中美教师职后培育机制比较——以“国培计划”与“城市教师驻校计划”为例  

Comparison of post-employment training mechanisms between teachersinChinaand America——The Case of“National Training Plan”and“Urban Teacher Residency Model”

作　　者：张翅 徐红[2] 周欣 ZHANG Chi;XU Hong;ZHOU Xin(XinYang senior high school,Yancheng 224300,China;Department of education,Yangtse University,Jinzhou 434023,China)

机构地区：[1]新洋高级中学,江苏盐城224300 [2]长江大学教育与体育学院,湖北荆州434023

出　　处：《教师教育学报》2020年第6期119-124,共6页Journal of Teacher Education

基　　金：湖北省教育科学规划课题“农村专家型教师成长规律与培育机制研究”(2016GB025),项目负责人:徐红。

摘　　要：我国教师职后培育目前广泛实施的“国培计划”与美国“城市教师驻校计划”既有相同之处,也存在明显区别。相同之处在于:两国都为计划顺利和有效施行提供了良好的资金保障和制度保障,并建立了行之有效的激励机制。但两国国情不同,使二者在机制运行方式、参训教师选拔方式、培训内容选择、教师职后培育监督主体和评价主体等方面也存在差异。借鉴美国实施“城市教师驻校计划”的成功经验,未来我国教师职后培育可着力于完善“G-U-S”协同培育机制、健全教师职后培育激励机制、创新教师职后培育监督机制、改进教师职后培育评价机制,以进一步提升我国教师职后培育实效,帮助教师实现更好更快的发展。This paper introduces the“National Training Program”in China and the“Urban Teacher Resident Program”in the United States,and both of them are widely used in the post-teacher cultivation.By comparing the two,the similarities are found.Both countries provide capital and system guarantee for the smooth and effective implementation of the plan,and establish incentive mechanism for participating teachers.However,the differences in national conditions lead to a distinct distinction between the two modes of operation in the mechanism,the selection methods and training content of the participating teachers,the supervisory body and the evaluation subject of the teacher s post-employment training.Drawing on the experience of the United States,China should improve the“G-U-S”collaborative cultivation mechanism,improve the incentive mechanism for teachers to cultivate after-service,reform the supervision mechanism for teachers post-employment training,and improve the evaluation mechanism for teachers post-employment evaluation,so as to further promote the implementation of teachers post-employment training and help teachers receive a better and faster development.

关 键 词：教师职后培养 培育机制 专业发展 国培计划 城市教师驻校计划 

分 类 号：G655[文化科学—教育学]