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：建構與驗證有效預測臺灣學生學業成就的三階層模式－階層線性模式之分析
作者：黃建皓 引用關係
作者(外文)：Jian-hao Huang
校院名稱：國立臺南大學
系所名稱：教育經營與管理研究所博士班
指導教授：胡蘭沁
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2012
主題關鍵詞：三階層模式；三階層模式的間接效果；階層線性模式；臺灣教育長期追蹤資料庫；學生學業成就；Students’ Academic Achievement；Indirect Effects of Three-Level Model；Three-Level Model；Hierarchical Linear Model；Taiwan Education Panel Survey
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(2) 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:99
在臺灣，過去探討影響學生學業成就因素的研究已經累積不少豐碩成果，但是，以三階層模式來探究影響學生學業成就因素的實徵研究卻尚未出現。基此，本研究在相關理論與實徵研究的導引下，運用三階層模式來探究學生、班級、學校階層因素對臺灣國中學生學業成就的影響。為了避免過去研究在抽樣與方法上的缺失，因此，本研究採用臺灣教育長期追蹤資料庫（Taiwan Education Panel Survey, TEPS）2001年的實徵資料，資料經巢套（nested）配對後，有效樣本為學校數276所，班級數1,044班，學生數12,388人。本研究以階層線性模式（Hierarchical Linear Model, HLM）進行資料統計分析，希冀建構與驗證一個有效預測臺灣學生學業成就影響的三階層模式。另外，就理論而言，三階層模式的間接效果是可能存在的，因此，本研究在控制各階層相關因素的影響下，檢定學校階層因素的「學校組織氣氛」是否會透過班級階層因素的「班級互動」（包括：師生互動、同儕互動）之中介作用，對學生學業成就產生間接影響。最後，針對研究結果提出具體建議，以提供國內教育政策制定或修正、教育實務及未來研究之參考。本研究主要的研究發現如下：
一、學生階層因素對學生學業成就有直接影響效果：
性別、是否就讀資優班、族群、家庭社經地位、財務資本、社會資本、文化資本、手足數目、學習態度、自我教育期望、學業投入對學生學業成就有顯著的直接影響效果。學生階層因素對學生學業成就的解釋變異量為19.3％。
二、班級階層因素對學生學業成就有直接影響效果：
師生互動、同儕互動、班級平均家庭社經地位對學生學業成就有直接影響效果。班級階層因素對學生學業成就的解釋變異量為23.7％。
三、學校階層因素對學生學業成就有直接影響效果：
學校規模、學校公私立別、學校城鄉差距、學校合格教師率對學生學業成就有顯著的直接影響效果。學校階層因素對學生學業成就的解釋變異量為40.7％。
四、在學生學業成就存在的變異比例方面：
學生學業成就有76.1％的變異存在於學生之間，有8.1％的變異存在於班級之間，有15.8％的變異存在於學校之間。此結果顯示學生階層因素仍是影響臺灣學生學業成就的主要原因，大致符合「柯爾曼報告書」（Coleman Report）（Coleman et al., 1966）之結論，但班級、學校階層因素仍有一定的影響力。另外，學校之間的變異大於班級之間的變異，此表示我國的學校城鄉差距問題仍存在，可能造成教育機會不均等。
五、三階層模式的間接效果達到顯著水準：
學校階層因素中的「學校組織氣氛」會透過班級階層因素中的「班級互動」（包括：師生互動、同儕互動）之中介作用，對學生學業成就產生顯著的間接影響效果。而且，師生互動、同儕互動都是扮演「完全中介效果」的角色，其次，再透過「Sobel 檢定」（Sobel test）確認三階層模式的間接效果達到顯著水準。
In Taiwan, there have been abundant researches exploring the factors affecting students’ academic achievement. However, there hasn’t been any empirical study using three-level model to explore factors affecting students’ academic achievement. In the view of this phenomenon, the study applied three-level model to explore the effect of student-level, class-level and school-level factors on Taiwan junior high school students’ academic achievement under the guidance of related theories and empirical study. To make up the insufficiency of sampling and methodology in past researches, this study adopted the empirical data from Taiwan Education Panel Survey (TEPS) in 2001. After the data had been nested and matched, effective sample includes 276 schools, 1,044 classes and 12,388 students. This study conducted data analysis by hierarchical linear model (HLM), wishing to construct and verify a three-level model which can effectively predict Taiwan students’ academic achievement. In addition, according to the theory, indirect effects of three-level model have possibly existed. Therefore, this study controlled related factors in each level to validate if “school organizational climate” of school-level factors have indirect effect on students’ academic achievement through mediating effects of “classroom interaction”（including teacher-student interaction and peer interaction）of class-level factors under controlling related explanatory variables of every level. Finally, we proposed some concrete suggestions according to the results for the reference of domestic education policy-making or revision, education practice and future research. The findings of the study are as following:
1. Student-level factors had direct effects on students’ academic achievement:
Gender, whether participating in gifted classes, ethic groups, family socioeconomic status, financial capital, social capital, cultural capital, siblings, learning attitude, one’s educational expectation and academic engagement had significant direct effects on students’ academic achievement. Explained variance of student-level factor on students’ academic achievement was 19.3％.
2. Class-level factors had direct effects on students’ academic achievement:
Teacher-student interaction, peer interaction, class mean socioeconomic status had significant direct effects on students’ academic achievement. Explained variance of student-level factor on students’ academic achievement was 23.7％.
3. On the aspect of school-level factors:
School size, public and private school, urban or rural school, the ratio of the qualified teacher in the schools had significant direct effects on students’ academic achievement. Explained variance of school-level factor on students’ academic achievement was 40.7％.
4. On the aspect of variance distribution in students’ academic achievement:
76.1％ variance existed in students’ academic achievement was caused by students, 8.1％ by classes and 15.8％ by schools. The results showed student-level factors were still main factors affecting students’ academic achievement identical to the conclusions in Coleman Report (Coleman et al., 1966), however, student-level and school-level factors still had considerable influence. Moreover, the variance caused by schools was larger than that caused by classes addressed the problem of differences between urban and rural schools, and this might lead to inequality of educational opportunity.
5. Indirect effects of three-level model were significant:
“School organizational climate” of school-level factors would have had significant indirect effects on students’ academic achievement through mediating effects of “classroom interaction” of class-level factors (including teacher-student interaction and peer interaction). In addition, teacher-student interaction and peer interaction played the role of complete mediating effects. Furthermore, through Sobel test, we confirmed indirect effects of three-level model were significant
中文文獻
方吉正（1999）。學校規模在教育品質的效應探討。教育資料與研究，27，51-57。new window
方杰、張敏強、邱皓政（2010）。基於階層線性理論的多層級中介效應。心理科學進展，18（8），1329-1338。
王正婷（2007）。國中生英語科及數學科學習態度、父母教養方式與其學業成就之關係：以TEPS資料庫資料為例。中學教育學報，14，55-76。
王明仁（2005）。教師養成背景與學生學業成績的關連性之研究：以台東縣國小五年級為例。臺東大學教育學報，16（1），35-68。new window
吳武典（1979）。國小班級氣氛的因素分析與追蹤研究。師大教育心理學報，12，133-156。new window
吳政達（2006）。少子化趨勢下國民中小學學校經濟規模政策之研究。教育政策論壇，9(1)，1-22。new window
吳清山、林天佑（2005）。自我應驗預言。教育研究月刊，127，5-17。
吳裕益 (1993 )。台灣地區國民小學學生學業成就調查分析。台南師院初等教育學報，6，1-31。new window
吳慧瑛（2007）。家庭背景與教育成就：五個出生世代的比較分析。人口學刊，34，109-143。new window
巫博瀚、賴英娟（2011）。性別、自我效能、工作價值、科學素養及學校層次因素對臺灣青少年學習情緒之影響：個人與情境調節作用之多層次分析。教育科學研究期刊，56，3，119-149。new window
李敦仁（2007）。人力資本、財務資本、社會資本與教育成就關聯性之研究－Coleman家庭資源理論模式之驗證。教育與心理研究，30（3），111-141。new window
李敦義（2011）。綜合高中分流政策對學生學習成就的影響：以 TEPS 資料分析為例。教育科學研究期刊，56（2），107-135。new window
林生傳（1995）。高中生大學聯考分數的預測分析。教育學刊，11，51-72。new window
林俊瑩、黃毅志（2008）。影響臺灣地區學生學業成就的可能機制：結構方程模式的探究。臺灣教育社會學研究，8（1），45-88。new window
林清江（1983）。文化發展與教育革新。台北市：五南出版社。
林進材（2002）。教學效能的研究發展及其在教學與研究上的意義。教育研究月刊，104，32-43。new window
林新發（1991）。校長領導行為、組織氣氛與組織績效的關係－實證研究結果的分析與討論。國立臺北師範學院學報，4，359-408。
林鉦棽（2005）。組織公民行為之跨層次分析:層級線性模式的應用。管理學報，22（4），503-524。new window
林慧敏（2012）。造成原漢族群高中入學考試基測成績不同之影響機制：以臺東縣國三生為例。教育研究與發展期刊，8（2），151-182。new window
孫志麟（2002）。教師效能三元模式建構與運用。教育研究月刊，104，44-54。new window
孫清山、黃毅志（1996）。補習教育、文化資本與教育取得。台灣社會學刊，19，95-139。new window
馬信行 (1992 )。台灣地區近四十年來教育資源之分配情形。國立政治大學學報， 67，19-56。
高新建（1997）。階層線性模式的基本概念與模式。測驗統計簡訊，15，1-10。
張佩瑛、蔣治邦（2000）。課堂內師生問答互動之研究：國小數學課問答互動中教師教學信念與教學處理的關係。教育與心理研究，23，99-122。new window
張春興、林清山（1982）。教育心理學。台北：東華。
張苙雲（2003）。臺灣教育長期追蹤資料庫：資料使用手冊【2011.12.01 版】。中央研究院調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。
張淑美 (1994)。不同地區教育機會差異之探討。國立高雄師範大學學報，5， 87-110。new window
張毓仁、柯華葳、邱皓政、歐宗霖、溫福星 (2011)。教師閱讀教學行為與學生閱讀態度和閱讀能力自我評價對於閱讀成就之跨層次影響：以PIRLS 2006為例。教育科學研究期刊，56（2），69-105。new window
張德銳（1995）。教育行政研究。台北市：五南。new window
郭為藩、高強華（1988）。 教育學新論。台北：正中。
陳正昌（1994）。北部三縣市家庭教育資源與國小學生學業成就之關係。教育研究，39，37-43。new window
陳怡靖、鄭燿男（2000）。台灣地區教育階層化之變遷－檢證社會資本論、文化資本論及財物資本論在台灣的適用性。行政院國家科學委員會研究彙刊：人文及社會科學，10（3），416-434。
陳俊瑋（2010）。國中教師集體效能感、教師自我效能感及教師組織公民行為間的關聯。當代教育研究，18（2），29-69。
陳俊瑋、吳璧如（2010）。國中教師自我效能感與集體效能感的關係。教育政策論壇，13（3），127-154。new window
陳俊瑋、黃毅志（2011）。重探學科補習的階層化與效益：Wisconsin 模式的延伸。教育研究集刊，57（1），101-135。
陳奕奇、劉子銘（2008）。教育成就與城鄉差距：空間群聚之分析。人口學刊，37，1-43.new window
陳奎喜（1990）。教育社會學研究。台北市：師大書苑。
陳建州、劉正（2001）。重探學校教育功能－家庭背景因素影響力變化之研究。臺東師院學報，12，115-144。new window
陳建志（1998）。族群與家庭背景對學業成績影響模式－以臺東縣原漢學童作比較。政大教育與心理研究，21，85-106。new window
陳順利（2007）。學校效能階層模式建構之探究。學校行政，49，16-44。
粘絢雯、程景琳（2010）。國中班級經營與班級氣氛相關因素之探討：關係攻擊與關係受害。教育實踐與研究，23，1，57-84。new window
曾建勝（2001）。學童體適能與同儕關係之相關研究。中華體育季刊，15，131-137。new window
黃富順（1974）。影響國中學生學業成就的家庭因素。師大教育研究所集刊，16，386-486。
黃毅志（1996）。台灣地區民眾地位取得之因果機制－共變結構分析。東吳社會學報，5，213-248。new window
黃毅志、陳怡靖（2005）。台灣的升學問題：教育社會學理論與研究之檢討。台灣教育社會學研究，5（1），77-118。new window
楊孟麗、譚康榮、黃敏雄(2003)。心理計量報告：TEPS 2001分析能力測驗。臺北市：中央研究院社會學研究所。
楊肅棟（2001）。學童、教師、家長與學生特質對原漢學業成就的影響-以臺東縣國小為例。臺灣教育社會學研究，1（1），209-248。new window
楊銀興（1988）。國民小學低成就學生之輔導。測驗與輔導，90，1761-1762。
溫福星（2006）。階層線性模式：原理、方法與應用。台北: 雙葉書廊。
溫福星、邱皓政 (2009)。組織研究中的多層次調節中介效果:以組織創新氣氛、組織承諾與工作滿意的實證研究為例。管理學報，26（2）, 189-211。new window
溫福星、邱皓政（2011）。多層次模式方法論。台北：鼎茂。
劉正（2006）。補習在臺灣的變遷、效能與階層化。教育研究集刊，52（4），1-33。new window
劉若蘭（2009）。大學教育品質與學生學習發展之因果模式研究。教育政策論壇，12（3），99-124。new window
鄭淵全（1996）。學校是偉大平衡器或不公平的再製者。國立新竹師範學院初等教育學系初等教育學報，4，127-167。
鄭淵全(1998)。社經地位、能力、學校教育與國小學生學業成就之關係－功能典範與衝突典範之探究。國立新竹師範學院新竹師院學報，11，421-448。new window
鄭耀嬋、何華國（2004）。國小融合班學生學習態度及其相關因素之探討。國民教育研究學報，13，215-260。new window
盧美貴（1980）。班級氣氛與學習。載於吳清山等人（主編），班級經營（頁435-466）。台北：心理出版社。
盧雪梅、毛國楠（2008）。國中基本學力測驗數學科之性別差異與差別試題功能（DIF）分析。教育研究與實踐，21（2），95-126。new window
謝孟穎（2003）。家長社經背景與學生學業成就關聯性研究。教育研究集刊，49（2），255-287。new window
簡茂發(1984)。高級中學學生家庭社經背景、教師期望與學業成就之關係。台灣師範大學教育研究集刊，26，1-95。
簡茂發、洪寶蓮（1990）。國中學生個人及環境因素與學習行為的相關研究。測驗年刊，37，181-194。new window
蘇船利、黃毅志（2009）。文化資本透過學校社會資本對台東縣國二學生學業成績之影響。師大教育研究集刊，55（3），99-129。new window
外文文獻
Adelman, H. S., & Taylor, L. (2002). Classroom climate. In S. W. Lee, P. A. Lowe, & E. Robinson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of school psychology (pp. 304-312). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Aitkin, M., & Zuzovsky, R. (1994). Multilevel interaction models and their use in the analysis of large-scale school effectiveness studies. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5, 45-73.
Anderson, A. R., Christenson, S. L., Sinclair, M. F., & Lehr, C. A. (2004). Check & connect: The importance of relationships for promoting engagement with school. Journal of School Psychology, 42, 95-113.
Anderson, L.W. (1991). Increasing Teacher Effectiveness. Paris: UNESCO, IIEP.
Armor, D. et al. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading programs in selected Los Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.
Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self- efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Battistich, V., Solomon, D., Kim, D., Watson, M., & Schaps, E. (1995). Schools as communities, poverty levels of student populations, and students’ attitudes, motives, and performance: A multilevel analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 627–658.
Berne, R., & Stiefel, L. (1984). The measurement of equity in school finance: Conceptual, methodological, and empirical dimensions. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.
Blake, J. (1985). Number of siblings and educational mobility. American Sociological Review, 50, 84-94.
Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupation structure. New York: Wiley.
Borich, G. D. (1994). Observation skills for effective teaching. New York: Teacher College Press.
Bosker, R. J., & Witziers, B. (1996). The magnitude of school effects. or: Does it really matter which school a student attends? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New York, USA.
Bosworth, D. (1994). Truancy and pupil performance. Education Economics, 2(3), 243-264.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C. (1977). Reproduction in education, society, and culture. London: Sage.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural Reproduction and Social Reproduction. In J. Karabel, & A. H. Halsey (Eds.), Power and Ideology in Education (pp. 487-511). New York: Oxford University press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984) .Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Brand, S., Felner, R., Shim, M., Seitsinger, A., & Dumas, T. (2003). Middle school improvement and reform: Development and validation of a school-level assessment of climate, cultural pluralism, and school safety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 570–588.
Brewster, A. B., & Bowen, G. L. (2004). Teacher support and the school engagement of Latino middle and high school student at risk of school failure. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 21, 47-67.
Brookover, W., & Lezotte, L. (1977). Changes in school characteristics coincident with changes in student achievement. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Brookover, W., Beady, C., Flood, P., Schweitzer, J., & Wisenbaker, J. (1977). Schools can make a difference. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., & Day, J. D. (1981). Learning to learn: On training students to learn from text. Educational Researcher, 10, 12-14.
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.
Coleman, J. S ., & Hoffer, T.(1987). Public and private schools: The impact of communities. NY: Basic Books.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95-120.
Coleman, J. S., & Hoffer, T. (1987). Public and private high schools: The impact of communities. New York: Basic Books.
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, A. M., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, E., & York, R. L. (1966). Equality of Educational Opportunity. Washington, D. C: United States Government Printing Office.
Coleman, J. S., Hoffer, T. ,& Kilgore, S. B. (1982). High school achievement: Public, catholic, and private schools compared. NY: Basic Books.
Creemeers, B. (1996). The school effectiveness knowledge base. In D. Reynolds, R. Bollen, B. Creemers, D. Hopkins, L. Stoll, & N. Lagerweij (Eds.), Making good schools: Linking school effectiveness and school improvement (pp. 36-58). London: Routledge.
Creemeers, B. (1996). The school effectiveness knowledge base. In D. Reynolds, R. Bollen, B. Creemers, D. Hopkins, L. Stoll, & N. Lagerweij (Eds.), Making good schools: Linking school effectiveness and school improvement (pp. 36-58). London: Routledge.
Crosnoe, R., Johnson, M. K., & Elder, G. H. (2004). Intergenerational bonding in school: The behavioral and contextual correlates of student-teacher relationships. Sociology of Education, 77(1), 60-81.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Reforming Teacher Preparation and Licensing: Debating the Evidence. Teachers College Record 102(1), 28–56.
Delamont, S. (1983). Interaction in the classroom (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.
Dorman, A., & Adams, A. (2004). Associations between students’ perceptions of classroom environment and academic efficacy in Australian and British secondary schools. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 27(1), 69-85.
Downey, D. B. (1995). When bigger is better: family size, parental resources, and children′s educational performance. American Sociological Review, 60, 746-761.
Dunkin, M. J., & Biddle, B. J. (1974).The study of teaching. New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston.
Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37(1), 15-24.
Elliott, M. (1998). School finance and opportunities to learn: Does money well spent enhance students’ achievement? Sociology of Education, 71(3), 223-245.
Enders, C. K., & Tofighi, D. (2007). Centering Predictor Variables in Cross-Sectional Multilevel Models: A New Look at an Old Issue. Psychological Methods, 12(2), 121–138.
Fantuzzo, J. W., Riggo, R. E., Connelly, S., & Dimeff, L. A. (1989), Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on academic achievement and psychological adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Education Psychology, 81(2), 173-177.
Farkas, G., Robert, P., Sheehan, D., & Shuan, Y. (1990). Cultural resources and school success: Gender, ethnicity, and poverty groups within an urban school district. American Sociological Review, 55, 127-142.
Fejgin, N. (1995). Factors contributing to the Academic excellence of American Jewish and Asian students. Sociology of Education, 68, 746-761.
Finn, J. D., & Voelk, K. E. (1993). School characteristics related to student engagement. Journal of Negro Education, 62, 249-268.
Firestone, W. A. (1991). Educators, researchers and the effective schools movement. In J. R. Bliss, W. A. Firestone, & C. E. Richards (Eds.), Rethinking effective schools: Research and practice (pp. 12-27). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Flanders, N. A. (1970). Analyzing teacher behavior. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fowler, W. J., Jr., & Walberg, H. J. (1991). School size, characteristics, and outcomes. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 13(2), 189-202.
Frazier, P. A., Tix, A. P., & Barron, K. E. (2004). Testing moderator and mediator effects in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 115-134.
Friedkin, N., & Necochea, J. (1988). School system size and performance: A contingency perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10(3), 237-249.
Friedman, L. (1989). Mathematics and the gender gap: A meta-analysis of recent studies on sex differences in mathematical tasks. Review of Educational Research, 59, 185-213.
Furlong, M. J., Whipple, A. D., St. Jean, G., Simental, J., Soliz, A., & Punthuna, S. (2003). Multiple contexts of school engagement: Moving toward a unifying framework for educational research and practice. The California School Psychologist, 8, 99-114.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. NY: Random House.
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 569-582.
Gila, H. (2001). Declining Gender Differences from FIMS to TIMSS. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 32 (1), 11-17.
Goddard, R. D., & Goddard, Y. L. (2001). A multilevel analysis of the relationship between teacher and collective efficacy in urban schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 807-818.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does Teacher Certification Matter? High School Teacher Certification Status and Student Achievement. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22, 129-45.
Goodenow, C., & Grady, K. E. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends’ values to academic motivation among urban adolescent students. Journal of Experimental Education, 62, 60-71.
Graham, G., & Heimerer, E. (1981). Research on teacher effectiveness: A summary with implications for teaching. Quest, 33, 14-25
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462-482.
Griffith, J. (1999). School climate as “social order” and “social action”: A multi-level analysis of public elementary school student perceptions. School Psychology of Education, 2, 339–369.
Grossberg, Wartella, E., & Whitney, D. C. (1998). Media Making: Mass Mediain a Popular Culture. London: Sage.
Hakkinen, I. ,Kirjavainen, T., & Uusitalo, R. (2003). School resources and student achievement revisited: new evidence from panel data. Economics of Education Review, 22(3), 329-335.
Halpin, A. W., & Croft, D. B. (1962). The organizational climate of school. Washington D. C.: U. S. Office of Climate of School.
Hanushek, E. A. (1972). Education and Race. Massachusetts, Lexington: Health.
Hanushek, E. A.(1987).Educational production functions. In G.. Psacharopoulos (Ed.), Economics of Education Research and Studies (pp. 33-42). Oxford: Pergamon press.
Ho Sui-Chu, E., & Willms, J. D. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 69, 126-141
Ho, I. T., & Hau, K.T. (2004). Australian and Chinese teacher efficacy: Similarities and differences in personal instruction, discipline, guidance efficacy and beliefs in external determinants. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 313-323.
Hofmann, D. A., & Gavin, M. B. (1998). Centering Decisions in Hierarchical Linear Models: Implications for Research in Organizations. Journal of Management, 24(5), 623-641.
Hox, J. J. (2002). Multilevel Analysis Techniques and Applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hoy, W. K., & Hannum, J. W.(1997). Middle school climate: An empirical assessment of organizational health and student achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 33(3), 290-312.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C.G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Hoy, W. K., Sweetland, S. R., & Smith, P. A. (2002). Toward an organizational model of achievement in high schools: The significance of collective efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38(1), 77-93.
Hoy, W. T., Tarter, C. J., & Bliss, J. R. (1990). Organizational climate, school health, and effectiveness: A comparative analysis. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26(3), 260-279.
Huang, G., & Howley, C. (1993). Mitigating disadvantage: Effects of small-scale schooling on student achievement in Alaska. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 9(3), 137-149.
Humphrey, L. L. (1984). Children''s self-control in relation to perceived social environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 178-188.
Jencks, C., Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M. S., Cohen, D., Gintis, H., Heyns, B., & Michelson, S. (1972). Inequality: A reassessment of the effect of family and schooling in America. New York: Basic Books.
Jones, M. G., & Gerig, T. M. (1994). Silent sixth-grade students: Characteristics, achievement and teacher expectations. Elementary School Journal, 95, 169-181.
Jones, M.G., Howe, A., & Rua, M. J. (2000). Gender differences in students’ experiences, interests and attitudes toward science and scientists. Science Education, 84, 180–192.
Kalmijn, M., & Kraaykamp, G.. (1996). Race, culture capital, and schooling: An analysis of trends in the United States. Sociology of Education, 69, 22-34.
Katsillis, J., & Rubinson, R. (1990). Cultural capital, student Achievement, and educational reproduction: The case of Greece. American Sociological Review, 55(2), 270-279.
Kreft, I. G. G., de Leeuw, J., & Aiken. L. S. (1995). The Effect of Different Forms of Centering in Hierarchical Linear Models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 30(1), 1-21.
Krull, J. L., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2001). Multilevel modeling of individual and group level mediated effects. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(2), 249–277.
Kyriacou, C. L. (1989). Effective teaching in schools. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, Ltd.
Laidra, K., Pullmann, H., & Allik, J. (2007). Personality and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement: A cross-sectional study from elementary to secondary school. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 441-451.
Lareau, A. (2002). Invisible inequality: Social class and child reading in black families and white families. American Sociological Review, 67, 747-776.
Lau, S., & Roeser, R. W. (2002). On cognitive abilities and motivational processes in students’ science engagement and achievement: A multidimensional approach to achievement validation. Los Angel: UCLA, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and student Testing.
Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1993). Effects of school restructuring on the achievement and engagement of middle-grade students. Sociology of Education, 66, 164-187.
Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1995). Effects of high school restructuring and size on early gains in achievement and engagement. Sociology of Education, 68(4), 241-270.
Levin, H. M. (1995). Raising educational productivity. In M. Carnoy (Eds), International encyclopedia of economics of education (pp. 283-291). Oxford: Pergamon press.
Levine, D. U., & Lezotte, L. W. (1990). Unusually effective school: A review and analysis of research and practice. Madison, WI: National Center for Effective Schools Research and Development.
Lewin, K. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Lieberson, S. (1985). Making it count: The improvementof socialresearch and theory. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Litwin, G. H., & Stringer, R. A. (1968). Motivation and organizational climate. Boston: Division of Research Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
Luke, D. A. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
M. Najib, G.., Rohani, O., & Ebrahim, M. (2011). Multilevel analysis of achievement in mathematics of Malaysian and Singaporean students. Journal of Educational Psychology and Counseling, 2(11), 285-304.
Ma, X., & Klinger, D. A. (2000). Hierarchical linear modeling of student and school effects on academic achievement. Canadian Journal of Education, 25(1), 41–55.
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
Marks, G. N. (2010). What aspects of schooling are important? School effects on tertiary entrance performance. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(3), 267-287.
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 153-184.
Marzano, R. J. (2003).What works in school: Translating research into action. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Mathieu, J. E., & Taylor, S. R. (2007). A framework for testing meso-mediational relationships in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 141–172.
Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluation educational environments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Mortimore, P., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., Lewis, D., & Ecob, R. (1988). School matters: The junior years. Somerset. United Kingdom: Open Books.
Mosteller, F., & Moynihan, D. P. (Eds.). (1972). On equality of educational opportunity. New York: Random House.
Murphy, J., Hallinger, P., & Mesa, R. P. (1985). School effectiveness: Checking progress and assumptions and developing a role for state and federal government. Teachers College Record, 86(4), 615-641.
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
National Research Council and the Institute of Medicine. (2004). Engaging schools: Fostering high school students’ motivation to learn. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Newell, R. J., & Ryzin, M. J. V. (2007). Growing hopes as a determinant of school effectiveness. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(6), 465-472.
Newmann, F. M., Wehlage, G. G., & Lamborn, S. D. (1992). The significant and sources of student engagement. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary school (pp. 11-39). New York: Teachers College Press.
Orr, A. J. (2003). Black-White differences in achievement: The importance of wealth. Sociology of Education, 76, 281-304.
Parcel, T . L., & Geschwender, L .E. (1995). Explaining Southern Disadvantage in Verbal Facility among Young Children. Social Forces, 73(3), 841–872.
Pascarella, E. T. (1985). College environmental influences on learning and cognitive development: A critical review and synthesis. In J. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 1, pp. 1-64). New York: Agathon.
Pituch, K. A., Murphy, D. L., & Tate, R. L. (2010). Three-level models for indirect effects in school- and class-randomized experiments in education. Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 60–95.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 717-731.
Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. The Elementary School Journal, 83(4), 427-452.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Raudenbush, S. W., Martinez, A., & Spybrook, J. (2007). Strategies for improving precision in group-randomized experiments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(1), 5–29.
Raudenbush, S., & Bryk, A. (1986). A hierarchical model for studying school effects. Sociology of Education, 59, 1-17.
Raygor, A. L., & Wark, D. M. (1970). Systems for study. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rogers, R.G. (1987). Is bigger better? Fact or fad concerning school district. Spectrum, 5(4), 36-39.
Roscigno, V. J., & Ainsworth-Darnell, J. W. (1999). Race, cultural capital, and educational resources: Persistent inequalities and achievement returns. Sociology of Education, 72(3), 158–178.
Rosenshine, B. V. (1983). Teaching functions in instructural programs. Elementary School Journal, 83, 335-351.
Rumberger, R. W., & Palardy, G. J. (2004). Multilevel models for school effectiveness research. In D. Kaplan (Ed.), Handbook on quantitative methodology for the social sciences (pp. 235-258). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ryan, R. M., Stiller, J. D., & Lynch, J. H. (1994). Representations of relationships to teachers, parents and friends as predictors of academic motivation and self-esteem. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 226-249.
Scarr, S., & Weinberg, R. A. (1978). The influence of family background on intellectual attainment. American Sociological Review, 43, 674-692.
Scheerens, J. (1990). School effectiveness research and the development of process indicators of school functioning. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(1), 61-80.
Scheerens, J. (1991). Process indicators of school functioning: A selection based on the research literature on school effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 17, 371-403.
Scheerens, J. (2001). Monitoring school effectiveness in developing countries. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12(4), 359-384.
Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford: Pergamon.
Scheerens, J., & Creemers, B. P. M. (1989). Conceptualizing school effectiveness. International Journal of Education Research, 13(7), 691-706.
Schultz, R. A. (1999). Illuminating learner realities: Perceptions, expectations and experiences of gifted underachievers in a secondary school classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent, OH.
Sergiovanai, T. J., & Strarratt, R. T. (1983). Human perspective (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Sewell, W. H., Haller, A. O., & Ohlendorf, G. W. (1970). The educational and early occupational attainment process: Replication and revision. American Sociological Review, 35(6), 1014-1027.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp.290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stringfield, S., Teddlie, C., & Suarez, S. (1985). Classroom interaction in effective and ineffective schools: Preliminary results from phase in of the Louisiana School Effectiveness Study. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 20(2), 31-37.
Sui-chu, E. H., & Willms, J. D. (1996). Effects of parental involvement on eighth-grade achievement. Sociology of Education, 69(2), 126-141.
Sweetland, S. R., & Hoy, W. K. (2000). School characteristics and educational outcomes: Toward an organizational model of student achievement in middle schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 36(5), 703-729.
Teachman, J. D. (1987). Family background, educational resource, and educational attainment. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 548-557.
Teddlie, C. (1994). The study of context in school effects research: History, methods, results, and theoretical implications. In D. Reynolds, B. P. M. Creemers, P S. Nesserlrodt, E. C. Schaffer, S. Stringfield, &, C. Teddlie (Eds.), Advances in school effectiveness research and practice (pp. 85-110). NY: Pergamon.
Teodorovic, J. (2011). Classroom and school factors related to student achievement: what works for students? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 22(2), 215-236.
The Plowden Report. (1967). Children and their primary schools: A report of the central advisory council for education. London, England: HMSO.
Thompson, M. E. (1976). The prediction of academic achievement by a British study habits inventory. Research in Higher Education, 5(4), 365-372.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45, 89-125.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Tsui, A. B. M. (1995). Introducing classroom interaction. London: Penguin.
Tucker, P. D., & Stronge, J. H. (2005). Linking teacher evaluation and student learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Usova, A. V. (2002). How to make learning interesting and successful. Russian Education and society, 44(2), 65-72.
Verdis, A., Kriemadis, T., & Pashiardis, P. (2003). Historical comparative and statistical perstectives of school effectiveness research: Rethinking educational evaluation in Greece. The International Journal of Educational Management, 17(4), 155-169.
Walberg, H. J. (1984). Improving the productivity of America’s schools. Educational Leadership, 41(8), 19-27.
Walberg, H. J., & Anderson, G. J. (1968). Classroom climate and individual learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 59, 414–419.
Weber, G. (1971). Inner city children can be taught to read: Four successful schools. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.
Wehlage, G. G., & Smith, G. A. (1992). Building new programs for student at risk. In F. M. Newmann (Ed.). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary school (pp. 92-118). New York: Teachers College Press.
Wenglinsky, H. (1997). How Money Matters: The effect of school district spending on academic achievement. Sociology of Education, 70, (3), 221-237.
Wentzel, K. R. (1994). Relations of social goal pursuit to social acceptance, classroom behavior, and perceived social support. Journal of Education Psychology, 86, 173-182.
White, D. W. (1986). Relationships between school climate and classroom climate, between school climate and student: achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 48, 282.
Williamson, B. (1979). Education, Social Structure and Development: A comparative analysis. New York: Holmes & Meier Publications.
Woolfork, A. E., & Hoy, W. (1990). Teachers’ sense of efficacy and their beliefs about managing students. Teaching and Education, 6, 137-148.
Wray, D., Medwell, J., Fox, R., & Poulson, L. (2000). The teaching practices of effective teachers of literacy. Educational Review, 52(1), 75-84.
Yoneyama, S., & Rigby, K. (2006). Bully/victim students & classroom climate. Youth Studies Australia, 25, 34-41.
Younger, M. & Warrington, M. (1996). Differential achievement of girls and boys at GCSE: Some observations from the perspectives of one school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 17, 299-314.
Zhao, N., Valcke, M., Desoete, A., & Verhaeghe, J. P. (2011). A multilevel analysis on predicting mathematics performance in Chinese primary schools: Implications for practice. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(3), 503-520.
Zigarelli, M. A. (1996). An empirical test of conclusions from effective schools research. Journal of Educational Research, 90(2), 103-110.new window
Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2005). A multilevel model of safety climate: Cross-level relationships between organization and group-level climates. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(4), 616-628.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
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：721（臺灣：716，外國：5） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1328876 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67137556
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