English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 86061/114710 (75%)
Visitors : 23036596      Online Users : 270
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/71740


    Title: 桃園縣國民中學校長分布式領導、教師心理賦權與教師學術樂觀關係之研究
    A Study of the Relationship among Principals’ Distributed Leadership, Teachers’ Psychological Empowerment and Teachers’ Academic Optimism in Secondary Schools of Taoyuan County
    Authors: 陳宇軒
    Chen, Yue Hsuan
    Contributors: 秦夢群
    陳宇軒
    Chen, Yue Hsuan
    Keywords: 分布式領導
    教師心理賦權
    教師學術樂觀
    distributed leadership
    psychological empowerment
    teachers’ academic optimism
    Date: 2014
    Issue Date: 2014-12-01 14:23:01 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究旨在瞭解桃園縣國民中學校長分布式領導、教師心理賦權與教師學術樂觀之現況,並分析不同背景變項之教師在知覺校長分布式領導、教師心理賦權與教師學術樂觀之差異情形,且探討三者之間的關係,最後藉由校長分布式領導與教師心理賦權對教師學術樂觀進行預測。
    本研究採調查研究法,共計抽樣30所學校,發出690份問卷,回收480份有效問卷,問卷有效率達69.97%。資料處理分別以描述性統計、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析、皮爾遜積差相關及多元逐步迴歸分析等統計方式進行統計分析。
    本研究獲致以下之結論:
    一、 桃園縣國民中學教師知覺校長分布式領導為中高程度,以「校長的自信與謙遜」之知覺程度為最高,「營造信任的文化」之知覺程度最低。
    二、 桃園縣國民中學教師有中高程度之教師心理賦權表現,以「影響力」的知覺為最高,「能力」之知覺為最低。
    三、 桃園縣國民中學教師有中高程度之教師學術樂觀表現, 以「效能感」的知覺為最高,「學術強調」之知覺為最低。
    四、 桃園縣國民中學教師,因其年齡、擔任職務、學校規模及學校歷史之不同,而有不同的校長分布式領導知覺感受,以51歲(含)以上之主任,並服務於學校規模12班(含)以下擁有21年(含以下)、41-60年、及61年(含以上)學校歷史之教師知覺程度較高。
    五、 桃園縣國民中學教師,因其年齡、服務年資、學校規模及學校歷史之不同,而表現出不同程度的教師心理賦權,以年齡51歲(含)以上且年資超過21年,目前服務於學校規模13-48班擁有20年以下學校歷史之教師在知覺教師心理賦權程度較高。
    六、 桃園縣國民中學教師,因其年齡及服務年資之不同,而有不同的教師學術樂觀知覺感受,以年齡51歲(含)以上並服務超過21年之學校教師在知覺教師學術樂觀程度較高。
    七、 桃園縣國民中學校長分布式領導、教師心理賦權與教師學術樂觀的知覺及各分層面,彼此之間具有正相關的關係。
    八、 桃園縣國民中學校長分布式領導、教師心理賦權對教師學術樂觀具有預測作用,以「校長分布式領導」的預測力最佳。
    最後依據研究結果與結論,提出具體建議,以供教育行政機關、學校校長與教師以及未來研究的參考。
    The purpose of this study was to investigate the current development of principal’s distributed leadership, teachers’ psychological empowerment, and teachers’ academic emphasis in secondary schools of Taoyuan County, and to analyze the difference between teachers of different background variables, and to explore the relationship among the three variables. This study has aimed to predict teachers’ academic emphasis through principal’s distributed leadership and teachers’ psychological empowerment.
    Through the use of questionnaire survey method, data were collected from 30 secondary schools, distributing 690 questionnaires in total. Valid questionnaires of 480 were collected, with a usable rate of 69.97%. All data were analyzed by the methods of descriptive statistics, independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson correlation, and multiple regression.

    The conclusions of this study are as follows:
    1. Secondary school teachers’ perception of principal’s distributed leadership is above average, in which the item “principals’ self-confidence” and “humility”was the highest, and “creating a culture of trust” was the lowest.
    2. Secondary school teachers’ perception of teachers’ psychological empowerment is above average, in which the item “impact” was the highest, and “competence” was the lowest.
    3. Secondary school teachers’ perception of teachers’ academic optimism is above average, in which the item “self-efficacy” was the highest, and “academic emphasis” was the lowest.
    4. There are significant differences in the secondary school teachers’ perception of principals’ distributed leadership in terms of age, position, scale of school, and age of school.
    5. There are significant differences in the secondary school teachers’ perception of teachers’ psychological empowerment in terms of age, years of service, scale of school, and age of school.
    6. There are significant differences in the secondary school teachers’ perception of academic emphasis in terms of age and years of service.
    7. There is a positive correlation among the principals’ distributed leadership, teachers’ psychological empowerment, and teachers’ academic optimism.
    8. Principal’s distributed leadership and teachers’ psychological empowerment have a predictive effect on teachers’ academic optimism.
    Reference: 壹、中文部分
    王友蘭(2012)。由學校領導促動組織學習以提升組織創造力。學校行政雙月刊,78,141-156。
    王如哲、林明地、張志明、黃乃熒、楊振昇(1999)。教育行政。高雄市:麗文。
    王金良、張大均(2011)。中小學教師心理授權的測量。心理發展與教育,1,105-111。
    王建祥(2013)。國民中學教師學術樂觀之指標建構及其現況調查之研究。國立政治大學學校行政碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    王麗雲、潘慧玲(2000)。教師彰權益能的概念與實施策略。教育研究集刊,44,173-199。
    石雷山(2005)。教師集體效能:教師性能研究的新進展。外國教育研究,32(10),72-75。
    行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。臺北市:行政院教育改革審議委員會。
    何建霖(2009)。國民小學學校分佈式領導、教師同僚專業互享與學生學習表現之研究。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
    吳建興(2002)。Empowerment理論的實踐及反思-以九年一貫教育改革能力教育教師工作坊為例。世新大學社會發展研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    吳清山(2004)。行政督導。臺北市:心理。
    吳清山、林天祐(2003)。教育名詞解釋-增權益能。教育研究,113,160。
    吳清山、林天祐(2010)。教育名詞-分布式領導。教育資料與研究雙月刊,95,149-150。
    吳璧如(2002)。教師集體效能感初探。教育資料與研究,49,72-78。
    周純萍(2012)。賦權領導與教學創新之關聯-心理賦權、內在動機、創新歷程投入之中介效果。大葉大學管理學院碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,彰化縣。
    林志成(1998)。授權增能導向的學校行政。載於國立台北師範學院(主編),學校行政理念(頁107-123)。臺北:國立台北師範學院。
    林秀聰(1998)。賦能策略應用於機關組織之研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    林明地(2000)。教師同僚互享:兼重專業與關懷的社區。載於國力中山大學舉辦之思摩特(SCTNet)2000年網友大會之「加強伙伴關係、建立教育社群研討會」,高雄市。
    林純暖(2010)。臺北縣國民小學認輔志工社會支持、心理賦權增能感與工作滿意度之關係研究。國立臺灣師範大學社會教育學系在職進修碩士班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    洪瑋齡(2012)。管理教練技能對員工工作投入之影響-以員工心理賦能為中介變項。國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所在職專班碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
    徐逢儀(2013)。核心自我評價、心理賦權與工作投入關連性之研究。國防大學管理學院資源管理及決策研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    孫志麟(1995)。教師效能的研究途徑與評量理念。教育資料與研究,5,67-75。
    秦夢群(2010)。教育領導理論與應用。臺北市:五南。
    馬家媛(2004)。員工對授權賦能的認知對其工作態度之影響。國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
    張文華(2000)。組織信任之初探。人力發展,80,14-27。
    張奕華(2009)。分散式領導、教師學術樂觀與學生學習成就關係之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(NSC 98-2410-H-004-011)。臺北市:國立政治大學教育學系。
    張奕華、許正妹、顏弘欽(2011)。「國民小學教師學術樂觀量表」之發展與衡量。測驗學刊,58,261-289。
    張春興(2000)。張氏心理學辭典。臺北市:東華。
    張慶勳(1999)。學校組織轉化領導研究。高雄市:復文。
    許道然(2001)。公部門組織信任與組織公民行為關係之研究。國立政治大學,公共行政學系博士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    郭逸瑄(2004)。高級中學校長領導行為與教師賦權增能關係。淡江大學教育政策與領導研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    陳怡卉(2010)。國民中學校長分散式領導與學校教育成效關係之研究。逢甲大學公共政策所碩士論文,未出版,臺中市。
    陳俊瑋、吳璧如(2010)。國中教師自我效能感與集體效能感的關係。教育政策論壇,13(3),127-154。
    黃玉貞(2012)。國民小學分布式領導、教師組織承諾與學校創新經營效能關係之研究。國立政治大學教育學系博士班論文,未出版,臺北市。
    黃宗顯主編(2008)。學校領導:新理論與實踐。臺北:五南。
    劉文章(2010)。臺北縣國民小學分散式領導對教師學術樂觀影響之研究。國立政治大學學校行政碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    蔡培村(1996)。學校經營與管理。高雄市:麗文文化。
    蔡培村、武文瑛(2004)。領導學-理論、實務與研究。高雄市:麗文。
    蔡進雄(2004)。國民中學校長轉型領導、交易領導、學校文化與學校效能關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    鄭卉玶(2012)。國民小學分布式領導對教師賦權增能影響之研究。國立政治大學學校行政碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。
    賴志峰(2008)。分佈式領導理論之探究-學校領導者、追隨者和情境的交互作用。國民教育研究學報,20,87-113。
    賴志峰(2009)。中小學分布式領導風格量表之驗證。初等教育學刊,34,25-52。
    薛天山、翟學偉(2009)。西方人際信任研究的路徑與困境。南京大學學報(哲學、人文科學、社會科學),2,127-134。
    謝文全(2006)。教育行政學。臺北市:高等教育。
    鍾任琴(2000)。教師專業權能之研究:理論建構與實證分析。臺北:五南。
    簡志明(2010)。學校分佈式領導與教師工作滿意度關係之研究:以新北市國小為例。臺北市立教育大學教育行政與評鑑研究所學校行政碩士學位班碩士論文,未出版,臺北市。

    貳、西文部分
    Alig-Mielcarek, J., & Hoy, W. K. (2005). Instructional leadership: Its nature, meaning and influence. In W. K. Hoy & C. Miskel (Eds.), Educational leadership and reform (pp. 29-54). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
    Ashforth, B. E. (1989). The experience of powerlessness in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43(2), 207-242.
    Ashton, P. T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
    Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman and Sons.
    Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175-1184.
    Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
    Barner, R. (1994). Enablement:The key to empowerment. Training and Development Journal, 48(6), 33-36.
    Barry, D. (1991). Managing the bossless team: Lessons in distributed leadership. Organizational Dynamics, 20(1), 31-47.
    Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). Developing transformational leadership: 1992 and beyond. Journal of European Industrial Training, 14, 21-37.
    Bell, N. E., & Staw, B. M. (1989). People as sculptors versus culture: The roles of personality and personal control in organizations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P. A., &Harvey, J. A. (2003). Distributed leadership: A review of literature. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://oroopen.ac.uk/8534/1/bennett-distributed-leadership-full.pdf
    Bensimo, E. M., Neumann, A., & Birnbaum, R. (1989). Making sense of administrative leadership: The OLOO word in higher education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University.
    Blanchard, K., Carlos, J. P., & Randolph, A. (1996). Empowerment: Takes more than a minute. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Bowen, D. E., & Lawler, E. E.(1992).The empowerment of service works: What, why, how, and when. Sloan Management Review, 33(3), 31-39.
    Brief, A. P., & Nord, W. R. (1990). Meanings of occupational work. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
    Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform. Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-45.
    Bryk, A. S., Lee, V. E., & Holland, P. (1993). Catholic schools and the common good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage.
    Bush, T., & Glove, D. (2003). School leadership: Concept and evidence. Report presented to the National College for School Leadership.
    Chebat, J. C., Babin, B., & Kollias, P. (2002). What makes contact employees perform? Reactions to employee perceptions of managerial practices. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 20(7), 325-332.
    Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., & Weinfeld, F. D. (1996). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
    Conger, A. J., & Pearce, C. L. (2003). Shared leadership: Reframing the hows and whys of leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
    Conger, A. J., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). The empowerment process: Integrating theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 13, 471-482.
    Craig, J., Butler, A., Cairo, L, Wood, C., Gilchrist, C., & Holloway, J. (2005). A case study of six high-performing schools in Tennessee. Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory at Edvantia.
    Daft, R. L. (2001). Organization theory and design (7th ed.). Eagan, MN: West Publishing Company.
    Davis, C. G., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Larson, J. (1998). Making sense of loss and benefiting from the experience: Two construal of meaning. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 561-574.
    Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024-1037.
    Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(4), 580-590.
    Dellinger, A. B., Bobbert, J. J., Olivier, D. F., & Ellett, C. D. (2008). Measuring teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Development and use of the TEBS-Self. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(3), 751-766.
    Dewettinck, K., & Ameijde, M. (2011). Linking leadership empowerment behaviour to employee attitudes and behavioural intentions: Testing the mediating role of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 40(3), 284-305.
    Elmore, R. (2000). Building a new structure for school leadership. American Educator, 23(4), 6-13.
    Ergeneli, A., Arı, G. S., & Metin, S. (2006). Psychological empowerment and its relationship to trust in immediate managers. Journal of Business Research, 60, 41-49.
    Fallon, D. (2004). Clarifying how we think about teaching and learning. Paper presented at the National Value Added Conference, Columbus, OH.
    Flutter, J. (2006). This place could help you learn: Student participation in creating better school environments. Educational Review, 58(2), 183-193.
    Forrester, R. (2000). Empowerment: Rejuvenating a potent idea. Academy of Management Executive, 14, 67-80.
    Frankl, V. E. (1969). Self-transcendence as a human phenomenon. In A. J. Sutich & M. A. Vich (Eds.), Readings in humanistic psychology (pp. 25-32). New York: The Free Press.
    Fredendall, L. D., & Robbins, T. L. (1995). Modeling the role of total quality management in the customer focused organization. Journal of Managerial Issues, 7, 403.
    Gibson, C. H. (1991). A concept analysis of empowerment. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 16(3), 354-361.
    Gist, M. E. (1987). Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Academy of Management Review, 12(3), 472-485.
    Goddard, R. D. (1998). The effects of collective teacher efficacy on student achievement in urban public elementary schools. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(10), 3702.
    Goddard, R. D. (2001). Collective efficacy: A neglected construct in the study of schools and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 467–476.
    Goddard, R. D. (2002). Collective efficacy and school organization: A multilevel analysis of teacher influence in schools. In W. K. Hoy & C. Miskel (Eds.), Theory and Research in Educational Administration (pp. 169–184). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
    Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure and effect on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 479–507.
    Goddard, R. D., Sweetland, S. R., & Hoy, W. K. (2000). Academic emphasis of urban elementary schools and student achievement in reading and mathematics: A multilevel analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 683–702.
    Goddard, R. D., Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. K. (2001). A multilevel examination of the distribution and effects of teacher trust in students and parents in urban elementary schools. Elementary School Journal, 102(1), 3-17.
    Gordon, Z.V. (2005). The effect of distributed leadership on student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, State University of Central Connecticut, New Britain, CT.
    Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed properties: A new architect for leadership. Educational Management and Administration, 28(3), 317-338.
    Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration (pp. 653-696). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
    Gronn, P. (2006). The significance of distributed leadership. Retrieved March 18, 2014 from http://slc.educ.ubc.ca/eJournal/Issue7/
    Articles/DistributedLeadership_%20Peter%20Gronn.pdf
    Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
    Harris, A. (2005). Distributed leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership (pp. 160-172). London: Paul Chapman.
    Hawks, J. H. (1992). Empowerment in nursing education: Concept analysis and application to philosophy, learning and instruction. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 17(6), 609-618.
    Hay Group. (2004). The five pillars of distributed leadership in schools. Nottingham, UK: National College for School Leadership.
    Hogan, R., Curphy, G. J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49(6), 493-504.
    Hoy, W. K. &Miskel, C. G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (6th ed.). Boston: Mcgraw-Hill.
    Hoy, W. K. (2002). Faculty trust: A key to student achievement. Journal of School Public Relations, 23(2), 88-103.
    Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. (2005). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Hoy, W. K., & Sabo, D. J. (1998). Quality middle schools: Open and healthy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
    Hoy, W. K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (1999). Five faces of trust: An empirical confirmation in urban elementary schools. Journal of School Leadership, 9, 184-208.
    Hoy, W. K., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2003). The conceptualization and measurement of faculty trust in schools. In W. K. Hoy & C. Miskel (Eds.), Studies in leading and organizing school (pp. 181–207). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
    Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2006a). Academic optimism of schools: A force for student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 43(3), 425-446.
    Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Woolfolk-Hoy, A. (2006b). Academic optimism: A second order confirmatory analysis. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Contemporary issues in educational policy and school outcomes (pp. 135-149). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
    Huang, J. T. (2012). Be proactive as empowered? The role of trust in one's supervisor in psychological empowerment, feedback seeking, and job performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 103-127.
    Hulpia, H., Devos, G., & Rosseel, Y. (2009). The relationship between the perception of distributed leadership in secondary schools and teachers’ and teacher leaders’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(3), 291-317.
    Isen, A. M. (2000). Positive affect and decision making. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland-Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp.417-435). New York: Guilford.
    Jencks, C., Smith, M., Acland, H., & Bane, M. J. (1972). Inequality: A Reassessment of the effect of family and schooling in America. New York: Basic Books.
    Klakovich, M. D. (1995). Development and psychometric evaluation of the reciprocal empowerment sccal. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 3(2), 29-35.
    Kollias, P. (2000). The impact of empowerment on customer contact employees role in service organizations. Journal of Service Research, 3, 66–81.
    Laschinger, H. K. S. (1996). A theoretical approach to studying work empowerment in nursing: A review of studies testing Kanter’s theory of structural power in organizations. Journal of Nursing Administration, 26(9), 27-35.
    Lawler , E. E. (1992). The ultimate advantage: Creating the high-involvement organization. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1999). Social support and achievement for young adolescents in Chicago: The role of school academic press. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 907-945.
    Leithwood, K., & Duke, D. L. (1999). A century’s quest to understand school leadership. In J. Murphy & K. S. Louis (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Administration (pp. 45-72). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Louis, K. (2006). Changing the culture of schools: Professional community, organizational learning, and trust. Journal of School Leadership, 16(1), 477-487.
    Louis, K. S., Mayrowetz, D., Smylie, M., & Murphy, J. (2013). Making sense of distributed leadership: How secondary school educators look at job redesign. International Journal ofEducational Leadership & Management, 1(1), 33-68.
    Maeroff, G. I. (1988). Teacher empowerment: A step toward professionalization. NASSP Bulletin, 72(511), 52-60.
    Marc, S., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 29(6), 703-722.
    Martinko, M. J., & Gardner, W. L. (1982). Learned helplessness: An alternative explanation for performance deficits. Academy of Management Review, 7(2), 195-204.
    Mascall, B., Leithwood, K., Straus, T., & Sacks, R. (2008). The relationship between distributed leadership and teachers’ academic optimism. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(2), 214-228.
    Mcguigan, L, & Hoy, W. K. (2006). Principal leadership: Creating a culture of academic optimism to improve achievement for all students. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 5, 203–229.
    McGuigan, L. B. A. (2005). The role of enabling bureaucracy and academic optimism in academic achievement growth (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Ohio State University, Columbia.
    Menon, S.T. (2001). Employee empowerment: An integrative psychological approach. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50(1), 153-180.
    Moghari, E. H., Lavasani, M. G., Bagherian, V., & Afshari, J. (2011). Relationship between perceived teacher's academic optimism and English achievement: Role of self-efficacy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2329-2333.
    Murphy, J. F., Weil, M., Hallinger, P., & Mitman, A. (1982). Academic press: Translating high expectations into school policies and classroom practices. Educational Leadership, 40(3), 22-26.
    National College for School Leadership (2004). Distributed leadership action pack. Retrieved March 18, 2014, from http://www.national
    college.org.uk/distributed-leadership-action-pack.pdf
    Peterson, C. (2000). The future of optimism. American Psychologist, 55, 44-55.
    Phillips, M. (1997). What makes schools effective: A comparison of the relationships of communal climate and academic climate to mathematics achievement and attendance during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 34, 633–662.
    Randolph, W. A. (1995). Navigating the journey to empowerment. Organizational Dynamics, 23(4), 19-32.
    Ritchie, R., & Woods, P. A. (2007). Degree of distribution: Towards an understanding of variations in the nature of distributed leadership in schools. School Leadership and Management, 27(4), 363-381.
    Robbins, S. (1995). Management. Pearson, AU: Pearson Custom Publishing
    Robbins, S. P. (1989). Organizational Behavior: Concepts, controversies, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Robbins, T. L., Crino, M. D., & Fredendall, L. D. (2002). An integrative model of the empowerment process. Human Resources Management Review, 12, 419-443.
    Robinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (1995). Psychological contracts and OCB: The effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(3), 289-298.
    Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). Optimism, coping, and health: Assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies. Health Psychology, 4, 219-247.
    Seligman, M. E. P. (2002). Positive psychology, positive prevention, and positive therapy. In I. I. Editor (Ed.). Handbook of Positive Psychology (pp.3-12). New York: Oxford.
    Senge, P. M. (1993). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.
    Short, P. M., & Greer, J. T. (1997). Leadership in empowered schools: Themes from innovative efforts. New Jersey, NJ: A Viacom Company.
    Shouse, R. C. (1996). Academic press and sense of community: Conflict and congruence in American high schools. Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization, 11, 173–202.
    Siegall, M., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. Personnel Review, 29(6), 703-722.
    Sinnott, D. M. (1995). Empowering leadership and its relationship to student academic performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wayne State, Michigan.
    Smith, P. A., & Hoy, W. K. (2007). Academic optimism and student achievement in urban elementary schools. Journal of Education Administration, 45(5), 556-568.
    Solomon, B. B. (1972). Black Empowerment: Social Work in Oppressed Communities. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Spillane, J. P. (2005). Distributed leadership. Educational Forum, 69(2), 143-150.
    Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
    Spillane, J. P., & Diamond, J. B. (2007). Distributed leadership in practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
    Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R., & Diamond, J. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23-28.
    Spreitzer, G. (2007). Taking stock: A review of more than twenty years of research on empowerment at work. In C. Cooper & J. Barling (Eds.), The Handbook of Organizational Behavior (pp. 54-72). New York: Sage Publications.
    Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
    Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 483-504.
    Spreitzer, G. M., De Janasz, S., & Quinn, R. E. (1994). Empowered to lead: The role of psychological empowerment in leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior , 20(4), 511-52.
    Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). A dimensional analysis of the relationship between psychological empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction, and strain. Journal Of Management, 23(5), 679-704.
    Stogdill, R. M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press.
    Taylor, G., Jungert, T., Mageau, G. A., Schattke, K., Dedic, H., Rosenfield, S., & Koestner, R. (2014). A self-determination theory approach to predicting school achievement over time: The unique role of intrinsic motivation. Contemporary Education Psychology, 39(4), 342-358.
    Terry, G. R. (1962). Principles of Management (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    The Education Trust (2005). Gaining traction, gaining ground: How some high schools accelerate learning for struggling students. Washington, D.C.: Author.
    Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive elements of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic task motivation. Academy of management review, 15(4) , 666-681.
    Thomas, K., & Tymon, W. (1994). Does empowerment always work: Understanding the role of intrinsic motivation and personal interpretation. Journal of Management Systems, 6, 3.
    Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2001). Teacher efficacy: Capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805.
    Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). A conceptual and empirical analysis of trust in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 36, 334-352.
    Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, W. K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning and measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 70, 547-593.
    Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202–248.
    Vine, B., Holmes, J., Marra, M., Pfeifer, D., & Jackson, B. (2008). Exploring co-leadership talk through interactional socio-linguistics. Leadership, 4(3), 339–360.
    Wahlstrom, K. & Louis, K. (2008). How teachers experience principal leadership: The roles of professional community, trust, efficacy and shared responsibility. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 458-495.
    Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and research. New Park, CA: Sage.
    Wolfe, L. M., & Robertshaw, D. (1982). Effects of college attendance on locus of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(4), 802-810.
    Woods, P. A., Bennet, N., Harvey, J. A., & Wise, C. (2004). Variabilities and dualities in distributed leadership: Findings from a systematic literature review. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 32(4), 439-457.
    Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers' sense of efficacy and their beliefs about managing students. Teaching and Teacher Education, 6(2), 137-148.
    Woolfolk-Hoy, A., Hoy, W. K., & Kurz, N. M. (2008). Teacher’s academic optimism: The development and test of a new construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(4), 821-835.
    Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
    Yukl, G. A. (2006). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological empowerment: Issues and illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23(5), 581- 599.
    Zimmerman, M., Israel, B., Schulz, A., & Checkoway, B. (1992). Further explorations in empowerment theory: An empirical analysis of psychological empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 20(6), 707-727.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    教育行政與政策研究所
    100171005
    103
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100171005
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[教育行政與政策研究所 ] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    100501.pdf2484KbAdobe PDF1949View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback