（專題）高雄市國中教師對樂學計畫合理性評估之研究：方案理論評鑑的觀點
作者:張炳煌(國立高雄師範大學教育學系)、蔡清華(文藻外語大學外語教學系)、陳盈傑(國立中山大學教育研究所)
卷期：59卷第1期
日期：2014年3月
頁碼：33-67
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(1).02
摘要：
本研究旨在運用方案理論評鑑取徑，檢視高雄市國中教師對於樂學計畫合理性之評定，除探討政策形成背景與實施情形外，也關切政策本身的理論假設與規劃邏輯是否周延。本研究提出樂學計畫之方案理論架構為，以「多元適性、就近入學、開創均質」為基礎理論假設，開展出三條理論路徑，分別以「避免單一入學標準」、「引進對應學校概念」、「不進行跨校比較」為子目標，並依其規劃邏輯擬訂方案措施。此方案理論架構為本研究之評鑑架構，據此進行問卷調查，共有426位教師參與研究。研究結果如下：一、樂學計畫具合理性，但各規劃邏輯合理性高低有別；二、樂學計畫基礎理論假設可解釋規劃邏輯之合理性，有助釐清方案成敗關鍵；三、不同區域國中教師對於樂學計畫合理性之評定並無差異。最後本研究提出政策上的建議。
關鍵詞：十二年國民基本教育、方案理論評鑑、免試入學方案、樂學計畫
《詳全文》
參考文獻：
- 王雅蘭（2003）。高中多元入學方案意見調查之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立屏東師範學院，屏東市。【Wang, Y.-L. (2003). The multiple enrollment program for senior high school (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Pingtung University of Education, Pingtung, Taiwan.】
- 王麗雲、侯崇博（2005）。應用方案理論進行評鑑：以嘉義縣市國小週三進修方案為例。載於潘慧玲（主編），教育評鑑的回顧與前瞻（pp. 219-249）。臺北市：心理。【Wang, L.-Y., & Hou, C.-P. (2005). Application of program theory into evaluation: “Teacher in-service on Wednesday afternoon” program of the elementary schools in Chiayi County and City. In H.-L. Pan (Ed.), Retrospect & prospect of educational evaluation (pp. 219-249). Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological.】
- 行政院教育改革審議委員會（1996）。教育改革總諮議報告書。臺北市：作者。【Education Reform Consultative Committee, the Executive Yuan. (1996). General consultation report for the education reform. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 吳武典（2005）。台灣教育改革的經驗與分析：以九年一貫課程和多元入學方案為例。當代教育研究，13（1），38-68。doi:10.1080/13803611003711310【Wu, W.-T. (2005). Experience and analysis of educational reform in Taiwan: The multiple school entrance system and “grades 1st-9th integrative curriculum” as example. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 13(1), 38-68. doi:10.1080/13803611003711310】
- 吳昭儀（2011）。高雄市國民中學鄰近學校規模差距成因及其教育機會均等意涵之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。【Wu, C.-I. (2011). School size difference among nearby schools in Kaohsiung City and its impact on equality of educational opportunity (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.】
» 展開更多
- 王雅蘭（2003）。高中多元入學方案意見調查之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立屏東師範學院，屏東市。【Wang, Y.-L. (2003). The multiple enrollment program for senior high school (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Pingtung University of Education, Pingtung, Taiwan.】
- 王麗雲、侯崇博（2005）。應用方案理論進行評鑑：以嘉義縣市國小週三進修方案為例。載於潘慧玲（主編），教育評鑑的回顧與前瞻（pp. 219-249）。臺北市：心理。【Wang, L.-Y., & Hou, C.-P. (2005). Application of program theory into evaluation: “Teacher in-service on Wednesday afternoon” program of the elementary schools in Chiayi County and City. In H.-L. Pan (Ed.), Retrospect & prospect of educational evaluation (pp. 219-249). Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological.】
- 行政院教育改革審議委員會（1996）。教育改革總諮議報告書。臺北市：作者。【Education Reform Consultative Committee, the Executive Yuan. (1996). General consultation report for the education reform. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 吳武典（2005）。台灣教育改革的經驗與分析：以九年一貫課程和多元入學方案為例。當代教育研究，13（1），38-68。doi:10.1080/13803611003711310【Wu, W.-T. (2005). Experience and analysis of educational reform in Taiwan: The multiple school entrance system and “grades 1st-9th integrative curriculum” as example. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 13(1), 38-68. doi:10.1080/13803611003711310】
- 吳昭儀（2011）。高雄市國民中學鄰近學校規模差距成因及其教育機會均等意涵之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。【Wu, C.-I. (2011). School size difference among nearby schools in Kaohsiung City and its impact on equality of educational opportunity (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.】
- 吳清山、高家斌（2007）。台灣中等教育改革分析：1994-2007年。教育資料集刊，34，1-24。【Wu, C.-S., & Kao, C.-P. (2007). The analysis on the reform of secondary education in Taiwan: 1994-2007. Bulletin of National Institute of Educational Resources and Research, 34, 1-24.】
- 吳清鏞（2007）。就近與跨區入學高中學生學測成績分析比較研究。教育部中等教育司委託之專題研究成果報告。宜蘭市：國立宜蘭高中。【Wu, C.-Y. (2008). A study of the comparison of the students’ general scholastic ability test scores between students enrolled in nearby schools and students enrolled in other schools. Department of Secondary Education research report. Yilan, Taiwan: National Yilan Senior High School.】
- 宋修德、蘇景進（2010）。高中職社區化之學生就近入學成效及其影響因素。教育政策論壇，13（4），1-32。【Sung, H.-T., & Su, C.-C. (2010). The effects and factors of nearby-enrollment in the construction of high school community project. Educational Policy Forum, 13(4), 1-32.】
- 宋曜廷、邱佳民、張恬熒、曾芬蘭（2011）。以國中基本學力測驗成績探討學習成就落差。教育政策論壇，14（1），85-117。【Sung, Y.-T., Chiou, J.-M., Chang, T.-Y., & Tseng, F.-L. (2011). Investigating learning achievement gap through students’ basic competence test scores. Educational Policy Forum, 14(1), 85-117.】
- 宋曜廷、周業太、吳佩璵、林秀珊、曾芬蘭（2010）。從學校本位評量省思臺灣擴大免試入學方案。教育科學研究期刊，55（2），73-113。doi:10.3966/2073X2010065502003【Sung, Y.-T., Chou, Y.-T., Wu, O.-Y., Lin, H.-S., & Tseng, F.-L. (2010). A reflection of school-based assessment on the extended open admission program in Taiwan. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55(2), 73-113. doi:10.3966/2073X2010065502003】
- 李坤崇、湯志民、宋修德、陳金進、王進鎰、王馨珮（2006）。高中職學校轉型及入學學區劃分之研究。教育部中等教育司委託之專題研究成果報告（系統編號：PG 9410-0261）。臺南市：國立成功大學。【Lee, K.-C., Tang, C.-M., Sung, H.-T., Chen, C.-C., Wang, C.-Y., & Wang, S.-P. (2006). A study of the transformation of the senior and vocational high school and the definition of the catchment area. Department of Secondary Education research report (No. PG 9410-0261). Tainan, Taiwan: National Cheng Kung University.】
- 李俊豪（2010）。解釋學生基測成績差異之個人因素與地區因素。地理學報，60，67-102。doi:10.6161/jgs.2010.60.04【Li, C.-H. (2010). Individual and local factors explaining students’ performance on the basic competence test for junior high students. Journal of Geographical Science, 60, 67-102. doi:10.6161/jgs.2010.60.04】
- 周祝瑛（2009）。邁向十二年國民基本教育：由繁化簡的高中、職免試入學方案。教育資料集刊，42，25-42。【Chou, C.-P. (2009). Toward a twelve-year basic education program in Taiwan. Bulletin of National Institute of Educational Resources and Research, 42, 25-42.】
- 周愚文（2010）。「擴大高中職及五專免試入學實施方案」政策形成分析。中等教育，61（1），114-122。【Chou, Y.-W. (2010). An analysis of policy-making of the scheme for widening access to senior high schools & junior colleges without entrance examination. Journal of Secondary Education, 61(1), 114-122.】
- 林大森（2010）。學生選擇多元入學管道因素之探討：以四技為例。教育科學研究期刊，55（3），89-122。doi:10.3966/2073753X2010095503004【Lin, D.-S. (2010). Factors influencing students’ choices in the multiple college entrance program: The case of four-year institutes of technology. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55(3), 89-122. doi:10.3966/ 2073753X2010095503004】
- 林永豐（2007）。追求均質學區－從高中職社區化反省學區的規劃。課程與教學季刊，10（2），131-144。【Lin, Y.-F. (2007). Toward equal-quality school districts－Rethinking the school district based on investigations on the district policy of upper secondary education. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 10(2), 131-144.】
- 林清山（1992）。心理與教育統計學。臺北市：東華。【Lin, C.-S. (1992). Psychological and educational statistics. Taipei, Taiwan: Tung Hua.】
- 施祐吉、黃毅志（2009）。從教育社會學的觀點檢視十二年國民基本教育政策。教育政策論壇，12（3），35-64。【Shih, Y.-C., & Hwang, Y.-F. (2009). Exploring the twelve-year public education program from the perspective of sociology of education. Educational Policy Forum, 12(3), 35-64.】
- 孫意雲（2008）。台北市高中職社區化政策評估之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北教育大學，臺北市。【Sun, Y.-Y. (2008). The study of senior high school community policy evaluation in Taipei (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.】
- 秦夢群（2006）。我國中等教育政策之檢討與策進。教育資料集刊，31，91-123。【Chin, J.-M. (2006). An analysis of the initiatives and policies on secondary education in Taiwan’s educational reform. Bulletin of National Institute of Educational Resources and Research, 31, 91-123.】
- 馬向青（2008）。台灣1990年代以後國民中學升學制度改革之批判論述分析（未出版博士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。【Ma, H.-C. (2008). A critical discourse analysis of the senior secondary education admission system reform in post-1990 Taiwan (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.】
- 高雄市政府教育局（2008a）。高雄區九十八學年度試辦國中生就近入學高中職樂學計畫。高雄市：作者。【Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government. (2008a). Happy learning experimental program for nearby enrolment to senior high school and vocational school in 2009 school year in Kaohsiung area. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Author.】
- 高雄市政府教育局（2008b）。高雄區九十八學年度高級中等學校多元入學實施計畫。高雄市：作者。【Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government. (2008b). Implementation plan for multi-admission to upper secondary school in 2009 school year in Kaohsiung area. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Author.】
- 高雄市政府教育局（2009a）。高雄區九十九學年國中生免試入學高中職樂學計畫。高雄市：作者。【Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government. (2009a). Happy learning program for access to senior high schools without entrance examination in 2010 school year in Kaohsiung area. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Author.】
- 高雄市政府教育局（2009b）。高雄區九十九學年度高級中等學校多元入學實施計畫。高雄市：作者。【Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government. (2009b). Implementation plan for multi-admission to upper secondary school in 2010 school year in Kaohsiung area. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Author.】
- 高雄市政府教育局（2010）。高雄區一百學年度擴大免試入學高中職樂學計畫。高雄市：作者。【Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government. (2010). Happy learning program for widening access to senior high schools without entrance examination in 2011 school year in Kaohsiung area. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Author.】
- 張炳煌（2011）。影響國中畢業生高中職選擇學校因素之研究。教育政策論壇，14（2），145-177。【Chang, P.-H. (2011). A study of school factors affecting students’ choice of senior high and vocational school. Educational Policy Forum, 14(2), 145-177.】
- 張嘉育、周愚文、張炳煌（2009）。綜合高中政策之評鑑與改進：方案理論評鑑的觀點。教育學刊，33，35-74。【Chang, C.-Y., Chou, Y.-W., & Chang, P.-H. (2009). The evaluation and improvement of the comprehensive high school policy in Taiwan: An approach of the program theory evaluation. Educational Review, 33, 35-74.】
- 張碧娟（2010）。免試入學的困境與活路。中等教育，61（4），12-19。【Chang, P.-J. (2010). Predicaments and ways out: A talk on multi-channel school admission system. Journal of Secondary Education, 61(4), 12-19.】
- 教育部（1995）。中華民國教育報告書。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (1995). Education report of the Republic of China. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 教育部（2009）。擴大高中職及五專免試入學實施方案。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (2009). Program for widening access to senior high schools & junior colleges without entrance examination. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 教育部（2010）。高級中等學校多元入學招生辦法。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (2010). Multiple admission regulations for processing students into senior high schools. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 教育部（2011）。十二年國民基本教育實施計畫。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (2011). Program for the twelve-year basic education. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 教育部（2012）。高級中等學校多元入學招生辦法。臺北市：作者。【Ministry of Education. (2012). Multiple admission regulations for processing students into senior high schools. Taipei, Taiwan: Author.】
- 教育部第七次中華民國教育年鑑編纂會（2012）。第七次中華民國教育年鑑（第貳冊）。臺北市：教育部。【Editing Committee of the Seventh Education Yearbook of the Republic of China. (2012). The seventh education yearbook of the Republic of China (Vol. II). Taipei, Taiwan: Ministry of Education.】
- 許泰益（2003）。我國高級中學多元入學方案政策規劃與執行及研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。【Sheu, T.-Y. (2003). The study of the policy planning and implementation of multiple schemes for entering senior high schools in Taiwan (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.】
- 陳弘裕、楊狄龍（2012）。高雄區101學年度高中高職免試入學樂學計畫辦理實務。中正高工學報，11，113-134。【Chen, H.-Y., & Yang, D.-L. (2012). Happy learning program in 2012 school year in Kaohsiung area. Bulletin of C.C.V.S., 11, 113-134.】
- 陳武雄、湯誌龍（2008）。高中職社區化實施成效與發展：以高雄市為例。高應科大人文社會科學學報，5，237-263。【Chen, W.-S., & Tang, J.-L. (2008). Implementation and development for high school community program: A case study of Kaohsiung City. K.U.A.S. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 5, 237-263.】
- 陳長瑞（2008）。高中生就近入學政策效益之研究：以高雄市北區為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立中山大學，高雄市。【Chen, C.-J. (2008). The study for the benefit of the senior high school student nearby school enrollment policy－An example of the north districts of Kaohsiung City (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.】
- 陳羿汎（2011）。推行十二年國民教育公立高中定位及入學方式之研究（未出版碩士論文）。淡江大學，新北市。【Chen, Y.-F. (2011). A study of promoting twelve-year basic education to the high school perception and entrance program (Unpublished master’s thesis). Tamkang University, New Taipei City, Taiwan.】
- 陳淑丹（2002）。高中多元入學方案目標達成及其對國中學生選校的影響之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北師範學院，臺北市。【Chen, S.-D. (2002). The senior high school diversified admission program and its impact on choosing a school for junior high school students (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.】
- 陳淑敏、廖遠光（2008）。十二年國民基本教育政策民意調查之研究。國民教育研究學報，21，1-29。【Chen, S.-M., & Liao, Y.-K. (2008). Survey on 12-grade compulsory education policy in Taiwan. Journal of Research on Elementary and Secondary Education, 21, 1-29.】
- 湯誌龍（2005）。高中職社區化學生適性學習調查研究：以高雄市為例。教育政策論壇，8（2），109-142。【Tang, J.-L. (2005). A study of students’ accommodated learning in senior high school community: A study case in Kaohsiung City. Educational Policy Forum, 8(2), 109-142.】
- 黃政傑、張嘉育（2010）。讓學生成功學習：適性課程與教學之理念與策略。課程與教學季刊，13（3），1-22。【Hwang J.-J., & Chang, C.-Y. (2010). Make learning more successful: Ideas and strategies for adaptive curriculum and instruction. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 13(3), 1-22.】
- 楊狄龍、陳弘裕（2009）。高雄區試辦國中生就近入學高中職樂學計畫規劃經緯。中正高工學報，8，1-18。【Yang, D.-L., & Chen, H.-Y. (2009). Planning of the happy learning experimental program in Kaohsiung area. Bulletin of C.C.V.S., 8, 1-18.】
- 楊育仁（2009）。影響高中職學校社區化推動因素分析：以中三區高中職學校社區化為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立中興大學，臺中市。【Yang, Y.-J. (2009). Indentifying the impact factors of policy implementation for community-based senior high school: A case of central Taiwan area (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.】
- 楊思偉（2006）。推動十二年國民教育政策之研究。教育研究集刊，52（2），1-31。【Yang, S.-W. (2006). A study of the policy of promoting the twelve-year public education program. Bulletin of Educational Research, 52(2), 1-31.】
- 楊朝祥（2010）。預應十二年國教，後期中等教育何去何從。教育資料集刊，46，1-26。【Yang, C.-S. (2010). The aftermath of 12-year compulsory education: Secondary education at the crossroad. Bulletin of National Institute of Educational Resources and Research, 46, 1-26.】
- 葉雅惠（2002）。高雄市國民中學學區演變與影響因素之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。【Yeh, Y.-H. (2002). The study of the change and related factors about the school catchment area for junior high school in Kaohsiung (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.】
- 葉嘉楠、方曉青（2012）。擴大高中職及五專免試入學實施方案評估之研究：以新竹縣市為例。中華行政學報，11，85-122。【Yeh, C.-N., & Fang, H.-C. (2012). The evaluation of implementation program of enlarging open admission of upper secondary schools and junior colleges: The case study of Hsinchu area. The Journal of Chinese Public Administration, 11, 85-122.】
- 甄曉蘭（2007）。偏遠國中教育機會不均等問題與相關教育政策初探。教育研究集刊，53（3），1-35。【Chen, H.-L. (2007). The issues of inequality of educational opportunity in rural junior high schools and related educational policies: A preliminary investigation. Bulletin of Educational Research, 53(3), 1-35.】
- 潘慧玲（2005）。邁向下一代的教育評鑑：回顧與前瞻。載於潘慧玲（主編），教育評鑑的回顧與展望（pp. 3-36）。臺北市：心理。【Pan, H.-L. (2005). Toward educational evaluation of next generation. In H.-L. Pan (Ed.), Retrospect & prospect of educational evaluation (pp. 3-36). Taipei, Taiwan: Psychological.】
- 潘慧玲、高嘉卿（2012）。臺北市國民小學試辦教師專業發展評鑑之成效分析：理論導向評鑑取徑之應用。教育政策論壇，15（3），133-166。【Pan, H.-L., & Kao, J.-C. (2012). Assessment of a pilot program of teacher evaluation for professional development in Taipei elementary schools: Application of theory-driven evaluation approach. Educational Policy Forum, 15(3), 133-166.】
- 蔡清華、陳金源、陳武雄、金尚屏、楊狄龍、陳弘裕（2010）。高雄區98學年度試辦國中生就近入學高中職樂學計畫研究報告。高雄市政府教育局99年度自行研究報告。高雄市：高雄市政府教育局。【Tsai, C.-H., Chen, C.-Y., Chen, W.-S., Chin, S.-P., Yang, D.-L., & Chen, H.-Y. (2010). A study of happy learning experimental program for nearby enrolment to senior high school and vocational school in 2009 school year in Kaohsiung area. Self research report of Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government in 2010. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: Bureau of Education, Kaohsiung City Government.】
- 鄭新輝、游淑惠、陳弘裕（2012）。十二年國民基本教育免試入學制度之探討：以高雄區為例。教育研究月刊，223，35-51。【Cheng, H.-H., You, S.-W., & Chen, H.-Y. (2012). A study of program for access to senior high schools & junior colleges without entrance examination under 12-year basic education. Journal of Educational Research, 223, 35-51.】
- 賴幸妮（2010）。國中教育人員對擴大高中職及五專免試入學方案實施意見之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立暨南國際大學，南投縣。【Lai, H.-N. (2010). A study on the opinion of lower secondary educators on the expansion of open admission of upper secondary schools and junior colleges (Unpublished master’s thesis). National Chi Nan University, Nantou County, Taiwan.】
- Astbury, B., & Leeuw, F. L. (2010). Unpacking black boxes: Mechanisms and theory-building in evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(3), 363-381. doi:10.1177/1098214010371972
- Bickman, L. (1987). The functions of program theory. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Using program theory in evaluation (pp. 5-18). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ev.1443
- Bickman, L. (2000). Summing up program theory. In P. J. Rogers, A. Petrosino, T. A. Huebner, & T. A. Hacsi (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 103-112). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ev.1886
- Brousselle, A., & Champagne, F. (2011). Program theory evaluation: Logic analysis. Evaluation and Program Planning, 34(1), 69-78. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2010.04.001
- Chen, H.-T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. London, UK: Sage.
- Coryn, C. L. S., Noakes, L. A., Westine, C. D., & Schröter, D. C. (2011). A systematic review of theory-driven evaluation practice from 1990 to 2009. American Journal of Evaluation, 32(2), 199-226. doi:10.1177/1098214010389321
- Donaldson, S. I. (2003). Theory-driven program evaluation in the new millennium. In S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems visions for the new millennium: Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 109-141). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Ehren, M., & Honingh, M. E. (2011). Risk-based school inspections in the Netherlands: A critical reflection on intended effects and causal mechanisms. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(4), 239-248. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2012.02.001
- Field, A. (2010). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage.
- Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences: New horizons. New York, NY: BasicBooks.
- Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-10. doi:10.2307/1176460
- Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Janssens, F. J. G., & de Wolf, I. (2009). Analyzing the assumptions of a policy program: An ex-ante evaluation of “Educational Governance” in the Netherlands. American Journal of Evaluation, 30(3), 411-425. doi:10.1177/1098214009341016
- Patton, C. V., & Sawicki, D. S. (1993). Basic methods of policy analysis and planning (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Rogers, P. J. (2000). Program theory evaluation: Not whether programs work but how they work. In D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus, & T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (pp. 209-232). Boston, MA: Kluwer. doi:10.1007/0- 306-47559-6_13
- Rogers, P. J. (2007). Theory-based evaluation: Reflections ten years on. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Enduring issues in evaluation: The 20th anniversary of the collaboration between NDE and AEA (pp. 63-67). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ev.225
- Rogers, P. J., Petrosino, A., Huebner, T. A., & Hacsi, T. A. (2000). Program theory evaluation: Practice, promise, and problems. In P. J. Rogers, A. Petrosino, T. A. Huebner, & T. A. Hacsi (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 5-13). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ev.1177
- Rossi, P. H., Freeman, H. E., & Lipsey, M. W. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). London, UK: Sage.
- Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000). Foundational models for 21st century program evaluation. In D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus, & T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (pp. 33-83). Boston, MA: Kluwer. doi:10.1007/0- 306-47559-6_3
- Tremblay, M.-C., Brousselle, A., Richard, L., & Beaudet, N. (2013). Defining, illustrating and reflecting on logic analysis with an example from a professional development program. Evaluation and Program Planning, 40, 64-73. doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.05.004
- Weiss, C. H. (1987). Where politics and evaluation research meet. In D. J. Palumbo (Ed.), The politics of program evaluation (pp. 47-72). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
- Weiss, C. H. (1997). Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future. In D. J. Rog & D. Fournier (Eds.), Progress and future directions in evaluation: Perspectives on theory, practice and methods (pp. 41-55). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ev.1086
- Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
- Weiss, C. H. (2000). Which links in which theories shall we evaluate? In P. J. Rogers, A. Petrosino, T. A. Huebner, & T. A. Hacsi (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities (pp. 35-45). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/ev.1180
Journal directory listing - Volume 59 (2014) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【59(1)】March (Special Issue: 12-Year Basic Education)
(Special Issue) Reasonableness of the Happy Learning Program Assessed by Junior High School Teachers in Kaohsiung: A Program Theory Evaluation
Author: Ping-Huang Chang(Department of Education, National Kaohsiung Normal University), Ching-Hwa Tsai(Department of Foreign Language Instruction, Wenzao Ursuline University of Languages), Ying-Chieh Chen(Institute of Education, National Sun Yat-sen University)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 59, No. 1
Date：March 2014
Pages：33-67
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(1).02
Abstract：
Admission to senior high school without entrance examinations has been proposed and conducted by the Ministry of Education in Taiwan. In view of unprecedented changes and challenges, it is valuable to examine some pilot projects that have been implemented by local governments. Considering that program theory evaluation has been used increasingly in recent decades, and its firmly established ability to provide suggestions on how a program can be improved, it was employed in this study to assess the reasonableness of the Happy Learning Program.
Based on the principles of Multiple Adaptive Education, Nearby-Enrolment, and Creating Homogeneity, this study reconstructed the program theories underlying the Happy Learning Program. A questionnaire survey was administered to 426 teachers who were drawn from 46 junior high schools in Kaohsiung. The main conclusions were as follows: the Happy Learning Program is reasonable, but its degree of reasonableness varies with planning logic; the reasonableness degree of planning logic can be explained using fundamental theories, enabling identification of crucial elements in the program; no significant differences were observed among districts regarding the reasonableness of the Happy Learning Program. Based on the aforementioned findings, this study provides implications for policy making.
Keywords：12-Year Basic Education, theory program evaluation, admission without entrance examinations, Happy Learning Program