@article{oai:chukyo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp:00009517,
 author = {新井, 猛浩 and 平井, 佐紀子 and 家田, 重晴 and 勝亦, 紘一 and ARAI, Takehiro and HIRAI, Sakiko and IEDA, Shigeharu and KATSUMATA, Koichi},
 issue = {2},
 journal = {中京大学体育学論叢, Research journal of physical education Chukyo University},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {In this study a survey was made of the actual conditions in evaluating student apprentices in a teaching practicum of health and physical education as well as some factors affecting their evaluations. This research was carried out to evaluate 701 student apprentices in the teaching practicum of health and physical education in 1994 and 1995. A total of 588 students responded to the questionnaire (response rate of 90.6%) administered annually following the completion of their teaching practicum. The main results are as follows : The obvious difference between the evaluations in Aichi and in other prefectures is that the evaluations in Aichi are relatively stricter. One of the reasons for this regional difference may be attributed to a preferential treatment shown by apprentices' former teachers to their students in their alma mater. For a fair and objective evaluation of student apprentices, the schools to which the students are sent should be allocated by the Board of Education. It is equally advisable that students' leadership qualities be evaluated not by a single teacher but by a number of teachers. Using the evaluations by schools as a resource for judgment, the proper term of effective apprentice practice may be three weeks, instead of two, during which the students are to be in charge of at least 10 and hopefully about 20 class practice sessions., 8, KJ00004196728, 原著論文, Original Article},
 title = {保健体育科の教育実習生に対する実習校の評価に関する研究 : 愛知県と他府県の比較を中心として},
 volume = {39},
 year = {1998},
 yomi = {アライ, タケヒロ and ヒライ, サキコ and イエダ, シゲハル and カツマタ, コウイチ}
}