D. J. Willower為當代美國頗具代表性的教育行政學者，其畢生投入於教育行政學術研究工作，在早期即與美國教育行政「理論運動」有密切的接觸，然其對教育行政理論的開展，主要採取一種行政科學的觀點來加以論述，並依循著Dewey實用主義來加以鋪陳。在思想脈絡上，Willower對當代學者批判主要集中在此三階段學者，首先對T. B. Greenfield之主觀主義，指出只重視客觀性，而忽視價值和人性考慮等；其次對R. J. Bates與W. P. Foster等人之批判理論，指出批判理論對實證主義和功能主義此不同觀念、事物當成同類來評述，輕忽社會存在多元興趣群體的實際現象；第三對C. W. Evers及G. Lakomski之自然融貫論批判，指出其在對哲學認識論討論是宏大的，然在探究領域中，具體和經驗層面知識是有侷限性，並認為有一些問題是存在的。

本研究運用教育詮釋學的研究方法，此方法的運用有以下四個階段：（一）教育文本歷史的確定、（二）教育文本意義的解釋、（三）教育文本假設的建構、（四）教育文本真相的理解。職是之故，本研究之結果，分別以理論和實務之啟示列舉如下：（一）實踐理論的發展須與教育行政現場實務經驗相互結合。（二）事實與價值，理論與實踐應併入行政理論中。（三）以實務運作而論，教學目的之啟發，乃重視經驗，透過省思的歷程，轉化更深一層的反思經驗。（四）以行政人員和制度方面，強調在科學理論探究中，肯定開放溝通的態度，接納多元思考，使彼此得到尊重與接納。總之，研究者尋繹詮釋該學者的思維內容，並從探究諸學者之批判中再延伸對Dewey實用主義的繼承，並藉以提供現場教育行政人員之參考，作為教育行政改革之借鏡。

關鍵字： 實用主義、理論運動

D. J. Willower is one of representative scholars in education administration nowadays in America. He devoted his lifetime to the academic research of education administration; therefore, he was involved with the development of the theoretical movement in the early days. A view of administrative science is discussed and elaborated in accordance with Dewey’s pragmatism. In terms of ideological context, Willower’s criticism of contemporary scholars mainly focuses on these three parts. First, he pointed out that T. B. Greenfield’s subjectivism only emphasizes objectivity, while ignoring the considerations of values and human nature. Secondly, he criticized R. J. Bates and W. P. Foster to simplify positivism and functionalism, while ignoring the reality and diverse interests in society. Thirdly, he criticized the related theory of C. W. Evers and G. Lakomski. It is pointed out that it is grand in the discussion of philosophical epistemology, but in the field of inquiry, the knowledge at the concrete and empirical level is limited, and it is believed that there are some problems.

This study adopts the methodology of educational hermeneutics to trace back the content of Willower’s thoughts. First, the determination of the history of educational texts. Then, explain the meaning of the educational text. The third is the construction of educational text hypothesis. Ultimately know the truth about educational texts. For this reason, the results of this study are listed as follows in terms of theoretical and practical inspiration respectively. (1) The development of practical theory must be combined with on-site practical experience of educational administration. (2) Facts and values, theory and practice should be incorporated into administrative theory. (3) In terms of practical operation, the inspiration of teaching purpose is to attach importance to experience, and to transform deeper reflection experience through the process of reflection. (4) In terms of administrative personnel and systems, it is emphasized that in the exploration of scientific theories, an attitude of open communication is affirmed, and multiple thinking is accepted, so that each other can be respected and accepted.
For this reason, the results of this study, through sorting out the origin of Willlower's thought, seek to interpret the content of the scholar's thinking, and extend the inheritance of Dewey's pragmatism from the exploration of the criticism of various scholars, and thereby provide on-site educational administration. The reference of personnel serves as a mirror for educational administrative reform.

Keywords：Pragmatism 、The Theory Movement

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究方法與步驟 9
第三節 重要名詞解釋 15
第四節 研究資料與範圍 17
第五節 研究論文的限制 19
第二章 Willower的思想淵源 21
第一節 Greenfield主觀主義之批判 21
第二節 Bates批判理論之批判 35
第三節 Evers與Lakomski批判理論之批判 42
第三章 Willower實用主義之主要內涵 49
第一節 Dewey實用主義之啟迪 49
第二節 Willower之科學理論 55
第三節 Willower價值理論和評價理論 61
第四節 Willower之實踐理論 71
第四章 Willower實用主義之綜合評價及啟示 79
第一節 Willower實用主義的綜合評價 79
第二節 Willower實用主義的啟示 87
第五章 結論與建議 91
第一節 結論 91
第二節 建議 97
參考文獻 99
一、中文文獻 99
二、英文文獻 102

一、 中文文獻
Dewey, J. （2012）。杜威全集（陳亞軍、姬志闖譯）。華東。（ 原著出版於2008年）
Wayne K. Hoy,Cecil G. Miskel（2003）。教育行政學：理論、研究與實際（林明地等，譯）。麗文。（原著出版於2001年）
王如哲（2003）。教育行政學。五南。
王瑞賢（1993）。新教育社會學之源流及其理論。現代。
吳清基（1985）。賽蒙行政決定理論及其在教育行政上的應用 〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所。
邱祖賢（1996）。 哈伯瑪斯的批判理論在我國教育政策制定的應用 〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立高雄師範大學教育學系。
林秀珍（1999）。Dewey經驗概念之教育涵義 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所。
林天祐（2003）。教育行政學。心理。
林志忠（2004）。教育行政理論-哲學篇。心理。
林秀珍（2007）。經驗與教育探微－Dewey（J.Dewey）教育哲學之詮釋。師大書苑。
周鈺欽（2010）。反省探究學習模式之建立及其應用 〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立東華大學國民教育研究所。
秦夢群、黃貞裕（2003）。教育行政研究方法論。五南。
陳柏璋（1987）。教育思想與教育研究。師大書苑。
莊文祺（2001）。傅柯權力理論對教育行政的啟示 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺北師範學院國民教育研究所。
梁福鎮（2000）。質的研究方法。麗文。
梁福鎮（2004）。改革教育學-起源、內涵與問題的探究。五南。
梁福鎮（2006）。教育哲學─辯證取向。五南。
梁福鎮（2008）。教育行政學：理論與實務。五南。
梁福鎮（2013）。教育哲學：新興議題的探究。五南。
陳鈺翔（2014）。R.J.Bates批判取向教育行政學說對教育行政之啟示 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立東華大學教育行政與管理學系。
陳美玲（2019）。學校行政管理與學校效能關係之統合分析 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。中臺科技大學文教事業經營研究所。
張明輝（1990）。巴納德組織與管理理論及其在教育行政上的應用 〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所。
黃乃熒（2000）。後現代教育行政學。師大。
黃貞裕（2000）。教育行政方法論典範變遷之研究：實證論、後實證論、與後現代主義〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立政治大學教育學系。
黃柏維（2003）。蔡元培教育行政思想之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺東大學教育研究所。
黃俊峰（2013）。論幸福臺灣與教育的意義及目的。臺灣教育評論月刊，2（11），51-55。
鄭佩香（1991）。四書集解新釋。正言出版社。
蔡佳蓉（2014）。高雄市國民中學學校行銷、學校文化與學校效能之相關研究 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立高雄師範大學教育學系。
謝文全等著（2006）。教育行政學：理論與案例。五南。
謝文全（2012）。教育行政學。高等教育出版。
謝芯（2015）。國民中小學校長尊重領導與學校創新型文化之關係研究-以桃竹苗原住民地區為例 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立新竹教育大學教育與學習科技學系教育行政碩士在職專班。
簡大鈞（2016）。Evers與Lakomski的「自然融貫論」對教育行政之啟示 〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立東華大學教育行政與管理學系。
羅虞村（1985）。領導理論之評析及其對我國教育行政領導之啟示 〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所。
顧紅亮（2000）。實用主義的誤讀─Dewey哲學對中國現代哲學之影響。華東。


二、 外文文獻
Bates, R. J. （1980）.Educational administration, the sociology of science, and the management of knowledge. Educational Administration Quarterly, 16（2）,1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X8001600204
Bates, R. J. （1981a）. Educational administration, the technologization of reason and the management of knowledge： Towards a critical theory., Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. （ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED206076）. Deakin University Press.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED206076.pdf
Bates, R. J. （1981b）. Power and the Educational Administrator： Brueaucracy,Loose Coupling or Cultural Negotiation ? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. （ ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED206077） . Deakin University Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED206077
Bates, R. J. （1982）. Towards a Critical Practice of Educational Administration. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.（ ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED219839）. Deakin University Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED219839
Bates, R. J. （1983）. Educational administration and the management of knowledge. Publication Sales, Deakin University Press.
Bates, R. J. （1988a）. Is there a new paradigm in educational administration ? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.（ ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED303847）Deakin University Press. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED303847.pdf
Bates, R. J. （1988b）. Evaluating schools：A critical approach. Deakin University Press.
Bates, R. J. （1988c）. Is there a new paradigm in educational administration? Deakin University Press
Cahill, W. P. （1994）.Why Greenfield? The relevance of T. B. Greenfield's theories to Catholic education. Educational management and administration, 22（4）,251-259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263211X9402200405
Danner, H. （1994）. Methoden geisteswissenschaftlicher padagogik. Munchen:Universitat Taschenbuch Verlag.
Dewey, J. （1908a）. Does reality possess practical character? Repr. in J. A. Boydston（ed.）.
The middle works of John Dewey,1899-192 （vol.4）. Southern Illinois University Press.,125-142.
Dewey, J. （1908b）.The bearing of pragmatism upon education. Repr. in J.A. Boydston（ed.）. The bmiddle works of John Dewey, 1899-1924（vol.4）. Southern Illinois
University Press., 178-191.
Dewey, J. （1925）. The development of American pragmatism. In J. A. Boydston （ed.）. The later works of John Dewey,1925-1953（vol.2） Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, J. （1938）. Logic：The theory of inquiry. Repr. In J. A. Boydston（ed.）. The later works of John Dewey,1925-1953（vol.12）. Southern Illinois University Press.
Donmoyer, R. （1995）. The knowledge base in educational administration. State University of New York Press.
Evers, C. W. , & Lakomski, G. （1991）. Knowing educational administration： Contemporary methodological controversies in educational administration.
http://doi.org/10.2307/1180020
Evers, C. W. & Lakomski , G. （1993）. Justifying educational administration. Educational Management and Administration, 21（3）,10-152.
http://doi.org/10.1177/174114329302100301
Evers, C. W. , & Lakomski, G. （1996a）. Exploring educational administration： Coherentist applications and critiical debates. Oxford：Pergamon.
Evers, C. W. , & Lakomski, G. （1996b） Science in educational administration： A postpositivist conception. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32（3）,379-402.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X96032003005
Evers, C. W. , & Lakomski, G. （1994）. Educational administration：ethical and philosophical issues. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethuaite （Eds.）. The Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford：Pergamon.
Evers, C. W. , & Lakomski, G.（2001）. Theory in educational administration： Naturalistic directions. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（6）,499-520.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230110407850
Feigl, H. （1949）. Naturalism and Humanism. In R. S. Cohen （Ed.）. Inquiries an Provications：selected writings ,1929-1974. D. Reidel Publishing Companyorsyth, PB. （2001）. Willower, the Professor and UCEA, Journal of Educational Administration , 39（5）, 419-423 . https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005811
Fusarelli, L. D. （2006）. Theory movement, in educational administration. In W. Fenwick （Ed.）, Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration ,1018-1019.Sge Publications, Inc.
Greenfield, T. B. （1975）.Theory about organization：A new perspective and its implications for schools. In M. C. Hughes（Ed.）, Administering Education：International Challenges,71-99. Athlone.
Greenfield, T. B. （1979）. Resarch in educational administration in the United States and Canada： An overview and critique. Educational Administration Quarterly, 8（1）
,207-245. https://doi.org/10.1177/174114327900800114
Greenfield, T. B. （1980）. The man who comes back through the door in the wall： Discovering truth, discovering self, discovering organizations. Educational Administration Quarterly, 16（3）, 26-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X8001600305
Greenfield, T. B. （1986）. The decline and fall of science in educational administration. Interchange, 17（2）, 57-90.
Greenfield, T. B. （1991a）. Science and Service:The Making of One Profession of Educational Administration. Papers presented at one Thirty-fifth Anniversary Conference of the Department of Educational Administration,University of Alberta,Edmonton,September.
Greenfield, T. B. （1991b）. Re-formin and re-valuin educational administration： Whence and when cometh the phoenix? Educational Management and Administration, 19（4）, 200-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/174114329101900402
Greenfield, T. B. （1993a）. Theory about organization. In T. B. Greenfield & P. Ribbins（Eds.）,Greenfield on educational administration：A new perspective and its implications for schools (pp.1-22 ). Routledge.
Greenfield, T. B. （1993b）. Science and Serviee. In T. B. Greenfield & P. Ribbins （Eds.）, Greenfield on educational administration：The Making of the profession of educational administration(pp.199-225) .Routledge
Gronn, P. C. （1983）. Rethinking Educational Administration：T. B. Greenfield and His Critics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. （ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED283257）. Deakin University Press.
Gronn, P. C. （1985）. After T. B. Greenfield,whither educational administration? Educational Management and Administration, 13（1）,55-61.
https://doi.org/10.1177/174114328501300109
Gronn, P. C. （1995）. Subjectivity and the creation of organizations. In C. W. Evers & J. D. Chapman （Eds.）, Educational administration： An Australian Perspective (pp.34-48 ). Allen and Unwin.
Gronn, P. C. , & Ribbins, P. （1993）.The salvation of educational administration：Better science or alternatives to science? Educational Management and Administration, 21（3）,161-169. https://doi.org/10.1177/174114329302100303
Greenfield, T. B. , & Ribbins, P. （1993）. Greenfield on Educational Administration. London：Routledge.
Hoy, W. K. （2001）. The pupil control studies: A historical, theoretical and empirical analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（5）,424-441.
Lakomski, G. , & Evers, C. W. （2001）. The imcomplete naturalist: Donald Willower on science and inquiry in educational administration. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（5）,442-454. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230110402549
Murphy, J. , & Forsyth, P. B. （1999）. A decade of change. In J. Murphy & P. B. Forsyth（Eds.）, Educational administration： A decade of reform, (pp. 3-38 ). CA：Corwin
Maxcy, S. J. （2001）. Education leadership and management of knowing: The aesthetics of coherentism. Journal of Educational Administration, 39 （6）, 573-588.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230110407896
Park, S. H. （1999）. The development of Richard Bates's critical theory in educational administration. Journal of Educational Administration, 37（4）,367-388.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578239910285598
Simon, H. A. （1976）. Administrative behavior. Collier Macmillan Publishers.
Thomas, A. R. （2001）. Donald J. Willower: Appraisal, appreciation,remembrance. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（5）,409-415.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005815
Willower, D. J. （1969）. Schools as Organizations：Some Illustrated Strategies for Educational Research and Practice. Journal of Educational Administration, 7（2）,110-126. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009636
Willower, D. J. （1975）. Theory in educational administration. Journal of Educational Administration, 13（1）,77-91. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009723
Willower, D. J. （1979）. Ideology and science in organization theory. Educational Administration Quarterly. 15（3）,20-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013131X7901500304
Willower, D. J. （1980）. Contemporary issues in theory in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly. 16（3）,1-25.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X8001600304
Willower, D. J. （1984）. Philosophy and the study of educational administration. Paper presented at the Inter-American Congress on Educational Administration, Brazil, July-August. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009897
Willower, D. J. （1988）. Synthesis and projection. In N. J. Boyan （Ed.）, Handbook of Research on Educational Administration,724-748. Longman.
Willower, D. J. （1991）. Micropolitics and the sociology of school organizations. Journal of Educational Administration, 23（4）,442-454.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124591023004006
Willower, D. J. （1992）. Educational Administration： Philosophy, Praxis,Professing. Madison, Wisconsin：National Council of Professors of Educational Administration.
Willower, D. J. （1994）. Dewey's Theory of Inquiry and Reflective administration. Journal of Educational Administration, 32（1）,5-22.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578239410051817
Willower, D. J. （1996）. Explainin and improving educational administration. In C. W. Evers & G. Lakomski （Eds.）, Exploring Eductional Administration：Coherentist Applications and Critical Debates,165-172. Oxford：Pergamon.
Thomas, A. R. （2001）. Donald J. Willower： Appraisal, appreciation, remembrance. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（5）,409-416.
https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005815
William Lowe Boyd. （2001a）A tribute to Donald J,Willower. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（5）,416-418. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230110402512
Willower, D. J. （2001b）. Epistemology, science, and moral practice. Interchange, 32（1）,1-16. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1010913319612
Willower, D. J, & Martin, W. J. （1981）. The managerial behavior of high school principals.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 17（1）,69-90.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X8101700105
Willower, D. J. , & Licata, J. W. （1997）. Values and valuation in the practice of educational administration. United Kingdom：Sage.
Willower, D. J. , & Uline, C. L. （2001）. The alleged demise of science：A critical inquest. Journal of Educational Administration, 39（5）, 455-471.
https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/EUM0000000005813
Willower, D. J. （1993）. Explaining and improving educational administration. Educational Management and Administration, 21（3）,60-153. https://doi.org/10.1177/174114329302100302