中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)熟練教師評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的構(gòu)建：以美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為鑒.pdf

1、碩士學(xué)位論文 中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)熟練教師評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的構(gòu)建：以美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為鑒 1 2008 年碩士學(xué)位論文 論 文 題 目： 中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)熟練教師評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的構(gòu)建： 中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)熟練教師評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的構(gòu)建： 以美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為鑒 以美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為鑒 授予學(xué)位學(xué)科（專業(yè)） ： 課程與教學(xué)論（數(shù)學(xué)教育） 課程與教學(xué)論（數(shù)學(xué)教育） 研 究 方 向： 教師評(píng)價(jià) 教師評(píng)價(jià) 編 號(hào)： 碩士學(xué)位論文

2、 中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)熟練教師評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的構(gòu)建：以美國(guó)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為鑒 3 Abstract The educational globalization appeals to innovative education, which is determined by innovative standards of teachers assessment. However, there are great issue

3、s in the evaluation of mathematics teachers in China, the most important of which are the absences of self-assessment and the specialization of the teachers’. One of the countermeasures to solve these problems is to foll

4、ow the preceding development in the international research and use American standards for reference. Therefore, this thesis gives a further study of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standard, Mathematics Stan

5、dard: Adolescence and Young Adulthood for accomplished teachers, interpreting its reference significance, and constructing a unique reference of accomplished teacher standard for the middle school mathematics teaching in

6、 China. The existing study of the American standards has not given a profound excavation of its values, not knowing the full significance and the systematic structure. Thus this thesis deepens the understanding of the A

7、merican standard, comparing the “accomplished” notion with the concept of “better teachers” in China, which is granted by the government to praise their merits, not wholly their competence. Then this thesis compares NPBT

8、S with the representative standard used in China, and finds that the major distinctions are as follows: the American standard gives prominence to the teacher’s individual innovative competence, the agreement between the

9、teacher assessment and the students development, precision and maneuverability, aiming at the development of teachers innovative competence, while the standard in China seeks the agreement between the assessment and the

10、goal of governing, too many entries in evaluation, simply pursuing quantity measures, and neglecting the development of the teachers creativity. The similar paradoxes which both standards in America and China have to con

11、front are as follows: the contradiction between the evaluating ideal and the reality, standard and the evaluating act, the teaching and the mutual movement between the teacher and the students, and the theory and the pra

12、ctice. This thesis analyses the inner values in NPBTS and finds its reference values: the personalities of the teacher and the students are the soul in making assessment standard, the social responsibility is the guidanc

13、e of the standard, the specialized knowledge is the heart of the assessment, teaching practice is the base of the standard, the professional development is the goal for the standard, self-evaluation reflecting work is th

14、e gist of the evaluation, the justice in the procedure of evaluating is the key in acting the assessment, innovative breakthrough is the trait of NPBTS. This thesis launches an investigation, demonstrating the acceptabil

15、ity of NPBTS in the eyes of Chinese teachers of mathematics and find that the principles and the standards are acceptable in a moderating degree. From the investigation this thesis finds the autonomous evaluation is the

16、nature of the teacher assessment, advances autonomous evaluation theory, arguing the rationales in making standard for assessment of the accomplished mathematical teachers in middle schools: the standard for teachers ass

17、essment should give prominence to the teachers’ social status, the goals for the teachers professional career, materiality and maneuverability, the development of teachers’ expertise in educational art, the creation of t

18、he quality of teachers’ innovative competence, the reflection of the nature in autonomous evaluation, promotion of every teacher’s development, and the democratic procedure to renew the standard. We must make the standar