弱勢教育政策在學校執行之研究--以新北市兩所國小為例

Abstract

弱勢學生的教育扶助已為國內教育領域中被所重視之議題之一，國內亦不乏對於各項弱勢教育政策執行之研究；過去之研究多針對各項單一政策之執行，鮮少對學校整體執行弱勢教育政策之情形為研究，然在現行弱勢議題已為政府施政重點之一的脈絡下，學校經常同時執行多項的弱勢教育政策。本研究目的即在於瞭解學校在固定的人力、資源環境下執行多項弱勢教育政策之情形，以及所面對的人力負擔、執行問題困難為何，另外也探討多項政策資源同時挹注於一所學校時是否有重複補助之情形。 研究方法上採個案研究法，以深入瞭解學校執行弱勢教育政策之情形、問題困難，以及學校人員的期待；選取兩所新北市偏遠小型學校為個案對象，以凸顯有限人力執行多項弱勢教育政策之限制與困難；蒐集資料方式為訪談校內弱勢教育政策相關承辦人與參與教師，輔以文件蒐集。 綜合文獻以及資料蒐集分析之結果，本研究獲致以下結論： 一、 個案學校皆申請補助執行多項弱勢教育政策方案協助學生的學習與成長，學期中所需執行之工作亦隨之增加。 二、 學校執行多項弱勢教育政策，行政兼教師人員工作負擔沈重。 三、 教師對於弱勢教育政策之執行尚可負擔，然最大困難仍在學生學習輔導。 四、 學生參與弱勢教育政策補助重疊。 五、 學校對弱勢教育政策執行成效存疑，然仍希望政府持續關心弱勢學生，並檢討政策意義，整合相關資源投入。 而對於上述結論本研究對於教育行政機關之建議為：省思各項弱勢教育政策之執行是否有整合可能性，使政策執行更具效率，亦減少學校行政之負擔，讓學校人員專注於學校教育的本質；至執行第一線瞭解學校對於政策實施之實際情形與問題困難，並設法建立完善配套措施協助其解決；對於弱勢學生的協助必須切確瞭解其學習弱勢之情形，整合運用政府資源對症下藥，或下放至學校自主辦理，避免儘以粗糙的分類來判別學生接受補助與否；對於政策執行成效之評鑑必須以是否確實促進弱勢學生學習成長為目標，非僅以表面量化數據作為政策實施成效考評標準。另對於對學校的建議本研究認為，行政與教師應持續溝通並交換政策實施之意見，並且以系統思考檢討政策辦理是否有實際成效或只是增加負擔。As the issue of disadvantaged education has been concerned recently, studies about the implementation of policies for disadvantaged education are increasing. However, most of the earlier studies were focused on one single policy, less was about the whole policies implemented in one school, where more than two policies implemented under the context government concerned about disadvantaged education. Thus, the purpose of this study aimed to explore the implementation of policies for disadvantaged students in elementary schools where more than one disadvantaged educational policy implemented, including about the situation of policies implementation, school members’ burden, problems and difficulties school facing; besides, the studies also researched about how students participate in those several policies. The study adopted a case study approach, and two small remote elementary schools which are one normal school and aboriginal school the other in New Taipei City were chosen to be research objects. The methods of data collection were semi-structured interview and document analysis. According to the results of this research, conclusions are the following: 1. Both the schools applied several project for helping disadvantaged students learing, so the work to do is increasing. 2. Teachers additional to their administrative job have great burden when implementing several policies for disadvantaged students. 3. Teachers do not have as much burden as administrative members do, but one difficulty facing teachers is about students’ learning. 4. Students participate in the overlapping policies. 5. School members doubt the success of the implementing, but they still hope that the government can continue concerns about those disadvantaged students, and the government should review those policies and integrate resources. This study provided suggesion for educational authorities are: concerned about the possibility of integrating several policies for disadvantaged children to make policy implementation more efficient and decrease school members’ loading; understand how the first line members practice policies and what problems they face, and then set up supporting measures to help them overcome problems; diagnose precisely how those students being disadvantaged and give them useful resources; evaluate the success of the polities with the goal which is promoting students’ learning instead of facial numbers. And for schools the study suggest that all the school members should dialoge and discuss about how to make things better, and then think systematically the outcome of the policy implementation.