不進而廢：高關懷國中生學校學習問題之研究

No Progress Leads to Abandonment: The Research on Learning Problems of At-Risk Students in Junior High School

10.53106/172851862022010063002

李逢堅(James Feng-Chien Lee)

高關懷 ； 第三空間理論 ； 國中生 ； 偏差行為 ； 學校學習 ； At-risk students ； deviant behaviors ； junior high school ； school learning ； third space theory

中華輔導與諮商學報

63期（2022 / 01 / 01）

35 - 70

繁體中文

高關懷學生有較高的學業適應問題，容易促發偏差行為甚至中輟。為了瞭解他們的學習困境，本研究從第三空間理論探究他們自學校學習的認同特徵及形成，同時檢視不利於他們學習的學校制度特徵。研究對象為十位有偏差行為的高關懷學生，選自北部一所升學型國中的三個多元班。研究方法採個別深度訪談及非參與觀察法。訪談對象為學生、三位多元班主責教師與輔導組長。觀察的三個班別為農耕班、熱舞班及導航班。以詮釋現象學取向進行資料分析。研究結果發現，他們的認同特徵是不讀書。認同形成肇因於不懂所學，他們學習壓力相當大，混和許多負向情緒，於是成為課堂局外人，展現課堂偏差、翹課甚至中輟。他們因應學習壓力的方式，混和逃避、放棄、抗拒、自然反應與偏差行為，不僅無助於改善困境，反而在學校制度課程屬性、統一規範的課程進度、大班教學與考試範圍下，形成棄學的迴圈。在課堂規範下，他們受管教而破壞師生關係，連帶討厭課堂。即使師生關係佳，仍不等於支持學習。也因放棄學習而缺乏支持學習的同儕。當他們從學習轉向玩樂，提高回歸學習的難度，若交往涉及幫派的同儕，不僅偏差行為加劇，更可能回頭抗拒家庭的管教。

At-risk students have more problems of learning in schools that might lead to delinquent behaviors and drop-out. It is important to find out their difficulties in learning in schools and let at-risk students receive suitable schooling. The research purposes are to investigate the identity and their formation based on the third space theory. This approach could reflect the school systems which would obstruct learning of at-risk students from their coping attitudes. Ten at-risk students who had delinquent behaviors were chosen from three Multiple Classes in a junior high school in Taipei. The school has better high school entrance performance. Multiple Classes teaching various activities but academy are designed for delinquent students who are not able to stay in regular classroom to learn. Classes include gardening, dance and navigation related activites. Research methods are individual in-depth interview and non-participatory observation. Interviewees were students, one teacher from each of the three Multiple Classes and Section Chief of Counseling in school. Observation was conducted in each of the three Multiple Classes using video recording and field diary. Data were analyzed by hermeneutic phenomenology approach. Interviews with student were the primary data, and interviews with teachers and class observation served as triangulation. After all cases were analyzed individually, cross cases analysis followed. The results find the identity of at-risk students is to quit learning, and four students identified themselves as to playaround. Regarding identity formation, they bear huge pressure from learning with lots of negative emotions which results from not understanding what they are taught. These emotions led to their delinquency behaviors and marginalization in class, cut classes or even flunk out. Avoiding, giving up, resisting and spontaneous reaction were used by these students to cope with pressure in school. These attitudes relating to misbehaviors can not relieve their difficulties, but form a feedback loop that impeded student learning in the school systems. These school systems are academic curriculum, one-size-fits-all curriculum schedule and tests, and whole class instruction. The loop keeps them from learning, getting harder to follow up classes and even staying away from schools. Class delinquency of students often led to disciplinary actions which worsened teacher-student relationship and their attitude toward the teachers' classes. Even the relationship is fair, it does not mean to support their learning. Additionally, at-risk students lack of classmates to support their learning after quit learning because common activities of classmates are about learning. If they escape from learning to play around, they spend more time on play and created a vicious circle of low school. Their parents are commonly unfamiliar with their friends frequently hanging on. If they have friends to do with gangsters, they would act more delinquent behaviors and even rebel against their family rules. The contributions of this research are in two perspectives. From research approach perspective, this research adopts third space theory to explore at-risk students learning problems in school. It not only reveals huge pressure experiences by at-risk students in learning but also the school systems that are disadvantageous to their learning. The at-risk student is the title labelled from the authority of school system taking them as different. From practical perspective, the results depict extremely embarrassed situations of at-risk students in learning. Education policy makers and school administrators should adjust the systems to be more flexible and fit better students' learning conditions. Teachers and consultants should be more sensitive to identifying their explicit delinquent behaviors and interpret such behaviors not as violating rules intentionally but as a warning of their learning difficulties and assist them to overcome.

1. 李逢堅, F. C.,濮世緯, S. W.(2014)。國中生學習者角色認同之研究：以台北市昇學國中為例。教育科學期刊，13(1)，113-136。
   連結：
2. 李逢堅, J. F. C.(2010)。國中導師對經常違規學生自我認同影響之研究。中華輔導與諮商學報，28，229-281。
   連結：
3. 張素貞, S. C.(2015)。原住民幼教師身分認同之探尋。教育實踐與研究，28(1)，61-98。
   連結：
4. 張楓明, F. M.(2011)。學業層面之參與、抱負、自我效能及緊張因素對初次偏差行為影響之縱貫性研究。當代教育研究季刊，19(3)，39-81。
   連結：
5. 彭淑玲, S. L.(2019)。知覺教師回饋、個人成就目標、學業自我效能與無聊之關係：中介效果與條件間接化效果分析。教育心理學報，51(1)，83-108。
   連結：
6. 鄭詩樺, S. H.,許文娟, W. J.,張文峯, M. F.,吳芝儀, C. Y.(2017)。《學生轉銜輔導及服務辦法》之保密倫理議題。輔導季刊，53(3)，9-19。
   連結：
7. 譚子文, T. W.,張楓明, F. M.(2013)。依附關係、低自我控制與青少年偏差行為關聯性之研究。中華輔導與諮商學報，36，67-90。
   連結：
8. 蘇郁嵐, Y. L.,陳李綢, L. C.(2007)。國中生社會地位、合作與競爭對其英語科學業成就、社會焦慮、成就動機及歸因風格之影響。教育心理學報，39(1)，111-127。
   連結：
9. Barton, A. C.,Tan, E.(2009).Funds of knowledge and discourses and hybrid space.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,46(1),50-73.
10. Barton, A. C.,Tan, E.,Rivet, A.(2008).Creating hybrid spaces for engaging school science among urban middle school girls.American Educational Research Journal,45(1),68-103.
11. Bhabha, H. K.(1994).The location of culture.Routledge.
12. Bhabha, H. K.,Rutherford, J.(1990).The third space: Interview with Homi Bhabha.Identity: Community, culture, difference
13. Bhatt, R. M.(2008).In other words: Language mixing, identity representations, and third space.Journal of Sociolinguistics,12(2),177-200.
14. Brezina, T.,Azimi, A. M.(2018).Social support, loyalty to delinquent peers, and offending: An elaboration and test of the differential social support hypothesis.Deviant Behavior,39(5),648-663.
15. Brickhouse, N. W.,Potter, J. T.(2001).Young women's scientific identity formation in an urban context.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38(8),965-980.
16. Burk, W. J.,Kerr, M.,Stattin, H.(2008).The co-evolution of early adolescent friendship networks, school involvement, and delinquent behaviors.Revue Française de Sociologie,49(3),499-522.
17. Castells, M.(1997).The power of identity.Blackwell Publishers.
18. Chapple, C. C.(2005).Self control, peer relations, and delinquency.Justice Quarterly,22,89-106.
19. Chung, H. L.,Mulvey, E. P.,Steinberg, L.(2011).Understanding the school outcomes of juvenile offenders: An exploration of neighborhood influences and motivational resources.Journal of Youth and Adolescence,40(8),1025-1038.
20. Creswell, J. W.(2007).Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches.Sage.
21. Crosnoe, R.(2002).High school curriculum track and adolescent association with delinquent friends.Journal of Adolescent Research,17(2),143-167.
22. Dong, B.,Krohn, M. D.(2016).Dual trajectories of gang affiliation and delinquent peer association during adolescence: An examination of long-term offending outcomes.Journal of Youth and Adolescence,45(4),746-762.
23. Froggio, G.,Agnew, R.(2007).The relationship between crime and "objective" versus "subjective" strains.Journal of Criminal Justice,35(1),81-87.
24. Goetz, T.,Sticca, F.,Pekrun, R.,Murayama, K.,Elliot, A. J.(2016).Intraindividual relations between achievement goals and discrete achievement emotions: An experience sampling approach.Learning and Instruction,41,115-125.
25. Gutiérrez, K. D.(2008).Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space.Reading Research Quarterly,43(2),148-164.
26. Hatt, B.(2007).Street smarts vs. book smarts: The figured world of smartness in the lives of marginalized, urban youth.Urban Review: Issues and Ideas in Public Education,39(2),145-166.
27. Hirata, S.,Sako, T.(1998).Perceptions of school environment among Japanese junior high school, non-attendant, and juvenile delinquent students.Learning Environments Research,1(3),321-331.
28. Hoffmann, J. P.(2018).Academic underachievement and delinquent behavior.Youth & Society,52(5),1-28.
29. Keenan, E. K.,Miehls, D.(2008).Third space activities and change processes: An exploration of ideas from social and psychodynamic theories.Clinical Social Work Journal,36(2),165-175.
30. Lin, W.-H.,Yi, C.-C.(2016).Family and school strains and their effects on adolescent deviance in Taiwan: A mediating study.Youth & Society,48(4),496-520.
31. Liu, R. X.(2011).Strain as a moderator of the relationship between parental attachment and delinquent participation: A China study.International Criminal Justice Review,21(4),427-442.
32. Moje, E. B.,Ciechanowski, K. M.,Kramer, K.,Ellis, L.,Carrillo, R.,Collazo, T.(2004).Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse.Reading Research Quarterly,39(1),38-70.
33. Müller, C. M.,Hofmann, V.,Fleischli, J.,Studer, F.(2016).Classroom peer influence from the entire class, dominant students, and friends.Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology,15(1),122-145.
34. Pattion、 M. Q.,吳芝儀（譯）, C. Y.(Trans.)(2008).質性研究與評鑑.濤石=Sage.
35. Pekrun, R.,Hall, N. C.,Goetz, T.,Perry, R. P.(2014).Boredom and academic achievement: Testing a model of reciprocal causation.Journal of Educational Psychology,106(3),696-710.
36. Saldaña, J.(2016).The coding manual for qualitative researchers.Sage.
37. Theimann, M.(2016).School as a space of socialization and prevention.European Journal of Criminology,13(1),67-91.
38. Vitulano, M. L.,Fite, P. J.,Rathert, J. L.(2010).Delinquent peer influence on childhood delinquency: The moderating effect of impulsivity.Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment,32,315-322.
39. Wang, M.-T.,Fredricks, J. A.(2014).The reciprocal links between school engagement, youth problem behaviors, and school dropout during adolescence.Child Development,85(2),722-737.
40. Wang, X.,Blomberg, T. G.,Li, S. D.(2005).Comparison of the educational deficiencies of delinquent and nondelinquent students.Evaluation Review,29(4),291-312.
41. 丁雪茵, H.-Y.,鄭伯壎, B.-S.,任金剛, C.-K.(1996)。質性研究中研究者的角色與主觀性。本土心理學研究，6，354-376。
42. 吳武典, W. T.(1997)。國中偏差行為學生學校生活適應之探討。教育心理學報，29，25-50。
43. 吳芝儀, C. Y.(2000)。國中階段中輟學生輟學經驗與危機因素之研究。犯罪學期刊，5，179-232。
44. 李逢堅, F. C.(2015)。國中生數理學習認同之研究。教育研究月刊，255，21-35。
45. 李逢堅, J. F. C.(2011)。國中導師管教行動與學生回應之研究。教師專業研究期刊，1，51-78。
46. 教育部統計處, Ministry of Education(2017)。國中小學生輟學概況分析。教育統計簡訊，64，1-2。
47. 陳貞吟, C. Y.,張楓明, F. M.,郭俊豪, J. H.(2018)。高中生知覺教師教學效能、學業自我效能與班級偏差行為關聯性之探討。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊，10(2)，1-42。
48. 曾儀芬, Y. F.,王秀美, H. M.,黃福慧, F. H.(2014)。執行高關懷兒少輔導方案機構間合作現況之探討：以澎湖縣為例。台灣社區工作與社區研究學刊，4(1)，83-130。
49. 楊俊鴻, C. H.,歐用生, Y. S.(2009)。第三空間及其課程美學蘊義。教育資料與研究，88，69-92。
50. 謝志龍, C. L.(2011)。國中學生偏差行為之研究：社會資本的觀點。臺灣教育社會學研究，11(2)，129-165。
51. 譚子文, T. W.,董旭英, Y. Y.,張博文, P. W.(2015)。依附、參與、抱負、信念與青少年學業適應問題關係之研究－社會控制理論的再檢視。青少年犯罪防治研究期刊，7(1)，91-139。