摘 　要
和諧國小(化名)為一所新設國民小學，「新」是它無可置疑的優勢，由於校舍新、師資新、理念新，創校前幾年實施總量管制，每年都有學生進不了和諧國小就讀。但「新」也是造成和諧國小制度不夠成熟、教師經驗不足、組織文化少了「情」的成份，以致於教師在表達意見時，採取直接批判方式，造成當事人心理受傷，更造成外界感覺衝突不斷。
本研究針對個案學校進行兩年的質性研究，採用參與觀察、訪談、文件分析等工具，進行資料蒐集，並透過質性研究輔助軟體N vivo 7進行編碼分析，獲致重要結論如下：
壹、和諧國小衝突主要因素
一、 學校行政基於依法行政、面對上級壓力以及對行政倫理尊重的立場與教師基於教育專業自主的立場多所衝突。
二、 新設學校剛開始的開放風氣與尚未健全的制度，與後來為了因應學生及班級人數的年年增加，制度調整的必要性，造成先鬆再緊的改革現象。另外學校人事的變動頻繁，使得行政和教學間產生調適上的困難。
三、 行政團隊和教學團隊經常在會議場合發生語言上及意識上不自覺的對立現象，使得和諧國小教師與行政之間的互信不足。造成衝突誤解很容易發生。
四、 部分教師具有強烈的自我主義，即使透過不斷的溝通，甚至動用表決決議，這些老師仍舊堅持己見，造成學校衝突。

貳、和諧國小衝突處理策略
不同的主任對於衝突處理策略也有不同，整體而言，和諧國小的衝突處理策略仍屬各個主任單打獨鬥的狀況。

參、和諧國小衝突影響
一、正面影響
（一） 和諧國小的衝突事件使得行政在推行措施時，能多了解不同教師的意見使制度改革日臻完善。
（二） 和諧國小的衝突事件促使行政與教學間產生對話，對雙方意見表達和情緒的抒發，及對方立場的理解有正面幫助。

二、負面影響
（一）和諧國小的衝突事件是造成行政和教學間的裂痕難以彌平，互信不足的主因。也進一步造成外界對和諧國小負面觀感。
（二）和諧國小的教師面對無法對抗行政壓力時，採取消極抵制措施，造成組織能量的內耗，減緩和諧國小進步的動力。

針對上述研究結論，本研究提出以下建議：
壹、對和諧國小行政人員的建議
一、 建議和諧國小行政人員參與各學年會議，了解教師心聲。
二、 建議和諧國小行政人員能夠培養高度情緒智商，並能夠跳出衝突情境，站在更高的學生利益來看待衝突。
三、 建議行政人員多加強橫向溝通。並透過處室主任三年輪替制度，打破處室本位思考模式。同時也建議建立行政團隊和教師團隊的輪替制度。
貳、 對和諧國小教師團隊的建議
1. 建議教師們勇於接受行政工作的挑戰。
2. 建議教師們能多參與校內外研習進修，踴躍報考研究所碩、博士學位。
3. 建議教師能夠保持心理彈性空間，讓多元的意見在和諧國小都有實踐的機會。
參、對未來研究的建議
一、 針對相同議題佐以量化調查。
二、 針對教師團隊的形成進行質性研究。
三、 針對「教師專業發展評鑑」進行行動研究。

Abstract
He-xie Elementary School (alias) is a newly established elementary school. Undoubtedly, “newness” is its advantage. Because of the new school house, new teaching staff, new idea and the total capacity control that implemented in the previous years since the foundation of this school, many students are unable to enter He-xie Elementary School. However, “newness” also caused He-xie Elementary School to have an immature school system, the staff with insufficient experiences and its lack of “sentiment” on organizational culture. As a result, teachers usually used the direct criticizing approach to express their opinions, which may cause the psychological damage to the person who involved in such critique, and further to show the constantly inharmonic (conflic) impression to the outside world.
This study conducted a 2-year qualitative research with aiming at the case study schools. It adopted the tools of participant observation, interview, document analysis etc., to carry out the data collection; in addition, applied N vivo 7, the Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software, to conduct the coding analysis. The important conclusions that obtained from this study are as follows:

I. Major conflict factors in He-xie Elementary School
1. It may have many conflicts between the standpoints of school administration which is implemented on the basis of law, responded to superior’s pressure and respected to the administrative ethics, and the standpoints of teachers which based on the professional autonomy of education.
2. The initiated opening tone and the not yet integrated system for the newly established school conflicted with the later necessity of making system adjustment in responding to the increasing number of students and classes year after year, which resulted in the innovative phenomenon of “early loose, later tight.” In addition, the personnel matters of this school have changed frequently, which caused the difficulty in adjustment between the administration and teaching.
3. Unrecognized opposite phenomena frequently occurred in the meeting sites vocally and consciously between the administration taskforce and teacher taskforce, which has caused the insufficient mutual trust between teachers and administrative personnel in He-xie Elementary School. Misunderstanding then might occurred easily due to the conflict.
4. Some teachers possessed stronger egoism, they may still persist in their opinions even underwent continuous communications or employed the voting approach to make resolution, which will cause the conflicts in school.

II. Coping Strategy for Conflicts in He-xie Elementary School.
Different directors may have different strategies to cope with conflicts; generally speaking, the coping strategy of conflicts in He-xie Elementary School for each director is still under the individual coping condition.

III. Conflicting Influence in He-xie Elementary School
1. Positive Influence
(1) The conflicting incidents in He-xie Elementary School may make the administrative taskforces to understand more opinions from different teachers while promoting the administrative measures in order to make better and perfect system reform.
(2) The conflicting incidents in He-xie Elementary School have urged the talk and communication between the administrative and teaching sectors, which may have the positive help for the opinion and emotion expression of both sides, and the understanding of mutual standpoints.

2. Negative Influence
(1) The conflicting incidents in He-xie Elementary School are the main reason to cause the gap between the administration and teaching which is difficult to heal up, and the insufficient for mutual trust. It further caused the negative impression on He-xie Elementary School for the outside world.
(2) When teachers of He-xie Elementary School encountering the administrative pressure that they were unable to resist, they may adopt the approaches of passive resistance that will cause the internal dissipation of the organizational energy and slow down the motivation of making progress for He-xie Elementary School.

In response to the abovementioned research conclusions, this study has proposed the following suggestions:
I. Suggestions to Administrative Personnel of He-xie Elementary School:
1. Suggest the administrative personnel of He-xie Elementary School to participate in the School Year Meeting of each Grade to understand the thoughts of teachers.
2. Suggest the administrative personnel of He-xie Elementary School to be able to cultivate higher emotion quotient (EQ) and can escape from the situational conflict to treat it from the viewpoint of making higher students benefits.
3. Suggest the administrative personnel to strengthen their horizontal communication. In addition, by adopting the 3-year rotation system for the directors of departments and offices to break through the department/office-base thinking pattern. Meanwhile, this study also suggests constructing the rotation system for the administration taskforce and teacher taskforce.

II. Suggestions to Teacher Taskforce of He-xie Elementary School:
1. Suggest teachers to have the courage to take the challenge for the administration work.
2. Suggest teachers to frequently participate in the further studying and learning programs inside and outside the campus, and encouraging them to apply Graduate Schools and pursue their Master’s and Ph.D. degrees.
3. Suggest teachers to be able to maintain the “space” of their mental flexibility and allow the diversified opinions having the opportunity of implementing in He-xie Elementary School.

III. Suggestions to Future Researches
1. Aided with the quantitative survey with aiming at the same issue.
2. Conducted the qualitative research on the formation of the teacher taskforce.
3. Conducted action research on “Evaluation of Teacher Professional Development”.

參考文獻
中文部分
王如哲等(1999)。教育行政。高雄：復文。
王春展(1994)。國民小學組織溝通之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
王淑俐(1994)。有話好說─邁向圓融的人際溝通。台北：南宏。
朱元發(1993)。韋伯思想概論。臺北：遠流。
朱金池(1991)。組織衝突之研究。警專學報，113-126。
池榮尉（2004）。國民小學教師團隊發展歷程之研究—以啄木鳥教師團隊為例。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。

吳宗立(1997)。學校行政研究。高雄：復文。
吳明清（民80）。教育研究。台北：五南。
吳金香 (2000)。學校組織行為與管理。台北：五南。
吳秉恩（1991）。組織行為學。台北：華泰。
申章政(1999)。國小校長管理溝通類型、衝突管理風格與學校效能之關係研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。未出版
辛武男 (2003)。國民小學校長行政溝通行為、衝突管理策略與學校效能關係之研究。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文。未出版。

李茂興、李慕華、林宗鴻譯（1994）。Robbins, S. P.著。組織行為。台北：揚智。
周春美、沈建華（1995）。如何建立學校組織衝突管理模式。技職教育雙月刊，25，49-53。
林明地、楊振昇、江芳盛譯（2000）。Owens, R. G.著。教育組織行為。台北：揚智。
林逸青(2003)。國中校長權力運作策略、衝突管理策略與學校效能之關係：微觀政治分析。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所博士論文，未出版，台北。
林姿君（2004）。國小學童對「模範生」及「模範生選舉活動」經驗之敘說研究。國立花蓮師範學院輔導碩士班碩士論文。未出版。

林振春(民82)，衝突管理理論及其在團體中的應用。社會教育學刊，第
22 期，73 – 106 頁。
尚榮安譯（ 2001）。個案研究。譯自Yin, R. K.: Case study. 台北：弘智文化。
簡麗賢(2004)。臺北縣市高級中等學校衝突管理之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版。

洪福財（1995）。學校組織衝突成因及其因應策略。教育資料文摘，214，171-192。
胡湲青(1998)。由韋伯的權威理念型比較中華民國與新加坡的領袖與繼承。 臺灣大學政治研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
連俊智(2004)。學校知識管理與衝突管理模式之相關研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義市。
秦夢群（1997）。教育行政－理論部分。台北：五南。
國民教育法(2004)。2006年12日1日，取自全國法規資料庫網頁: http://law.moj.gov.tw/fl1.asp。

陳慶安(2000)。談學校衝突管理。學校行政雙月刊，10，50-53。
張金鑑(1985)。管理心理學。台北：五南圖書出版公司。
張鈿富總校閱，王如哲等譯(2004) Joseph Murphy & Karen Seashore Louis. 教育行政研究手冊(Handbook of research on educational administration： a project of the American educational Association, 2nd ed.)。台北：心理。
張德銳（1994）。淺談學校衝突管理。教師天地，64，49-53。
張德銳（2000）。教育行政研究（三版）。台北：五南。
張鐸嚴(1985)。國民小學教師與行政人員衝突管理之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
陳嘉皇（1996）。國民小學學校組織衝突管理之研究。國立屏東師範院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。　
傑瑞.理查森(1998)。神奇的人際關係－如何成為溝通贏家。台北：世茂。

曾淑敏(2002)。女性參與教育事務歷程之研究—以和諧國小（化名）社區造校運動為例。國立政治大學碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
曾燦金（1994）。衝突係助力乎？抑阻力乎？－論組織衝突之正反功能及其在學校行政管理之啟示。教育資料文摘，200，150-158。
黃昆輝(1984)。教育行政溝通原理及其應用。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所集刊，第26期，23 — 59頁。
黃昆輝(1993)。教育行政學。台北：東華。
黃哲彬(2003)。以鬆散結合理論分析學校科層體制與教師專業自主之衝突與調適。學校行政雙月刊，28。頁16-28。
黃瑞琴(1991)。質的教育研究方法。台北：心理
教育部(2006)。推展學校體育績優團體及個人頒奬典禮網頁。2006年11月27日，取自http://140.122.72.29/summary/list.html。

新竹市高峰國民小學(無日期)。高峰國小設校芻議。2005年11月27日，取自http://www.gfps.hc.edu.tw/WebMaster/。

新竹市政府（2004年10 10日）。光武、陽光、和諧等團隊榮列標竿一百學校名單。新竹市教育電子報。第一期。2005年11月27日，取自http://www.hceb.edu.tw/epaper/200410/school/school2.htm
蔡培村（主編）（1998）。學校經營與管理。高雄市：麗文。
廖炳雄 （2001）。政府採購法實施對採購人員運作影響之研究。東海大學公共事務碩士學程在職進修專班碩士論文。未出版。

蔡進雄（2001）。學校行政領導。臺北：師大書苑。
葉菁華(1994)。有衝突才有活力─衝突管理面面觀。管理雜誌，237，90-94。
潘正德（1995）。團體動力學。台北：心理。
謝文全(1987)。教育行政─理論與實務。台北：文景。
劉世閔(2006)。質性研究資料分析與文獻格式之運用：以QSR N6 與 EndNote 8為例。台北：心理。
韓經綸（1994）。組織行為學導論。臺北：五南。
瞿立鶴(1987)，教育行政溝通理論之分析。教育資料文摘，20(3)，4- 48。

西文部分
Adams, P. E. (1997). Beginning science teacher cognition and its origins in the preservice secondary science teacher program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 34(6), p.633-653.
Barnard, C. I.(1968). The functions of the executive. Cambridge, Massachusetts：Harvard University Press.
De Dreu,C.K.W.(1997).Conflict management and performance.In De Dreu,C.K.W.&Vande Vliert E.(eds.)Using conflict in organizations.
Etzioni, A.(1964). Modern organization .Englewood Cliffs, NJ： Prentice-Hall.
Hellriegel,D.,Slocum,J.W.,＆Woodman,R.W.(1989).Organizational behavior(5th ed .).New York: West.
Johnson, D. W. (1985). Social psychology of education. Washington D.C.： Hemisphere.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York： John wiley & Sons.
Laue, J. (1987). The emergence and institutionalization of third party roles in conflict. In D. J. D. Sandole, & I. San-dole-Staroste (Eds.). Conflict management and problem solving. London： Frances Printer.
Lewis, P. V.(1975). Organizational communication：The essence of effective management. Columbus, Ohio：Grid.
Lysaught, J. P.(1984). Toward a comprehensive theory of communications.：A review of selected contributions. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(3), 101- 127.
March, J. G. & Olsen, J. P. (1976). Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Bergen, Norway： Universitetsforlaget.
March, J. G.,& Simon, H. A. (1958) .Organizations. New York：John Wiley & Sons.
McCloskey, G.(1976).Education and public understanding(2nd ed.). N. Y.：Harper & Row, Publishers.
Pondy,L.R.(1967).Organizational Conflict： Concepts and Models. Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(2).
Rahim, M. A. (1983). Measurement of organizational conflict. The Journal of General Psychology, 109, 189-199.
Rasberry, R. W. & Lemoine, L. F.(1986). Effective managerial communication. Boston, Massachusetts：Kent Publishing Company.
Robbins, S. P. (1989). Organization behavior： Concepts, controversies, and applications (4th ed.). New Jersey： Prentice-Hall.
Robbins, S. P.(1983).Organizational Behavior. N. J.：Prentice Hall Inc.
Robbins（2001）. Essentials of organizational behavior.p.171.Englewood Cliffs,NJ：Prentice-Hall.
Roesthlisberger, F. J. & Dickson, W. J. (1952). Formal and informal status. In R. K. Merton, A. P. Gran, B. Hockey & H. C. Selvin (Eds.). Reader in bureaucracy (pp. 255-264). New York： Free Press.
Schramm, W. and Roberts, D. F.(1971).The process and effects of mass communication. Revised edition. Illinois：The Board of Trustees, University of Illinois.
Schultz, B. G. (1989). Communicating in the small group：Theory and practice. New York：Harper & Row.
Thomas, K. W. (1976). Conflict and conflict management. In M.Dunnette (ed), Handbook of industrial and organization psychology (p.90).Chicago:Rand McNaiiy
Thomas K.(1983).“Conflict and Negotiation Processes in Organizations,” in M. D. Dunnette and L. M, Hough (eds.), Handbook of industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., Vol. 3 (Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, in press). With permission.
Tyack, D. & Tobin, W. (1994). The “grammar”of schooling： Why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 31, 453-479.
Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organizations .(A. M. Henderson & T. Parsons, trans ) New York： Oxford University Press.
Wheeless, L. R. & Reichel, L. S.(1990). A reinforcement model of the relationships of supervisors’ general communication styles and conflict management styles to task attraction. Communication Quarterly, 38(4) Fall.
Williams, F.(1989). The new communications.(2nd ed.) Belmont, California：Wadsworth Publishing Company