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：美國聯邦政府提升高等教育公平之作為
書刊名：高等教育
作者：劉秀曦
作者(外文)：Liu, Hsiu-hsi
出版日期：2010
卷期：5:2
頁次：頁35-60
主題關鍵詞：入學機會；負擔能力；高等教育；教育公平；Accessibility；Affordability；Higher education；Educational equity
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(3) 博士論文(3) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:104
  • 點閱點閱:48
當高等教育發展由菁英型邁入大眾化甚至普及化階段後，高等教育 入學機會與負擔能力隨之成為各界關注的新議題。即使在崇尚自由、民 主與平等的美國，聯邦政府歷年來雖不斷透過相關法案的修訂，並提出 一系列配套措施，以保障公平理想得以在現實層面中實踐，但其高等教 育中仍存在某些不公平現象，有待政府持續透過相關高等教育策略或政 策之改革予以改善。 有鑑於我國高等教育階段亦存在諸多公平問題，本文透過文件分析 法來檢視美國高等教育公平現況、說明美國政府在提升教育公平方面的 作為，進而釐清美國在聯邦政府的努力下，其高等教育發展方向是否能 更加貼近社會對高等教育公平的要求。最後，期能藉由美國聯邦政府對 照顧弱勢學生的努力與經驗，達成提升我國高等教育公平的目標。
This paper reviewed the empirical evidence on how higher educational policies of United States federal government can be designed to enhance the educational equity. For example, the inequity in higher education has been reduced because the Federal government in United States put a lot of interventions into financial aid systems. However, more polices have to be made to ensure the equal educational opportunity. This paper showed that the federal government plays an important role in these efforts and the federal education funding should be targeted to promote equity on the nationwide level. The aim of this paper is to review the policies concerning the improvement of equity of higher education in USA. The method of document analysis was adopted. It seems reasonable to conclude that 1. The puzzles of accessibility and equity in higher education are quite complex, therefore, there are no simple solutions for their inherent conflicts. 2. Current American higher educational system does not seem to be effective in helping disadvantaged students to improve their social and economical status. It is obvious that the federal government has to face the challenge of achieving the equity in higher education. In addition, there is still plenty of room for improvement in the future policy-making of higher education.
期刊論文
1.Espinoza, O.(2007)。Solving the equity-equality conceptual dilemma: A new model for analysis of the educational process。Educational Research，49(4)，343-363。  new window
2.陳麗珠(20070900)。論資源分配與教育機會均等之關係：以國民教育為例。教育研究與發展期刊，3(3)，33-53。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.王麗雲、甄曉蘭(20071200)。臺灣偏遠地區教育機會均等政策模式之分析與反省。教育資料集刊，36，25-46。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Crosby, F.(1994)。Understanding affirmative action。Basic an Applied Social Psychology，15，31-41。  new window
5.Hannah, B.(1996)。The Higher Education Act of 1992: Skills, constraint, and the politics of higher educations。The Journal of Higher Education，67(5)，498-527。  new window
6.Hartle, T.,、Simmons, C.(2003)。Federal triangle: Congress focuses on access, affordability and accountability。Connection: New England Journal of Higher Education，18(2)，13-15。  new window
7.Rosenfeld, R. A.,、Kalleberg, A. L.(1991)。A cross-national comparison of the gender gap in income。American Journal of Sociology，96，69-106。  new window
8.Steil, J. M.,、Hay, J. L.(1997)。Social comparison in the workplace: A study of 620 dual-career couples。Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin，23(4)，427-438。  new window
學位論文
1.劉秀曦(2002)。我國大學教育財政改革之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Carnevale, A. P.、Rose, S. J.(2004)。Socioeconomic status, race/ethnicity, and selective college admissions。America's untapped resource: Low-income students in higher education。New York, NY：Century Foundation Press。  new window
2.Chowdry, H.、Crawford, C.、Dearden, L. Goodman, A.、Vignoles, A.(2010)。Widening participation in higher education: Analysis using linked administrative data。London：Institute for Fiscal Studies。  new window
3.Jonathan, R.(1997)。Illusory freedoms: liberalism, education and the market。Oxford：Blackwell。  new window
4.Wirt, F. M.、Kirst, M. W.(1997)。The Political Dynamics of American Education。Berkeley, CA：McCutchan。  new window
5.蓋浙生(2008)。教育經濟與財政新論。台北：高等教育。  延伸查詢new window
6.姜添輝(2002)。資本社會中的社會流動與學校體系：批判教育社會學的分析。臺北市：高等教育。  延伸查詢new window
7.Weimer, David L.、Vining, Aidan R.(1999)。Policy Analysis: Concepts and Practice。Prentice-Hall。  new window
8.楊瑩(1995)。教育機會均等--教育社會學的探究。台北：師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
9.林生傳(2005)。教育社會學。巨流圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
10.施建生(2007)。偉大經濟學家海耶克。台北。  延伸查詢new window
11.楊瑩(1998)。教育機會均等。現代教育社會學。台北。  延伸查詢new window
12.Avery, C.,、Kane, T. J.(2004)。Student perceptions of college opportunities: The Boston COACH program。College choices: The economics of where to go, when to go, and how to pay for It。Chicago。  new window
13.Desjardins, S.(2003)。Understanding and using efficiency and equity criteria in the study of higher education policy。New York。  new window
14.Hanushek, E. A.(1999)。Budgets, priorities, and investment in human capital。Financing College Tuition。Washington, DC。  new window
15.Hurst, C. E.(1995)。Social inequality: Forms, causes, and consequences。Boston：Allyn and Bacon。  new window
16.Kane, T.(1999)。Reforming public subsidies for higher education。Washington, DC。  new window
17.Salmi, J.,、Hauptman, A. M.(2006)。Higher education in the world 2006: The financing of universities。New York。  new window
18.The College Board(2007)。Trends in student aid 2007。Washington, DC。  new window
19.The College Board(2009)。Trends in student aid 2009。Washington, DC。  new window
圖書論文
1.楊瑩(1997)。當前臺灣地區教育機會均等問題的探討。社會變遷中的教育機會均等。臺北市：揚智出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Berne, Robert、Stiefel, Leanna(1999)。Concepts of school finance equity: 1970 to the present。Equity and adequacy in education finance: Issues and perspectives。Washington, DC：The National Academies Press。  new window
3.Levine, J. M.,、Moreland, R. L.(1989)。Social values and multiple outcome comparisons。Social and moral values: Individual and societal perspectives。Hillsdale, NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
 
 
 
 
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：973（臺灣：953，外國：20） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1451226 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67245486
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