:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:「扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫」之政策分析
作者:陳世聰
作者(外文):Shih-Tsung Chen
校院名稱:高雄師範大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:陳麗珠
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2007
主題關鍵詞:扶幼計畫政策分析教育成本執行評估學前教育the Head Start Program for Disadvantaged Children in Taiwanpolicy analysiscost of educationimplementation evaluationpreschool education
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(3) 專書(1) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:128
「扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫」之政策分析
摘要
本研究旨在探討「扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫」的政策形成過程與地方執行情形,並從官方觀點與回應觀點對政策的輸出與影響進行評估,進而了解標的對象的家庭教育成本與負擔感受,最終目的在於合理地評估政策成效,進行政策學習,以供相關教育政策制定、執行與評估之參考。為達上述研究目的,本研究採用文件分析法、問卷調查法、訪談調查法等研究方法,研究工具為三份自編的調查問卷,研究地區含蓋花東屏三縣37個原住民鄉鎮市,有效樣本有縣訪談問卷3份、園所調查問卷177份,以及分屬191所國小的小一家長問卷1261份,電話訪談對象有3位園所長與6位家長。本研究量化分析方法包括描述性分析、卡方考驗、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析、多元迴歸分析等。研究之結論如下:
一、「扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫」源自幼托整合政策,議程歷時七年始形成決策;然而決策過程與計畫內容未充分考慮弱勢標的族群的立場與需要,扶弱精神大受折損。
二、扶幼計畫之政策設計缺乏明確的政策目的與周全的因果理論,政策標的對象界定不夠完善,且政策採用後配套準備不及,政策工具之效果大打折扣。
三、扶幼計畫採上而下的政策執行模式,雖然中央執行鏈設計相當完整,然而各地方政府態度與執行能力不同,且有未標準化的介入,產出的服務傳遞系統不同。
四、國幼班的設置在鄉區以公立園所為主,在城區以私立園所為主,試辦園所類型,城區多於鄉區,致使鄉區幼兒的教育選擇機會比城區少。
五、國幼班的試辦,確實提升了師資素質、教學與服務品質,然而引發更激烈的市場競爭,加速幼教生態的改變。
六、花東屏三縣中,屏東縣在公立學前教育機構成長率的績效指標上,未達官方預定成長的15%目標,且試辦園所以公托為主,有違扶幼計畫之精神。
七、花東屏三縣中,花蓮縣在滿五歲弱勢幼兒就學率的績效指標上,未達官方預定的81%目標,尚有四分之一強的標的幼兒未入園,顯示政策訊息傳達仍有未逮。
八、花東屏三縣國幼班教師參與師資專業發展方案之滿意度,可達到官方預期的績效指標,然而均認為政府在研習規劃與巡迴輔導上,仍有待改進。
九、家長為孩子選擇園所主要考量距離、環境與師資等因素。雖然七成八的家長反應孩子享有充分的幼教就學機會,但原住民五歲幼兒就讀公立國幼班高達八成八,可見其選擇機會有限。
十、國幼班家長對幼兒的受教品質可達滿意程度,尤其對孩子受到的關懷接納與良好的親師互動特別感到滿意,但鄉托國幼班的服務品質較受家長質疑。
十一、影響幼生家庭教育成本與家長負擔感受的主因依序是家庭背景、縣市背景、族群、園所立別;私立園所幼生的家庭教育成本,約為公立園所者之二至三倍,家長對此負擔尚可接受。
針對上述研究發現,本研究提出建議如下:
一、中央政策制定方面
(一)政策制定應精準考量政策目的與因果理論,擬定出更適切的政策工。
(二)政策標的對象應明確界定,避免過度覆蓋,分散資源造成浪費。
(三)政策結果不宜單就績效指標加以評估,更應檢視地方傳遞的服務品質。
(四)弱勢幼兒關懷應講求垂直公平的價值、積極主動的服務傳遞,及早介入改善弱勢循環的因素。
二、地方政策執行方面
(一)整合服務傳遞系統,並主動追蹤未被服務的弱勢標的對象。
(二)盡速改善國幼班師資與設備,齊一各類國幼班服務品質
(三)加強國幼班教師專業成長,優先改善園所的安全與衛生。
(四)地方應提升補助款撥款時效,並積極研擬學費補助直接抵扣學費。
三、在未來研究上的省思
(一)實地訪談無力填答之受訪對象,以利蒐集真實的弱勢族群聲音。
(二)扶幼計畫政策分析應包含整個政策過程,納入各階段的執行評估。
(三)針對原住民地區弱勢幼兒的就學機會,應持續關懷進行追蹤研究。
A Policy Analysis of the Head Start Program for Disadvantaged Children in Taiwan
Abstract
The purpose of this study were to explore the policy process of the Head Start Program for Disadvantaged Children in Taiwan, and to evaluate the policy output and policy impact after the implementation of the second phase of this program in school year 2005-2006. This study adopted document analysis, questionnaire survey and interviewing methods to achieve those purposes. Considering the target population of Due to the habitation of aboriginal people in Taiwan, this study chose the three counties with highest percentage of aboriginal people, which are Hualien County, Taitung County, and Pingtung County. The administrators from three county governments and 177 kindergartens, and 1,261 first-graders’ parents from 191 elementary schools were the respondents of the survey questionnaire. In addition, 3 kindergarten directors and 6 parents were interviewed by in-depth questions. The datum were analyzed and presented by descriptive statistics, t-test, chi-square test, one-way ANOVA, and multiple regressions. The conclusions of this study were as follows:
1. It took seven years to develop the Head Start Program for Disadvantaged Children in Taiwan. However, the essence of positive was weakened due to the lack of consideration for the real needs and situation of the target population, which were the five-year-old disadvantaged children and their families.
2. The policy design of the Head Start Program for Disadvantaged Children in Taiwan lacked explicated policy goals, convincing causal theory, definite target population, and hasn’t well prepared for the policy implementation, so the effects of the policy tools discounted.
3. The implementation of the program adapted a ”top-down” approach, and it also had an intact implementation chain. Nevertheless, the implementing abilities of the local governments were different, and the interventions unstandardized, so there were differences among the service system of the three counties.
4. The majority of the subsidized classes in rural areas were executed mostly in public-funded kindergartens, and in private-funded kindergartens in the urban areas. The preschoolers’ parents in the urban areas had more choices than the parents in rural areas when deciding the preschool program for their children.
5. This program raised the quality of preschool education, but it also provoked the competition of the preschool education market, accelerated the ecology of preschool education.
6. The first official performance indicator referred to increase percentage of public-funded preschool institutions. Among the three counties of this study, Pingtung County was the only one, which fell below 15%, the program target. It was also found that the service systems in Pingtung were mainly provided by public nursery preschools that departed from the spirits of the program.
7. The second official performance indicator referred to increase the enrollment for five-year-old children. Among the three counties of this study, Hualien County was the only one, which fell below 81%, the program target. Apparently, there existed some problems in the process of information delivering.
8. The third official performance indicator referred to the preschool teachers’ satisfaction on their participation of professional development activities. All the three counties of this study had reached the target. However, there were rooms for improvement in terms of the curriculum design for teacher professional development, and the in-site guidance from county government.
9. The main considered factors of parents when choosing preschools were: distance, environment, and teacher quality. Although 78% parents responded there were ample choices for preschool education, the majority of the 5-year-old aboriginal children were confined in public kindergarten or nursery preschool, indicating the choice within limits.
10. The majority of parents were satisfied with the quality of the preschool programs, especially teachers’ caring attitude and the warming interaction with them. Comparatively, the parents were dissatisfied with the quality of nursery schools set up by the township agent level.
11. The main factors of the costs of preschool education and the parents’ perception of economic burden were: family socioeconomic status, county, ethnic background, and school controlled. Although the costs of private preschools tripled the public preschools, most parents reported the burden were acceptable.
Based on the above conclusions, the following suggestions were proposed for policy making, policy implementation and further research:
1. In the aspect of policy making in the central government:(1) To consider thoroughly when making policy design. (2) To define the target population of the policy, in order to avoid resource diversion. (3) To evaluate policy impact by the quality of service systems delivered by the local government. (4) To intervene with positive treatments in the early years of disadvantaged children.
2. In the aspect of policy implementation in the local government: (1) To integrate services system and track the target children not yet enrolled in the preschool program. (2) To improve the quality of teachers and facilities in the preschool institutions, and to equalize the quality of services of all kinds of preschool programs. (3) To enhance the teacher professional development and to improve the security and sanitation of the schoolyard in the preschool institution. (4) To promote the timeliness of funds appropriated.
3. In the aspect of further research: (1) To assemble the real voice of the disadvantaged population. (2) To evaluate all the stages of implementation. (3) To conduct follow-up on the educational opportunity of the disadvantaged children enrolled in preschool program in the aboriginal area.
中文參考書目
中央銀行 (2005)。認識通貨膨脹2005/10/17。取自 http://www.ba.ncku.edu.tw /teacher/yong/z/ web&term/INFLATION.html
中華民國統計資訊網 (2006)。全國統計資料。2006/7/17。取自 http:// www .stat. gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem =15262&CtNode=3596。
內政部 (2005)。內政部統計年報。2005/12/17。取自 http://sowf.moi.gov.tw /stat/year/list.ht。
內政部兒童局 (2006)。兒童福利數據。2006/7/17。取自 http:// www. cbi. gov.tw /text_version。
內政部社會司 (2006)。社會救助。2006/7/17。取自http://sowf.moi. gov. tw/10/new 10.htm。
內政部統計處 (2006)。內政部統計通報。內政部統計處。
內政部統計資訊網 (2006)。重要參考指標。2006/7/17。取自http://www. m oi .gov.tw/stat/。
王文科 (1998)。教育研究法(四版)。台北:五南。new window
王淑英、孫嫚薇 (2003)。托育照顧政策中的國家角色。國家政策季刊,2(4),147-174。
王淑英、張盈堃 (2000)。多元文化與托育服務:政體中心觀點的探討。輯於蕭新煌、林國明主編,台灣的社會福利運動(頁309-340)。台北:巨流。new window
王舒芸(2003)。低生育率 對政策的不信任票。2003/08/26,取自http://gb.udn.com/ b5/fe1.udn.com/PE2004/comment/20031001438723564/20031001439261056.shtml
王業立、郭應哲、林佳龍(譯) (1999)。M. L. Herbert原著。政治學中爭辯的議題(Political issues debated : an introduction to politics)。台北:韋伯。
台灣立報 (2003)。當大學變成貴族俱樂部。2005/04/21,取自http://iwebs.url. com.tw /main/html/lipo/920.shtml
全國幼教資訊網 (2006a)。扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫。2006/7/12。取自http://140.126.34.248。
全國幼教資訊網 (2006b)。園所合格教師分組統計表。2006/7/12。取自http://140 .126.34.248/policy/950609_.pdf。
全國幼教資訊網 (2006c)。幼兒教育暨照顧法(草案)立法總說明。2006/5/12。取自http://140.126.34.248/policy/950609_.pdf。
行政院 (2006)。發放幼兒教育券實施方案 。2006/7/28。取自http://163.27.240.80/ ~u08/TEST/kids_law/901212-2.htm。
行政院主計處 (2003)。我國性別統計及婦女生活地位之國際比較研究。2006/7/28。取自http://www.stat.gov.tw/public/Data/411711334571.pdf。
行政院主計處 (2007)。94年人力資源調查統計 - 年報。2007/5/15。取自http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=15389&ctNode=3102
行政院研究發展考核委員會 (1993)。強化政策執行能力之理論建構。台北︰行政院研究發展考核委員會。
行政院原住民族資訊網 (2006)。統計資料。2006/7/17。取自http:// www.apc.gov.tw/official/govinfo/number/number3.aspx。
行政院婦女權益促進委員會(2007)。婦女勞動政策。2007/5/15。取自http: //cwrp.moi.gov.tw/WRPCMain/Project_Show.asp?Project_ID=3。
余漢儀(2004)。政府績效評估。輯於行政院研究發展考核委員會編,政府績效評估(頁427-438)。台北:行政院研考會。
吳老德 (2000)。正義理論與福利國家。台北:五南。
吳定 (1995)。公共行政論叢。台北:天一。
吳定 (2005)。公共政策辭典(三版)。台北:五南。
吳忠吉(2002)。弱勢族群的意義與托育。2006/5/24。取自http://www. npf. org.tw/PUBLICATION/SS/091/SS-C-091-120.htm.
吳政達 (2006)。高級中等學校教育發展指標系統之研究。研習資訊,23(1),13-18。
吳財順 (2005a)。九年一貫與芬蘭類似。2006/7/11。取自http://www.mdn -kids.com/info/news/。
吳財順 (2005b)。經費短缺 幼托整合地方哭窮。2006/7/1。取自http://www.mdn -kids.com/info/news/。
呂亞力等 (1989)。社會科學概論。台北:東華。
李允傑、丘昌泰 (2003)。政策執行與評估。台北:元照。
李明寰(譯)(2002)。N. D. William著。公共政策分析(Public policy analysis : An introduction)。台北:時英出版社。
李欽湧 (1994)。社會政策分析。台北:巨流。
汪秋一 (1999,4月)。原住民幼兒教育問題與對策。輯於原住民文化與幼兒教育研會實錄(頁93-108),台東縣。
周俊良等 (2006)。幼兒特殊教育導論。台北:偉華。
林水波、張世賢 (1984)。公共政策。台北:五南。
林水波等著譯 (1984)。政策分析評論。台北:五南。
林佩蓉 (2005)。從政策制度層面看幼兒教育權的問題與保障。2006/5/25。取自http://www.hre.edu.tw/report/epaper/no24/topic1_1.htm。
林佩蓉、陳淑琦 (2003)。幼兒教育。台北:國立空中大學。
林佩蓉、馮燕 (1999)。七歲以下幼兒就讀學前機構比例之調查研究。教育部委託專案計畫成果報告。
林義男編譯 (1991)。社會學詞彙。台北:巨流。
林嘉誠 (2004)。行政機關績效評估制度的建置與回顧。輯於行政院研究發展考核委員會編,政府績效評估 (頁3-20)。台北:行政院研考會。
林鍾沂、柯義龍、陳志瑋(譯) (2003)。H. Michael原著。現代國家的政策過程(The Policy process in the modern state)。台北:韋伯。
花蓮縣政府教育局全球資訊網 (2006)。花蓮縣94學年度教育部補助本縣試辦國幼班開辦費核撥一覽表。2006/5/5。取自http:// 210.240.53.3 /2005/。
花蓮縣政府教育局全球資訊網(2006)。花蓮縣原住民地區94學年度試辦國民教育幼兒班申請設班作業流程表。2006/5/5。取自http:// 210.240.53.3 /2005/。
邱吉鶴、黃宏光 (2004)。企業績效評估實務之探討。輯於行政院研究發展考核委員會編,政府績效評估(頁23-60)。台北:行政院研考會。
邱志鵬 (2006)。「幼兒教育暨照顧」的精神與內涵。2006/5/12。取自http: //www.tmue.edu.tw/~kid/seminar/92chiu_seminar 3.pdf。
邱瓊平 (2006)。貧窮的小孩念不起私立幼稚園,教改團體批幼兒券成效不彰。2006/5/5。取自http://news.yam.com/ettoday/garden/200604/2006042 4547323.html。
柯三吉 (1985)。公共政策評估之理論與方法。輯於魏鏞等著,政策評估的理論與實務(頁17-60)。行政院研究發展考核委員會。
洪福財 (2000)。台灣地區幼兒教育歷史發展與未來義務化下之探討。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文,未出版,台北市。
孫志麟 (2000)。國民教育指標體系建構之研究。國立臺北師範學院學報,13,121-148。new window
翁麗芳 (2004)。當代日本的幼托政策:少子化時代的幼兒托育與教育。台北:心理。
國民黨 (2006)。國民黨政策綱領。2006/9/18。取自http://www.kmt.org.tw /About Us/Aboutus-3-1.html
張孝筠 (2007,6月)。從多元觀點建構國民教育幼兒班教學訪視及輔導工作模式。專題演講於當主流遇上非主流:偏遠地區學前教育研討會,屏東縣。
教育部 (2003)。全國教育發展會議。2006/7/12。取自http://www.edu.tw/EDU_ WEB/EDU_MGT/SECRETARY/EDU8354001/2003/discuss/2003index.htm
教育部 (2005)。普及幼稚教育。2005/12/12。http://www.edu.tw /EDU_WEB /EDU _MGT /E0001/EDUION001/menu03/sub02/content_020101/03020101
教育部 (2006a)。即時新聞:對弱勢幼兒教育,教育部早有優惠措施。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/EJE/index.htm。
教育部 (2006b)。教育部「扶幼計畫」具體成果。2006/9/14。取自http:// engl -ish.moe.gov.tw/public/attachment/662911402371.doc。
教育部 (2006c)。教育指標。2006/7/12。取自http:// www.edu.tw / document/11/0,2340, en_2649_34515 _35321099_1_1_1_1,00.html。
教育部 (2006d)。扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫。2006/11/2。取自http://140.111.1.192/04_2.doc
教育部 (2006e)。扶持五歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫補助作業要點。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/EJE/EDU5147002/LAW/95/3-4.doc
教育部 (2006f)。教育部補助直轄市縣(市)政府增設幼稚園班作業要點。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/EJE/EDU5147002 /LAW/95/3-3.doc
教育部 (2006g)。教育部93年度施政績效報告(國幼)。2006/5/5。取自http:// www .edu.tw/EDU_WEB/ EDU_M GT/EJE/EDU5147002 /LAW/95/3-3.doc
教育部 (2006h)。政令宣導:中華民國九十三年四月離島地區國民教育幼兒班實施計畫。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/ EDU_M GT/EJE/EDU51 47002 /LAW/95/3-3.doc
教育部 (2007)。教育部94年度施政績效報告。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/ edu_web/edu_mgt/secretary/edu3612001/plan/94p/94p01.htm)。
教育部即時新聞 (2005a)。原住民54個鄉鎮市國民教育幼兒班將於94學年正式起跑。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/EJE/index.htm。
教育部即時新聞 (2005b)。國民教育幼兒班學費補助及相關幼教補助措施。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/EJE/index.htm。
教育部即時新聞 (2005c)。幼托整合後幼兒園之行政主管機關確立為教育部門。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/EJE/index.htm。
教育部即時新聞 (2005d)。中低收入家庭幼童托教補助10月30日截止申請。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/EJE/index.htm。
教育部即時新聞 (2005e)。國幼班開學典禮及補助原住民地區液晶電視教學設備受贈儀式教師節熱鬧登場。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/ web/ EJE/index.htm。
教育部即時新聞 (2006a)。對弱勢幼兒教育,教育部早有優惠措施。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/EJE/index.htm。
教育部即時新聞 (2006b)。扶持5歲弱勢幼兒及早教育計畫第3階段弱勢幼兒優先就讀公立幼稚園前置作業已經啟動。2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/web/ EJE/index.htm。
教育部電子公告 (2005)。94學年度試辦國幼班清冊總表(摘要版)。 2006/5/5。取自http://www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/Web/publicFun/dynamic_default.php.
郭勝峰 (2000)。我國幼托整合政策可行性之研究。國立政治大學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
陳世聰 (2006,11月)。扶幼計畫執行評估指標與結果分析:以花蓮縣為分析實例。輯於2006年嘉義大學幼兒教育教學卓越與研究前瞻學術研討會論文集(頁169-189),嘉義縣。
陳枝烈 (1999,4月)。原住民地區學前教育之現況與展望。輯於原住民文化與幼兒教育研會實錄(頁35-52),台東縣。
陳恆鈞、蔣麗君、韓家瑩、侯淑嫣、周劭彥等(譯)(2004)。最新政策分析 : 概念與實踐 (Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice)。台北:韋伯。
陳淑芳 (1999,4月)。他國經驗的啟示¾¾談融合原住民文化的教育課程。輯於原住民文化與幼兒教育研會實錄(頁71-92),台東縣。
陳惠珍 (2007,6月)。代理教師制度對國幼班輔導機制的影響探討。輯於當主流遇上非主流:偏遠地區學前教育研討會論文集(頁5-25),屏東縣。
陳漢強 (2006)。台灣幼兒教育券之分析研究。2006/7/28 。取自http://www. age 06 .com/Age06Public/SPEAuditing/PostPreview.aspx?view&ContentID=234745.
陳慧津 (2004)。幼托整合方案下幼兒園評鑑指標建構之研究。國立暨南國際大學教育政策與行政研究所碩士論文,未出版,南投縣。
陳麗珠、陳世聰、莊錦源、鄭建良、葉宗文、許仲毅 (2006)。我國幼稚教育學生教育成本資料建立與分析之研究。教育部委託專案計畫成果報告。
游光菁 (2006)。近年來英國幼教改革的兩大措施。2006/6/8。取自http:// www.pep .com.cn/ 200406/ca440986.htm。
湯絢章(譯) (1981)。Edith Stokey,& Richard Zeckhauser原著。政策分析初階 (Primer for policy analysis)。台北市 : 國立編譯館。
童春發 (1999,4月)。文化與學習¾¾文化對於原住民幼兒學習和發展的影響。輯於原住民文化與幼兒教育研會實錄(頁1-12),台東縣。
馮燕 (1997)。托育服務:生態觀點的分析(修訂版)。台北:巨流。new window
黃俊龍(譯) (2003)。Keith Faulks著。公民身份(Citizenship)。台北:巨流。
黃崇梅(譯) (2001)。David C. Hawkes彙編。原住民族與政府責任 : 探討聯邦政府與省政府的角色(Aboriginal peoples and government responsibility : Exploring federal and provincial roles)。台北 : 行政院原住民委員會。
楊國賜、蔡榮貴(2002)。全國幼兒教育普查計畫。教育部委託專案計畫成果報告。
經濟部投資業務處 (2007)。全球台商服務網:台灣競爭優勢。2007/5/25。取自http://twbusiness.nat.gov.tw/asp/superior6.asp
葉俊榮 (2003)。「永續臺灣發展指標系統」在政策評估中的應用。永續台灣簡訊,5(3) ,1-53。
詹中原 (2003)。新公共政策—史、哲學、全球化。台北︰華泰。
詹火生、林慧芬 (2003)。貧富差距下社會福利政策省思。2005/9/18。取自http: //www.npf.org.tw/PUBLICATION/SS/092/SS-C-092-114.htm
靳建國(譯) (1991)。Bertrand Russell 原著。教育論 (Education and the good life)。台北:遠流。
趙善如(譯) (1999)。Lawrence L.Martin & Peter M.Kettner原著。社會服務方案績效的評量:方法與技術(Measuring the Performance of Human Service Programs) 。台北:亞太。
劉一新(譯) (2000)。加拿大森林永續經營之準則與指標(Criterria and indicators of sustainable forest management in Canada)。台北:行政院農委會林試所。
劉麗貞 (2000)。幼兒教育政策評估-以幼兒教育券及幼托整合為研究焦點。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,台中市。new window
歐滄和、李茂能(1985)。社會科學研究法辭典。高雄:復文。
蔡慧敏 (2003)。協助地方永續發展為目標的指標研究工作。永續台灣簡訊,5(3)。54-87。
蔡曉玲 (2004)。「反對幼兒教育券、推動幼托公共化」的請願活動紀實。2007/5/15。取自http://youth.ngo.org.tw/Youth-comment/Youth-comment-20040521.htmnew window
鄭青青、宋明君 (2007)。好學校的條件--家長評鑑幼兒園觀點之初探研究。2007/03/ 25。取自http://www.tecr.pu.edu.tw/wteacher/wt/wt_1.pdf
鄭燕祥 (2001)。學校效能及校本管理發展的機制。台北:心理。new window
鄭麗嬌 (1995)。美國各州「失依兒童家庭補助」(AFDC)社會福利方案之評估研究。輯於鄭麗嬌主編,中西社會福利政策與制度(頁307-339)。台北:行政院研考會。new window
盧美貴、謝美慧 (2002)。幼兒教育券 : 理論與實踐。台北:師大書苑。new window
親民黨 (2006)。國親聯盟-教育政策白皮書。2006/9/18。取自http://www.pfp. or g .tw/policy/ policy_detail.php?id=18&p=65
謝明瑞 (2003)。痛苦指數的省思。2006/9/18。取自http://www.npf.org.tw/ PUBL -ICATION /FM/093/FM-C-093-136.htm
簡淑真 (1999)。原住民幼兒教育再思:渥德福教育系統的啟示。輯於原住民文化與幼兒教育研會實錄(頁13-34),1999.04.24-25。台東師範學院。
簡楚瑛 (2003)。幼兒教育與保育之行政與政策¾¾歐美澳篇。台北;五南。new window
簡楚瑛、廖鳳瑞、林佩蓉、林麗卿 (1995)。當前幼兒教育的問題與因應之道。2006/6/27。取自http://www.sinica.edu.tw/info/edu-reform/farea8/j14/32.html
羅清俊、陳志瑋(譯) (1999)。T. R. Dye原著。公共政策新論(Understanding public policy)。。台北:韋伯。
譚光鼎 (1998)。原住民教育研究。台北:五南。new window









英文參考書目
Abbott-Shim, M., Lambert, R., & McCarty, F.(2000). Structural model of Head Start classroom quality. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(1), 115–134.
American Federation of Teachers. (2002). At the starting line: Early childhood educat-ion programs in the 50 states. Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://www.acei.org /wgu ides.htm
Anderson, D. R., Sweeney, D. J., & Williams, T. A. (2003). An introduction to manage-ment science: Quantitative approaches to decision making(10th ed). New York. : South-Western college Pub.
Arnold, D. h., & Doctoroff, G. L.(2003). The early education of socioeconomically disadvantaged children. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 2003, 54, 517–45.
Bardach, E. (2005). A practical guide for policy analysis: The Eightfold path to more effective problem solving(2nd ed.). Washington: CQ Press.
Barnes, H. V., Guevara, M. D., Garcia, C., Levin, M., & Connell, D. B. (2006). How do head start staff characteristics relate to parent involvement and satisfaction? Retrieved October 26, 2006, from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/hs/ faces/ pres _papers/staff_characteristics/staff_character.pdf
Barnett, P., & David W. (1999). Evaluating early intervention: Accountability methods for service delivery innovations. Journal of Special Education, 33(3), 177-188.
Barnett, W. S. (1993). New directions for early childhood care and education policy. In Fuhrman, S. H. (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy : Improving the system(pp. 180-219). San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Barnett, W. S. (1998). Long-term cognitive and academic effects of early childhood education on children in poverty. Preventive Medicine, 27, 204–207.
Barry, N. P. (1999). Welfare(2nd ed). Milton Keynes : Open University Press.
Basile, K. C., & Henry, G. (1996). Quality and effectiveness of pre-kindergarten program-ms in georgia: Parental perspectives. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED403016).
Bellisimo, Y., Sacks, C. H., & Mergendoller, J. R. (1995). Changes over time in kinder- garten holding out: Parent and school contexts. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10, 205-222.
Berman, P.(1978). The study of macro- and micro-implementation. Public policy, 26(2), 157-184.
Berns, R. M. (1997). Child, family, school, community: Socialization and support. Fort Worth : Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
Birkland, T. A. (2005). An introduction to the:Policy process(2nd ed ). New York:M. E. Sharpe.
Birman, B. F. (2000). Education policy analysis and program evaluation shifting methods politics and temperament. Professional practice, 299, 300-304.
Bobrow, D. B., & Dryzek, J. S. (1987). Policy analysis by design. Pittsburgh, PA.: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Bonnet, G.. (2004). Evaluation of education in the European Union: Policy and methodology. Assessment in Education, 2004, 11(2), 179-191.
Brian, B. (1993). Aboriginal children: Back to origins. Family Matters, 35, 7-12.
Briar-Lawson, K., & Drews, J. (2000). Child and family welfare policies and services: Current issues and historical antecedents. In Midgley, J, Tracy, M. B., & Livermore, M. (Eds.), The handbook of social policy(pp. 157-174). Thousand Oak, California: Sage.
Brinkerhoff, D. W. (Ed.). (1997). Policy analysis concepts and methods : An institutional and implementation focus . Greenwich, CT. : JAI Press.
Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Intervention and policy as change agents for young children. In Vincent, C. (Ed.), Social justice, education, and identity. London : Routledge.
Butler,B. (1993). Aboriginal children: Back to origins. Retrieved October 10, 2006, from http://www.aifs.gov.au /institute/pubs/fm1/fm35bb.html.
Campbell, F. A. & Ramey, C. T. (1994). Effects of early intervention on intellectual and academic achievement: A follow-up study of children from low-income families. Child Development, 65(2), 684-698.
Cassidy, D. J., Buel, M. J. l, Pugh-Hoese, S., & Russell, S. (1995). The effect of education on child care teachers’ beliefs and class quality: Year one evaluation of the teacher early childhood associate degree scholarship program. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10, 171-183.
Cassidy, D. J., Hestenes, L. L., Hegde, A., Hestenes, S., & Mims, S. (2005). Measurement of quality in preschool child care classrooms: An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the early childhood environment rating scale-revised. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,, 20(3), 345-360.
Cassidy, D. J., Hestenes, L. L., Hegde, A., Hestenes, S.,& Mims, S. (2005). Measure- ment of quality in preschool child care classrooms: An exploratory and confirma- tory factor analysis of the early childhood environment rating scale-revised. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20, 345–360.
Chambers, D. E. (2000). Social policy and social progams: A method for the practical public policy analyst(3rd ed). Boston :Allyn and Bacon.
Charles, J. F. (1987). Biases in public policy impelmentation evaluation. Policy studies review, 7(1), 128-141.
Chase-Lansdale, P. L., Kiernan, K., & Friedman, R. J. (Eds.). (2004). Human development across lives and generations : The potential for change. New York : Cambridge University Press
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2002a). Early childhood care? Development? Education? UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2002 March, N° 1.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2002b). Planning for access: Develop a data system first. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2002 April, N° 2.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2002c). Integrating early childhood into education: The case of Sweden . UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2002 May, N° 3.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2002d). Women, work, and early childhood: The nexus in developed and developing countries (Ⅰ). UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2002 June, N° 4.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2002e). Women, work, and early childhood: The nexus in developed and developing countries(Ⅱ). UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2002 July-August, N° 5.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2004a). Access, public investment, and equity in ECCE: The nexus in nine high-population countries. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2004 January, N° 19.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2004b). “Encourage private sector”: pre-school education reform in moroccoo . UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2004 January, N° 20.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2004c). Enrolment gaps in pre-primary education: The impact of a compulsory attendance policy. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2004 January, N° 21.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2005). Supporting the poorest: Vietnam’s early childhood policy. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2005 November-December, N° 29.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2006a). Pre-primary education: The valid investment option for EFA. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2006 March-April, N° 31.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2006b). Integration of care and education:the challenge in Brazil. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2006 May, N° 32.
Choi, Soo-Hyang. (2006c). Ensuring equitable access to preschool education: Kazakh-stan’s experience. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2006 July – August, N° 33.
Choo, K. K. (2004). Inter-ministerial collaboration in early childhood training in Sin-gapore. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2004 June, N° 24
Choo, K. K.(2003). Lifelong learning and social policy for early childhood. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2003 March, N° 11.
Cizek, G. J. (1999). Handbook of educational policy. London : Academic.
Cohen, B., Wallace, J., Moss, P., & Petrie, P. (2003). Re-forming education and care in England, Scotland and Sweden. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2003 April, N° 12.
Committee for economic development. (2002). Preschool for all investing in a productive and just society. New York: Author.
Coplin, W. D., & O,Leary, M. K. (1981). Basic policy studies skills(3rd ed). Croton-on- Hudson, NY: Policy Studies Associates.
Dahlberg, G., & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics in early childhood education. London : Routledge Falmer.
Danziger, S. K., & Danziger, S. (1995). Child poverty, public policies and welfare reform. Children and Youth Services Review, 17(1-2), 1-10.
DeCicca, P. (2007). Does full-day kindergarten matter? Evidence from the first two years of schooling. Economics of Education Review, 26, 67–82.
deHaven-Smith, L. (1988). Philosophical critiques of policy analysis: Lindblom, Habermas, and the Great Society. Gainesville :University of Florida Press.
deHaven-Smith, L.(1988). Philosophical critiques of policy analysis: Lindblom, Habermas, and the Great Society. Gainesville :University of Florida Press.
Doherty, G., Forer, B., Lero, D. S., Goelman, H., & LaGrange, A. (2006). Predictors of quality in family child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 296–312.
Dudley, G., Parsons. W., Radaelli, C. M., & Sabatier, P. (2000). Symposium: Theories of the policy process. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(1), 122-140.
Duncan, MacRac, Jr. (1985). Poilcy indicators:Links between social science and public debate. Chapel Hill and London: The University of North Carolina Press.
Dunn, W. N. (1994). Public policy analysis : An introduction (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ. : Prentice Hal.
Dunn, W. N. (2004). Public policy analysis : An introduction (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ. : Prentice Hall.
Dye, T. R. (2002). Understanding public policy(10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Prentice Hall.
Education Countson edCentre. (2005). Indicator Framework. Retrieved August 26, 2006, from http://educationcounts.edcentre.govt.nz/metadata/indicator-framework .html.
Ellsworth, J., & Ames, L. J. (1998). Critical perspectives on proiect Head Start: revisioning the hope and challenge. New York: State University Of New York Press.
Fantuzzo, J., Perry, M. A., & Childs, S. (2006). Parent Satisfaction with educational experiences scale: A multivariate examination of parent satisfaction with early childhood education programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly ,21, 142–152.
Fitz-Gibbon, C. T., & Morris, L. L. (1987). How to design a program evaluation. Newbury Park, CA. : Sage Publications.
Foster, E. M., & Furstenberg, F. F. Jr. (1999). The most disadvantaged children: Trends over time. Social Service Review, 73 ( 4), 560-578.
Fowler, F. C. (2000). Policy studies for educational leaders:An introduction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.:Prentice-Hall.
Fuller, B., Holloway, S. D., & Bozzi, L. (1998). Evaluating child care and preschools. advancing the interests of government, teachers, or parents? In Spodek, B. & Saracho, O. N. (Eds.), Issues in early childhood educational assessment and evaluation(pp. 7-27). New York : Teachers College Press.
Fuller, B., Kagan, S. L., Loeb, S., & Chang, Y. W. (2004). Child care quality: Centers and home settings that serve poor families. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 505–527.
Gass, S. I. (1983). Decision-aiding models: Validation, assessment, and related issues for policy analysis. Operations Research, Jul/Aug83, 31 (4), 603-631.
Gay, L.R., & Airasian, P. (2000). Educational research : competencies for analysis and application. Upper Saddle River, NJ. : Merrill.
Goggin, M. L., Bowman, A. O’M, Lester, L. P., O’Toole, L. J. Jr. (1990). Implementation theory and practice: Toward a third generation. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Foresman/Little, Brown Higher Education : HarperCollins.
Greenstein, F. I., & Polsby, N. W. (Ed.). (1975). Handbook of political science. Boston.: Addison-Wesley.
Greenstein, F. I.,& Polsby, N. W. (1985). Cumulative index, handbook of political science. Boston.: Addison-Wesley.
Greenwood, M. (2001). An overview of the development of aboriginal early childhood services in Canada. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED456954).
Greenwood, M., & Shawana, P. (2002). Appropriateness of outcome-based framework for aboriginal child care. Human resources development Canada, Ottawa. Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://www.indianeduresearch.net/ greenwood 1.pdf.
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA. : Sage Publications.
Guba, E. G. (1984). The impact of various definitions of policy on the nature and outcomes of policy analysis. Retrieved October 12, 2006, from http://search. epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&an= ED242778& lang=zh-tw.
Head Start Bureau. (2004). Report on Head Start monitoring: fiscal year 2004. Retrieved December 10, 2006, from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb /about/index. htm#history
Heck, R. H. (2004). Studying educational and social policy: Theoretical concepts and research methods. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Heymann, J. (2002). Social transformations and their implications for the global demand for ECCE. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2002 November-December, N° 8.
Heymann, J. (2003). Role of early childhood care and education in ensuring equal opportunity. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2003 November-December, N° 18.
Hill, M. J. (1999)。The policy process in the modern state( 3rd ed). New York : Prentice Hall.
Hogwood, B. A, & Gunn, L. A. (l981). The policy orientation. Univeraity of Strathclyde: Centre for the Study of Public Policy.
Hoon, S. S.(1994). quality of kindergarten education in Singapore: Parents’ views and expectations. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 376 968).
Hoult, T. F. (1975). Social justice and its enemies:a normative approach to social problems. Cambridge: Schenkman.
House, P. W., & Shull, R. D. (1991). The practice of policy analysis : forty years of art & technology. Washington, D.C. :Compass Press.
Howlett, M. & Ramesh, M. (2003). Studying Public Policy:Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems. Oxford University Press.
Institute of Education Sciences. (2006). National assessment of Title I interim report:Executive summary. U.S. Department of Education.
Jacobson, L. (2005). Universal preschool seen as money saver . Retrieved September 15, 2006, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/06/28/42preschool _web .h25.html? levelId=1000.
Janet, F. (1984). Education as socail policy. London ; New York : Longman.
Jonathan, B. (2002). Child poverty and child outcomes. Children & Society,16, 131–140.
Joseph S. Wholey, Harry P. Hatry, & Kathryn E. Newcomer. (Eds.). (2004). Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass.
Kagan, S. L., & Meuman, M. J. (2000).Early care and education: Current issues and future strategies. In Shonkoff J. P., & Meisels S J. (Eds), Handbook of early childhood intervention(2nd )(pp. 339-360). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
Karoly, L., & Bigelow, J. H. (2005). The economics of investing in universal preschool education in California. RAND Corporatio.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundations of behavior research.(2nd ed). New York : Rinehart and Winston.
King, J. A., Morris, L. L., & Fitz~Gibbon, C. T. (1987). How to assess program implementation. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
King, R. A. (2003). School finance : Achieving high standards with equity and efficiency. Boston. : Allyn and Bacon.
Konzal, J. L. (2001). Collaborative inquiry: A means of creating a learning community. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16, 95–115.
Levine, C., Peters, B. G., & Thompson, F. J. (1990). Public administration: Challenges, choices, consequences. Illinois: Scott, Foresman and I and Company.
Li-Grining, C. P.,& Coley, R. L. (2006). Child care experiences in low-income communities: Developmental quality and maternal views. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21 (2006), 125–141.
Lippman, L. (2005). Indicators and indices of child well-being: A Brief History. Baltimore, MD.:The Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Love, A. (2004). Implementation evaluation. In Joseph S. Wholey, Harry, P. Hatry, & Kathryn E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation(pp. 63-97). San Francisco:Jessey-Bass.
Mainguet, C., & Baye, A. (2006). Defining a framework of indicators to measure the social outcomes of learning. Retrieved September 15, 2006, from http://www. oecd.org / dataoecd /15/20/37425733.pdf
McDonnell, L. M., & Elmore, R. F. (1987). Getting the job done:Alternative policy instruments. Eductaional Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 133-152.
McLaughlin, J. A., & Jordan, G. B. (2004). Using logic models. In Joseph S. Wholey, Harry, P. Hatry, & Kathryn E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation(pp. 7-31). San Francisco:Jessey-Bass..
Meade, A., & Podmore, V. N. (2004). Funding strategies for equitable access to early childhood education: The case of New Zealand. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2004 April, N° 22.
Michael, H. (2005). The public policy process(4th ed.) . New York : Pearson Longman.
Miedel. W. T., & Reynolds, A. J. (1999). Parent Involvement in Early Intervention for Disadvantaged Children: Does It Matter? Journal of School Psychology, 37(4), 379–402.
Miller, D. C. (1991). Handbook of research design and social measureme(5th ed.).. Newbury Park, CA.: Sage Publications.
Miller, D. C., & Salkind, N. J. (2002). Handbook of research design and social measureme(6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage Publications.
Mitchell, D. E. (1984). Educational policy analysis: The state of the art. Educational Administration Quarterly, 20(3), 129-160.
Moe, T. M. (2001). Schools, vouchers, and the American public. Washington, D.C. : Brookings Institution Press.
Morrison, G. S. (1991). Early childhood education today. New York : MacMillan Pub.
Moss, P. (2003). Re-forming the education and care workforce in England, Scotland and Sweden. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2003 May, N° 13.
Moss, P. (2004). The early childhood workforce in ‘developed’ countries: Basic structures and education. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2005 November-December, N° 28.
NACCRRA (2006). Criteria for best practices : In the delivery of consumer education and referral(2nd ed.). Retrieved October 15, 2006, from http://www. Naccrr a.org/docs/ qap/qap_ criteria-new.pdf
Nachmias, D. (1979). Public policy evaluation: Approaches and methods. New York:St. Martin’s Press.
NAEYC (2006). A call for excellence in early childhood education. Retrieved May 21, 2006, from http://www.naeyc.org/
Nagel, S. (1990). Trends in policy analysis. Policy Studies Journa, 18( 3), 802-807.
Noddings, Nel (1995). Philosophy of education. Boulder, CO. : Westview Press.
Odden, A. R. (Ed.). (1991). Education policy implementation. Albany, NY. : State University of New York Press.
OECD (2001). Policy challenges for early childhood education and care provision across OECD countries. Stockholm conference report:Starting Strong: Early childhood education and care, June 13th-15th, 2001.
OECD (2006a). Framework for the development of OECD education indicators. Retrieved August 26, 2006, from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/12/23/2498 647.pdf.
OECD (2006b). Education at a glance 2005. Retrieved May 21, 2006, from http:// www. oecd.org/edu/ eag2005.
OECD Directorate for Education (2006). Starting strong early childhood education and care policy. Retrieved March 25, 2006, from http://www.oecd.org/document /63/0, 3343, en_2649_34511_37416703_1_1_1_1,00.html
Office of Head Start (2006). About Head Start. Retrieved September 15, 2006, from http:// www. acf.hhs .gov/programs/hsb/about/index. htm#history
Olmsted, P. P. (2002). Data collection and system monitoring in early childhood programs. UNESCO, Early Childhood and Family Policy Series n°5, November, 2002.
Olsen, D. A. (1999). Universal preschool is no golden ticket: Why government should not enter the preschool business. Retrieved September 10, 2006, from http:// www . cato.org/pubs /pas/pa333.pdf
Parsons, D. W. (1995). Public policy : An introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Brookfield, Vt. : Edward Elgar Pub.
Patton, C. V. (1986). Basic methods of policy analysis and planning. New Jersey:Prentice-Hall.
Piotrkowski, C. S., Botsko, M., & Matthews, E.(2000). Parents’ and teachers’ beliefs about children’s school readiness in a high-need community. Early Child- hood Research Quarterly, 15(4), 537–558
Poister, T. H. (1978). Public program analysis : Applied research methods. Baltimore : University Park Press.
Poister, T. H. (2004). Performance monitoring. In Joseph S. Wholey, Harry, P. Hatry, & Kathryn E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation(pp.98-125). San Francisco: Jessey-Bass.
Posavac, E. J., & Carey, R. G. (1985). Program evaluation : Methods and case studies. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Raoa, P., Koong, M., Kwong, M., & Wong, M. (2003). Predictors of preschool process quality in a Chinese context. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 331–350.
Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation : A systematic approach(7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
Rossi, P., & Freeman, H. (1985). Evaluation: A systematic approach (3rd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Sabatier, P. A. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research. Journal of Public Policy, 6 (Jan), 21-48.
Sabatier, P. A. (2005). Top-down and botton-up approaches to implementation. In Stern, E. (Ed.), Evaluation research methods(Ⅳ)(pp. 380-408). London : SAGE.
Sabatier, P. A. (Ed.). (1999). Theories of the policy process. Boulder, CO.: West- view Press.
Shaul, M. S. (2000). Preschool education: Federal investment for low-income children significant but effectiveness unclear: T-HEHS-00-83. GAO Reports; 4/11/2000, 1-13.
Spodek, B., Saracho, O. N., & Davis, M. D. (1991). Fondations of early childhood Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.:Prentice Hall.
Stern, E. (Ed.). (2005). Evaluation research methods(I) . London : SAGE.
Stokey, E., & Zeckhauser, R. (1978). A primer for policy analysis. New York: W. W. Norton.
Stone, D. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. Glenview Ⅲ:Scott.
Stone, D. A. (2002). Policy paradox : The art of political decision making . New York : Norton.
Sutton, M., & Levinson, B. A. U. (2001). Policy as practice: Toward a comparative sociocultural analysis of educational policy. Stamford, CT. : Ablex Pub.
Sylva, K., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B., Sammons, P., Melhuish, E., Elliot, K., & Totsika, V. (2006). Capturing quality in early childhood through environmental rating scales. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 76–92.
The Association for Childhood Education International (2006). Global Guidelines For Early Childhood Education And Care In The 21st Century. Retrieved October 10, 2006, from http://www.acei.org/wguides.htm
Tietze, W., Cryer, D., Bairrio, J., Palacios, J., & Wetzel, G. (1996). Comparisons of Observed process qualify in early child care and education programs in five countries. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11, 447-475.
Tracy, M., & Tracy, P. D. (2000). Education and social welfare policy. In Midgley, J, Tracy, M. B., & Livermore, M. (Eds.), The Handbook of social policy(pp. 331-348). Thousand Oak, CA.: Sage.
U.S. Department of Education (2006). Elementary & secondary education. Title I — improving the academic achievement of the disadvantaged. Retrieved September 10, 2006, from http://http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/pg1. html
UNESCO & OECD (2005). Education trends in perspective analysis of the world education indicators(2005 Edition). Retrieved July 10, 2006, from http:// www .uis .unesco.org/ template/pdf/wei/wei2005.pdf.
UNICEF (2006). Evaluation standards. Retrieved October 14, 2006, from http:// www. unicef. org/ bangladesh/Evaluation_standards.pdf.
United Nations (1992). The rights of the child. Retrieved July 10, 2006, from http:// www .unicef.org/crc/。
Walberg, H. J., & Reynolds, A. J. (1997). Longitudinal evaluation of program effect-iveness. Advancing the interests of government, teachers, or parents? In Spodek, B., & Saracho, O. N. (Eds.), Issues in early childhood educational assess -ment and evaluation(pp. 28-47). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Weimer, D. L. (1999). Policy analysis : concepts and practice(3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ. : Prentice Hall.
Weimer, D. L., & Vining, A. R. (2004). Policy analysis : concepts and practice(4th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ.: Prentice Hall.
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation:Methods for studying programs and policies.(2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ.: Prentice Hall.
White, C. S., & Isenberg, J. P. (2003). Development Issues Affecting Children. In Isenberg J. P. & Jalongo, M. R. (Eds.), Major Trends and issues in early childhood education(2nd ed.).New York:Teachers college, Columbia University.
Wholey, J. S. (2004). Evaluability Assessment. In Joseph S. Wholey, Harry, P. Hatry, & Kathryn E. Newcomer (Eds.), Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation(pp. 33-62). San Francisco:Jessey-Bass..
Wicker, J., & Mathur, S. (1997). What do they do all day? Comprehensive evaluation of a full-day kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 459-480.
Williams, J. R. A. (2004). Quality information for a quality early childhood care and development. UNESCO Policy Brief on Early Childhood, 2004 July-Augustl, N° 25.
Wiltz, N. W., & Klein, E. L. (2001). “What do you do in child care?” Children’s per- ceptions of high and low quality classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16, 209–236.
Windham, D. M., & Charman, D. W. (1990). The evaluation of education efficiency: constraints, issues, and policy. Grennwich CT.: JAI .
Winter, S. C. (2006). Implementation. In B. Guy Peters, & Jon Pierre (Eds.), Handbook of public policy. Thousand Oaks, CA.: SAGE.
Wisconsin Child Care Research Partnership (2005). Family Experiences and Parent Satisfaction with 4-year-old Kindergarten in Wisconsin. Retrieved March 25, 2007, from http://www.uwex.edu/ces/flp/wccrp/matters.html
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE