我國中輟防治工作現況與困境之研究

本研究旨在透過訪視，瞭解當前：一、各縣市政府實施中輟防治工作政策的成效與優缺點；二、各縣市政府推行中輟中介教育機構執行的績效；三、我國中輟防治之現況與當前所面對之困境與限制。訪視對象包含全國25縣市中輟防治工作相關人員。研究工具包含83-93學年度教育部中輟通報資料，以及中輟防治工作評估表。評估表先以文獻分析的方式找尋國內外用以評估中輟防治工作執行狀況之向度與細項指標，形成初步之評估工具，再以專家德懷法，進行指標適合度之審核與修改，形成評估工具，再邀集各縣市政府實際負責中輟業務規畫與執行之工作人員進行座談，並針對所形成初步之評估工具進行討論與修改，形成正式之研究工具。研究的時程以94年度爲基準，並在訪視後依據縣市所填之自評表、訪視委員所填之評估表進行資料分析與處理。主要訪視結果爲：一、全國中輟人數與中輟率持續維持在低比率的良好狀況；二、全國復學人數與復學率呈上升趨勢且維持在高比率復學現象；三、中輟通報機制實行初期中輟人數較低，其後呈現緩減的趨勢；四、在採網路登錄通報後，全國中輟人數呈先升後降的變動，近年呈緩步下降趨勢五、各縣市中輟人次和中輟率差異互見。中輟中介教育設施現況爲：一、中輟復學生中介教育容量仍見不足；二、「復學有增，中輟稍減」現象，顯示中輟高危學生輔導仍應策進加強；三、中介教育容量不足的困境在於分布不均。當前中輟防治工作之困境與限制則分別就「領導、組織、運作與計畫」、「資源投入與使用」、「中輟預防與高危群輔導」、「中輟通報、追蹤與尋回」、「中輟復學生之輔導」及「中輟復學中介教育之運作」等六大向度分析，因內容眾多請詳見本文。本研究除整理及討論研究之發現外，並提出未來中輟防治工作實務與研究建議。

關鍵字

中輟防治工作；訪視；中輟現況；中介教育機構

並列摘要

The purposes of this study were to understand (a) the effectiveness, strengths, and weaknesses of the dropout-prevention programs implemented by all the local governments, (b) the accountability of the alternative education programs implemented by the local governments, and (c) the status, dilemma, and limitations of the dropout-prevention programs in Taiwan. The study was conducted by evaluating dropout-prevention programs at 25 counties around the nation. Firstly, the researchers reviewed related literatures to identify the dimensions and detailed indicators of evaluating dropout-prevention programs in order to develop initial evaluation tool. Then the researchers applied Delphi method to revise the indicators. Finally, the researchers held a work conference, inviting the administrators who were practically in charge of plan and execution of dropout-prevention in the local governments to discuss and modify the initial evaluation tool to develop the formal research tool，Dropout Prevention Inventory-DPI. Data were collected from the Annual Reports of the dropout prevention programs released by the Ministry of Education, the self-report of' the administrators in local governments, and the DPI completed by the interviewers to evaluating the dropout-prevention programs in all the local governments. The dilemma and limitations of the dropout-prevention programs were analyzed in according to six dimensions: ”Leading, Organizing, Operating, and Planning,” ”Input and Usage of Resources,” ”Student-Dropout-Prevention and Programs for At-Risk Student,” ”Dropout Register, follow-up, and Helping Back School”, ”Programs for Reentry Students,” and ”Alternative Schools Programs for Reentry Students.” The study provided practically suggestions for the dropout-prevention programs to all the local governments and the central government of and further study.