![slider image 1](http://contemporary.cere.ntnu.edu.tw/sites/default/files/public/30-4封面%28縮%29.jpg)
![slider image 1](http://contemporary.cere.ntnu.edu.tw/sites/default/files/public/30-4封面%28縮%29.jpg)
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 haveconcerned educators, researchers, and policy makers in Taiwan inrecent years. The “After School Alternative Program (ASAP)” ofMinistry of Education (MOE) and “Yonglin School of Hope” ofYonglin Education Foundation are the representative remedialprograms by the public sector (government agents) and private sector(non-profit charity foundation), respectively. The objective of thisstudy is to compare the implementation and effects of these 2remedial programs. The participants are second graders of theprimary schools. Major findings are: (1) the implementationframeworks of the 2 remedial instruction programs are different.From the screening and management of cases, the provision of theremedial material, the training and supervision of the remedialteachers, as well as the assessment of the effects, Yonglin programhas built a complete framework and maintained a consistentexecution. ASAP has more variation in the implementation becausethe teachers are free to make their own instructional decisions. Mostteachers adopt the materials used in the regular classes as theremedial teaching materials. In- service teachers still emphasize onthe homework completion. (2) Yonglin program shows better readingprogress than ASAP. The major significant differences betweenprograms are in word recognition and dictation scores; the differencein reading comprehension is not significant. (3) After one year ofremedial instruction, the progress of the students in Yonglin programis more significant than that of ASAP in both helping studentsmitigate difficulties in reading and writing, and match the level ofperformance of their peers.
本著作係採用創用 CC 姓名標示-非商業性 3.0 台灣 授權條款授權.
本刊國立台灣師範大學教育研究與創新中心
106台北市和平東路一段162號 | 電話: 02-7749-3670 | E-mail: cerecerq@gmail.com
教創中心 | 師大 | 電子報 | 線上投審系統
本刊由國家科學及技術委員會人文社會科學研究中心補助經費
© 2014 CERI-NTNU