教師道德推理測驗之發展

在道德認知發展領域的研究中，Kohlberg的Moral Judgment Interview （MJI）及Rest 的Defining Issues Test （DIT）是兩種測量道德推理的有效工具。但是Rest建議為了能更精確解釋及預測專業成員的道德行為，研究者應自各個專業中發掘道德難題。因為取自真實情境的道德兩難推理測驗，當比MJI 或DIT此兩種假設性的道德推理測驗，更能有效解決及預測專業成員的道德行為。本文是在Rest指導下，發展適用於教學的「教師道理推理測驗」（THE TEST OF TEACHERS’ MORAL REASONING， TTMR）。TTMR的研究共分兩個階段。第一個階段工作主要是經由深度訪談，發展出七個道德兩難故事及道德考慮因素。結果顯示在加權後的「重要性排序」分數的t考驗上，「專家老師」的分數顯著高於「新手教師」，顯示此測驗具有初步效度。第二階段工作是以修訂後的TTMR及中文版DIT為工具，對223名國小老師及108名師院學生施測。主要目的是進一步找出TTMR最佳計分方式及再考驗TTMR的信效度。在對TTMR的三十二種計分指標作種種信效度考驗後，結果發現「因素分析取向」的第一種計分指標的信效度最高。效度檢驗顯示：（1）TTMR與「道德提名」的相關顯著高於TTMR與「人緣提名」的相關；（2）「道德專家老師」的TTMR分數顯著高於「非道德專家老師」的TTMR分數；（3）小學老師的TTMR分數顯著高於師院學生的TTMR分數；（4）TTMR與中文版DIT有低度相關。更值得注意的是TTMR較中文版DIT在分別老師的道德判斷上，更具區辨力。

A two phase study was conducted to develop a teaching-specific moral reasoning test， involving refinement of test scale indices. All data for both phases of the study were collected in Taiwan. The test of Teachers’ Moral Reasoning（TTMR）was developed and used in the first phase study. Subjects were asked to rate the importance of each of 15 ”consideration statements” related to moral dilemmas presented in story form and to rank the three most important statements form each story. Forty three teacher college students served as the novice group and 26 teaching faculty and ex-teachers were dominated to serve as the expert group. T-tests comparisons f the weighted scored for the rankings show that the experts scored higher than the novices on the TTMR. Phase Two of the study employed the revised TTMR and the Chinese Defining Issues Test（DIT）as instruments. Samples included 223 primary school teachers and 108 teacher college students. The primary school teachers were divided in to morally expert and less morally expert teachers， according to the morality nomination. The peer popularity nominations also separated the teachers into popular and less popular teacher categories. Thirty two indexing methods for the TTMR had been tried in order to see which consistently yielded the best results. The findings showed that the TTMR was valid and reliable. Results also indicated that， compared with the Chinese DIT， the TTMR better differentiated the morally expert teachers from the less morally expert teachers. Limitations and suggestions for future studies were also discussed.