臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：「沒有孩子落後」之後：NCLB豁免計畫的角色定位、法理基礎與實施爭議之探討
書刊名：教育科學研究期刊
作者：陳成宏 引用關係
作者(外文)：Chen, Cheng-hung
出版日期：2016
卷期：61:1
頁次：頁69-89
主題關鍵詞：沒有孩子落後；教育政策；豁免計畫；NCLB；Education policy；NCLB waiver
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(2) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:44
  • 點閱點閱:63
無可諱言，《沒有孩子落後法案》（No Child Left Behind, NCLB）的實施後期疲態漸露，當初反對者的諸多憂慮逐一現形，縱使贊成者勉力提出各項數據加以辯駁，但NCLB之宣示於2014年達成數學與閱讀100%精熟的終極挫敗令其不得不黯然低頭。「沒有孩子落後」的政策時程至2014年證明已然「落後」，但是其相關配套所衍生的問題仍得繼續面對與處理，B. Obama總統受制於國會兩黨的政治角力，在《初等與中等教育法案》（Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA）的再授權暫時無解之下，遂改弦易轍推出NCLB豁免計畫（NCLB Waiver）因應。NCLB豁免計畫因有助學區學校脫離辦學不力的惡名，以及逃開隨之而來的各種懲罰措施，對於各州無疑具有極大的吸引力，至今已有多達48州進行規劃和申請交換豁免。鑑於NCLB豁免計畫的特殊背景與重要性，以及延續近10餘年來國內對於NCLB的相關研究，本研究目的乃從廣受關注的NCLB豁免計畫入手，深入探討其角色定位、法理基礎與實施爭議。根據研究結果，本研究有三點歸結：一、豁免計畫的角色定位雙重，既在為NCLB解套，亦在替「邁向巔峰」計畫（Race to the Top, RTT）配套；二、豁免計畫的法源基礎有所本亦具模糊解釋空間；三、豁免計畫的實施爭議牽涉不同面向。另本研究提出五點建議：一、精準引用與正確解釋教育變革政策的法理；二、整體考量教育變革政策的制度與地域統合問題；三、謹慎處理教育變革政策的政治干預與對立問題；四、全面規劃教育變革政策的策略配套與滑順接軌；五、正視因應教育變革政策的優質卓越與社會正義
The performance of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) has decreased gradually as the concerns of its opponents have been realized. Although NCLB’s advocates have painstakingly collected data for its defense, they are highly frustrated by the fact that NCLB’s ultimate goal of all students reaching 100% proficiency in reading and math in 2014 has failed. To address the problems of NCLB, President Obama proposed the NCLB Waiver in response to congressional partisanship, which has prevented the Elementary and Secondary Education Act from being reauthorized. Because the NCLB Waiver provides states the flexibility for circumventing the flawed provisions of NCLB, nearly all states would apply for the waiver for evading NCLB’s sanctions. The results of this study revealed that the dual purpose of the NCLB Waiver is releasing states from the mandates of NCLB and matching NCLB with Race to the Top; NCLB’s legal foundation is Section 9401 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act; and NCLB’s implementation controversy is multidimensional. Finally, this paper proposes five recommendations: (1) precisely citing and interpreting the legal foundation for education change policy; (2) comprehensively considering the integration of enactment and region of education change policy; (3) cautiously coping with the political intervention with and confrontation over education change policy; (4) systematically planning the strategic matching and transition in education change policy; and (5) addressing the quality and social justice of education change policy
期刊論文
1.Carnoy, M.、Loeb, S.(2003)。Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis。Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis，24(4)，305-331。  new window
2.顏國樑(20130200)。美國《不讓一位孩子落後法》政策執行：成效、爭議與啟示。教育研究，226，130-147。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Dee, T. S.、Jacob, B.(2011)。The impact of No Child Left Behind on student achievement。Journal of Policy Analysis and Management，30(3)，418-446。  new window
4.Figlio, D. N.(2006)。Testing, crime, punishment。Journal of Public Economics，90(4/5)，837-851。  new window
5.Ladd, H. F.、Lauen, D. L.(2010)。Status versus growth: The distributional effects of school accountability policies。Journal of Policy Analysis and Management，29(3)，426-450。  new window
6.Onosko, J.(2011)。Race to the top leaves children and future citizens behind: The devastating effects of centralization, standardization, and high stakes accountability。Democracy and Education，19(2)，1-11。  new window
7.陳佩英、卯靜儒(20100900)。落實教育品質和平等的績效責任制：美國《NCLB法》的挑戰與回應。當代教育研究，18(3)，1-47。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.Sims, D. P.(2013)。Can failure succeed? Using racial subgroup rules to analyze the effect of school accountability failure on student performance。Economics of Education Review，32，262-274。  new window
9.Cavanagh, S.(2012)。Some states still wary about NCLB Waiver offer。Education Week，31(17)，1-14。  new window
10.Eitel, R. S.、Talbert, K. D.(2012)。The road to a national curriculum: The legal aspects of the common core standards, race to the top, and conditional waivers。The Federalist Society，13(1)，1-24。  new window
11.Klein, A.(2012)。California hopes to go its own way on NCLB Waiver。Education Week，31(31)，23-24。  new window
12.Klein, A.(2014)。Loss of NCLB Waiver puts Washington state on uncertain ground。Education Week，33(30)，28-33。  new window
13.Klein, A.(2014)。Minority-Group Lawmakers Slam Impact of NCLB Waivers。Education Week，33(21)，22。  new window
14.Michele, M.(2011)。Waiver plans would scrap parts of NCLB。Education Week，31(13)，1-28。  new window
15.McEachin, A.、Polikoff, M. S.(2012)。We are the 5%: Which schools would be held accountable under a proposed revision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act?。Educational Researcher，41(7)，243-251。  new window
16.Martin, V.、Lazaro, L. M.(2011)。The race to educational reform in the USA: The race to the top。Language and Education，25(6)，479-490。  new window
17.Michele, M.(2012)。States punch reset button with NCLB Waivers。Education Week，32(8)，1-25。  new window
18.Morgan, C. K.(2014)。Executive action in the face of congressional inaction: Education waivers circumventing the legislative process。Brigham Young University Education and Law Journal，2，347-366。  new window
19.Riley, B.(2012)。Waive to the top: The dangers of legislating education policy from the executive branch。American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research，1，1-6。  new window
20.吳清山、蔡菁芝(20060400)。英美兩國教育績效責任之比較分析及其啟示。師大學報. 教育類，51(1)，1-21。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.Polikoff, M. S.、McEachin, A. J.、Wrabel, S. L.、Duque, M.(201303)。The waive of the future: School accountability in the waiver era。Association for Education Finance and Policy Annual Conference。New Orleans, LA。  new window
研究報告
1.Lohman, J.(2010)。Comparing No Child Left Behind and race to the top。  new window
2.Reback, R.(2007)。Teaching to the rating: School accountability and the distribution of student achievement。  new window
其他
1.U.S. Department of Education(2010)。A blueprint for reform: The reauthorization of the elementary and secondary education act，http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf。  new window
2.United States Department of Education(2013)。ESEA flexibility，http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/esea-flexibility/index.html。  new window
3.Nichols, S. L.，Berliner, D. C.(2008)。Why has high-stakes testing so easily slipped into contemporary American life?。  new window
4.Severson, K.，Blinder, A.(20140606)。Test scandal in Atlanta brings more guilty pleas，http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/education/test-scandal-in-atlanta-brings-more-guilty-pleas.html?_r=0。  new window
5.Wayne, R.(2012)。Major accountability themes of second-round state applications for NCLB Waivers，http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED531861。  new window
6.The Associated Press(2014)。Washington: State loses control of some school funds，http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/25/us/washington-state-loses-control-of-some-school-funds.html?_r=0。  new window
7.The Advocacy Institute(2013)。ESEA flexibility: Issues for students with disabilities，http://www.advocacyinstitute.org/ESEA/AdvocacyInstitute-ESEA.Flexibility.Issues.for.SWDS.pdf。  new window
8.Black, D.(2013)。Effective teachers for disadvantaged students no longer part of NCLB Waiver process，http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/education_law/2013/11/effectiveteachers-for-disadvantaged-students-no-longer-part-of-nclb-waiver-process.html。  new window
9.Burke, L.(2012)。States must reject national education standards while there is still time，http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/04/states-must-reject-national-educationstandards-while-there-is-still-time。  new window
10.Center for American Progress(2012)。No Child Left Behind Waivers，http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2012/07/pdf/nochildwaivers.pdf。  new window
11.Center on Education Policy(2012)。Major accountability themes of second-round applications for NCLB Waivers，http://www.cep-dc.org。  new window
12.Center on Education Policy(2012)。Accountability issues to watch under NCLB Waivers，http://www.cep-dc.org。  new window
13.Harris, D. M.(2012)。Leveraging change via competition: The promise and limitations of race to the top，http://nau.edu/uploadedFiles/Academic/COE/About/Projects/Leveraging%20Change%20Via%20Competition.pdf。  new window
14.Legal Information Institute(2011)。20 U.S. Code §7861(a)--Waivers of statutory and regulatory requirements，http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/7861。  new window
15.Legal Information Institute(2011)。20 U.S. Code §7861(b)(c)(d)--Waivers of statutory and regulatory requirements，http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/20/7861。  new window
16.Legal Information Institute(2014)。U.S. Constitution，http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei。  new window
17.Montalto, S. A.(2013)。Standards and assessment: Why race to the top is the preeminent alternative to No Child Left Behind，http://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/centers/childlaw/childed/pdfs/2013studentpapers/montalto.pdf。  new window
18.Nancy, K.，Wayne, R.(2012)。Accountability issues to watch under NCLB Waivers，http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED535955。  new window
19.National Education Association(2014)。No Children Left Behind Act (NCLB)--ESEA，http://www.nea.org/home/NoChildLeftBehindAct.html。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：466（臺灣：454，外國：12） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2000451 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67808314
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上