資優學生鑑定標準及安置方式之調查研究

本研究旨在透過問卷調查法蒐集資優教育學者專家、縣市教育局（處）、資優班家長、普通班家長及資優學生家長團體對於資優生鑑定方式及鑑定標準之意見。研究工具爲「資賦優異學生鑑定評量流程及內容（草案）」及「資賦優異學生鑑定安置方式及鑑定標準專家學者及縣市意見調查問卷」。資料處理分析係以百分比統計與變異數分析方式檢定不同調查對象意見差異的情形。主要研究結果如下： 1.有關多元安置型態部分，在「是否該因應各類別、各教育階段資優學生之需求，提供多樣化之教育安置型態」之議題上，50位專家學者、25縣市及24位家長均表示贊同，贊同比例爲98.02%，顯示專家學者、縣市及家長均認爲應因應學生需求，提供多元而適當的安置方式。 2.在安置方式部分，家長較不贊成採分散式資優資源班、校本資優方案及區域資優方案三種安置型態。在國小階段，家長較之專家學者傾向採集中式資優班安置型態；在高中階段，專家學者則較縣市贊成採集中式資優班安置型態。 3.有關多元鑑定標準部分，在「是否該因應不同安置型態，提供不同的鑑定標準」議題上，48位專家學者、21縣市及24位家長表示贊同，贊同比例爲92.1%，顯示多數人認爲在鑑定過程中，因應不同安置方式應可採用不同的鑑定標準。 4.在鑑定標準方面，專家學者及縣市認爲：集中式資優班以標準化測驗百分等級97以上(61.8%)之標準最適合；分散式資優資源班以標準化測驗百分等級93以上(70.1%)之標準最適合；校本資優及區域方案以標準化測驗百分等級85以上(49.3%、45.6%)之標準最適合。另外，有1位專家學者認爲不同鑑定標準應該非專指標準化測驗而言，實作評量……等均可有不同的鑑定標準。本研究以上述問卷調查結果規劃訂定「資賦優異學生鑑定評量及安置要點」，基本精神如下：1.因應各類別及各教育階段需求，提供多元安置型態，2.因應各類別及各教育階段需求，提供多元鑑定方式，3.因應不同安置型態，提供多元鑑定標準。

關鍵字

無資料

並列摘要

The purposes of this study were to survey the opinions of professionals and experts specializing in gifted education on identification criteria and placement for gifted and talented students through a questionnaire. Totally 111 questionnaires were collected. Research instruments were ”Drafted Procedure of Identification and Placement of Gifted and Talented Students” and ”Questionnaire for Professionals and Administrative Representatives on Identification and Placement of Gifted and Talented Students.” Percentage and ANOVA were the main statistical analysis methods used for the data analysis in order to examine the difference in opinion surveys gathered from different subjects. The main findings were as follows: 1. On multiple placement: There were totally 50 professionals and experts, government officials and administrative representatives from 25 city/county governments, and 24 parents agreed to the proposal whether there is a need to arrange multiple placement paths between categories and levels of education for gifted and talented students. The acceptance ratio reached 98.02%, which obviously indicated a need to arrange multiple placement to meet the developmental needs of students. 2. On program type: The findings showed that parents did not prefer resource program, gifted resource classroom, school-based or community-based enrichment programs. Rather, those parents of primary school students preferred special classes. At the senior high school stage, it was professionals and experts instead of government officials preferred special classes. 3. On multiple criteria for identification: There were 48 professionals and experts, government officials and administrative representatives from 21 city/county governments, and 24 parents agreed to the proposal whether there is different criteria for different placement. The acceptance ratio reached 92.1%, which revealed that multi-dimensional identification was strongly recommended. 4. On identification criteria: For professionals, experts, and government officials, reasonable identification criteria for different placement were as follows: the PR 97 and above in standardized test could be the standard for special class, the PR 93 and above could be the standard for resource program, while the PR 85 and above could be the standard for school-based and community-based enrichment programs. Furthermore, there was one professional considering that different identification criteria was suitable for use not only in standardized test but also in performance assessment and other assessments. In sum, based on the survey results from questionnaires, the ”Regulation for Identification and Placement of Gifted and Talented Students” was drafted with the ideals of arranging multiple placement paths and multiple identification plans to meet the needs of students in different categories and levels of education, and offering multiple identification criteria for different placement as well.