Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125009
|
| Title: | 學校效能研究熱點與前沿之可視化知識圖譜分析
Mapping knowledge domains analysis of research hotspots and front in School Effectiveness |
| Authors: | 王育仁
Wang, Yu-Jen |
| Contributors: | 吳政達
Wu, Cheng-Ta
王育仁
Wang, Yu-Jen |
| Keywords: | 可視化知識圖譜
研究熱點
研究前沿
學校效能
mapping knowledge domains analysis
research hotspots
research frontier
school effectiveness
CiteSpace |
| Date: | 2019 |
| Issue Date: | 2019-08-07 17:01:02 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 今日科學信息大量湧現，造成信息技術的快速發展，研究者透過快速有效的研究方法及工具，可迅速正確地獲得科學領域之研究熱點、研究前沿、知識基礎與合作關係。學校效能研究已達五十餘年，本研究為探討學校效能最新之研究熱點、前沿、知識基礎與合作關係，以供國內相關領域研究者運用，故以文獻計量學之引文分析法與信息可視化法，將學校效能相關文獻資料進行統計與整理，再借助雲端資料庫與相關軟體協助，以進行文獻計量分析可視化。
本研究採用本校圖書館WOS核心集合收錄社會科學索引(Social Sciences Citation Index,SSCI)等引文資料庫，以學校效能(school effectiveness)為檢索詞，取得與學校效能研究主題相關之有效書目(施引文獻604篇、被引文獻4028篇)，透過CiteSpace可視化軟體進行文獻計量分析，運用共引圖譜、共現圖譜、突現詞檢測與合作圖譜等分析方法，將文獻數據可視化，透過文獻共被引探索學校效能研究領域之知識基礎；並運用高頻關鍵詞共現聚類分析，呈現1979年至2018年國際間學校效能研究熱點、前沿與合作關係。
依據研究結果與分析，本研究之研究結論歸結如下：一、經由共被引與聚類分析，確定學校效能研究知識基礎為審視關聯、教學實踐、轉型學校領導效應、師生人際關係、有效學校文獻、班級規模效應、教育政策與重新設計教師工作。二、基於共現圖譜分析，探究到學校效能研究之研究熱點為學校因素、內容傳遞、學校效能、高等教育入學表現、權威性學校、學校資源、學習支持、多級建模、參與式決策及教育不平等。三、以突現詞探測演算法，發掘到學校效能之研究前沿包含有研究設計、特許學校、閱讀成就、教學領導、公立學校及學區，六大主題已然成為學校效能研究未來新興的研究議題。四、透過聚類結構分析，確定學校效能研究合作關係將持續往國際化邁進。
最後，本研究依據研究結果，針對學校效能研究之知識基礎、研究熱點、研究前沿、合作關係的探索，及可視化知識圖譜未來發展等方面，提出相關建議。
Because of the proliferation of scientific information, information technology has been rapidly developed. With rapid and effective research methods and tools, researchers can quickly and accurately access the scientific fields of research hotspots, research frontiers, knowledge bases, and cooperative relations. Moreover, research on the effectiveness of international schools has been ongoing for more than 50 years. To examine international research hotspots, frontiers, knowledge bases, and cooperative relationships based on school effectiveness and to broaden the field for future researchers, this study employed a citation analysis method using literature econometrics and information visualization for calculating and collating literature data related to school effectiveness. Cloud database and related software were then employed to visualize the literature analysis.
This study applied citation databases, such as the Social Sciences Citation Index of the Web of Science Core Collection in the school library, and school effectiveness was the search term. An effective bibliography related to school effectiveness research was obtained (604 citations, 4028 citations). Moreover, CiteSpace visualization software was used for bibliometric analysis. The data were visualized through cocitation mapping, co-occurrence mapping, burst detection, and collaborative mapping. Visualization mappings analyzed texts from 1979 to 2018 and presented relationships among school efficiency, research hotspots, research frontiers, and cooperation.
The conclusions are as follows:
1.On the basis of a cocitation cluster, the knowledge base of the studies on school effectiveness examines topics including relationships, teaching practices, effective school literature, teachers and students, leadership transition effects, class size effects, and redesign of teacher education policy work.
2.Based on the co-occurrence mappings, the hotspots of the studies on school effectiveness are school factors, content delivery, school effectiveness, tertiary entrance performance, authoritative schools, school resources, learning support, multi-level modeling, participatory decision, and educational inequality.
3.According to the results of burst detection, the research frontiers of school effectiveness were research design, charter schools, public schools, school districts, instructional leadership,and reading achievement. These six major topics have already become crucial research topics.
4.Based on the result of cocitation clustering, the cooperation of studies on school effectiveness in the future will be international.
Finally, based on the results this study, suggestions are mentioned for the future studies on the knowledge base of school effectiveness, research hotspots, research frontiers, the exploration of partnerships, and mapping knowledge domain analyses. |
| Reference: | 壹、中文部分
王立學、冷伏梅（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。
左秀英（1995）。開發文獻知識信息單元的方法和途徑。江蘇圖書館學報，(3)，47-48。
吳清山（1992）。學校效能研究。台北市：五南。
吳清山、林天佑(2007)。教育名詞─全球在地化。教育資料與研究，78，249-250。
吳清山、林天佑(2010) 。教育e辭書。台北市：高等教育。
吳清山、高家斌（1992）。臺灣近二十年學校效能研究論文取向分析。教育研究月刊，2009。
李杰(2018)。《科學計量與知識網絡分析：方法與實踐》。北京：首都經濟貿易大學出版社。
李杰、陳超美(2017)。《CiteSpace：科技文本挖掘及可視化》。北京：首都經濟貿易大學出版社。
周曉劍(2014)。基于CiteSpace的語義網國外研究熱點與前沿分析。情報探索，9，24-27。
林明地、連俊智（2013）。國小學校領導動力及其學校效能的差異分析。教育研究集刊，(59:4)，1-45。doi:10.3966/102887082013125904001
徐榮生（2001）。知識單元初論。圖書館雜誌，20 (7)，2-5。
梁秀娟(2009)。科學知識圖譜研究综述。圖書館雜誌，28(6)，58-62。
陳銳、陳超美、胡志剛、王賢文（2014）。《引文空間分析原理與應用：CiteSpace實用指南》。北京：科學出版社。
楊思洛、韓瑞珍（2012)。國外知識圖譜繪製的方法與工具分析。圖書情報知識，6(6)，101-109。
楊思洛、韓瑞珍（2012)。國外知識圖譜研究現狀及趨勢的可視化分析。情報資料工作，34(6)，15-20。
楊思洛、韓瑞珍（2012)。知識圖譜研究現狀及趨勢的可視化分析。情報資料工作，4，22-28。
蔡明月（2003）。資訊計量學與文獻特性。台北市：國立編譯館。
劉植惠（1998）。知識基因探索(一)。情報理論與實踐，1，62-64。
劉則淵、陳悅、侯海燕（2008）。科學知識圖譜：方法與應用。北京：人民出版社。
賴協志（2009）。學校效能模式之探析。教育研究，188，60-75。
謝吉隆（2012）。圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典。台北市：國立編譯館。取自http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1678858/
簡惠閔、高家斌（2007）。提升學校效能之具體策略--學習型學校的觀點。教育資料與研究，79，155-168。
貳、英文部分
Amendum, S. J., & Fitzgerald, J. (2013). Does structure of content delivery or degree of professional development support matter for student reading growth in high-poverty settings?. Journal of Literacy Research, 45(4), 465-502.
Angrist, J. D., Pathak, P. A., & Walters, C. R. (2013). Explaining charter school effectiveness. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(4), 1-27.
Angus, L. (1986). Schooling, the School Effectiveness Movement, and Educational Reform. Publication Sales, Deakin University Press, Victoria 3217, Australia.
Ashenden, D. (1987) ‘An odd couple? Social justice: Performance Indicators’, Public lecture sponsored by the Victorian State Board of Education. Melbourne: Australia.
Bamard, C. I. (1938). The functions of the executive. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press Google Scholar.
Banks, D. (1988) ‘Effective schools research and educational policy making in Australia’,Paper presented at the First International Congress for School Effectiveness, London:England.
Berends, M. (2015). Sociology and school choice: What we know after two decades of charter schools. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 159-180.
Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W. (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual
Bosker, R. J., & Velden, R. K. W. van der (1989). Schooleffecten enrendementen. Loopbanen doorheen het onderwijs. Lisse: Swets & Zeitinger.
Brion-Meisels, G. (2015). “Can I Trust You With This?” Investigating Middle School Students’ Use of Learning Supports. Urban Education, 50(6), 718-749.
Bruggencate, G., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., & Sleegers, P. (2012). Modeling the influence of school leaders on student achievement: how can school leaders make a difference?. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 699-732.
Bryk, A. S., & Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical models: Applications and data analysis methods.
Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S.(2010).
Caldwell, B. J., & Spinks, J. M. (1988). The self-managing school: Educational policy
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Information (International Social Science Council), 22(2), 191-235.
Chen, C. (2002).Visualization of knowledge structures. In Handbook of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering: Volume II: Emerging Technologies (pp.201-237).
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 57(3), 359-377.
Chen, C. (2012). Predictive effects of structural variation on citation counts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(3), 431-449.
Chen, Y. G., Cheng, J. N., & Sato, M. (2017). Effects of School Principals` Leadership Behaviors: A Comparison between Taiwan and Japan. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 17(1), 145-173.
Chen, C., Ibekwe‐SanJuan, F., & Hou, J. (2010). The structure and dynamics of cocitation clusters: A multiple‐perspective cocitation analysis. Journal of the American Society for information Science and Technology, 61(7), 1386-1409.
Chicago Press.
Chen, C., Chen, Y., Horowitz, M., Hou, H., Liu, Z., & Pellegrino, D. (2009). Towards an explanatory and computational theory of scientific discovery. Journal of Informetrics, 3(3), 191-209.
Cobo, M. J., López‐Herrera, A. G., Herrera‐Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382-1402.
Cools, W., De Fraine, B., Van den Noortgate, W., & Onghena, P. (2009). Multilevel design efficiency in educational effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 20(3), 357-373.
Cookson, P. (2018). Expect miracles: Charter schools and the politics of hope and despair. Routledge.
Cordero, J. M., Cristobal, V., & Santín, D. (2018). Causal inference on education policies: a survey of empirical studies using PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS. Journal of Economic Surveys, 32(3), 878-915.
Costa, P., & Araújo, L. (2018). Skilled students and effective schools: Reading achievement in Denmark, Sweden, and France. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(6), 850-864.
Creemers, B. P. (1994). Effective instruction: An empirical basis for a theory of educational effectiveness. In Advances in school effectiveness research and practice (pp. 189-205).
Creemers, B. P., & Kyriakides, L. (2010). Explaining stability and changes in school effectiveness by looking at changes in the functioning of school factors. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(4), 409-427.
Creemers, B., & Kyriakides, L. (2008). The dynamics of educational effectiveness: A contribution to policy, practice and theory in contemporary schools. Routledge.
Dobbie, W., & Fryer Jr, R. G. (2013). Getting beneath the veil of effective schools: Evidence from New York City. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(4), 28-60.
Doolaard, S. (1995). Stabiliteit van schooleffecten in het basisonderwijs.
Drucker, P. (2016). The effective executive. Routledge. (Original work published 1966).
Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational leadership, 37(1), 15-24.
Endersby, J. W. (1996). Collaborative research in the social sciences: Multiple authorship and publication credit. Social Science Quarterly, 375-392.
Fahle, E. M., & Reardon, S. F. (2018). How Much Do Test Scores Vary Among School Districts? New Estimates Using Population Data, 2009–2015. Educational Researcher, 47(4), 221-234.
Fortunato, S. (2010). Community detection in graphs. Physics reports, 486(3-5), 75-174.
Freeman, L. C. (1977). A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry, 35-41.
Freeman, L. C., Roeder, D., & Mulholland, R. R. (1979). Centrality in social networks: II. Experimental results. Social networks, 2(2), 119-141.
Gill, M. G., Ashton, P., & Algina, J. (2004). Authoritative schools: A test of a model to resolve the school effectiveness debate. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 389-409.
Girvan, M., & Newman, M. E. (2002). Community structure in social and biological networks. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 99(12), 7821-7826.
Goldstein, H. (1987). Multilevel models in education and social research. Oxford University Press.
Goldstein, H. (1997). Methods in school effectiveness research. School effectiveness and school improvement, 8(4), 369-395.
Gorard, S. (2003). What is Multi–level Modelling For?. British Journal of Educational Studies, 51(1), 46-63.
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal`s role in school effectiveness: A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational administration quarterly, 32(1), 5-44.
Hanushek, E. A. (1999). Some findings from an independent investigation of the Tennessee STAR experiment and from other investigations of class size effects. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 143-163.
Hanushek, E. A., Rivkin, S. G., & Taylor, L. L. (1996). Aggregation and the estimated effects of school resources (No. w5548). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. routledge.
Heck, R. H., & Moriyama, K. (2010). Examining relationships among elementary schools` contexts, leadership, instructional practices, and added-year outcomes: a regression discontinuity approach. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(4), 377-408.
Henderson, D. J., Simar, L., & Wang, L. (2017). The three I s of public schools: irrelevant inputs, insufficient resources and inefficiency. Applied Economics, 49(12), 1164-1184.
Jacoby, R. (1998). U.S. Patent No. 5,768,552. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Kamada, T., & Kawai, S. (1989). An algorithm for drawing general undirected graphs. Information processing letters, 31(1), 7-15.
Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration?. Research policy, 26(1), 1-18.
Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American documentation, 14(1), 10-25.
Kessler, M. M. (1963). Bibliographic coupling between scientific papers. American documentation, 14(1), 10-25.
Kreft, I. G. (1993). Using multilevel analysis to assess school effectiveness: A study of Dutch secondary schools. Sociology of education, 104-129.
Kyriakides, L., Creemers, B., Antoniou, P., & Demetriou, D. (2010). A synthesis of studies searching for school factors: Implications for theory and research. British Educational Research Journal, 36(5), 807-830.
Lee, J., & Shute, V. J. (2010). Personal and social-contextual factors in K–12 academic performance: An integrative perspective on student learning. Educational Psychologist, 45(3), 185-202.
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). Transformational school leadership effects: A replication. School effectiveness and school improvement, 10(4), 451-479.
Leithwood, K., Tomlinson, D., & Genge, M. (1996). Transformational school leadership. In International handbook of educational leadership and administration (pp. 785-840). Springer, Dordrecht.
Lezotte, L. W. (1989). School improvement based on the effective schools research. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(7), 815-825.
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.
Luyten, H. (1994). Stability of school effects in Dutch secondary education: The impact of variance across subjects and years. International journal of educational research, 21(2), 197-216.
Luyten, H., Visscher, A., & Witziers, B. (2005). School effectiveness research: From a review of the criticism to recommendations for further development. School effectiveness and school improvement, 16(3), 249-279.
Marks, G. N. (2010). What aspects of schooling are important? School effects on tertiary entrance performance. School effectiveness and school improvement, 21(3),
Marzano, R. J. (2012). Marzano levels of school effectiveness. Marzano laboratories.
Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American sociological review, 69(2), 213-238.
Morris, S. A., Yen, G., Wu, Z., & Asnake, B. (2003). Time line visualization of research fronts. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 54(5), 413-422.
Mortimore, P. (1993). School effectiveness and the management of effective learning and teaching. School effectiveness and school improvement, 4(4), 290-310.
Mortimore, P., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., & Ecob, R. (1988). School matters. Univ of California Press.
Mosteller, F. (1995). The Tennessee study of class size in the early school grades. The future of children, 113-127.
Normand, R. (2008). School effectiveness or the horizon of the world as a laboratory. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 29(6), 665-676.
Opdenakker, M. C., Maulana, R., & den Brok, P. (2012). Teacher–student interpersonal relationships and academic motivation within one school year: Developmental changes and linkage. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 23(1), 95-119.
Orr, M. T., & Orphanos, S. (2011). How graduate-level preparation influences the effectiveness of school leaders: A comparison of the outcomes of exemplary and conventional leadership preparation programs for principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(1), 18-70.
Paccagnella, O. (2006). Centering or not centering in multilevel models? The role of the group mean and the assessment of group effects. Evaluation review, 30(1), 66-85.
Pellerin, L. A. (2005). Applying Baumrind`s parenting typology to high schools: toward a middle-range theory of authoritative socialization. Social Science Research, 34(2), 283-303.
perspectives.
Persson, O. (1994), The intellectual base and research fronts of JASIS 1986–1990.J.Am. Soc. Inf. Sci., 45: 31-38.
Phillips, M. (1997). What makes schools effective? A comparison of the relationships of communitarian climate and academic climate to mathematics achievement and attendance during middle school. American educational research journal, 34(4), 633-662.
Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. The elementary school journal, 83(4), 427-452.
Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Sage.
review of information science and technology, 37(1), 179-255.
Reynolds, D., & Creemers, B. (1990). School effectiveness and school improvement: A mission statement. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(1), 1-3.
Robinson, V. M., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational administration quarterly, 44(5), 635-674.
Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Workplace conditions that affect teacher quality and commitment: Implications for teacher induction programs. The Elementary School Journal, 89(4), 421-439.
Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of computational and applied mathematics, 20, 53-65.
Rowe, E. E., & Lubienski, C. (2017). Shopping for schools or shopping for peers: Public schools and catchment area segregation. Journal of Education Policy, 32(3), 340-356.
Rutter, M. (1982). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children. Harvard University Press.
Rutter, M., & Maughan, B. (2002). School effectiveness findings 1979–2002. Journal of school psychology, 40(6), 451-475.
Sakellariou, C. (2017). Private or public school advantage? Evidence from 40 countries using PISA 2012-Mathematics. Applied Economics, 49(29), 2875-2892.
Scheerens, J. (2013). What is effective schooling? A review of current thought and practice.
Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Pergamon.
Scheerens, J., & Creemers, B. P. (1996). School effectiveness in the Netherlands: the modest influence of a research programme. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(2), 181-195.
Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1990). Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Ablex Publishing.
Slee, R., Weiner, G., & Tomlinson, S. (Eds.). (1998). School effectiveness for whom?: Challenges to the school effectiveness and school improvement movements. Psychology Press.
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.
Smith, D. J., & Tomlinson, S. (1990). The school effect: A study of multi racial comprehensives.
Smylie, M. A. (1994). Chapter 3: Redesigning teachers` work: Connections to the classroom. Review of research in education, 20(1), 129-177.
Somech, A. (2010). Participative decision making in schools: A mediating-moderating analytical framework for understanding school and teacher outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(2), 174-209.
Stevens, P. A. (2007). Researching race/ethnicity and educational inequality in English secondary schools: A critical review of the research literature between 1980 and 2005. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 147-185.
Supovitz, J., Sirinides, P., & May, H. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 31-56.
Supovitz, J., Sirinides, P., & May, H. (2010). How principals and peers influence teaching and learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(1), 31-56.
Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2000). The international handbook of school effectiveness research. Psychology Press.
Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2001). Countering the critics: Responses to recent criticisms of school effectiveness research. School effectiveness and school improvement, 12(1), 41-82.
Teddlie, C., & Stringfield, S. (1993). Schools Make a Difference: Lessons Learned from a 10-Year Study of School Effects. Teachers College Press, 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027.
Tom, A. B., Bosker, T. A. S. R. J., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: an introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Sage.
Urick, A., Wilson, A. S., Ford, T. G., Frick, W. C., & Wronowski, M. L. (2018). Testing a framework of math progress indicators for ESSA: How opportunity to learn and instructional leadership matter. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(3), 396-438.
Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629-635.
Weber, G. (1971). Inner-City Children Can Be Taught to Read: Four Successful Schools. CBE Occasional Papers, Number 18.
White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1997). Visualization of literatures. Annual review of information science and technology (ARIST), 32, 99-168.
White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a discipline: An author co‐citation analysis of information science, 1972–1995. Journal of the American society for information science, 49(4), 327-355.
Wiggins, J. S., Steiger, J. H., & Gaelick, L. (1981). Evaluating circumplexity in personality data. Multivariate Behavioral Research. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
學校行政碩士在職專班
105911004 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0105911004 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU201900389 |
| Appears in Collections: | [學校行政碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 100401.pdf | 7643Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
