國小縮短修業年限學生家長對子女教育安置相關問題之個案研究

A Case Study on Educational Placement for Elementary Gifted Students Who Were in Acceleration Programs: A Parental Perspective

10.6457/BSER.201106.0107

蔡明富(Ming-Fu Tsai)；莊文昭(Wen-Chao Chuang)

縮短修業年限 ； 資優學生 ； 生活適應 ； 教育安置 ； acceleration program ； gifted student ； life adaptation ； educational placement

特殊教育與復健學報

24期（2011 / 06 / 01）

107 - 131

繁體中文

針對縮短修業年限（以下簡稱縮修）教育之研究，目前鮮少探討符合跳級至國一資格卻選擇國小六年級免修資優學生，本研究主要探討此群縮修學生家長為子女選擇免修的考量因素為何，並了解縮修學生家長對子女生活適應與教育安置的看法。本研究對象為立意選取高雄市通過國一跳級卻選擇免修的國小六年級資優學生家長共3名，採取質性研究中的個別深度訪談來蒐集和分析資料，研究結果發現：一、縮修學生家長為子女選擇免修的因素包括個人（如子女身心發展）、學校（如減少課業壓力、充實學習能力、行政宣導不足、時間銜接不易）及家庭（如交通接送困難及教養負荷過重）因素。二、在學習適應上，縮修學生家長認為，單科免修子女在特定學習科目之學習態度更為積極，惟全部學科免修的子女在整體學習態度變消極；另子女參與免修有利學習多元課程及充實弱勢課程，且在學習成就並無負面影響；在人際適應會因免修科目數有所不同，單科免修的子女在人際適應未受到影響，全部學科免修子女與家長互動頗佳，但在同儕互動待加強；在個人適應會表現情緒調適良好及自我概念提升。三、縮修學生家長對子女教育安置感到滿意原因為孩子可減少學習壓力、避免重複學習時間浪費及增加學習廣度；不滿意的原因有師資來源缺乏、教學場所難尋、課程規劃負擔過重、縮修資訊不足及縮修計畫撰寫困難等問題。

The purpose of this study was to explore the educational placement of elementary gifted students who were in acceleration programs in Kaohsiung city. This study employed the qualitative research as the methodology. Three parents of gifted students who were in acceleration programs were recruited as the participants of the study. The data were collected mainly thorough interviews.The results revealed that:1. The gifted students' parents who were unwilling to adopt grade skipping had three reasons: personal factors (e. g., early entrants' readiness), school factors (e. g., learning and administration resources) and home factors (e. g., traffic time and child-caring).2. The gifted students' parents were aware that there were positive and negative effects of children's participation in the ”free from taking courses” program. The advantages of learning adjustment included positive learning attitude provision of enrichment curriculum and compensation for weak abilities. The interpersonal adjustment was partly negative in relationship with peers. The parents considered that adopting the ”free from taking courses” program could enhance students' emotional adjustment and self-concept.3. The viewpoints of the parents agreed that the educational placement policy for the gifted students reduced the academic pressure and the enrichment curriculum could enhance the children's abilities. The educational placement policy they disagreed about included a lack of sources of teachers, teaching places, curriculum designs, and the information and plan of acceleration programs.

1. 高雄市政府教育局（2000）。高雄市國小資賦優異學生縮短修業年限實施方式參考範例。
2. 資賦優異學生降低入學年齡縮短修業年限及升學辦法- - 修正條文（2004）。
3. 資賦優異學生降低入學年齡縮短修業年限及升學辦法（1999）。
4. Benbow, C. P.(1997).Mathematically talented children: Can acceleration meet their educational needs?.Handbook of gifted education,Boston:
5. Bogdan, R. C.,Biklen, S. K.(2007).Qualitative research for education: Anintroduction to theory and methods.Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
6. Brody, L. E.,Assouline, S. G.,Stanley, J. C.(1990).Five years of early entrants: Predicting successful achievement in college.Gifted Child Quarterly,34(4),138-142.
7. Brody, L. E.,Benbow, C. P.(1987).Accelerative strategies: How effective are they for the gifted?.Gifted Child Quarterly,3(3),105-110.
8. Colangelo, N.(Ed.),Assouline, S. G.(Ed.),Gross, M. U. M.(Ed.)(2004).A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students.Iowa City, IA:The Connie Belin & Jacquline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talent Development.
9. Feldhusen, J. F.,Moon, S. M.(1992).Grouping gifted student: Issue and concerns.Gifted Child Quarterly,36(2),63-67.
10. Gross, M. U. M.(1992).The use of radical acceleration in cases of extreme intellectual precocity.Gifted Child Quarterly,36(2),91-99.
11. Gross, M. U. M.(1994).Radical acceleration: Responding to academic and social needs of extremely gifted adolescents.Journal of Secondary Gifted Education,5(4),27-34.
12. Gross, M. U. M.,van Vliet, H. E.(2003).Radical acceleration of highly gifted children: An annotated bibliography of international research on highly gifted children who graduate from high school three or more years early.Sydney, Australia:University of New South Wales.
13. Heinbokel, A.(2002).Acceleration: Still an option for the gifted.Gifted Education International,16,170-178.
14. Heller, K. A.(Ed.),Monks, F. J.(Ed.),Passow, A. C.(Ed.)(1993).International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent.Oxford:Pergamon.
15. Kulik, J. A.,Kulik, C. C.(1992).Meta-analytic findings on grouping programs.Gifted Child Quarterly,36,73-77.
16. Kulik, J. A.,Kulik, C. C.(1984).Synthesis of research on effects of acclerated instruction.Educational Leadership,42(2),84-89.
17. Lupkowski, A. E.,Whitmore, M.,Ramsay, A.(1992).The impact of early entrance to college on self-esteem: A preliminary study.Gifted Child Quarterly,36(2),87-90.
18. Olszewski-Kubilius, P.(1998).Early entrance to college: Students' stories.Journal of Secondary Gifted Education,10,226-247.
19. Rimm, S. B.,Lovance, K. J.(1992).The use of subject and grade skipping for the prevention and reversal of underachievement.Gifted Child Quarterly,36(2),100-105.
20. Schiever, S. W.,Maker, C. J.(1997).Enrichment and acceleration: An overview and new directions.Boston:
21. Southern, W. T.(Ed.),Jones, E. D.(Ed.)(1991).The academic acceleration of gifted children.New York:Teachers College Press.
22. Southern, W. T.,Jones , E. D.,Fiscus, E. D.(1989).Practitioner objections to the academic acceleration of gifted children.Gifted Child Quarterly,33,29-35.
23. Stanley, J. C.(1985).How did six highly accelerated gifted students fare in graduate school?.Gifted Child Quarterly,29(4),180.
24. Swiatek, M. A.(1993).A decade of longitudinal research on academic acceleration through the study of mathematically precocious youth.Roeper Review,15(3),120-124.
25. VanTassel-Baska, J.(2005).Acceleration strategies for teaching gifted learners.Waco, TX:Prufrock Press.
26. Walberg, H. J.(Ed.),Reynolds, M. C.(Ed.)(1994).Handbook of special and remedial education: Research and practice.St. Louis, MO:Elsevier.
27. 朱怡勳(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學特教研究所。
28. 何秋蘭、陳幼君(1994)。資賦優異學生縮短修業年限之輔導。國小特殊教育，16，46-49。
29. 何瑞枝(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學特教研究所。
30. 吳昆壽(1999)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,臺北市:中華民國行政院國家科學委員會。
31. 吳芝儀譯、李奉儒譯(1999)。質的評鑑與研究。臺北市:桂冠。
32. 高淑清(2008)。質性研究的18堂課：首航初探之旅。高雄市:麗文。
33. 郭靜姿(2000)。談資優生縮短修業年限的鑑定與輔導方式。資優教育季刊，76，1-11。
34. 郭靜姿、蔡尚芳、王曼娜(1998)。跳級資優生之生活適應分析。特殊教育研究學刊，16，379-400。
35. 陳幼君(1992)。臺北市民生國小資賦優異縮短修業年限之畢業學生追蹤調查報告。資優教育季刊，43，26-27。
36. 陳炫佚(2007)。臺南市，國立台南大學特殊教育。
37. 陳美芳(1996)。資優學生身心特質與評量。教育資料集刊，資優教育專輯，13-26。
38. 蔡典謨(2005)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,臺北市:中華民國行政院國家科學委員會。
39. 鄭綺瑩(2008)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北市，國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學系。
40. 謝佳諺(2009)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學特殊教育學系。