政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/131268
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113318/144297 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51101855      線上人數 : 960
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/131268


    題名: 教育選擇權知識圖譜的可視化分析
    Knowledge mapping of School Choice research: A visual analysis using CiteSpce
    作者: 趙夢菲
    Zhao, Meng-Fei
    貢獻者: 吳政達
    Wu, Cheng-Ta
    趙夢菲
    Zhao, Meng-Fei
    關鍵詞: 教育選擇權
    知識圖譜
    知識基礎
    研究熱點
    研究前沿
    CiteSpace
    school choice
    knowledge mapping
    knowledge based
    research hotspot
    CiteSpace
    educational choice
    research frontier
    日期: 2020
    上傳時間: 2020-08-03 18:27:26 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 近年來，國內對於教育選擇權的議題越來越重視，國外眾多研究者從各種不同的角度對教育選擇權領域的各個方面進行了大量的研究，這些研究對教育選擇權政策的制定起到了重要的作用。本研究先對教育選擇權相關研究進行整理與統計，在利用CiteSpace軟體進行進行視覺化分析，以探究教育選擇權之知識基礎、研究熱點與研究前沿，為後續相關研究者提供參考。
    本研究以Web of Science核心合輯收錄社會科學索引（Social Sciences Citation Index,SSCI）等引文資料庫，以教育選擇權（school choice、educational choice）為檢索詞進行文獻檢索，一共獲得1584篇主題文獻，并採用CiteSpace軟體進行可視化分析。以文獻共被引聚類分析、關鍵詞聚類分析、突現詞分析來探討教育選擇權研究的知識基礎、研究熱點與研究前沿。
    根據研究結果與分析，本研究之研究結論歸結如下：
    一、教育選擇權之知識基礎為：市區學校、精準區隔界限、政治、多元入學文化、白人大遷移、美國理論、學生學習成就、學校選擇過程和宗教因素。
    二、教育選擇權之研究熱點為：大熔爐、脫軌學校、就學機會、家庭教育行為、組織表現、特許學校、班级构成、限制自由。
    三、教育選擇權之研究前沿為：不公平、種族與機制。
    最後針對本研究結果，對教育選擇權之知識基礎、研究熱點和研究前沿，以及可視化知識圖譜未來發展等方面，提出建設性意見。
    In recent years, more and more attention has been paid to the issue of educational choice. Many researchers have a large number of studies on the education choice from various angles and various aspects ,which has become the guidelines in the actual reform of the education choice .This study sorts and stats the research related to educational choices, and uses CiteSpace for visual analysis to explore the knowledge base, research hotspots, and research frontiers of educational choices.
    In this study ,the Social Sciences Citation Index was used from the core collection of the Web of Science database, and “ educational choice ” or “school choice” was used as the search term. Atotal of 1584 subject documents were obtained. This paper discusses the knowledge base, research hotspots and research frontiers of educational choice research with literature co-citation cluster analysis, keyword cluster analysis, and burst detection.
    The conclusions of this study can be summarized as follows:
    The knowledge base of educational choice research includes the following: urban school,hard bound,the politics, market, white flight, American theory, student achievement, school choice process and religious factor.
    The hotspots in education choice research include the following: melting pot, detracking school, schooling opportunities, household schooling behavior, organization performance, charter school , classroom composition and restricted liberty.
    According to the resulet of burst detection,the research frontiers of education choice were inequality, race and mechanism.
    Finally, based on the results this study, suggestions are mentioned for the future studies on the knowledge of education choice, research hotspots, research frontiers and mapping knowledge domain analysis.
    Keywords: school choice, educational choice, knowledge mapping, knowledge based, research hotspot, research frontier, CiteSpace
    參考文獻: 中文文獻
    王立，冷伏海（2010）。簡論研究前沿及其文獻計量識別方法。情報理論與實踐，
    33（3），54-58。
    王佑鎂，陳惠斌（2014）。近十年我國電子書包研究熱點與發展趨勢──基於共詞
    矩陣的知識圖譜分析。中國電化教育，328，4-10。
    王俊斌（2013）。論當代「能力取向理論」發展及其對高等教育研究之影響。教
    育科學期刊，12（2），1-22。
    王俊斌（2016）教育制度中的社會正義理論分析──多元觀點與比較基礎建構。
    臺灣教育社會學研究，16（2），29-63。
    王家通（1998）。論教育機會的均等與公平──以概念分析為中心。教育政策論壇，
    1（2），8-15。
    何金針（2003）教育市場與教育政策。學校行政，28，29-44。
    吳知賢、段良雄（1999）。臺灣地區公私立國中國小學校選擇模式。國家科學委
    員會研究彙刊：人文及社會科學，9（2），254-268。
    吳勁甫（2003）。從羅爾斯的正義觀談教育機會均等。學校行政，25，53-63。
    吳清山、林天祐（1997）。教育選擇權。教育資料與研究，16，82。
    吳清山、黃久芬（1995）。美國教育選擇權之研究。初等教育學刊，4，1-26。
    李杰、陳超美（2016）。CiteSpace：科技文本挖掘及可視化（第二版）。北京：
    首都經濟貿易大學。
    李柏佳（2009）。家長參與學校教育權利之探討──以國民教育階段為例。學校行
    政，60，140-168。
    沈姍姍（1997）。教育選擇與控制理念的另類思考。教育資料與研究，9，14-15。
    周淑卿（2001）。市場自由與國家介入——論全國課程架構的建立。國立臺北師
    範學院學報，14，57-74。
    林蘭櫻（1993）。家長教育選擇權之探究。研習資訊，5(21)，61-68。
    邱均平（2000）。資訊計量學在圖書情報領域的應用──以核心期刊研究和測定為
    例。情報理論與實踐，24（5），396-400。
    邱均平（2001）。文獻資訊引證規律和引文分析法。情報理論與實踐，4（3），
    236-240。
    邱均平，劉國徽（2014）。國內耦合分析方法研究現狀與展望。圖書情報工作，7
    （58），131-144。
    侯海燕（2006）。基於知識圖譜的科學計量學進展研究（未出版之博士論文）。大
    連理工大學科學學與科技管理研究所，大連市。
    姜雷，張海（2014）。MOOC 研究熱點與發展趨勢的知識圖譜研究。中國遠程教
    育，12，35-40。
    候劍華（2009）。工商管理學科演進與前沿熱點的可視化分析（博士論文）。取自
    http://www.doc88.com/p-5733425956158.html
    秦夢群（2015）。教育選擇權研究。臺北：五南。
    崔雷、鄭華川（2003），關於從MEDLINE 數據庫中進行知識抽取和挖掘的研究
    進展。情報學報，22（4），425-433。
    張炳煌（2000）。影響國中家長學校選擇因素之研究。載於楊思偉（主編），家長
    學校選擇權（193-250 頁）。臺北市：商鼎。
    張茂源（2005）。評析家長教育選擇權之理論與實務。學校行政，36，148-158。
    張福建（1999）。多元主義與合理的政治秩序：羅爾斯政治自由主義評析。政治
    科學論叢，8，111-132。
    張德銳（1997）。誰選擇？誰損失？學校選擇權對教育機會均等的影響。載於中
    國比較教育會，中國教育學會（主編），社會變遷中的教育機會均等（37-57
    頁）。臺北：商鼎。
    張德銳（2000）。新世紀我國中小學學校經營的方向。學校行政雙月刊，5，12-22。
    莊勝義（1996）。市場導向與教育改革。國立台灣師範大學教育改革學術研討會
    講稿，未出版。
    莫家豪、羅浩俊（2001）。市場化與大學治理模式變遷：香港與台灣比較研究。
    教育研究集刊，47，335-355。
    許添明（2003）。教育財政制度新篇。臺北：高等教育。
    陳明德（2000）。國民小學實施家長教育選擇權可行性之研究──以臺北縣為例（未
    出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。
    陳奎熹（1996）。如何促進教育機會均等。彰化文教，37，4-6。
    陳郁仁（1997）小留學生家長教育選擇行為之研究（碩士論文）。取自臺灣博碩
    士論文系統。（系統編號：085NTPTC576014）
    陳悅、陳超美、胡志剛、王賢文（2014）。引文空間分析原理與應用。北京：科
    學出版社。
    陳悅、劉則淵（2005）。悄然興起的科學知識圖譜。科學學研究，23（2），149
    ﹣154。
    陳悅、劉則淵、陳勁、侯劍華（2008）。科學知識圖譜的發展歷程。科學學研究，
    3（26），449-458。
    陳榮政（2019）。教育行政與治理：新管理主義途徑。臺北：學富文化。
    陳鴻賢、許素艷（2002）。教育改革潮流中之家長教育選擇權。學校行政，20，
    129-138。
    陳麗珠（2000）。美國教育財政改革。臺北：五南。
    陶穎，周莉，宋豔輝（2017）。知識域可視化中的共被引與耦合研究綜述。圖書
    情報工作，11（61），140-148。
    湯堯（2010）。教育市場化與行銷思維策略之案例分析探究。教育學誌，24，
    157-176。
    馮朝霖（2006）。另類教育與二十一世紀教育改革趨勢。研習資訊，23（3），5-12。
    黃乃熒（2000）。父母選擇的教育改革意義。載於楊思偉（主編），家長學校選擇
    權（3-36 頁）。臺北市：商鼎。
    黃嘉雄（1998）。學校本位管理政策下教育機會均等策略──英國為例。載於中華
    民國比較教育學會、中國教育學會（主編），社會變遷中的教育機會均等
    （143-180 頁）。臺北市：揚智文化。
    黃福，侯海燕，任佩麗、胡志剛（2018）。基於共被引與文獻耦合的研究前沿探
    測方法遴選。情報雜誌，12（37），12-35。
    蓋浙生（1993）。教育財政學。臺北：東華。
    趙蓉英、許麗敏（2010）。文獻計量學發展演進與研究前沿的知識圖譜探析。中
    國圖書館學報，5，60-68。
    劉世閔、吳育偉（2004）。家長教育選擇權：教育公平與績效的雙刃劍。國民教
    育研究學報，12，19-40。
    劉盛博，張春博，丁堃，劉則淵（2013）。基於引用內容與位置的共被引分析改
    進研究。情報學報，12（32），1248﹣1256。
    鄭新輝（1997）。家長教育選擇權的可行性分析。初等教育學報，10，389-415。
    戴曉霞（2002）。高等教育市場化：臺、港、中趨勢。臺北：高等教育。
    顏妙芳（2005）。新優派哲學對英國教育政策的影響。網絡社會學通訊期刊，51。
    取自http://mail.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/51/51-25.htm
    顏秀如（2003）。教育市場化的省思與反思。學校行政，27，99-109。
    英文部份
    Abdulkadirolu, A., & Roth, P. A. (2009). Strategy-proofness versus efficiency in
    matching with indifferences: redesigning the NYC High School
    match. American Economic Review, 99(5), 1954-1978.
    Addonizio, M. F. (2003). From fiscal equity to educational adequacy: lessons from
    Michigan. Journal of Education Finance, 28(4), 457-483.
    Angrist, J. D., Pathak, P. A., & Walters, C. R. (2013). Explaining charter school
    effectiveness. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(4), 1-27.
    Apple, M. W. (1996). Culture politics and education. NY: Teachers College of
    Columbia University.
    Ball, S. J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education. London: Routledge.
    Ball, S. J. (2003). Class strategies and the education market. British Educational
    Research Journal, 52(4), 433-436.
    Bast, J. L., & Walberg, H. J. (2004). Can parents choose the best schools for their
    children? Economics of Education Review, 23(4), 431-440.
    Batteson, C. H. (1999). The 1944 Education Act Reconsidered. Educational Review,
    51, 5-15.
    Betts, J. R., Lorien, A. Rice, Andrew, C. Zau., Cory, R. Koedel., & Emily,
    Tang.(2006). Does School Choice Work? Effects on Student Integration and
    Achievement. San Francisco, CA: Public Policy Institute of California
    Bifulco, R., & Ladd, H. F. (2007). School choice, racial segregation, and test‐score
    gaps: Evidence from North Carolina`s charter school program. Journal of Policy
    Analysis and Management, 26(1), 31-56.
    Bifulco, R., Cobb, C. D., & Bell, C. (2009). Can interdistrict choice boost student
    achievement? The case of Connecticut’s interdistrict magnet school
    program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 323-345.
    Blank, R. K. (1989). Educational effects of magnet high schools (G-00869000789).
    Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED313469.pdf
    Blank, R. K., Dentler, R. A., Baltzell, D. C., & Chabotar K. (1986). Survey of magnet
    schools: analyzing a model of quality integrated education. James H. Lowey and
    Associates, 14, 1-72.
    Booker, K., Gilpatric, S., Gronberg, T., & Jansen, D. (2004). Charter school
    performance in Texas. Journal of Public Economics, 31(5), 1-30.
    Brathwaite, J. (2017).Neoliberal education reform and the perpetuation of inequality.
    Critical Sociology, 43, 429-448.
    Brennan, D. L. (2002). School choice and social justice. NY: Oxford University.
    Broughman, B., Steven, P., & Kathleen, W. (2011). Characteristics of private schools
    in the United States: Results from the 2003-2004 private school universe survey.
    National Center for Education Statistics, 4, 90.
    Burgess, S., Greaves, E., Vignoles, A., & Wilson, D. (2015). What parents want:
    School preferences and school choice. The Economic Journal, 125(587),
    1262-1289.
    Buxton, C. A. (2005). Creating a culture of academic success in an urban science and
    math magnet high school. Science Education, 89(3), 392-417.
    Carl, J. (2001). Freedom of choice: Vouchers in America education. Santa Barbara,
    CA: Praeger.
    Chan, D., & Mok, K. H. (2001). Educational reforms and coping strategies under the
    tidal wave of marketization: a comparative study of Hong Kong and mainland.
    Comparative Education, 37(1), 21-41.
    Che, Y. K., & Tercieux, O. (2018). Efficiency and stability in large matching markets.
    Journal of Political Economy, 127(5), 2301-2342.
    Cheng, A., Trivitt, J.R., & Wolf, P.J. (2016). School choice and the branding of
    Milwaukee private schools. Social Science Quarterly, 97(2), 362–375.
    Chiang, H. (2008). How accountability pressure on failing schools affects student
    achievement. Journal of Public Economics, 93(9), 1045-1057.
    Christenson, B., Eaton, M., Garet, M., Miller, L., Hikawa, H., & Dubois, P. (2003).
    Evaluation of the Magnet School Assistance Program,1998 grantees (Rep.
    2003-15). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED482977.pdf
    Chubb, J, E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and America’s schools. DC:
    Brookings.
    Cohen, D. (2002) The religious factor in private education. Occasional Paper,53,23-71.
    Crain, R., Allen, A., Thaler, R., Sullivan, D., Zellman, G. L., Little, J. W & Quigley,
    D. D. (1999).The effect of academic career magnet schools on high schools and
    their graduates. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational
    Education.
    Cullen, J. B., Jacob, B. A., & Levitt, S. D. (2005). The impact of school choice on
    student outcomes: an analysis of the Chicago public schools. Journal of Public
    Economics, 89(5), 729-760.
    Daniels. N. (1989). Reading Rawls: Critical studies on Rawls’ A theory of juscice. CA:
    Stanford University.
    David, M., West, A., & Ribbens, J. (1994). Mother’s intuition? Choosing secondary
    schools. London: Falmer.
    Dawood, D. C. (2009). College readiness and academic successes for arts magnet and
    traditional high school graduates. Disssertations & Theses Gradworks,
    17(9),13-20.
    Denis, D. P., & Levine, M.(1984). Magnet schools: choice and quality in public
    education. Phi Delta Kappan, 66(4), 265-270.
    Dobbie, W., & Fryer, R. G. (2011). Are high-quality schools enough to increase
    achievement among the poor? Evidence from the Harlem Children’s Zone.
    American Economic Journal, 3(2), 158-187.
    Dobbie, W., & Fryer, R. G. (2015). The medium-term impacts of high-achieving
    charter schools on non-test score outcomes. Journal of Political Economy,
    123(5), 985–1037.
    Dronkers, J. (1995). The existence of parental choice in the Netherlands. Educational
    Policy, 9(3), 227-243.
    Engberg, J., Epple, D., Imbrogno, J., Sieg, H., & Zimmer, R. (2014). Evaluating
    education programs that have lotteried admission and selective attrition. Journal
    of Labor Economics, 32(1), 27-63.
    Figlio, D., & Rouse, C. (2006). Do accountability and voucher threats improve low
    performing schools? Journal of Public Economics, 90(1), 239-255.
    Friedman, M, (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
    Gamoran, A. (1996). Student Achievement in Public Magnet, Public Comprehensive
    and Private City High Schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy
    Analysis, 18(1), 1–18.
    Garfield, E. (2001). From bibliographic coupling to co-citation analysis via
    algorithmic historio-bibliography. PA: Drexel University.
    Gewirtz, S., Ball, S., & Bowe, R. (1995). Markets, choice and equity in education.
    UK: Open University
    Gintis, H. (1995). The political economy of school choice. Teacher College Record,
    96(3), 492-511.
    Greene, J. P., Forster, G., &Winters, M. A. (2003). Apples to apples: An evaluation of
    charter schools serving general student populations. Education Working Paper
    Archive, 4, 1-19.
    Halsey, A. H. (1997). Education-culture, economy, society. NY: Oxford U.P.
    Hastings, J. S.(2002). Information, school choice, and academic achievement:
    Evidence from two experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 123(4),
    1373-1414.
    Henig, J. R., & John, F. W. (1995). Rethinking school choice: limits of the market
    metaphor. American Political Science Association, 89(1), 205-220.
    Holmes, G. M., DeSimone, J., & Rupp, N. G. (2006). Does school choice increase
    school quality? Evidence from North Carolina charter schools. Improving School
    Accountability, 14, 131-155.
    Howell, W. G., Wolf, P. J., Campbell, D. E., & Peterson, P. E. (2002). School vouchers
    and academic performance: results from three randomized field trials. Journal of
    Policy Analysis and Management, 21(2), 191-217.
    Hoxby, C. M. (2003). School choice and school competition: Evidence from the
    United States. Swedish Economic Policy Review, 10, 9-65.
    Hubert, M. (1999). The politics of school choice. NY: Rowman and Littlefield
    Pubulishers.
    John , F. (2000).The market approach to Education: An Analysis of America’s First
    Voucher Program. NJ: Princeton University.
    Joseph, K. (1976). Stranded on the middle ground. London: Center for policy studies.
    Kelley, F. (2018). Subject to evaluation: how parents assess and mobilize information
    from social networks in school choice. Social Forum, 34(1), 158-180.
    Kimelberg, S. M., & Billingham, C. M. (2013). Attitudes toward diversity and the
    school choice process: middle-class parents in a segregated urban public school
    district. Urban Education, 48(2), 198-231.
    Kojima, F. (2013). Matching with couples:stability and incentives in large markets.
    The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(4), 1585-1786.
    Kurata, R. (2017). Controlled school choice with soft bounds and overlapping
    type. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 58, 153-184.
    Laws, L. (1987). Assessing outcomes of magnet schools. Academic Achievement,
    34,12.
    Levin, H. (1976). Educational Opportunity and Social Inequality in Western
    Europe. Social Problems, 24(2), 148-172.
    Li, X., Ma, E., & Qu, H. (2017). Knowledge mapping of hospitality research- A
    visual analysis using CiteSpace. International Journal of Hospitality
    Management, 60, 77-93.
    Manski, C. F. (1992). Educational choice (vouchers) and social mobility. Economics
    of Education Review, 11(4), 351-369.
    Marcotte, D., & Dalane, K. (2019). Socioeconomic segregation and school choice in
    America public schools. Educational Research, 48(8),132-146.
    Margaret, D. T. (1995). Concepts and issues in school choice. Lewiston, NY: Edwin
    mellen.
    Martinez, V., Thomas, K., & Kemerer, F. R. (1994).Who chooses and why: A look at
    five school choice plans. Phi Delta Kappan, 75(9), 678.
    McCully, D., & Malin, P. J. (2003). What parents think of New York’s charter schools
    (CCI-R-37). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED477791.pdf
    Miron, G., & Nelson, C.(2004). Student academic achievement in charter schools:
    What we know and why we know so little. NY: Teacher College.
    Nelson, J. L., Carlson, K., & Palonsky, S. B. (1996). Critical issues in education: A
    dialectic approach. NY: McGraw-Hill College.
    Pathak, P. A.(2011). The mechanism design approach to student assignment. Annual
    Review of Economics, 3(1), 513-536.
    Persson, O. (1994). The intellectual base and research front of JASIS 1986-1990.
    Journal of American Society for Information Science, 45, 31-38.
    Peters, B. G. (1996). The future of governing: Four emerging models. KS: University
    Press of Kansus.
    Peterson, P. E., Campbell, D. E., & West, M. R. (2002). Who chooses? Who uses?
    Participation in a national school voucher program. Hill Hoover
    Institution,1,51-84.
    Plucker, J., Muller, P., Hansen, J., Ravert, R., & Makel, M. (2006). Evaluation of the
    Cleveland Scholarship and Tutoring Program. Director, 812, 855-4438.
    Power, S., & Whitty, G. (1996). Teaching new subjects? The hidden curriculum of
    marketised education systems. Critical Studies in Education, 37(2), 1-21.
    Price, D. J. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 149, 510-515.
    Ray, B. D. (1994). A nationwide study of home education in Canada: Family
    characteristics, student achievement, and other topics. OR: NHERI Publications.
    Raywid, M. A. (1984). Synthesis of Research on Schools of Choice. Educational
    Leadership, 41(7), 70-78.
    Rhea, A., & Regan, R. (2007). Magnet program review. Wake County Public School
    System, Evaluation and Research Department, 6, 5-45.
    Robert, B., & Helen, F. L. (2006). The impacts of charter schools on student
    achievement: evidence from North Carolina. Education Finance and Policy, 1(1),
    50-90.
    Robert, B., & Helen, F. L. (2007). School choice, racial segregation, and test score
    gaps: evidence from North Carolina`s charter school program. Journal of Policy
    Analysis and Management, 21(1), 31-56.
    Rolf, K. B. (1983). Survey of magnet schools: analyzing a model of quality integrated
    education. Office of Planning, 14, 1-74.
    Rouse, C. E. (1998). Private school vouchers and student achievement: An evaluation
    of the Milwaukee parental choice program. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113,
    553-602.
    Sass, T. R. (2006). Charter school and student achievement in Florida. Education
    Finance and Policy, 1(1), 91-122.
    Schneider, M., & Buckley, J. (2002). What do parents want from schools? Evidence
    from the Internet. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(2), 133–144.
    doi:10.3102/ 01623737024002133
    Schneider, M., Teske, P., & Marschall, M. (2000). Choosing schools: Consumer
    choice and the quality of American schools. NJ: Princeton University.
    Silver, D., Saunders, M., & Zarate, E. (2008). What factors predict high school
    graduation in the Los Angeles Unified School District. Policy Brief, 14, 15-23.
    Small, H. (1973). Co-citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the
    relationship between two documents. Journal of the American Society for
    Information Science, 24(4), 265-269.
    Small, H. (1999). Visualizing science by citation mapping. Journal of the American
    Society for Information Science, 50(9), 799-813.
    Smith, P. H., Arnot-Hopffer, E., Carmichael, C. M., Murphy, E., Valle, A., González,
    N., & Poveda, A. (2002). Raise a child, not a test score: perspectives on bilingual
    education at Davis Bilingual Magnet School. Bilingual Research Journal, 26(1),
    103-121.
    Sneyers, E., Vanhoof, J., & Mahieu, P. (2018). Primary teachers’ perceptions that
    impact upon track recommendations regarding pupils’ enrolment in secondary
    education: a path analysis. Social Psychology of Education, 21, 1153–1173.
    Sobel, R. S., & King, K. A. (2008). Does school choice increase the rate of youth
    entrepreneurship? Economics of Education Review, 27(4), 429-438.
    Solmon, L., Park, K., & Garcia, D. (2001). Does charter school attendance improve
    test scores? Comments and Reactions on the Arizona Achievement Study.
    Upjihn Institute Working Paper, 70, 1-12.
    Sugarman, S. D., & Kenerer, F. R. (1999). School choice and social controversy:
    politics, policy and law. DC: Brooking Institution Press.
    Trivitt, J. R., & Wolf, P. J. (2011). School choice and the branding of Catholic
    schools. Education Finance and Policy, 6(2), 202–245.
    Vanourek, G. (2005). State of the charter school movement 2005: Trends, issues, and
    indicators. DC: Charter School Leadership Council.
    Walford, G. (1994). Choice and equity in education. London: Cassell.
    Weiher, G. R. (2001). Does choice lead to racially distinctive schools? Charter schools
    and household preferences. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,
    21(1),79-92.
    Whitty, G., Power, S., & Halpin, D. (1998). Devolution and choice in education: the
    school, the state and the market. Educational Researcher, 27(6), 24-36.
    Witte, J. F., Sterr, T. D., & Thorn, C. A. (1995). Fifth year report: Milwaukee
    parental choice program. WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.
    Witte, J. F. (1996). Who chooses? Voucher and interdistrict choice programs in
    Milwaukee. American Journal of Education, 104(3), 186–217.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    教育行政與政策研究所
    107171016
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107171016
    資料類型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202001100
    顯示於類別:[教育行政與政策研究所 ] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 描述 大小格式瀏覽次數
    101601.pdf3940KbAdobe PDF20檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋