:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:美國芝加哥教育改革模式發展的現況與問題--學校本位經營成功案例的分析與啟示
書刊名:教育研究資訊
作者:廖仁智
作者(外文):Liaw, Matt
出版日期:2001
卷期:9:5
頁次:頁17-38
主題關鍵詞:教育改革學校本位經營Educational reformSchool-based management
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(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(1)
  • 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:35
     美國芝加哥教育改革運動在一九八八年芝加哥學校改革法案通過,推動以學校本位經營為主要架構的改革策略之後,學生成績逐漸改善,特別是在一九九五年的修正案,增加績效機制,學生的成績有顯著的改善,因此芝加哥的教育改革模式值得注意和研究。本文研究的目的即在探討美國學校本位經營芝加哥地區推動的狀況,促使國內學校經營者的反省。 依據芝加哥教育改革模式的分析,可以得知下列幾點:一、學校本位經營並不能夠單獨的促進所有學校的改進;二、芝加哥學校改革的理論基礎在於有效能學校和參與式管理的研究;三、學校改革需要「由下而上」和「由上而下」雙種策略的運用;四、為了擴大所有學校改革的成效,績效是改革的主要成份;五、芝加哥推動留級制度,固然有其爭議之處,但此項策略亦有其積極面;六、地方學校委員會的成員必須接受訓練,如果沒有完成訓練,其資格會被取消;七、芝加哥的學校教育體系成為校長、教師和學生等必須為自己行動負責,特別是校長仍然身居要角;八、為改進學校,全體教職員必須擁有機會和資源推動改革,這樣才能使改革有意義;九、芝加哥教育改革有留級制度的採用,雖然會造成輟學率的增加,但是學生的出席、成就和行為卻有顯著性的改善。
     In today's world, school-based management(SBM)facing a loss of authority is becoming a common phenomenon. This article examines the school-based management reforms, which were instituted in Chicago in 1988 and subsequently underwent needed changes in 1995. After describing the development and the problems of recent Chicago school reforms, some conclusions can be drawn: 1.School-based management alone is not enough to make improvements happem in all schools. 2.The primary theoretical basis of the Chicago School Reform lies in the examination of the affected school and in a participatory management. 3.Whether it is strategic management, or a balanced form of governing, school reform requires some combination of bottom-up and top-down governing. 4.To ensure that all schools arre affected, accountability is likely to be an essential component. 5.Chicago Public Schools implemented a policy designed to end social promotion and to raise awareness of academic achievement. Although the impact of this policy has been controversial, it had a positive effect as well. 6.LSC members are legally obliged to take mandatory training; if they do not complete this training they are subject to expulsion. 7.Chicago is a school system, which holds principals, teachers and students accountable for their actions. School principles play a major role. 8.In order for schools to improve, teachers must have expectations of their students. Staff must have the opportunity and the resources to adopt reform strategies that will result in a significant improvement, and the capacities of the teachers must be enhanced. 9.Academic standards have been raised and made uniform. The promotion of social status has been abolished. Education experts predicted these changes would lead to an increase in the dropout rate. However, student attendance, achievement and overall student behavior all improved significantly.
期刊論文
1.Pick, G.(2000)。Reshaping student assessment in CPS。Catalys,7(1),1-10。  new window
2.Shipps, D.、Kahne, J.、Smylie, M. A.(1999)。The politics of urban school reform: Legitimacy, city growth, and school improvement in Chicago。Education Policy,13(4),518-545。  new window
3.Hess, G. A.(1999)。Expectations, opportunity, capacity, and will: The four essential components of Chicago school reform。Education Policy,13(4),494-517。  new window
其他
1.Roderick, M.,Bryk, A. S.,Jacob, B. A.,Easton, J. Q.,Allensworth, E.(1999)。Ending social promotion: Results from the first two years,http://www.consortium-chicago.org/endsocia1promo.html, 2000/08/22。  new window
2.Catalyst(1999)。Chicago school reform timeline 1999,http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/timeline/time99.htm, 2000/08/22。  new window
3.Catalyst(2000)。Chicago school reform act highlights,http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/resources/reformact.htm, 2000/08/21。  new window
4.Catalyst(2000)。Chicago school reform timeline: 1985-1987,http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/timeline/time85.htm, 2000/08/22。  new window
5.Chicago Board of Education(2000)。CPS at a glance,htpp://www.cps.kl2.il.us/CPS_ata_Glance/cps_at_a_glance.html, 2000/08/21。  new window
6.Chicago Board of Education(2000)。Trending up,http://www.cps.kl2.il.us/Trending-upltrending-up.html, 2000/08/21。  new window
7.Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights under Law(1999)。1999 Legislative changes affecting local school councils,http://www.clccrul.org/senbill652.htm, 2000/08/20。  new window
8.House, E. R.(1998)。Predictable failure of Chicago's student retention program,http://www.dfc.org/Chicfail.pdf, 2000/08/20。  new window
9.Kirkpatrick, D.(1999)。Chicago school reforms bring improvement,http://www.heartland.org/educationlfeb99/chicago.htm, 2000/08/22。  new window
10.Lawyers' School Reform Advisory Project(1993)。Common questions about professional personnel advisory committees,http://www.clccrul.org/PPACqs.htm, 2000/08/20。  new window
11.Lawyers' School Reform Advisory Project(1998)。1995 Board of education policy on closing schools,http://www.clccrul.org/closing.htm, 2000/08/20。  new window
12.Lawyers' School Reform Advisory Project(1998)。Principal performance contracts,http://www.clccrul.org/performa.htm, 2000/08/20。  new window
13.Lenz, L.(1997)。Punching up reform,http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/11-97/117punch.htm。  new window
14.Moore, D. R.(1999)。National experts judge Chicago's student retention program a failure,http://www.dfcl.org/, 2000/08/20。  new window
15.North Central Regional Educational Laboratory(1993)。Rationale and history of Chicago school reform,http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/envrnmnt/go/93-l/hess.htm, 2000/08/20。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top