臺北市國中區域衛星資優教育方案之發展歷程與效應

Abstract

本研究旨在檢視臺北市國民中學教育階段推動區域衛星資賦優異教育方案政策從制定、試辦及政策實施的歷程，並探討臺北市國中資優教育工作的後續效應，並進而提出建議的改善作法。

藉由研究者本身承辦衛星方案的經驗，以深度訪談的方式進行資料蒐集，分別與兩位主管機關行政人員、五位總召學校教師及兩位一般學校教師進行對話，歸納出以下結論： 一、規劃過程側重行政問題解決 衛星方案規劃過程專注於解決校本方案的師資、經費以及小校經營資優方案的困難，但卻未考量到總召學校過度負荷、課程深度不足、學校特色消失等問題。 二、促使資優教育資源統整 衛星方案促使資優師資與經費的集中，促使課程廣度增加，學生也有更多的跨校學習交流與觀摩機會。 三、缺乏適性化教學與個別化輔導精神 衛星方案實施後，大型方案不易進行個別化的調整，而學校在資優教育的輔導功能則漸漸式微。 四、學校資優教育發展受限 由於衛星方案課程集中辦於總召學校，許多過去辦理校本方案成果優異的學校則必須停止辦理，其受限了資優教育在學校場域的發展。 五、資優師資缺乏始終未解 即便是衛星方案的總召學校仍然未具資優教師編制，授課師資缺乏及資優專業背景不足的情況仍待改善。 六、教育現場需要兼具課程研發與行政功能的資源中心 因臺北市一般學校內並未普設資優師資，在資優教育的推動上期待資源中心能夠成立專責課程與師資人才的單位，符應教學現場廣大的實務需求。

此外，對於臺北市學術性向資優教育方案調整或發展，建議應兼顧兼顧學術、行政與實務的考量，並且鼓勵資優教育多元發展，讓不同型式的資優服務得以並存其中；當一般學校內尚未普設資優教師，或者因現行法規制度下，學生無法跨區就讀資優班的情況時，則應建立資優課程的支援體系與配套制度，才能讓學校在資優教育的推展上更具備條件與基礎。The purpose of this study is to examine the process of formulating, piloting, and implementing policies for Satellite Gifted Education Program (SGEP) at Junior High Schools in Taipei. It also explores the impact of the policies, and suggests the feasible implementation.

The interview data gathered from two administrative agency officials, five teachers in the host schools, and two school teachers were analyzed and concluded the following results. Firstly, the process of planning SGEP emphasizes administrative problem solving, including teacher hiring, funding, and management in the small-scale schools. However, this study suggests that other problems, including host school overloading, insufficient curriculum depth, and invisible school features, should be emphasized. Secondly, promoting the integration of gifted education resources, including centralized funding, broadening curriculum depth, more observation and learning activities for cross-school students exchange are proposed. Next, this study suggests that the large-scale projects lack of adaptive teaching and individualized counseling after implementing SGEP. This study also found that school gifted education development is limited because SGEP are implemented in the host schools. Also, the lack of gifted education teachers and professionals are expected to be improved in SGEP. Finally, in order to support teaching and learning practice, the establishment of a resource center that combines curriculum research, development, and administrative functions is necessary.

In conclusion, regarding the adjustment or development of the academically gifted education program in Taipei City, this study suggests that, among academy, administration and practice, SGEP should encourage the diversified development of gifted education so that different types of gifted services could coexist. A supporting gifted curriculum system should be established if there is no gifted teacher in the school or the students are unable to attend gifted class by crossing the school districts.