學生認知能力、非認知能力及家庭社經背景的跨校分布：跨國、跨時期比較國中與高中階段的差別

Distribution of Student Cognitive and Non-Cognitive Abilities and Family Socioeconomic Status across Schools: Differences between Junior and Senior High Schools over Time and across Countries

10.7015/JEAS.202106_51(2).0005

黃敏雄(Min-Hsiung Huang)

認知能力 ； 非認知能力 ； 家庭社經背景 ； 校間差異 ； 考試制度 ； cognitive ability ； non-cognitive abilities ； family SES ； between-school variation ； high-stakes test

歐美研究

51卷2期（2021 / 06 / 01）

357 - 427

繁體中文

筆者選擇九年級之後會進入高中階段的32個教育體制，分析國中即將畢業學生被篩選分發到不同高中學校的之前與之後，學生認知能力（學科表現）、非認知能力（社會情緒技能）及家庭社經地位的跨校分布。臺灣在學生家庭社經地位的校間差異上，高中與國中階段之間沒有顯著差別。也就是說，依升學考試成績入學的制度，相對於依戶籍所在學區入學的制度，並沒有提高家境不同臺灣學生同讀一校的機會。俄羅斯與克羅埃西亞的國中畢業生在升上高中之後，認知能力、家庭社經地位及非認知能力的校內同質程度都一致顯著提升，是相當獨特的現象。

In many countries, screening and sorting of students into different types of schools starts after the completion of nine-year compulsory education. Here, a total of 32 education systems are selected to examine the distribution of student cognitive and noncognitive abilities as well as family SES across schools, before and after the transition from lower to upper secondary schooling. In Taiwan, Russia, South Korea and four Chinese provinces/municipalities, between-school differences in academic performance increase most markedly as students progress from lower to upper secondary schools. Russia and Croatia are very unique in that between-school differences in all three respects of student characteristics increase significantly as students transit from lower to upper secondary schools. In Taiwan, between-school differences in academic performance at the upper secondary level have decreased significantly since 2014. As to between-school differences in family SES, those at the lower secondary level are similar to those at the upper secondary level. This implies that the use of high-stakes examination for admission to different types and ranks of senior high schools, relative to mandatory school assignment based on household location and registration, does not increase the odds that Taiwanese students of different family SES to attend the same school. Taiwanese students with high social-emotional skills are widely distributed across schools, either at the lower or the upper secondary levels.

1. Aronson, J., Fried, C., & Good, C. (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 2: 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1491
   連結：
2. Baranik, L., Barron, K., & Finney, S. (2007). Measuring goal orientation in a work domain: Construct validity evidence for the 2×2 framework. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 4: 697-718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406292090
   連結：
3. Blackwell, L., Trzesniewski, K., & Dweck, C. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child Development, 78, 1: 246-263. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00995.x
   連結：
4. Elliot, A., & McGregor, H. (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 3: 501-519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.3.501
   連結：
5. Heckman, J., Stixrud, J., & Urzua, S. (2006). The effects of cognitive and noncognitive abilities on labor market outcomes and social behavior. Journal of Labor Economics, 24, 3: 411-482. https://doi. org/10.1086/504455
   連結：
6. Helmreich, R. L., Beane, W., Lucker, G. W., & Spence, J. T. (1978). Achievement motivation and scientific attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 2: 222-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 014616727800400209
   連結：
7. Huang, M.-H. (2009). Classroom homogeneity and the distribution of student math performance: A country-level fixed-effects analysis. Social Science Research, 38, 4: 781-791. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ssresearch.2009.05.001
   連結：
8. Lindqvist, E., & Vestman, R. (2011). The labor market returns to cognitive and noncognitive ability: Evidence from the Swedish enlistment. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 3: 101-128. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.3.1.101
   連結：
9. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K.-T., Artelt, C., Baumert, J., & Peschar, J. L. (2006). OECD’s brief self-report measure of educational psychology’s most useful affective constructs: Cross-cultural, psychometric comparisons across 25 countries. International Journal of Testing, 6, 1: 83-95. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0604_1
   連結：
10. Murayama, K., & Elliot, A. (2012). The competition-performance relation: A meta-analytic review and test of the opposing processes model of competition and performance. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 6: 1035-1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028324
    連結：
11. Opdenakker, M., & Van Damme, J. (2000). Effects of schools, teaching staff and classes on achievement and well-being in secondary education: Similarities and differences between school outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 11, 2: 165-196. https://doi.org/10.1076/0924-3453(200006)11:2;1-q;ft165
    連結：
12. Poropat, A. (2009). A meta-analysis of the five-factor model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 2: 322-338. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014996
    連結：
13. Richardson, M., Abraham, C., & Bond, R. (2012). Psychological correlates of university students’ academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 2: 353-387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026838
    連結：
14. Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 4: 313-345. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00047.x
    連結：
15. Rumberger, R., & Palardy, G. (2005). Test scores, dropout rates, and transfer rates as alternative indicators of high school performance. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 1: 3-42. https://doi.org/ 10.3102/00028312042001003
    連結：
16. Schuetz, G., Ursprung, H. W., & Woessmann, L. (2008). Education policy and equality of opportunity. Kyklos, 61, 2: 279-308. https:// doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6435.2008.00402.x
    連結：
17. 大學甄選入學委員會 (2017年3月7日)。《大學「繁星推薦」入學錄取及篩選結果出爐 招生名額錄取率再創新高》。http://www.jbcrc.edu.tw/documents/admission/1060307_106Star Report.pdf (College Admissions Committee. [2017, March 7]. The universities’ “Stars Program” admission and screening results released: Admission rate hits new high.)
18. 丘愛鈴 (2012)。〈繁星推薦擴大招生名額政策之問題分析〉，《臺灣教育評論月刊》，1, 10: 76-78。(Chiu, A.-L. [2012]. Analyzing the problem of the Stars Program’s enrollment expansion policy. Taiwan Educational Review Monthly, 1, 10: 76-78.)
19. 張苙雲 (2002)。〈臺灣教育追蹤資料庫之簡介〉，《調查研究》，12: 111-118。(Chang, L.-Y. [2002]. Introduction of the Taiwan Education Panel Survey data. Survey Research-Method and Application, 12: 111-118.)
20. 張苙雲 (2011)。《臺灣教育長期追蹤資料庫：第一波 (2001)、第二波 (2003)、第三波 (2005)、第四波 (2007) 國中、高中、高職、五專資料使用手冊》(2011.12.1版)。中央研究院調查研究專題中心。(Chang, L.-Y. [2011]. Taiwan Education Panel Survey: The first wave [2001], the second wave [2003], the third wave [2005], the fourth wave [2007], users’ guide [2011.12.1]. Center for Survey Research, Academia Sinica.)
21. 章倩萍 (2002)。《認識國中基本學力測驗》。聯經。(Chang, C.-P. [2002]. An introduction to the Basic Competence Test for Junior High School Students. Linkingbooks.)
22. 教育部 (1998)。《高中及高職多元入學方案》。https://edu.law.moe. gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=FL008733 (Ministry of Education. [1998]. The Multi-opportunities high school enrollment program.)
23. 教育部 (2005)。《九十五年國民中學學生寫作測驗試辦實施方案》。https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=FL036611 (Ministry of Education. [2005]. Pilot implementation of writing assessment for junior high school students in 2006.)
24. 教育部 (2010年5月27日)。〈回應全教會要求暫緩「2011學年度繁星計畫併入甄選入學」之相關研究說明〉，《教育部電子報》。https://epaper.edu.tw/news.aspx?news_sn=3186 (Ministry of Education. [2010, May 27]. A reply to National Teachers’ Association’s request of postponing the combination of 2011 academic year’s Stars Program with recommendation and screening-based admission. Ministry of Education Newsletter.)
25. 教育部 (2015年6月23日)。〈十二年國民基本教育實施計畫〉(修正計畫)。《行政院全球資訊網》。https://goo.gl/iyvLT1 (Ministry of Education. [2015, June 23]. The 12-year basic education program [rev.]. The Executive Yuan.)
26. 楊孟麗、譚康榮、黃敏雄 (2003)。《臺灣教育長期追蹤資料庫──心理計量報告：TEPS 2001分析能力測驗》。中央研究院調查研究專題中心。(Yang, M.-L., Tam, T., & Huang, M.-H. [2003]. Taiwan Education Panel Survey: Psychometric report for the ability tests of TEPS 2001. Center for Survey Research, Academia Sinica.)
27. 蔡閨秀 (2008)。〈大學招生新管道──繁星計畫〉，《大學考試中心選才通訊》，172。(Tsai, K.-H. [2008]. The new channel for university admissions: The Stars Program. College Entrance Examination Center Newsletter, 172.)
28. Domina, T., Penner, A., & Penner, E. (2017). Categorical inequality: Schools as sorting machines. Annual Review of Sociology, 43: 311-330.
29. Dweck, C. (2007). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books.
30. Heckman, J., Humphries, J. E., & Kautz, T. (Eds.). (2014). The myth of achievement tests: The GED and the role of character in American life. The University of Chicago Press.
31. Huang, M.-H., & Hauser, T. S. (2010). Tracking persons from high school through adult life: Lessons from the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. EurAmerica, 40, 2: 311-358.
32. Kerckhoff, A. C. (1995). Institutional arrangements and stratification processes in industrial societies. Annual Review of Sociology, 21: 323-347.
33. Nusche, D., Braun, H., Halász, G., & Santiago, P. (2014). OECD reviews of evaluation and assessment in education: Netherlands 2014. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264211940-en
34. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2019). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. https://doi.org/10. 1787/b25efab8-en
35. Spence, J. T., & Helmreich, R. L. (1983). Achievement-related motives and behavior. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives: Psychological and sociological approaches (pp. 10-74). Freeman.
36. Spring, J. (1976). The sorting machine. David McKay.
37. Spring, J. (1989). The sorting machine revisited: National educational policy since 1945 (Rev. ed.). Longman.
38. von Maurice, J., & Roßbach, H. G. (2017). The educational system in Germany. Structural Context of Refugee Integration in Canada and Germany, 15: 49-53. https://www.gesis.org/fileadmin/upload/forschung/publikationen/gesis_reihen/gesis_schriftenreihe/GS_15_-_Refugee_Integration_in_Canada_and_Germany.pdf

1. 黃敏雄(Min-Hsiung Huang);顏詩耕(Shih-Keng Yen)(2023)。研究紀要／學術評論：國際視角解析臺灣中學生數學表現的跨年趨勢。教育研究集刊。(69:4)。121-147。