:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:「小班小校」的系統分析:以臺北縣市小學為例
書刊名:國民教育研究學報
作者:陳玉玲 引用關係
作者(外文):Chen, Yu-ling
出版日期:1997
卷期:3
頁次:頁155-178
主題關鍵詞:小班小校小學臺北縣
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(0) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:28
     民國八十三年時,四一○教育改造運動以小班小校為四大訴求之一,此一主張逐 漸獲得教育部、教育改革審議委員會等各單位的重視。本研究採用系統分析的方法,以臺北 市和臺北縣八十四學年度的所有公立國小為母群,根據目前各國小的班級數、學生數和教師 數等現況,再對各單位的各種替代方案逐一評估。 在小班方面,計有教育部第一階段的 40 人,教育部第二階段的 35 人,教育改革審議委員會的 30 人、四一○教改的 25 人、建立 資訊時代教室等四種替代方案。 而小校的替代方案有三:維持現狀、少於 60 班、少於 30 班。 經比較各國實例與衡量我國在臺北縣市的教育現況,作者認為,在小班方面以每班 30 人且建立資訊時代教室為最佳替代方案;而小校則主張維持現況的方案最為可行。
     In 1994, one of appeals in 410 Educational Reform Ally is 'small class size and small school size'. then many groups, included Department of Education, paid much attention to this appeal. This study uses the method of system analysis. And according to the class number, pupil number, teacher number in Taipei Municipality and Taipei County of all public elementary schools, We evaluate the alternatives of 40, 35, 30, 25 pupils, and the classroom of information time in class size. Also, we evaluate the alternatives of maintain the present situation, less than 60 classes, less than 30 classes in school size. The conclusions are as follows: 1.The best alternatives of class size are both the class size of 30 pupils and the classroom of information time. 2.The best alternative of school size is maintain the present situation.
期刊論文
1.Bloom, B. S.(1984)。The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring。Educational Leadership,41(8),4-17。  new window
2.SIavin, R. E.(1990)。Class size and student achievement: Is smaller better?。Contemporary Education,62(1),6-12。  new window
3.許芳菊(19961100)。未來老師。天下雜誌,特刊16,40-43。  延伸查詢new window
4.楊謦伊(19951200)。教育興革的理想與實踐--從小校小班的共識與歧議談起。教師天地,79,26-30。  延伸查詢new window
5.Byrnes, D. A.、Yamamoto, K.(1986)。Views on grade repetition。Journal of Research and Development in Education,20,14-20。  new window
6.Connell, D. R.(1987)。The first 30 years were the fairest: Notes from kindergarten and ungraded primary(k-l-2)。Young Children,42,30-39。  new window
7.林本炫(19950600)。從日本「班級與學校規模適正化」政策,看我小班小校運動。教育資料文摘,35(6)=209,95-98。  延伸查詢new window
8.許芳菊(19961100)。未來學校。天下雜誌,特刊16,36-39+40-43。  延伸查詢new window
9.Norton, M. S.(1990)。Practical alternatives to student retention。Contemporary Education,61,204-208。  new window
10.Pate-Bain, B. H.、Achilles, C. M.、Boyd-Zaharias, J.、McKenna, B.(1992)。Class size does make a difference。Phi Delta Kappan,74,253-256。  new window
11.Tobin, J. J.、Wu, D. Y.、Davidson, D. H.(1987)。Class size and student/teacher ratios in the Japanese preschool。Comparative Education Review,31(4),533-549。  new window
12.牟中原(19951000)。中小學小班小校制議題初探。教改通訊,13,17-21。  延伸查詢new window
13.Tomlinson, T. M.。Class size and public policy: The plot thickens。Contemporary Education,62(1),17-23。  new window
14.Finn, J. D.、Achilles, C. M.(1990)。Answers and questions about class size: A statewide experiment。American Educational Research Journal,27(3),557-577。  new window
會議論文
1.Luyten, H.(1994)。School size effects on achievement in secondary education: Evidence from the Netherlands, Sweden and the USA。The annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association。  new window
2.Nye, B. A.(1992)。Small is far better。The meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association。  new window
3.Nye, B. A.(1993)。Class-size research from experiment to field study to policy application。The annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association。  new window
研究報告
1.教育部(1996)。八十四學年度各國民中小學基本統計--鄉鎮市區別。教育部統計處。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.楊國賜(1990)。系統分析在教育革新上的應用。臺北:水牛。  延伸查詢new window
2.季延平、郭鴻志(1995)。系統分析與設計。華泰。  延伸查詢new window
3.吳京(1996)。迎接新世紀,開展新教育。教育部。  延伸查詢new window
4.教育部(1995)。中華民國教育統計指標。台北:教育部統計處。  延伸查詢new window
5.許榮榕(1995)。系統方法專案管理。臺北:天一圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
6.Cooley, W.、Bickel, W.(1986)。Decision-oriented education research。Boston:Kluwer-Nijhoff。  new window
7.Glass, G. V.、Smith, M. L.(1978)。Meta-analvsis of research on the relationship of class size and achievement。San Franciso:Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development。  new window
8.Slavin, R. E.、Madden, N. A.(1987)。Effective classroom programs for students at risk。Baltimore:John Hopkins University, Center for Research on Elementary and Middle Schools。  new window
9.UNESCO(1994)。Statistical Yearbook。Paris:UNESCO。  new window
10.行政院教育改革審議委員會(19960611)。第三期諮議報告書。臺北:行政院教育改革審議委員會。  延伸查詢new window
單篇論文
1.Harvey, B. H.(1994)。The effect of class size on achievement and retention in the primary grades: Implications for policy makers(ED 369172)。  new window
2.Hou, J. W.(1994)。Class size and Determinants of learning effectiveness(ED 377239)。  new window
其他
1.(19940409)。小班小校計畫應早實現。  延伸查詢new window
2.任懷鳴(19951010)。從人口趨勢看小班小校的規劃。  延伸查詢new window
3.李柏欣(19950713)。小班小校也有不少問題。  延伸查詢new window
4.黃城(19951013)。如何落實小班小校?。  延伸查詢new window
5.黃隨(19950411)。「四一〇教育改造」的省思。  延伸查詢new window
6.楊正敏,楊蕙菁(19951011)。無法都市改造,難以小班小校--一個學校萬餘名學生, 曾被視為臺灣「名勝」,如今教改雖有共識,卻出現另一個難題。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Slavin, R. E.(1989)。Achievement effects of substantial reductions in class size。School and classroom organization。Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE