國小二年級不同補救教學方案之實施與成效之比較：攜手計畫與永齡希望小學
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2015-06-??
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
教育研究與評鑑中心
Center for Educational Research and Evaluation
Center for Educational Research and Evaluation
Abstract
教育部的攜手計畫與永齡教育基金會的永齡希望小學，分別是公私立機構相當具有代表性的課後補救方案。本研究旨在比較這兩種方案在國小二年級國語文補救教學的執行和成效差異。主要發現有三：一、兩方案的執行方式不同，永齡方案從個案的篩選與管理、補救教材、師資的培訓與督導到成效評估，已建立完整的架構，各校執行方式一致；攜手方案補救教學執行方式差異性較大，由教師自主，大多數教師採用學校教科書為補救教材，在職教師仍看重作業指導；二、永齡組的補救成效明顯比攜手組較佳，但成效主要在識字和聽寫層次，閱讀理解的差異則不顯著；三、經過一年補救教學，在幫助學生脫離讀寫困難以及讓學生回到同儕水準行列上，永齡組的進展都比攜手組好。
Issues related to remedial instruction to underachievers have concerned educators, researchers, and policy makers in Taiwan in recent years. The “After School Alternative Program (ASAP)” of Ministry of Education (MOE) and “Yonglin School of Hope” of Yonglin Education Foundation are the representative remedial programs by the public sector (government agents) and private sector (non-profit charity foundation), respectively. The objective of this study is to compare the implementation and effects of these 2 remedial programs. The participants are second graders of the primary schools. Major findings are: (1) the implementation frameworks of the 2 remedial instruction programs are different. From the screening and management of cases, the provision of the remedial material, the training and supervision of the remedial teachers, as well as the assessment of the effects, Yonglin program has built a complete framework and maintained a consistent execution. ASAP has more variation in the implementation because the teachers are free to make their own instructional decisions. Most teachers adopt the materials used in the regular classes as the remedial teaching materials. In-service teachers still emphasize on the homework completion. (2) Yonglin program shows better reading progress than ASAP. The major significant differences between programs are in word recognition and dictation scores; the difference in reading comprehension is not significant. (3) After one year of remedial instruction, the progress of the students in Yonglin program is more significant than that of ASAP in both helping students mitigate difficulties in reading and writing, and match the level of performance of their peers.
Issues related to remedial instruction to underachievers have concerned educators, researchers, and policy makers in Taiwan in recent years. The “After School Alternative Program (ASAP)” of Ministry of Education (MOE) and “Yonglin School of Hope” of Yonglin Education Foundation are the representative remedial programs by the public sector (government agents) and private sector (non-profit charity foundation), respectively. The objective of this study is to compare the implementation and effects of these 2 remedial programs. The participants are second graders of the primary schools. Major findings are: (1) the implementation frameworks of the 2 remedial instruction programs are different. From the screening and management of cases, the provision of the remedial material, the training and supervision of the remedial teachers, as well as the assessment of the effects, Yonglin program has built a complete framework and maintained a consistent execution. ASAP has more variation in the implementation because the teachers are free to make their own instructional decisions. Most teachers adopt the materials used in the regular classes as the remedial teaching materials. In-service teachers still emphasize on the homework completion. (2) Yonglin program shows better reading progress than ASAP. The major significant differences between programs are in word recognition and dictation scores; the difference in reading comprehension is not significant. (3) After one year of remedial instruction, the progress of the students in Yonglin program is more significant than that of ASAP in both helping students mitigate difficulties in reading and writing, and match the level of performance of their peers.