國際文憑教師表現指標之跨國共構與素養導向師資教育之在地應用研究

As the global trend, preparing students with core competences has been the central educational concerns in many counties. International Baccalaureate Programs has become more popular around the world. Consequently, there are great demands for preparing teachers with global perspectives and capacities for competences-oriented teaching and learning. To meet the needs of competent teachers for implementing newly reformed competence-oriented curriculum, this two-year cross-national joint construction of IB teacher performance indicators and teaching assessment project is intended to explore the local implications for teacher education in Taiwan. The research findings and results are as follows: (1) The required knowledge, skills, and dispositions of an IB teacher are framed by constructivist perspectives and IB pedagogical principles, include: inquiry- based, concept-driven, contextualized, collaborative, differentiated, and assessment-informed. In order to prepare IB learners, an IB teacher has to be international-minded, open-minded, flexible and resilient. (2) Since the core philosophy of IB pedagogy emphasize student-centered and inquiry-based, IB teachers’ teaching is very much constructivist oriented. Thus, IB teachers’ performance indicators need to reflect IB pedagogical principles and be connected to the development of approaches to learning and attributes of Learner Profile. (3) The framework and assessment instrument of IB teacher performance indicators developed by the Stanford research team were basically following the concepts of their edTPA model, but simply modified the schemes by adopting the five domains of IB approaches to learning, i.e., thinking, research, communication, social, and self-management skills. Due to lack of clear definitions of the performance indicators, it created difficulties in interpreting and judging teachers’ teaching behaviors and intentions. In the implementation process (quite similar to the teacher professional development assessment process in Taiwan), teachers had no problems with the operational process, but raised issues and concerns about the instrument. (4) Based on the feedbacks and opinions collected from the participant IB teachers and coordinators, starting from the second year, NTNU research team decided not to adopt the framework and instrument developed by the Stanford team but to reconstruct the framework initiated and proposed by NTNU team in the first year. A series of focus group interviews and internal meetings were held for the reconstruction of the performance indicators framework. Then, a Delphi survey was conducted among IB coordinators from different countries, and external reviews by teachers from non-IB schools were delivered as well. By so doing, more simplified, easier operated framework and instrument with clearer definitions were constructed, which had received positive feedbacks and been considered as quite feasible. (5) Due to breakout of the COVID-19, the on-sites tryouts and oversea trip for related data collection arrangements were canceled. Though the newly reconstructed framework and instrument did not get to tryout in actual school sites yet, they will be further explored in IB schools and local schools in the on-going new research project. (6) Based on the preliminary findings, initial suggestions for updating Taiwan teacher performance indicators and possible ways of incorporating IB teacher performance indicators and assessment into Taiwan teacher education program were proposed, which have been published as a book chapter.