小學部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫。高級中等教育階段部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫網站。https://pro.k12ea.gov.tw/k12eagt/theme/themeAction!themeCourseTitle.so;jsessionid=1D7621FAF06EE52746FBB25AB36B4072?themeCourseCode=4YCQ3W 教育部師資培育及藝術教育司 (無標示)。在職教師雙語教育增能。https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ed2600/Content_List.aspx?n=2DFA1EA62E9A0262 郭玉霞 (1996)。教師在課程實施中所扮演的角色。國民教育研究集刊，4，53-59。https://doi.org/10.7038/BREE.199606_(4).0003 郭為藩 (1971)。角色理論在教育學上之意義。師友月刊，50，16-20。https://doi.org/10.6437/EM.197107.0006 黃彥文 (2021)。雙語教育在師資培育課程的問題之探析。台灣教育研究期刊, 2(6), 157-183。https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fivnuZTHv945fzlZpIIfPKiaZKefYP2Q/view 黃政傑 (2022)。從雙語政策看中小學雙語師資培育。臺灣教育評論月刊，11(6)，1-10。 http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/11-6/topic/01.pdf 臺北市政府教育局 (2019)。臺北市政府教育局新聞稿―臺北市雙語大教室―各領域 CLIL 教給你看! 臺北市政府教育局網站。 https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=B3DDF0458F0FFC11&sms=72544237BBE4C5F6&s=0AAF462783829118 臺北市政府教育局 (2022a)。重大施政成果-臺北市雙語課程學校。臺北市政府教育局網站。https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=2ADAF137A801E4D2&sms=C04230CB75259A56&s=8E17591F678ED1B5 臺北市政府教育局 (2022b)。臺北市雙語教育白皮書。 https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzQyL3JlbGZpbGUvMC8xMTM2OTUvZDhmZDUxZGItMzI5ZS00ZWQyLWI4N2UtNjg1MWM4MGQwNGM1LnBkZg%3D%3D&n=6Ie65YyX5biC6ZuZ6Kqe5pWZ6IKy55m955qu5pu4LnBkZg%3D%3D&icon=..pdf 臺北市政府教育局 (2022c)。臺北市立高級中等以下學校教師甄選作業要點。臺北市法規查詢系統。https://www.laws.taipei.gov.tw/Law/LawSearch/LawArticleContent?lawId=P05K2028-20220128&realID=05-11-2028&lawArticleContentButton= 臺北市政府教育局 (2023)。111學年度臺北市高級中等以下學校概況表。臺北市政府教育局網站。https://www.doe.gov.taipei/News_Content.aspx?n=596E0D35F1581985&sms=69B4E6B26379EE4E&s=FB890C92546FF822 駐波士頓辦事處教育組 (2017)。麻州議會通過雙語教學法案。國家教育研究院-臺灣教育研究資訊網。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/ct?ctNode=647&mp=teric_b&xItem=2000141&resCtNode=454&OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=IO66-BTMR-0SQM-GI1K-SMWT-3PQC-F505-CRWZ 蔡政宏與謝文惠 (2011)。應用科技內容教學知識(TPACK)理論架構發展資訊科技融入教學創新教學模式之啟示。新竹縣教育研究集刊，11，43-76。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/DoDownload?xmlId=1992967&fileName=1512638362605&format=pdf 羅文杏 (2022)。臺灣雙語教師知能及增能課程規劃。臺灣教育評論月刊，11(8)，12-15。 http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/11-8/topic/03.pdf 羅恩冕與郭昭佑 (2018)。我國大學學生評鑑教師教學指標之研究：概念構圖法的調整應用。教育研究與發展期刊，14(1)，1-34。https://doi.org/10.3966/181665042018031401001 貳、外語部分 Airey, J. (2016). EAP, EMI or CLIL? The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes, Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, 71-83. Aliev, R. A., Aliev, R. R., Ahmedov, I. Z., & Aliyeva, K. R. (2004). Fuzzy Delphi Method. Society of Azerbaijan Republic Journal, 3-4. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299510278_Fuzzy_Delphi_Method Almudena, F. (2012). CLIL in the Foreign Language Classroom: Proposal of a Framework for ICT Materials Design in Language-Oriented Versions of Content and Language Integrated Learning. Alicante Journal of English Studies, 25, 317-334. Babbie, E. R. (1973). Survey research methods. Wadsworth Publ. Co. Inc. Belmont. Baker, C. (2001). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism(3rd edition). Multilingual Matters LTD. Beardsmore, H. B. (2002). The Significance of CLIL/EMILE. University of Jyväskylä. Beatriz, C. P., & Pino Rodríguez, A. M. (2021). Analysing CLIL Teacher Competences in Pre-service Preschool Education. A Case Study at the University of Granada. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 670-688. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1890021 Bertaux, P., Coonan, C. M., Frigols-Martín, M. J., & Mehisto, P. (2010). The CLIL Teacher’s Competences Grid. http://tplusm.net/CLIL_Competences_Grid_31.12.09.pdf Bialystok, E. (2018). Bilingual education for young children: review of the effects and consequences. Int J Biling Educ Biling, 21(6), 666–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1203859. Brown, H., & Bradford, A. (2016). EMI, CLIL, & CBI- Differing Approaches and Goals. Transformation in Language Education, 328-334. Cazden, C. B., & Snow, C.E. (1990). English Plus: Issues in Bilingual Education. Sage Publications, Inc., 9-11. Commission of the European Communities. (1995). White Paper:teaching and learning towards the learning society. Commission of the European Communities. Cortina-Pérez, B., & Pino Rodríguez, A. M. (2021). Analysing CLIL Teacher Competences in Pre-service Preschool Education. A Case Study at the University of Granada. European Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 670-688. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2021.1890021 Coyle, D. (2002). Relevance of CLIL to the European Commission’s Language Learning Objectives. In D. Marsh (Ed.), CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension. Action, trends and foresight potential, 27-30. University of Jyväskylä, Finland. Coyle, D. (2007). Content and Language Integrated Learning: Towards a Connected Research Agenda for CLIL Pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-562. https://doi.org/10.2167/beb459.0 Coyle, D. (2010). Preface in CLIL in Spain: Implementation Results and Teacher Training. In D. Lasagabaster & Y. R. de Zarobe (Eds.), CLIL in Spain: Implementation Results and Teacher Training. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Cummins, J., & Swain, M. (1998). Bilingualism in Education Aspects of theory, research and practice. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Cummins, J., Bismilla, V., Chow, P., Cohen, S., Giampapa, F., Leoni, L., Sandhu, P., & Sastri, P. (2005). Affirming Identity in Multilingual Classrooms. Educational Leadership, 63(1), 38–43. Darn, S. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning(CLIL): A European Overview. ERIC Education Resources Information Center. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED490775.pdf Dearden, J. (2014). English as a medium of instruction – a growing global phenomenon. British Council. DelliCarpini, M. (2021). Developing the C in Content and Language Integrated Learning: Teacher Preparation That Builds Learners’ Content Knowledge and Academic Language Through Teacher Collaboration and Integrated Pedagogical Training. In Hemmi, C., Banegas, D. L., International Perspectives on English Language Teaching, 217-238. Palgrave Macmillan. Dixon, L. Q. (2005a). Bilingual Education Policy in Singapore: An Analysis of its Sociohistorical Roots and Current Academic Outcomes. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 8(1), 25-47. Dixon, L. Q. (2005b). The Bilingual Education Policy in Singapore: Implications for Second Language Acquisition. In Cohen, J., McAlister, K. T., Rolstad, K., & MacSwan, J., International Symposium on Bilingualism (4th), 625-635. Escobar, L., & Moreno, A. I.(eds). (2021). Mediating specialized knowledge and L2 abilities New Research in Spanish:English bilingual models and beyond. Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87476-6 Eurydice Report. (2006). Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) at School in Europe. the Eurydice European Unit. Eurydice Report. (2017). Key Data on Teaching Languages at School in Europe – 2017 Edition. European Commission. Fleta Guillén, M. T. (2019). Practices to Scaffold CLIL at Transition to Primary. Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts, 59-90. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6_4 Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). Issues in EAP: A preliminary perspective, 8-24. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524766.004 Genesee, F., & Gándara, P. (1999). Bilingual education programs: A Cross-National Perspective. Journal of Social Issue, 55(4), 665-685. Gutiérrez, G., Durán, R., & Beltrán, F. (2012). CLIL in teacher training: A Nottingham Trent University and University of Salamanca experience. Encuentro, 21, 48–62. Hillyard, S. (2011). First steps in CLIL: Training the teachers. Latin American Journal of Content and Language Integrated Learning, 4(2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.5294/laclil.2011.4.2.1 Holmes, B., Tangney, B., FitzGibbon, A., Savage, T., & Mehan, S. (2001). Communal Constructivism: Students constructing learning for as well as with others. 12th International Conference of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE 2001), 1-7. Hurajová, A. (2015). An overview of models of bilingual education. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(6), 186-190. Kardaras, D. K., Karakostas, B., & Mamakou, X. J. (2013). Content presentation personalisation and media adaptation in tourism web sites using Fuzzy Delphi Method and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps. Expert Systems with Applications, 40(6), 2331-2342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.10.031 Langé, G. (2001). Teaching through a foreign language: A guide for teachers and schools to using foreign languages in content teaching. TIE-CLIL. http://www.ub.edu/filoan/CLIL/teachers.pdf Lin, H., Lai, W. & Wu, B. (2020). How to Determine the Critical Ratios for Fuzzy Delphi Method? International Journal of Intelligent technologies and applied statistics, 13(3), 257-266. Llinares, A., Milne, E. D., & Morton, T. (2010). CLIL across contexts: A scaffolding Framework for CLIL Teacher Education. Special Issue: Current Research on CLIL3, 19, 12-20. Luo, W. H., & Chen, Y. C. (2022). Constructing a teaching capability maturity model for content and language integrated learning teachers in Taiwan. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00928-1 Magdalena, C. E. (2019). CLIL Teacher Education in Spain. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6 Marsh, D. (2006). The CLIL Quality Matrix. European Centre for Modern Languages, 1-3. https://archive.ecml.at/mtp2/CLILmatrix/pdf/CLIL_pdescE.pdf Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., Aliaga, R., Asikainen, T., Frigols-Martin, M. J., Hughes, S., & Langé, G. (2009). CLIL:Practice Perspectives from the Field. CCN. Marsh, D., Mehisto, P., Wolff, D., & Frigols-Martin, M. J. (2011). European Framewok for CLIL Teacher Education. Council of Europe. https://www.english-efl.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/CLIL-EN.pdf Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE-The European dimension. Action, trends and foresight potential. University of Jyväskylä. https://www.ecml.at/Portals/1/resources/Articles%20and%20publications%20on%20the%20ECML/CLIL_EMILE.pdf Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-Performance Analysis. Journal of Marketing, 41(1), 77-79. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1250495?typeAccessWorkflow=login May, S. (2017). Bilingual Education: What the Research Tells Us. Bilingual and Multilingual Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 81-100. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02258-1_4 Meyer, O. (2010). Towards quality CLIL: Successful planning and teaching strategies. Pulso, 33, 11-29. Mishra, M. K., M. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. Ng, P. (2011). Language Planning in Action: Singapore‟s Multilingual and Bilingual Policy. Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific Journal. https://secure.apu.ac.jp/rcaps/uploads/fckeditor/publications/journal/RJAPS_V30_Ng.pdf Orazbayeva, K. O. (2016). Professional Competence of Teachers in the Age of Globalization. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(9), 2659-2672. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2016.714a Paschalidou, G. (2018). Content and Language Integrated Learning(CLIL) in Europe and Greece: Common practices and effectiveness, limitations and suggestions. Faculty of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki & Polydromo Group. Pavón, V. (2014). Enhancing the quality of CLIL: making the best of the collaboration between language teachers and content teachers. Encuentro, 23, 115-127. https://blog.ufes.br/kyriafinardi/files/2017/10/Enhancing-the-Quality-of-CLIL-Making-the-Best-of-the-Collaboration-between-Language-Teachers-and-Content-Teachers-2014.pdf Pavón, V., & Fernando, R. (2010). Teachers' Concerns and Uncertainties about the Introduction of CLIL Programmes. Porta LInguarum, 14, 44-58. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.30827/Digibug.31943 · Source: OAI Pavón, V., Callejas, L. N., & Bretones, C. (2020). Keys issues in developing teachers’ competences for CLIL in Andalusia: training, mobility and coordination. The Language Learning Journal, 48(1), 81-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1642940 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2012). CLIL research in Europe: past, present, and future. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(3), 315-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2011.630064 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2016). Are teachers ready for CLIL? Evidence from a European study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 202-221. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2016.1138104 Pérez Cañado, M. L. (2018). Innovations and Challenges in CLIL Teacher Training. Theory Into Practice, 57(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2018.1492238 Pokrivčáková, S. (2013). Bilingual education in Slovakia: A Case Study. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 2(5), 10-19. Quezada, M., Wiley, T. G., & Ramirez, J. D. (1999). How the reform agenda shortchanges English learners. Educational Leadership, 57(4), 57-61. Rossell, C. H., & Baker, K. (1996). The Educational Effectiveness of Bilingual Education. Research in the Teaching of English, 30(1), 7-74. Sampson, S.E., & Showalter, M.J. (1999). The Performance-Importance Response Function: Observations and Implications. The Service Industries Journal, 19(3), 1-25. Sasajima, S. (2019). Teacher Development: J-CLIL. In K. Tsuchiya, & Pérez Murillo, M. D.(eds) (Ed.), Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan. Sever, I. (2015). Importance-performance analysis: A valid management tool? Tourism Management, 48, 43-53. Swain, M. (1998). Manipulating and Complementing Content Teaching to Maximize Second Language Learning. TESL Canada Journal, 6(1), 68-83. Tan, Y. Y. (2003). Reading the census: Language use in Asia. In Lindsay, J., Tan, Y. Y., Babel or Behemoth: Language Trends in Asia, 175-210. NUS Press. Trochim, W. M. (1989). An Introduction to Concept Mapping For Planning And Evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 1-16. Trochim, W. M. (1993). The reliability of concept mapping. Annual Conference of the American Evaluation Association. Dallas, Texas. Trochim, W. M., & Kane, M. (2005). Concept Mapping: An introduction to structured conceptualization in health care. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzi038 Tsuchiya, K. (2019). CLIL and Language Education in Japan. In K. Tsuchiya, & Pérez Murillo, M. D. (Eds.), Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan. Tsuchiya, K., & Pérez Murillo, M. D. (2019). Content and Language Integrated Learning in Spanish and Japanese Contexts. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27443-6 Wächter, B., & Maiworm, F. (2014). English-taught programs in European higher education: The state of play in 2014. Bonn: Lemmens. Widodo, W., Gustari, I., & Chandrawaty, C. (2022). Adversity Quotient Promotes Teachers' Professional Competence More Strongly Than Emotional Intelligence: Evidence from Indonesia. Journal of Intelligence, 10(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10030044 zh_TW
