本研究主要目的是在了解桃竹苗四縣市國民小學績效責任管理之現況，探討不同背景變項之校長、主任、組長與教師在績效責任管理知覺上的差異，研究結果可作為欲推動學校績效責任管理之教育行政主管機關、校長與教師參考用。
本研究主要以問卷調查法為主，並輔以訪談法進行。研究工具「桃竹苗四縣市國民小學績效責任管理之調查問卷」係參考相關文獻自編而成，而研究對象係以桃竹苗四縣市國民小學之校長、主任、組長與教師為對象，一共抽取86所學校，公立國民小學780位教育人員對象，有效樣本627人。問卷回收後，以描述統計 、t 檢定、單因子變異數分析等方法進行資料分析，所得主要研究結果歸納如下：
一、國民小學績效責任管理屬於中等程度。

二、國民小學績效責任管理因其性別、學歷、擔任職務、服務年資、學校所在地區以及學校規模之不同，而有顯著差異情形。

三、國民小學績效責任管理上的困境為
（一）行政管理效能：校務發展規劃層面，為學校成員配合的意願不高；人力資源管理層面，缺乏提升成員工作績效的誘因機制；財務管理層面，預算未能符合行政及教學的實際需要。
（二）學生學習成就：家長未能有效支持配合與協助。
（三）教師專業表現：缺乏激勵教師教學創新的環境。
（四）優質校園環境：經費有限，難以規劃。
四、建立完善的激勵制度與營造優質的學校文化有助於績效責任管理的推動。

最後，依據研究結果，提出具體建議，俾供主管教育行政機關、國民小學、國小教師及後續研究者之參考。

關鍵詞：國民小學、績效責任、績效管理

Abstract
This research aims at understanding the present situations on School Accountability Management in Elementary School, including Taoyuan county, Hsindu county, Hsindu city, and Miaoli county. The research probes different variables which are the different perceptions of principals, teachers served as administrators, and teachers in the Accountability Management. The result of the research will be a reference for the authorities of educational administration who intended to promote Accountability Management in Elementary School.
The research data were collected by using questionnaire as well as interview. The research tool, the Accountability Management in Elementary School questionnaire, was constructed by the researcher herself. The research samples included principals, teachers served as administrators, and teachers in the elementary schools in Taoyuan county, Hsindu county, Hsindu city, and Miaoli county. The researcher sampled 780 educators in 86 public elementary schools. There are 627 valid samples. After finishing collecting the data, the research adopted descriptive statistics, t-test, and one-way ANOVA analysis to analyze them. Finally, the researcher offered several suggestions according to the result.
The main results are summarized as the following:
1. The Accountability Management in elementary school is at an intermediate level.
2. The Accountability Management in elementary school has significant difference due to different background and variables, such as sex, education background, serving years, the location of school, the size of school.
3. There are four difficult positions in the Accountability Management in elementary school.
(1) The administration efficiency: In the plan of school development, the faculties have little inclination to cooperate with school. In human resource management, school doesn’t offer many incentives for faculties to improve their working efficiency. In the financial management, the budget isn’t fit for administration and instruction’s practical demand.
(2) The student’s learning effect: The parents can’t cooperate with instructor to help and supervise their children very well.
(3) The teacher’s professional performance: School doesn’t offer an environment to inspire teacher’s enthusiasm about innovating teaching approaches.
(4) The quality school environment: The school funds are limited. Therefore, it’s hard for school to build an excellent school environment.
4. Building a perfect system to encourage faculties and creating a high quality school culture will help school to execute the Accountability Management.
According to the results mentioned above, the research also provides several suggestions for education authority, elementary schools and further studies in the future.

Key words : Elementary School , Accountability,Performance

壹、中文部分
丁志達（2003）。績效管理。台北：揚智。
天下雜誌編輯部（2006）。五大面向，體檢幸福競爭力。天下雜誌，354，104-111。
王芳鈞（2004）。國民小學教師效能評鑑指標之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
江書良（2006）。完全中學學校績效責任指標及學校績效責任報告卡之建構。國立臺北教育大學教育政策與管理研究所博士論文，未出版，台北。
行政院（2005）。行政院暨地方各級行政機關九十五年實施績效獎金計畫作業手冊。台北市：行政院人事行政局。
吳明清（1998）。教育研究：基本觀念與方法之分析。台北市：五南。
吳政達（1999）。國民小學教師評鑑指標體系建構之研究。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北。
吳清山（2000）。學校績效責任的理念與策略。學校行政雙月刊，6，3-13。
吳清山、林天祐（2001）。績效責任。教育研究月刊，83，139-140。
吳清山、黃美芳和徐緯平（2002）。教育績效責任研究。台北：高等教育文化。
林志成（2004）。建構卓越的教育績效責任文化。教育研究月刊。124，41-51。
林宜靜（2006）。國民中小學教育卓越表現標準建構之研究。台北市立教育大學教育行政與評鑑研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
范熾文（2002）。國小校長領導行為、教師組織承諾與學校組織績效之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北。
徐敏榮（2002）。國民小學教師評鑑規準之研究。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
徐緯平（2001）。國民小學學校教育績效責任指標之建構。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
秦夢群、吳政達（2006）。國民教育階段學校行政績效指標體系建構之研究。教育資料與研究雙月刊，68，43-62。
張淑美（1998）。績效管理。載於蔡培村主編，學校經營與管理。頁423-457。高雄：麗文。
陳正義（2004）。桃竹苗四縣市國民小學教師之學校績效責任信念與教師效能關係之研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹。
陳曉齡（2004）。國民小學教師績效評鑑指標與歷程之研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
曾菁天（2003）。我國小學教師工作績效評量指標研究—平衡計分卡觀念之應用。私立淡江大學教育政策與領導研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
賀宏偉（2005）。以平衡計分卡建構國民小學校務評鑑指標之研究。暨南國際大學教育政策與行政學系碩士論文，未出版，南投。
黃同圳（2003）。績效評估與管理。載於李誠主編，人力資源管理的12堂課。頁109-153。台北：天下文化。
黃美芳（2002）。美國學校教育績效責任制及其在我國實施可行性之研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
黃振球（1990）。學校管理與績效。台北：師大書苑。
黃淑梅（2005）。國民中學教育績效責任指標建構之研究。國立台南大學教育經營與管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台南。
蔡菁芝（2006）。英美兩國學校績效責任及其對我國的啟示。台北市立教育大學國民教育研究所博士論文，未出版，台北。
鄭秋貴（2004）。國民小學實施績效管理之研究。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
鄭彩鳳（2004）。教育績效管理與績效責任。教育研究月刊，124，5-21。
駱奕穎（2004）。國民小學教師績效評鑑制度規劃之研究。國立台北師範學院教育政策與管理所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
謝發昱（2005）。績效管理在國民中學學校行政應用之研究—以台北縣市為例。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。

貳、外文部分
Al-Garni, S.A. (1998). The role of strategic planning in improving public organizations’ performance. DAI-A 58/10, P.4060.
Amerstrong, M. (1994). Performance Management: The New Realities, Institutes of Personnel and Development.
Climaco, C. (1992). Getting to know schools using performance indicator：criteria, indicators and process. Educational Review, 44 (3), 297-308.
Cobb, C. D. (2004). Looking across the States: Perspectives on school accountability. Educational Foundations, 18(3/4),59-79.
Colorado State Board of Education (2005).School accountability reports: A Five-Year Review of Progress (2001-2005).Retrieved December 16, 2005, from http://reportcard.cde.state.co.us/reportcard/pdf/sar5yearreport.pdf
Cutt, J., & Murray, V., (2001). Accountability and effectiveness evaluation in non-profit organization. London: routledge.
Department for Education and Employment. (2000). Performance management in schools. London：Author.
Dorn, S., (1998). The political legacy of school accountability system. Education policy Analysis Archives, 6(1), ISSN 1068-2341.
Education Commission of the States (1999).Education accountability systems in 50 states.(ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 428455)
French, R. (1985). Performance appraisal: Assessing human behavior at work. Boston, MA: Kent-Wadsworth.
Gallegos, A. (1994).Meta-evaluation of school evaluation model. Studies in Education Evaluation, 20, 41-45.
Genck, F.H. (1983). Improve school performance. N.Y.: Praeger Publishers.
Gintis, H., (1995). The Political Economy of School Choice. Teachers College Record, 6(3), 492-511.
Hall, W., & Keynes, M. (2002). Performance management in schools: could the Balanced Scorecard help. School Leadership & Management, 22(3), 321-338.
Jennifer,L.N.W. (1999). Selecting educational accountability indicators︰Exploring states and local performances. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota, MN.
Kellaghan, T. & Madaus, G. F. (2000). Outcome evaluation. In G. F. Madaus, D. L. Stufflebeam, & T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (2nd ed.) (pp. 97-112). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Kogan, M. (1988). Educational accountability; An analytical overview. London: Hutchinson.
Lashway, L. (1999).Holding schools accountable for achievement. Retrieved January 26, 2003, from http: //eric.uoregon.edu/ publications/digests/digest130.html
Leithwood, K., & Earl, L., (2000). Educational accountability effects: An international perspective. Peabody Journal of Education, 75(4), 1-18.
Macpherson, R. J. S. (1996). Educative accountability: Theory, practice, policy and research in educational administration. Oxford, OH：Pergamon.
Macpherson,R.J.S. (1996). Educative accountability policy research：Methodology and epistemology. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 80-106.
Oakes, J. (1986). Educational indicators: A guide for policy makers. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 315920).
Pease, J.A. (1998). The impact of staffing levels on organizational performance. DAI-A 58/08, P.3304.
Reeves, J., Forde, C., O’Brien, J., Smith, P. & Tomlinson, H. (2002). Performance management in education: Improving practice. London: Paul Chapman.
Richard R., (2000). Toward a composite index of school performance. The Elementary School Journal, 100(5), 409-441.
Rubin, M. A. (2004). Improving the current status of school performance reporting. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 16(2) , 147-170.
Scheerens ,J. (1990). School effectiveness research and the development of process indicators of school functioning. School Effectiveness and School Improveness, 1(1), 61-68.
Schuler, R. S. & Jackson, S. E. (1996). Human resource management: Positioning for the 21st century. New York: International Thomson.
Schuler, R. S. (1996). Managing human resources. New York: International Thomson.
Tam, F.W.M. (1999). A study of multi-models of school education quality from organizational perspectives. DAI-A 60/03, P.614.
Wanger, R. B. (1989). Accountability in education: A philosophical inquiry. New York: Routledge.