教育專業與教育改革的關係之探討：以臺灣與美國的發展為例

An Exploration of the Relationship between Education Profession and Education Reform: Taking the Development in Taiwan and in the U.S.A. as Examples

本文旨在探討教育專業與教育改革的關係，主要的立論是：教育專業與教育改革的關係甚為複雜，隨著時空而有所變動，教育改革可能有助於教育專業的形塑，而教育專業的發展可能有助於教育改革的推動，不過這種互惠的關係並非必然。以台灣1990年代以來的教育改革為例，說明教育改革可以形塑教育專業的成長與發展，以美國1980年代以來的教育改革為例，說明教育專業可以促進教育改革的設計與推動，然而二者之間也存在著矛盾與對立，在台灣，教育專業對教育改革的影響有所削弱，在美國，由教育專業倡議的教育改革遭逢困難。不管是台灣或是美國，可以發現教育專業的建立與教育改革的推行都鑲嵌在特定的歷史社會情境中，從美國的經驗來看，教育專業的參與或主導並不能保證教育改革的成效或品質，因為影響教育改革的因素非常複雜，事實上，教育專業如行政、教學也是在某種時空背景下形成的，甚至是順應教育改革、社會變遷的趨勢與要求。本文主張在探討教育專業與改革的關係時，必須同時著眼於廣大的社會面向，以跳脫教育專業與教育改革的矛盾與對立、超越「眾矢之的」與「代罪羔羊」的處境與宿命。

The article is to explore the relationship between education profession and education reform. Its main point is that that relationship is extremely complicated and varies from time to time， from place to place. Education reform may be conducive to the shaping of education profession and the development of education profession to the facilitating of education reform. However， such a reciprocal relationship is not inherently necessary. Taking as an example the education reform that has been taking place since the 1990s in Taiwan， it is safe to say that education reform does contribute to the growth and development of education profession. Taking as another example the education reform that has been taking place since the 1980s in the United States， it is also safe to say that education profession does influence the design and implementation of education reform. But there exist some paradoxes and oppositions between both. In the case of Taiwan， the influence that education profession wields on education reform is weaker. In the case of the United States， education reform advocated by education profession encounters difficulties. No matter which case， we can see that both the building of education profession and the enforcing of education reform are embedded in a particular historical and societal condition. In terms of the United States’ experience， the participation or leading of education profession does not guarantee the effectiveness or quality of education reform， because the factors that have an impact on education reform are extremely complicated. Indeed， education profession such as administration and teaching is conditioned by social and historical backgrounds as well， even demanded by education reform and social change. This article maintains that we must take the broad society into consideration simultaneously while thinking about the relationship between education profession and education reform in order to go beyond paradoxes and oppositions and not to serve as a ready-made scapegoat.