國小音樂才能資優班多元多階入學鑑定方式之調查研究

• Main Authors: Tsae-lian Wu, 吳彩蓮
• Other Authors: 廖永堃
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2009
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/42697769605938488949

碩士 === 國立花蓮教育大學 === 國民教育研究所 === 97 === This study aimed to investigate the opinions of education bureaus and schools with musical talent programs about the admission procedures of musical talent programs, particularly after multi-dimensional and multi-phased identification process of gifted students was announced by the Ministry of Education in school year 2007. This study was conducted through questionnaire survey and interviews in 32 schools in 16 counties and cities where there were musical talent programs. The content included five parts. They were preparatory work, initial evaluation of nominees’ qualification, testing instruments, document evaluation and overall judgment. The results of the study were as follows. 1. In the preparatory work, the education bureau devised an overall plan and directors of counseling from schools undertook the following tasks. The identification committee was mainly composed of principals, directors of counseling, section chiefs of special education and professors. Issues were discussed in the meeting, such as the process, methods and schedule of identification. Meanwhile, the content of the admission instructions were formulated according to the rules and regulations of special education. The identification examination was jointly held in the same county or city with no restrictions on the musical instruments nominees intend to play. Physically or mentally disabled nominees would be provided with related support and assistance. The administration felt that the preparatory work did not need adjusting, while schoolteachers thought it was necessary to adjust “the settlement of admission instructions or instructions of enrollment” and “related support and assistance provided once the sign-up is granted”. 2. In the initial evaluation of nominees’ qualification, among the five observation checklists, criteria for evaluation were solely for reference. In most cases, criteria were not established. Characteristics checklist for musically talented students and observation checklist for high musical ability were employed. The nomination of experts, teachers or parents was recognized by all counties and cities. Certificates or evidence of high musical ability or outstanding performance were considered to be the most required documents. Despite some negative opinions, more than 60 percent of the administration and schoolteachers did not consider it necessary to adapt the initial evaluation of qualification. 3. The major test administrators were staff from special education center. In the testing instruments, aptitude test functioned as an indicator which may predict a student’s future potential development. The basic musical ability and musical instrument test included sense of rhythm and music scales. The musical instruments students choose to play were based on the feature of school music band. Performance tests were divided into basic musical ability test and musical instrument test, 50 percent respectively. The evaluators were mostly part-time music teachers outside the school, who should be specialized in the music field. Nominees’ results of aptitude test would be analyzed first and the musical instrument test and basic musical ability test would then be compared. More then 70 percent of the administration and schoolteachers did not consider it necessary to adapt the testing instruments. 4. In the document evaluation, national music contests included those held by the Ministry of Education. Music contests referred to solo performances, which were mostly instrument playing. The instruments included piano and all sorts of orchestral instruments. The nominees were required to be the first, second or third place winners in recent two to three years. Document evaluation would be firstly made at school and then handed over to the identification committee. Schools should specify the procedures of and criteria for document evaluation to parents to smooth the way for the administration. 5. In the overall judgment, all the information would be given to and discussed in the identification committee. Those who involved in the identification process were mainly the administration in education bureau and professors. The identification instruments adopted were musical instrument test, musical aptitude test and basic musical ability. As the nominees were approved in the initial qualification evaluation, they took the required tests. The scores of the music aptitude test and performance test would be weighted. Those who received the highest scores were admitted. The documents would be examined and discussed case by case, in the same vein; those who fulfilled the criteria were admitted. From the results of the study, it could be concluded that multi-dimensional and multi-phased identification of the gifted meet the needs of special education and may well be the general trend in identification of the gifted. Based on the conclusions above, suggestions were put forward for education administration, elementary schools with musical talent programs and future research.