:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:臺灣地區與美國特許學校政策之比較及其啟示
書刊名:教育經營與管理研究集刊
作者:賴志峰 引用關係
作者(外文):Lai, Chih-feng
出版日期:2008
卷期:4
頁次:頁95-121
主題關鍵詞:特許學校教育政策比較教育Charter schoolEducational policyComparative 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(2) 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:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:81
  • 點閱點閱:98
特許學校的成立目的在於促進教育機會均等、提供教育選擇及建立績效責任 制度,是當前重要的教育政策之一。本文首先探究臺灣地區和美國特許學校政策 的起源、過程與現況,並針對發展背景、許可單位、辦理單位、學校類型、學校 規模、自主性、領導結構、經費來源、績效責任與評鑑制度等方面,比較臺灣地 區和美國特許學校政策之異同,最後,提出以下的啟示:1特許學校的立法是當 務之急,有待中央主管教育行政機關努力突破;2因地制宜發展具有臺灣教育特 色的特許學校,開創多元的辦學風格;3經費是成立特許學校面臨的首要問題, 中央主管教育行政機關應考慮補助;4賦予特許學校更大的經費和人事自主性, 以追求辦學特色的更大突破;5讓特許學校的開放性和透明性,成為監督辦學成 效的重要機制。
The purposes of charter schools are to enhance the equity of educational opportunity, provide school choice, and build the accountability system. Charter school is one of the most important educational policies. In the beginning, the research explored the originality, process, current situations of charter school policies in Taiwan and the USA. Second, the research compared the dissimilarity and sameness of charter school policies between Taiwan and the USA according to developmental context, authorizers, operators, the styles and sizes of schools, autonomy, leadership structure, funding, accountability, and evaluation. At last, the research made the following implications: 1The enactment of charter school laws should be viewed as the first priority; 2The Ministry of Education (MOE) should found charter schools on the basis of Taiwanese distinctive features; 3The MOE should subside the budget of charter schools; 4The MOE should endow charter schools with more autonomy concerning about budget and staff; 5The MOE should establish the transparent mechanism of charter schools.
期刊論文
1.Bulkley, K.、Fisler, J.(2003)。A decade of charter schools: From theory to practice。Educational Policy,17(3),317-243。  new window
2.黃德祥、林重岑(20070200)。美國「網路特許學校」的發展與爭議。教育研究,154,159-171。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.陳英豪(19970300)。鼓勵民間參與投資經營教育事業。研考報導,38,28-43。  延伸查詢new window
4.游春生(20020300)。宜蘭縣縣屬學校委託私人辦理之探討。學校行政,18,116-125。  延伸查詢new window
5.Palmer, L. B.、Gau, R.(2005)。Charter school authorizing: Policy implication from a national study。Phi Delta Kappan,86(5),352-357。  new window
6.林玉芬(20020400)。臺灣省公立高中公辦民營策略分析。師說,164,39-44。  延伸查詢new window
7.陳仕宗(20000600)。美國特許學校的發展狀況及其對我國教育改革的啟示。花蓮師院學報,10,127-144。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.黃嘉雄(20000600)。美國信託學校理念與制度之探討。國立臺北師範學院學報,13,177+179-199+201。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.秦夢群、曹俊德(20010600)。我國義務教育公辦民營制度之可行性研究。教育與心理研究,24(上),19-47。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.Ball, S. J.(1998)。Big policies/small world: An introduction to international perspectives in education policy。Comparative Education,34(2),119-130。  new window
11.吳清山(19990200)。臺北市國民中小學實施「公辦民營」之可行性分析。教育政策論壇,2(1),157-179。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.Robelen, Erik W.(2002)。ESEA to boost federal role in education。Education Week,21(16),28-31。  new window
13.吳清山(19950400)。美國學校經營型態的新實驗:談「公設私營」的革新方式。中華民國比較教育學會比較教育通訊,36,23-27。  延伸查詢new window
14.吳清山、林天祐(1998)。特許學校。教育資料與研究,22,73。  延伸查詢new window
15.吳清山、黃久芬(19951200)。美國教育選擇權之研究。初等教育學刊,4,1-26。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.賴志峰(20041000)。美國教育經營組織經營特許學校之經驗分析。教育研究資訊,12(5),59-87。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.Budde, R.(1996)。The evolution of the charter concept。PHI DELTA KAPPAN,78(1),72-73。  new window
18.Finn, C. E. Jr.、Vanourek, G.、Manno, B. V.(2000)。Accountability via transparency。Education Week,33(1),44-45。  new window
研究報告
1.吳清山(1998)。但是值得嘗試:臺北市國民小學試辦「公辦民營」之可行模式分析。臺北市:臺北市景興國民小學。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.吳明哲(2006)。宜蘭縣公辦民營學校之研究(碩士論文)。國立花蓮教育大學,花蓮縣。  延伸查詢new window
2.林碧惠(2006)。公辦民營學校家長參與學校事務之研究--以宜蘭縣人文國小為例(碩士論文)。國立花蓮師範學院。  延伸查詢new window
3.洪榮進(2002)。台南縣市國小教育人員對學校公辦民營意見 調查研究(碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。  延伸查詢new window
4.吳美智(2005)。公辦民營學校在宜蘭的實踐與困境(碩士論文)。國立花蓮師範學院,花蓮縣。  延伸查詢new window
5.王萍(1999)。美國特許學校及其在我國設立可行性之研究(碩士論文)。臺北市立師範學院,臺北。  延伸查詢new window
6.曹俊德(1999)。中小學教育公辦民營可行性之研究(碩士論文)。國立政治大學,台北市。  延伸查詢new window
7.游琇雯(2005)。宜蘭縣公辦民營人文國小創新經營之個案研究(碩士論文)。臺北市立教育大學。  延伸查詢new window
8.賴志峰(2006)。臺灣地區中小學公辦民營之研究:理論、政策與實施(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Vergari, S.(2002)。The charter school landscape。Pittsburgh, PA:University of Pittsburgh Press。  new window
2.Green, P. C. III、Mead, J. F.(2003)。Charter schools and the law: Establishing new legal relationships。Norwood, MA:Christopher-Gordon Publishers。  new window
3.立法院(1991)。立法院公報。  延伸查詢new window
4.立法院(1996)。立法院公報。  延伸查詢new window
5.慈心教師團隊(2005)。93學年度辦學報告書--學校圖像總覽。宜蘭縣:慈心華德福教育實驗國民小學。  延伸查詢new window
6.Finnigan, K.、Adelman, N.、Anderson, L.、Cotton, L.、Donnelly, M. B.、Price, T.(2004)。Evaluation of the public charter schools program: Final report。Washington, DC:SRI International。  new window
7.Guarino, C.、Zimmer, R.、Krop, C.、Chau, D.(2005)。Nonclassroom-based charter schools in California and the impact of SB 740。Santa Monica, CA:RAND。  new window
8.Kolderie, T.(1990)。Beyond choice to new public schools: Withdrawing the exclusive franchise in public education。Saint Paul, MN:Center for policy studies。  new window
9.Molnar, A.、Wilson, G.、Allen, D.(2003)。Profiles of for-profit education management companies: Fifth annual report 2002-2003。Tempe, AZ:Education Policy Studies Laboratory, Arizona State University。  new window
10.The National Commission on Excellence in Education(1983)。The National Commission on Excellence in Education. A nation at risk: The imperative for education reform。Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Education。  new window
11.Weil, D. K.(2000)。Charter schools: A reference handbook。Santa Barbara, CA:ABCCLIO。  new window
12.Guthrie, J. W.(2003)。Encyclopedia of Education。New York, NY:Macmillan。  new window
13.Riordan, C.(2004)。Equality and achievement。Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice-Hall。  new window
14.Murphy, J.、Shiffman, C. D.(2002)。Understanding and assessing the charter school movement。New York, NY:Teacher College, Columbia University。  new window
15.Miron, G.、Nelson, C.(2002)。What's public about charter schools? Lessons learned about choice and accountability。Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press。  new window
16.Nathan, Joe(1996)。Charter schools: Creating hope and opportunity for American education。San Francisco, California:Jossey-Bass Publishers。  new window
17.吳清山(2001)。教育發展研究。臺北:元照出版社。  延伸查詢new window
18.秦夢群(1997)。教育行政:理論部分。臺北市:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
19.Husen, T.(1972)。Social background and educational career: Research perspectives on equality of educational opportunity。Paris:Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development。  new window
20.Cooper, B. S.、Fusarelli, L. D.、Randall, E. V.(2004)。Better Policies, Better Schools: Theories and Applications。Boston, MA:Pearson。  new window
21.Manno, B. V.、Finn, C. E.、Bierlein, L. A.、Vanourek, G.(1997)。How Charter Schools Are Different: Lessons and Implications。Washington, DC:Hudson Institute。  new window
22.Horn, J.、Miron, G.(1999)。Evaluation of the Michigan public school academy initiative。Kalamazoo, MI:The Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University。  new window
其他
1.(2005)。國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查計畫簡介,http://timss.sec.ntnu.edu.tw/timss2007/program.asp, 2006/02/07。  延伸查詢new window
2.楊迪文,廖雅欣(20060815)。頭城人文慈心華德福教師選校長。  延伸查詢new window
3.廖雅欣,孟祥傑(20041031)。公辦民營小學公立私立吵兩年。  延伸查詢new window
4.Moquete, F. D.(2002)。Evaluating charter schools: A comprehensive approach,http://www.cew.wisc.edu/CharterSchools/practicesattachments/Chavez/chessie_moquete_THESIS.pdf, 2006/01/03。  new window
5.Sautter, R. C.(1993)。Charter schools: A new breed of public schools,http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/enviroment/go/go0och.htm, 2005/05/28。  new window
6.The Center for Education Reform(2004)。Charter school laws across the States: Ranking and scorecard,http://www.edreform.com/_upload/charter_school_laws.pdf, 2005/06/12。  new window
7.Center for Education Reform(2005)。All about charter schools,http://www.edreform.com/index.cfm?fuseAction=documentanddocumentID=1964, 2005/06/12。  new window
8.The Center for Education Reform(2005)。National charter school data at-a-glance,http://www.edreform.com/_upload/national_data_glance2005.pdf, 2005/12/12。  new window
圖書論文
1.李柏佳(2005)。學校公辦民營的理想與現實。文教法律研究所創所紀念特刊。臺北市:國立臺北教育大學文教法律研究所。  延伸查詢new window
2.楊文貴(2005)。被「公立」困住的「公辦民營」小學--宜蘭人文國小辦學經驗簡介。文教法律研究所創所紀念特刊。臺北市:國立臺北教育大學文教法律研究所。  延伸查詢new window
3.楊文貴(2005)。為後現代精神具象化的一個嘗試--宜蘭縣公辦民營人文國小四學期制課程的實施與評鑑。後現代課程--實踐與評鑑。臺北縣:中華民國教材研究發展學會。  延伸查詢new window
4.Chubb, J. E.(2006)。Should charter schools be a cottage industry?。Charter schools against the odds: An assessment of the Koret Task Force on K-12 Education。Stanford, CA:Hoover Institution Press。  new window
5.Finn, C. E. Jr.、Manno, B. V.、Vanourek, G.(2001)。Charter schools: Talking stock。Charters, vouchers, and public education。Washington, DC:The Brookings Institution。  new window
6.Zimmer, R.、Chau, D.、Gill, B.(2003)。Introduction。Charter school operations and performance: Evidence from California。Santa Monica, CA:RAND。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE