未有資優生之前：地方模式偏鄉校本資優方案之行動研究

Path to giftedness: An action research of place-based gifted program for rural students in Taiwan

10.6172/BSE.202207_47(2).0003

呂金燮(Chin-Hsieh Lu)；張琇儀(Hsiu-Yi Chang)；劉亞汶(Yea-Wen Liou)

才能發展典範 ； 地方模式 ； 行動研究 ； 校本資優方案 ； 偏鄉學生 ； Action Research ； Place-based Model ； Rural Students ； School-based Gifted Program ； Talent Development Paradigm

特殊教育研究學刊

47卷2期（2022 / 07 / 30）

65 - 94

繁體中文

偏鄉地區資優生出現率偏低，是低代表性族群資優教育的重要議題。以才能發展典範的資優教育理念為基礎，研究團隊與新北市偏鄉地區學校合作，以4年的行動研究，探究地方模式校本資優方案的建構與調整歷程、成效與意義。為回應偏鄉地區的殊異性，行動研究調整全校性充實模式結合資優行動拓樸模式的優異概念，做為偏鄉地區校本資優方案的架構。行動期間共有21位二至五年級的學生持續參與校本自然觀察方案至少一年，其中女生3位，男生18位。行動研究資料來自學生的自然觀察特質、興趣量表、歷程觀察與作品與相關其他學業成就表現，以及教師焦點團體座談和非正式個別訪談等。行動研究主要發現有三：首先，回應偏鄉學校殊異性，行動以三個在地轉化階段將全校性充實模式轉化為偏鄉校本資優方案；其二，以地方模式偏鄉校本資優方案設計的自然觀察充實課程，有利於促發偏鄉學校學生在自然觀察特質與目標導向行動腳本的發展；其三，未有資優生之前，才能發展典範地方模式校本資優方案可作為偏鄉資優教育建構的另類模式。最後，依據行動結果，從才能發展典範與文化回應觀點，對偏鄉資優教育提出具體建議。

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the constructing processes and effectiveness of a place-based gifted program for rural students in Taiwan. The low ratio of gifted students identified in rural areas is a critical issue in gifted education. Gifted education researchers strongly emphasize that the concepts of intelligence and giftedness are indicative of cultural values. Responding to the issues of multiculturalism and the learning needs of rural children, gifted education should construct a supporting system which integrated the characteristics of rural children and their local culture. Generally, identification of gifted student status is the locomotive of a gifted program in Taiwan. However, children in rural areas often fail to meet the identification criteria of giftedness due to their language, culture, and/or region of residence. To construct a gifted program for rural children, it is thus necessary to deviate from the typical standard of ＂giftedness＂ and to value the local culture from the perspective of placed-based education. Moreover, the talent developmental trajectories of rural children from a diverse cultural background must be accounted for. Therefore, a talent development paradigm was adopted to guide this action research of placed-based gifted program. Method: This study was a 4-year, long-term action research project. The framework of the place-based gifted program was based on the theorical foundations of school-wide enrichment model and the Actiotope model of giftedness. Shui-Shui Elementary School in New Taipei City was invited to construct the place-based gifted program cooperatively with the researchers. More than two-thirds of Shui-Shui students are Atayal. Generally, Shui-Shui students' academic achievements are below average relative to Taiwanese students overall. Students' main strengths are in athletics, dancing, singing, and naturalist intelligence. However, sports have been the main developmental goal for most students, and students who have a high interest in natural observation have limited opportunities to cultivate their interest, despite Shui-Shui including natural ecology as part of the curriculum since 2001. Based on the strengths of students and the resources of the Shui-Shui school and surrounding community, the goal of this action research was to construct a place-based gifted program for Shui-Shui students who are highly interest in natural observation. During the 4-year action research, a total of nine teachers, two parents, and two elders were invited to structure an after-school natural observation program based on the framework of the place-based gifted education. A total of 39 students were identified and invited to participate in the after-school natural observation program, 21 of whom participated for at least one year, including 3 girls and 18 boys. The data were collected using the Natural Observation Characteristics Scale, Biophilia Scale, Interest Scale, academic achievement, teacher focus-group interviews, student works, and related documents. The data were drawn from the school level and student cases and were analyzed through descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis. Results: Three main findings were identified through the action research. First, to respond to the uniqueness of children's learning in rural areas, three stages of adjustments were implemented to transform the school-wide enrichment model into a place-based model. The first stage focused on resources, the second stage adjusted the standard of giftedness according to the students' strengths, and the third stage involved development of each student's talent in natural observation. Each stage lasted roughly 1 year, depending on the progress of and changes in students' learning. Second, the place-based gifted program facilitated positive changes in students' natural observation characteristics, especially when evaluated according to the indicators of biophilia and scientific inquiry. Third, with the supports of the place-based gifted program, students developed alternative goal-oriented action scripts. Three types of student goal-oriented action scripts were identified and delineated. Conclusions: As previously mentioned, sports or performance-oriented activities have been the most successful endeavors of Shui-Shui students, and they are generally the predominant goals of most students in rural areas. The most challenging aspect of this action research was encouraging students to understand, pursue, and invest in their own abilities and to develop their optimal personal trajectory because of the counterinfluence of the pressure of mainstream education and the achievement action script of school culture. Based on the results from research at Shui-Shui, it was found that three factors can lead to an effective place-based gifted program for rural students: dynamically monitoring teachers' understanding of gifted characteristics through assessment, scientifically mediating students' experiences through enrichment learning, and systematically guiding talent development through productive outcomes. The identification of rural students' giftedness has always been a critical challenge for gifted education. We found that teachers' understanding of the indicators of gifted characteristics, such as multiple intelligence assessments, enhanced their sensitivity to students' strengths in areas other than academics or sports and they adjusted their teaching easily to support students' learning. Generally, Shui-Shui students are highly interested in natural observation but lack scientific inquiry skills and habits. After-school enrichment activities provided systematic mediated learning for students to explore their interests and develop the necessary intellectual understanding. Moreover, students and teachers enjoyed sharing the students' productive outcomes, which helped to actively develop students' talents. Implications: Place-based educational research is complex. To avoid directly adopting the paradigmatic concept of giftedness and the associated criteria for identifying gifted children into the learning culture of rural schools, the researchers used the constructing process of the place-based gifted program as a path for shifting Shui-shui teachers' perspective of giftedness from gifted children paradigm to talent development paradigm. On the path of construction, teachers' devotion to and awareness, recognition, and appreciation of students' strengths were facilitated. According to the talent development paradigm, constructing a learning culture for students to develop a goal-oriented action script for pursuing personal excellence is far more important than identifying gifted students. If rural schools can create a learning culture based on place-based education and recognize students' strengths on the basis of the paradigm of talent development, some achievement results that can be specifically assessed or measured may change in the long term. The place-based model of gifted program based on the theoretical foundations of the talent development paradigm is a promising direction for gifted education in rural areas.

1. 吳璧純, P.(2017)。耕耘一畝兒童學習的沃土 – 十二年國民基本教育之生活課程特色。教育脈動，10，1-13。
   連結：
2. 呂金燮, C.-H.,侯貞伊, C.-Y.,陳偉仁, W.-R.(2016)。資優教育的在地轉化：一個課外方案的實踐與省思。資優教育論壇，14，1-26。
   連結：
3. 李家兆, C.-C.,郭靜姿, C.-C.(2017)。公平與正義－低代表性資優群體的研究發展與趨勢。資優教育季刊，142，1-8。
   連結：
4. 林佳靜, C.-C.,許世璋, S.-J.(2017)。地方本位環境教育課程的實踐 - 以東臺灣一個原住民小學為例。科學教育學刊，25(4)，301-330。
   連結：
5. 侯雅齡, Y.-L.,陳淑慧, S.-H.(2017)。在偏鄉中拔尖－屏東資優教育的在地化實踐。資優教育論壇，15，69-89。
   連結：
6. 洪如玉, R.-U.(2016)。從地方教育學觀點探討跨議題融入課程與教學。課程與教學，19(2)，83-102。
   連結：
7. 洪萱芳, H.-F.,顏瓊芬, C.-F.,張妤萍, Y.-P.,洪韶君, S.-C.(2016)。以偏鄉國小為場域之地方本位環境教育課程省思。科學教育學刊，24(3)，299-331。
   連結：
8. 陳依信, I.-S.(2014)。自然觀察智能的躍升 - 從潛能到才能。資優教育論壇，12，55-65。
   連結：
9. 陳偉仁, W.-R.(2012)。人才培育的空間美學：在地化資優教育的探討。資優教育季刊，124，19-30。
   連結：
10. 黃楷茹, K.-J.,陳美芳, M.-F.(2018)。才能發展取向的學生才能檔案建構。資優教育季刊，146，13-23。
    連結：
11. 譚光鼎, K.-D.,林明芳, M.-F.(2002)。原住民學童學習式態的特質—花蓮縣秀林鄉泰雅族學童之探究。教育研究集刊，48(2)，233-261。
    連結：
12. Armstrong, T.(2017).Multiple intelligence in the classroom.Association for supervision & Curriculum Development.
13. Barnhardt, R.(2008).Creating a place for indigenous knowledge in education: The Alaska native knowledge network.Place-Based Education in the Global Age
14. Berkes, F.(1993).Traditional ecological knowledge in perspective.Traditional ecological knowledge: Concept and cases
15. Bevan-Brown, J.(2005).Providing a culturally responsive environment for gifted maori learners.International Education Journal,6(2),150-155.
16. Borland, J. H.(2005).Gifted education without gifted children: The case for no conception of giftedness.Conceptions of giftedness
17. Bruner, J.(1996).The culture of education.Harvard University Press.
18. Callahan, C. M.,Azano, A. P.(2021).Place-based gifted education in rural schools.Handbook of giftedness and talent development in the Asia-Pacific
19. Colangelo, N.,Assouline, S. G.,Baldus, C. M.,New, J. K.(2003).Gifted education in rural schools.Handbook of gifted education
20. Dai, D. Y.,Chen, F.(2013).Three paradigms of gifted education: In search of conceptual clarity in research and practice.Gifted Child Quarterly,57(3),151-168.
21. Donovan, M. J.(2015).Aboriginal student stories, the missing voice to guide us towards change.The Australian Educational Researcher,42,613-625.
22. Dronkers, J.,Schijf, H.(1986).Neighbourhoods, schools, and individual attainment: A better model for analyzing unequal educational opportunities?.Research in Sociology of Education and Socialization,6,203-225.
23. Gagńe, F.(2010).Motivation within the DMGT 2.0 framework.High Ability Study,21(2),81-99.
24. Gardner, H.(2000).The giftedness matrix: A developmental perspective.Talents unfolding: Cognition and development
25. Gay, G.(2018).Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice.Teachers College Press.
26. Gruenewald, D. A.,Smith, G. A.(2008).Place-based education in the global Age.Routledge.
27. Harker, R. K.(1990).Cultural reproduction and school achievement: A case for Kura Kaupapa Maori.Contemporary Issues in Education,19(2),80-94.
28. Kellert, S. R.,Wilson, E. O.(2008).Biophilia.Human Ecology,462-466.
29. Lidz, C. S.,Macrine, S.(2001).An alternative approach to the identification of gifted culturally and linguistically diverse learners: The contribution of dynamic assessment.School Psychology International,22(1),74-96.
30. Maslow, A.(1993).The farther reaches of human nature.Penguin.
31. Monaghan, F.(2007).Gifted and talented statistics: PLASC data and EAL.Naldic Quarterly,5(1),35-39.
32. Morris, M.(2004).The eighth one: Naturalist intelligence.Multiple intelligences reconsidered
33. Olszewski-Kubilius, P. P.,Thomson, D. T.(2015).Talent development as a framework for gifted education.Gifted Child Today,38(1),49-59.
34. Persson, R. S.(2012).Cultural variation and dominance in a globalized knowledge economy: Towards a culture-sensitive research paradigm in the science of giftedness.Gifted and Talented International,27(1),15-48.
35. Plucker, J. A.,Peters, S. J.(2016).Excellence gap in education: Expanding opportunity for talent students.Harvard Education Press.
36. Renzulli, J. S.(1997).The Interest-A-Lyzer.Creative Learning Press.
37. Renzulli, J. S.(2000).The identification and development of giftedness as a paradigm for school reform.Journal of Science Education and Technology,9(2),95-114.
38. Scheffler, I.(1985).Of human potential: An essay in the philosophy of education.Routledge and Kegan Paul.
39. Shear, B.,Fleetham, M.(2008).Creating extra-ordinary teachers: Multiple intelligences in the classroom and beyond.The Continuum International Publishing Group.
40. Shurkin, J. N.(1992).Terman's kids: The groundbreaking study of how the gifted grow up.Little, Brown and Co..
41. Simonton, D. K.(2000).Creativity: Cognitive, personal, developmental, and social aspects.American Psychologist,55(1),151-158.
42. Vygotsky, L. S.(1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Harvard University Press.
43. Ziegler, A.(2005).The actiotope model of giftedness.Conceptions of giftedness
44. 林坤燦（編）, K. C.(Ed.)(2009).「資優學生鑑定評量及安置要點訂定」執行推動手冊.教育部=Ministry of Education.
45. 教育部=Ministry of Education(2008).資優教育白皮書.教育部=Ministry of Education.
46. 郭靜姿, C.-C.(2001)。潛藏的才能：原住民學生的學習特質及潛能評估研究。族群融合的心境界 -原住民教育文化
47. 郭靜姿, C.-C.,張蘭畹, L.-W.,王曼娜, M.-N.,盧冠每, K.-M.(2000)。文化殊異學生學習潛能評估之研究。特殊教育研究學刊，19，253-278。
48. 廖永堃, Y.-K.(2002)。國立臺灣師範大學=National Taiwan Normal University。
49. 蔣明珊, M.-S.(1995)。國立臺灣師範大學=National Taiwan Normal University。

1. 侯雅齡(2023)。跨校混成教學於資賦優異學生獨立研究課程之實踐。特殊教育研究學刊，48(2)，77-110。