國小縮短修業年限學生家長對子女教育安置相關問題之個案研究

A Case Study on Educational Placement for Elementary Gifted Students Who Were in Acceleration Programs: A Parental Perspective

針對縮短修業年限（以下簡稱縮修）教育之研究，目前鮮少探討符合跳級至國一資格卻選擇國小六年級免修資優學生，本研究主要探討此群縮修學生家長為子女選擇免修的考量因素為何，並了解縮修學生家長對子女生活適應與教育安置的看法。本研究對象為立意選取高雄市通過國一跳級卻選擇免修的國小六年級資優學生家長共3名，採取質性研究中的個別深度訪談來蒐集和分析資料，研究結果發現：一、縮修學生家長為子女選擇免修的因素包括個人（如子女身心發展）、學校（如減少課業壓力、充實學習能力、行政宣導不足、時間銜接不易）及家庭（如交通接送困難及教養負荷過重）因素。二、在學習適應上，縮修學生家長認為，單科免修子女在特定學習科目之學習態度更為積極，惟全部學科免修的子女在整體學習態度變消極；另子女參與免修有利學習多元課程及充實弱勢課程，且在學習成就並無負面影響；在人際適應會因免修科目數有所不同，單科免修的子女在人際適應未受到影響，全部學科免修子女與家長互動頗佳，但在同儕互動待加強；在個人適應會表現情緒調適良好及自我概念提升。三、縮修學生家長對子女教育安置感到滿意原因為孩子可減少學習壓力、避免重複學習時間浪費及增加學習廣度；不滿意的原因有師資來源缺乏、教學場所難尋、課程規劃負擔過重、縮修資訊不足及縮修計畫撰寫困難等問題。

The purpose of this study was to explore the educational placement of elementary gifted students who were in acceleration programs in Kaohsiung city. This study employed the qualitative research as the methodology. Three parents of gifted students who were in acceleration programs were recruited as the participants of the study. The data were collected mainly thorough interviews. The results revealed that: 1. The gifted students’ parents who were unwilling to adopt grade skipping had three reasons: personal factors (e. g.， early entrants’ readiness)， school factors (e. g.， learning and administration resources) and home factors (e. g.， traffic time and child-caring). 2. The gifted students’ parents were aware that there were positive and negative effects of children’s participation in the “free from taking courses＂ program. The advantagesof learning adjustment included positive learning attitude provision of enrichment curriculum and compensation for weak abilities. The interpersonal adjustment was partly negative in relationship with peers. The parents considered that adopting the “free from taking courses＂ program could enhance students’ emotional adjustment and selfconcept. 3. The viewpoints of the parents agreed that the educational placement policy for the gifted students reduced the academic pressure and the enrichment curriculum could enhance the children’s abilities. The educational placement policy they disagreed about included a lack of sources of teachers， teaching places， curriculum designs， and the information and plan of acceleration programs.