English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113648/144635 (79%)
Visitors : 51631608      Online Users : 549
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 教育學院 > 教育學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/124982
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/124982


    Title: 成年人回顧自學經驗之主題分析:自我的流轉
    Thematic Analysis of Retracing Homeschooling Experience
    Authors: 游捷
    Yu, Jie
    Contributors: 邱美秀
    Chiu, Mei-Shiu
    游捷
    Yu, Jie
    Keywords: 非學校型態實驗教育
    個人自學
    自我統整狀態
    Homeschooling
    Ego identity status
    Date: 2019
    Issue Date: 2019-08-07 16:56:59 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究的目的是探索臺灣個人自學的樣貌及自我統整狀態。以半結構深度訪談的方式,邀請五名具有個人自學經驗、自我統整狀態發展較趨穩定之20 歲以上成年人為研究參與者。研究結果發現(1)參與者普遍因為自學經驗而產生自己與眾不同的獨特感;(2)吸引學生及家長踏入自學的原因迥異,其中,過早自學以及吸引家長選擇自學的理由,可能有違背自主精神的疑慮;(3)五位參與者對自學與人際經驗關聯的三種說法,顯示其彼此間有互為因果的現象;最後,(4)受訪時,參與者的自我統整狀態,呈現對其整體人生發展有利或不利的情形,可能因素來自於所遇事件的催化、家長控制程度的強弱、學生獨立自主機會的多寡、親子關係的緊密程度、家長對子女教育的謹慎程度、以及自學生堅持投入探索行動的程度。
    這些結果可能會對有興趣參與個別實驗教育的家長,學生,教師和教育政策制定者產生啟示。
    The aim of this study was to explore homeschooler’s homeschooling experiences and to identify their ego identity status. Five adults were invited to participate in semi-structured in-depth interviews. All of them were over 20 years old and had the experience of homeschooling. The results of this study included that (1) participants generally had their own unique experience of homeschooling. (2) There were many reasons for attracting students or parents to choose homeschooling. Among them, homeshooling too early and the reasons attracting parents may violate the faith of autonomy. (3) Three kinds of arguments concluded by five participants about the homeshooling and interpersonal experience showed reciprocal causation phenomena; in the end, (4) During the interview, the participants` ego identity status expressed possibilities of advantages and disadvantage for their development. Possible factors are derived from the catalysis of the incidents, the degree of parents’ control, the level of students’ independent opportunities, the closeness of parent-child relationships, the degree of parental care for their children, and the extent to which students’ persistence to explore. These results may provide implications for parents, students, teachers, and educational policymakers who are interested to involve in individual experimental education.
    Reference: 一、 中文部分
    方慧琴(2002)。台北市實施在家自行教育之研究。臺北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,臺北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/4h8u45
    方慧琴(2005)。在家自行教育的萌芽與紮根。師友月刊,454,13-17。
    王志菁(1998)。從教育機會均等的精神論美國的在家教育。載於中國教育學(主編),社會變遷中的教育機會均等(337-365頁)。台北市:揚智。
    包媖子(2013)。在家自行教育與學校教育學 生學習適應、幸福感之比較研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學,新竹市。
    行政院重要性別統計資料庫(2018)。各級學校學生數多維度查詢。檢自:https://www.gender.ey.gov.tw/gecdb/Stat_Statistics_Query.aspx?sn=IokSYwX3SUOfMF33ctQcKg%3d%3d&statsn=7PAA4%2b%2fqz5bRbc7v8RooEw%3d%3d&d=m9ww9odNZAz2Rc5Ooj%2fwIQ%3d%3d
    何英奇(1986)。大學生自我認證之發展及其相關因素之研究。師大學報,31,169-200。
    何英奇(1988)。大專學生之責任感與自我統整:艾立克森青年自我統整理論之倫理分析。教育心理學報,21,77-98。
    何華國(1995)。在家自行教育學生之服務需求問題。特殊教育與復健學報,4,1-28。
    吳昌期(2003)。從教育的目的談非學校型態教育實驗之在家自行教育。北縣教育,45,45-48。
    吳武典、蔣興傑(1995)。在家自行教育學生之家長對其身心障礙子女教育安置之意見調查。特殊教育研究學刊,12,51-73。
    吳清山(2011)。自學生的平等受教權。師友月刊,534,47-52。
    吳瓊洳(2006)。我國實施在家自行教育相關法令的內容分析。臺東大學教育學報,17(1),133-154。
    李明昌(2004)。在家教育法制化之研究。輔仁大學法律學研究所碩士論文,新北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/jy848b
    林純真(2018)。實驗教育三法鬆綁教育體制後,在家自學的趨勢。臺灣教育評論月刊,7(1),96-102。
    林彩岫、李彥儀、林妤蓁(2018)。實驗教育文獻反映的歷史脈絡。臺灣教育評論月刊,7(1),37-52。
    金樹人、林清山、田秀蘭(1989)。我國大專學生生涯發展定向之研究。教育心理學報,22,167-190。
    美國在臺協會(2018年06月15日)。國際宗教自由報告:2017年台灣部分。2019年01月25日,取自:https://www.ait.org.tw/zhtw/taiwan-2017-international-religious-freedom-report-zh/
    唐光華(2016)。多元化的臺灣在家自學教育模式—實驗教育個案週課表比較分析。國家教育研究院教育脈動電子期刊,5。
    特殊教育法(民國86年5月14日)。
    特殊教育法(民國90年12月26日)。
    秦夢群(2015)。教育選擇權研究。臺北市:五南圖書出版。
    高級中等以下教育階段非學校型態實驗教育實施條例(民國103年11月19日)。
    高級中等以下教育階段非學校型態實驗教育實施條例(民國107年1月31日)。
    高級級中等教育階段辦理非學校型態實驗教育辦法(民國100年7月13日)。
    高淑清(2008)。質性研究的18堂課:首航初探之旅。高雄市:麗文文化。
    國民教育法(民國88年2月3日)。
    國民教育階段辦理非學校型態實驗教育準則(民國100年6月27日)。
    張芬芬(2001)。臺北與美國在家自行教育家長的意識型態比較。初等教育學刊,10,57-87。
    張春興(2013)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北市:東華。
    張春興、黃淑芬(1982)。大學教育環境與青年期自我統整形成關係的初步研究。教育心理學報,15,31-46。
    張嘉成(1996)。落實在家教育的可行方式。特殊教育季刊,58,7-9。
    張碧如(2006)。宗教信念型在家教育個案之理念與適應省思。屏東教育大學學報,24,201-229。
    張碧如(2007)。教育選擇權與受教權之間的兩難:一位在家教育評鑑委員之訪談研究。屏東教育大學學報:教育類,27,1-30。
    強迫入學條例(民國71年5月12)。
    強迫入學條例(民國92年1月15)。
    教育部統計處(2014)。中華民國教育統計民國103年版。臺北市:教育部。
    教育部統計處(2015)。中華民國教育統計民國104年版。臺北市:教育部。
    教育部統計處(2016)。中華民國教育統計民國105年版。臺北市:教育部。
    教育部統計處(2017)。中華民國教育統計民國106年版。臺北市:教育部。
    教育部統計處(2018)。中華民國教育統計民國107年版。臺北市:教育部。
    許素梅(2003)。臺北縣非學校型態實驗教育—在家教育實施二年之我見:北縣教育,45,27-34。
    許素梅(2007)。在家教育學習資源的探索與運用。師友月刊,484,40-43。
    陳向明(2017)。社會科學質的研究。臺北市:五南圖書出版。
    陳李綢(1983)。大專男女生自我統整程度與職業選擇、學習滿意度及父母養育方式之比較研究。教育心理學報,16,89-98。
    陳坤虎、雷庚玲、吳英璋(2005)。不同階段青少年之自我認同內容及危機探索之發展差異。中華心理學刊,47(3),249-268。
    陳怡光(2014)。臺灣自學的機會與挑戰。另類教育,3,169-192。
    陳冠伶(2008)。在家教育學生母親之親職壓力與因應方式個案研究。僑光技術學院通觀洞識學報,10,53-62。
    陳淑英(2006)。論父母在家教育權-教育行政的鬆綁與再規範。學校行政,42,79-89。
    陳麗華(2002)。聖經中的子女教育觀—基督徒選擇在家教育的原動力。教育論叢,創刊號,93-99。
    陳麗華(2003)。與神同行的在家教育。國教新知,49(3),9-16。
    鈕文英(2018)。質性研究方法與論文寫作。臺北市:雙葉書廊。
    黃坤謨(1995)。推行在家教育遭遇之困難與改進之道。特殊教育季刊,56,23-24+29。
    楊智馨、林世華(1998)。大學生生涯發展狀況與自我認定狀態之關係。教育心理學報,30(2),1-16。
    楊雅琪(2016)。建構完善的自學道路—自主學習促進會的理念與未來。師友月刊,593,21-24。
    廣梅芳(譯)(2000)。生命週期完成式(原作者: E. H. Erikson、J. M. Erikson)。臺北市:張老師文化。(原著出版年:1986)
    蔣興傑(1994)。身心障礙學生接受在家自行教育之現況與檢討。特殊教育研究學刊,11,63-88。
    賴玲玲、蔡至欣(2009)。在家自學者網路論壇資訊行為初探:以讀經教育論壇為例。教育資料與圖書館學,46(3),403-436。
    二、 英文部分
    Adams, G. R., & Jones, R. M. (1983). Female adolescents` identity development: Age comparisons and perceived child-rearing experience. Developmental Psychology, 19(2), 249.
    Apple, M. W. (2013). Gender, religion, and the work of homeschooling. In G. Zehavit, D. Lynn, D. Al-Khansaa (Eds.), Gender, religion and education in a chaotic postmodern world (pp. 21-39). Germany, Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
    Årseth, A. K., Kroger, J., Martinussen, M., & Marcia, J. E. (2009). Meta-analytic studies of identity status and the relational issues of attachment and intimacy. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 9(1), 1-32.
    Berzonsky, M. D. (1990). Self-construction over the life-span: A process perspective on identity formation. In G. J. Neimeyer & R. A. Neimeyer (Eds.), Advances in personal construct theory, (Vol. 1, pp. 155-186). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
    Cakir, S. G., & Aydin, G. (2005). Parental attitudes and ego identity status of Turkish adolescents. Adolescence, 40(160), 847-860.
    Cheek, J. M. (1989). Identity orientations and self-interpretation. In D. M. Buss & N. Canter (Eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp. 275-285). New York: Springer-Verlag.
    Dewey, A. R. (2004). Introduction to psychology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    Erikson, E. H. (1956). The problem of ego identity. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 4(1), 56-121.
    Erikson, E. H. (1968). Youth: Identity and crisis. New York: W. W. Norton Company.
    Erikson, E. H. (1970). Autobiographic notes on the identity crisis. Daedalus, 99(4), 730-759.
    Fields-Smith, C., & Williams, M. (2009). Motivations, sacrifices, and challenges: Black parents’ decisions to home school. The Urban Review, 41(4), 369-389.
    Grubb, D. (1998). Homeschooling: Who and why? ERIC Digest [ED427138]
    Hall, G. S. (1904). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relations to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion, and education (Vols. 1). New York: D. Appleton & Co.
    Isenberg, E. J. (2007). What have we learned about homeschooling? Peabody Journal of Education, 82(2-3), 387-409.
    Jeub, C. (1994). Why parents choose homeschool. Educational Leadership, 52, 50-52.
    Kroger, J. (2000). Ego identity status research in the new millennium. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24(2), 145-148.
    Kroger, J., & Green, K. E. (1996). Events associated with identity status change. Journal of Adolescence, 19(5), 477-490.
    Kroger, J., Martinussen, M., & Marcia, J. E. (2010). Identity status change during adolescence and young adulthood: A meta-analysis. Journal of Adolescence, 33(5), 683-698.
    Kunzman, R., & Gaither, M. (2013). Homeschooling: A comprehensive survey of the research. Other Education, 2(1), 4-59.
    Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62(5), 1049-1065.
    Marcia, J. E. (1966). Development and validation of ego-identity status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3(5), 551.
    Marcia, J. E. (1967). Ego identity status: relationship to change in self‐esteem, “general maladjustment,” and authoritarianism. Journal of personality, 35(1), 118-133.
    Marcia, J. E. (1980). Identity in adolescence. Handbook of adolescent psychology, 9(11), 159-187.
    Marcia, J. E. (1994). The empirical study of ego identity. In H. A. Bosma, T. L. G. Graafsma, H. D. Grotevant, & D. J. de Levita (Eds.), Sage focus editions, Vol. 172. Identity and development: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 67-80). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.
    Martin, M. (1997). Homeschooling: Parents` reactions. ERIC Digest [ED 415984]
    Martin-Chang, S., Gould, O. N., & Meuse, R. E. (2011). The impact of schooling on academic achievement: Evidence from homeschooled and traditionally schooled students. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement, 43(3), 195.
    Mashegoane, S. (2012). Identity status development in the South African context: Relations with defenses, narcissism, parental attachment and ego strengths (Doctoral dissertation, University of Limpopo (Turfloop Campus)).
    Medlin, R. G. (2000). Home schooling and the question of socialization. Peabody Journal of Education, 75(1&2), 107-123.
    Medlin, R. G. (2006). Homeschooled children’s social skills. Home School Researcher, 17(1), 1-8.
    Meeus, W. (1996). Toward a psychosocial analysis of adolescent identity: An evaluation of the epigenetic theory (Erikson) and the identity status model (Marcia). Social problems and social contexts in adolescence, 83-104.
    Meilman, P. W. (1979). Cross-sectional age changes in ego identity status during adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 15(2), 230.
    National Center for Education Statistics. (n. d.). Number and percentage of homeschooled students ages 5 through 17 with a grade equivalent of kindergarten through 12th grade, by selected child, parent, and household characteristics: Selected years, 1999 through 2016. Retrieved on January 27, 2019, from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d17/tables/dt17_206.10.asp
    Patterson, S. J., Sochting, I. and Marcia, J. E. (1992). The inner space and beyond: Women and identity. In G. R. Adams, T. P. Gullotta, and R. Montemayor (Eds.), Adolescent Identity Formation (99-24). Newbury Park, California: Sage.
    Pew Research Center (n. d.). Religious landscape study. Retrieved on January 25, 2019, from http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/
    Ray, B. D. (1990). A nationwide study of home education: Family characteristics, legal matters, and student achievement. Salem, OR: NHERI Publications.
    Ray, B. D. (1994). A nationwide study of home education in Canada: Family characteristics, student achievement, and other topics. Salem, OR: NHERI Publications.
    Ray, B. D. (1997a). Home education across the United States: Family characteristics, student achievement, and other topics. Purcellville, VA: HSLDA Publications.
    Ray, B. D. (1997b). Strengths of their own: Home schoolers across America. Salem, OR: NHERI Publications.
    Ray, B. D. (2010). Academic achievement and demographic traits of homeschool students: A nationwide study. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, 8(1). Retrieved from: https://scholars.fhsu.edu/alj/vol8/iss1/7
    Ray, B. D. (2015). Research facts on homeschooling. Salem, OR: National Home Education Research Institute.
    Riley, G. (2016). The role of self-determination theory and cognitive evaluation theory in home education. Cogent Education, 3(1),1-7.
    Romanowski, M. H. (2006). Revisiting the common myths about homeschooling. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79(3), 125-129.
    Schultheiss, D. P., & Blustein, D. L. (1994). Contributions of family relationship factors to the identity formation process. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73(2), 159-166.
    Taylor, V. (2005). Behind the trend: Increases in homeschooling among African American families. In B. S. Cooper (Ed.), Home schooling in full view (121-133). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
    U. S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2017). Parent and family involvement in education: Results from the National Household Education Surveys Program (NCES Publication No. 2017-102). Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017102.pdf
    Waterman, A. S. (1999). Identity, the identity statuses, and identity status development: A contemporary statement. Developmental Review, 19, 591-621.
    Waterman, A. S., & Goldman, J. A. (1976). A longitudinal study of ego identity development at a liberal arts college. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 5(4), 361-369.
    Waterman, A. S., & Waterman, C. K. (1971). A longitudinal study of changes in ego identity status during the freshman year at college. Developmental Psychology, 5(1), 167-173.
    West, R. L. (2009). The harms of homeschooling. Philosophy & Public Policy Quarterly, 29(3/4), 7-12.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    教育學系
    106152011
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1061520111
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU201900289
    Appears in Collections:[教育學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    011101.pdf1615KbAdobe PDF2120View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    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 ©   - Feedback