1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. 教育學院
  4. 學位論文
  5. Item

學術產出-學位論文

文章檢視/開啟

書目匯出

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

引文資訊

TAIR相關學術產出

題名 幼兒園品質評估指標建構與應用之研究- 以桃園市為例
Research on the Construction and Application of Evaluation Indicators for Preschool Quality-Taking Taoyuan City as an Example
作者 蔡詩欣
Tsai, Shih-Hsin
貢獻者 郭昭佑
Kau, Chao-Yu
蔡詩欣
Tsai, Shih-Hsin
關鍵詞 幼兒園
品質
評估指標
Preschool
Quality
Evaluation Indicators
日期 2022
上傳時間 1-八月-2022 18:42:07 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究目的為建構桃園市幼兒園品質評估指標，並以桃園市為例，針對桃園市公立、非營利、準公共及私立幼兒園抽樣300間園所進行指標重要性及表現情形調查。

本研究除關注結構及歷程品質外，並加入結果品質觀點，關注幼兒學習發展與表現，研究方法為問卷調查法，由研究者先蒐集國內外品質評估指標進行品質評估指標初構，再透過模糊德懷術及概念構圖專家問卷確認指標內容與構面。所得指標據以對桃園市幼兒園進行重要性及表現情形問卷調查，並進行IPA分析及以單因子變異數分析探究各類型幼兒園表現是否有所差異。

研究所得結論與建議如下：
一、結論
(一)本研究所建構之幼兒園評估指標共計六構面40個指標。
(二)「幼兒保育」為桃園市幼兒園人員認為最重要及表現最佳之指標構面，不同類型幼兒園所認為之指標重要性及表現情形有所差異。
(三)不同類型幼兒園品質評估指標重要性與表現情形分析(IPA)結果因幼兒園特性而有所差異。
(四) 公立和準公共幼兒園在「課程與教學」構面表現情形差異達顯著；公立與準公共及私立幼兒園在「學習表現」表現情形差異達顯著，惟因自評者效應影響，分析結果未必能代表桃園市不同類型幼兒園之實際表現情形。
二、建議
(一)對教育行政機關之建議
1、參考本研究建構之品質評估指標擬定幼兒園品質評估機制。
2、可參酌美國 QRIS 品質評估機制提供幼兒園診斷建議及支持措施。
3、關注幼兒發展與學習表現並建構合適之幼兒發展與學習評估工具。
4、持續挹注幼兒園經費與資源協助提升品質。
(二)對幼兒園經營者之建議
1、參考本研究所建構之指標適時自評以提升品質。
2、對各類幼兒園共同認為重要性高之品質指標加強關注。
3、兼顧品質指標與構面，加強課程與教學及學習表現構面之表現。
(三)對未來研究之建議
1、幼兒園品質評估指標構面及內容宜持續做適當之更新。
2、幼兒園品質評估指標建構應參酌多方利害關係人意見。
3、可就幼兒園品質表現情形採實地觀察、訪談等多元調查方式以求客觀。
4、針對影響幼兒園品質表現之其它背景變項進行研究。
5、發展合適之幼兒發展與學習評估指標。
The purpose of this research was to construct a quality evaluation index for kindergartens, and take Taoyuan City as an example to investigate the importance and performance of indicators in a sample of 300 public, non-profit, quasi-public and private kindergartens in Taoyuan City.

In addition to emphasizing the quality of structure and process, this study also contained the viewpoint of result quality, focusing on children`s learning development and performance. The research was conducted by a questionnaire survey method. The Fuzzy Delphi Method and Concept mapping expert questionnaires confirmed the content and dimensions of the indicators. The obtained index data was used to conduct a questionnaire survey on the importance and performance of kindergartens in Taoyuan City, and IPA analysis and One-way ANOVA analysis of variance were used to explore whether the performance of various types of kindergartens was different.

The conclusions and recommendations of the study are as follows:
1.Conclusion
(1) The kindergarten evaluation index constructed by this research had a total of 40 indicators in six dimensions.
(2) "Early child care" was the most important and best-performing indicator aspect considered by Taoyuan City kindergarten staff. The importance and performance of indicators varied in different types of kindergartens.
(3) The results of the Importance and Performance Analysis (IPA) of different types of kindergarten quality assessment indicators differed according to the characteristics of kindergartens.
(4) The performance of public and quasi-public kindergartens in the dimension of "curriculum and teaching" is significantly different; the performance of public and quasi-public and private kindergartens in "learning performance" is significantly different. However, the analysis results may not be representative of the actual performance in different types of kindergartens in Taoyuan City due to the influence of the self-evaluator effect.
2. Suggestion
(1) Suggestions to educational administrative agencies
A. With reference to the quality assessment indicators constructed in this study, a kindergarten quality assessment mechanism was formulated.
B. Kindergarten diagnostic advice and support measures can be provided with reference to the QRIS quality assessment mechanism in the United States.
C. Pay attention to early childhood development and learning performance and construct appropriate early childhood development and learning assessment tools.
D. Continue to inject funds and resources to help kindergartens improve their quality.
(2) Suggestions for kindergarten operators
A. Refer to the indicators constructed by this research to self-evaluate in a timely manner to improve the quality.
B. Pay more attention to the quality indicators that all kinds of kindergartens consider to be highly important.
C. Take the quality indicators and aspects into account, and strengthen the performance of curriculum and teaching and learning performance aspects.
(3) Suggestions for future research
A. The dimensions and content of the quality assessment indicators for kindergartens should be updated continually and appropriately.
B. The construction of kindergarten quality assessment indicators should take into account the opinions of multiple stakeholders.
C. Multiple survey methods such as field observation and interview can be used to achieve objectivity in relation to the quality performance of kindergartens.
D. Conduct research on other background variables that affect the quality performance of kindergartens.
E. Develop appropriate evaluation indicators for early childhood development and learning.
參考文獻 壹、中文部分
王萍、薛媛媛(2014)。臺灣地區提高托幼教育品質的新舉措—《幼稚園教保活動與課程大綱》的框架性內容及啟示。東北師大學報（哲學社會科學版），2014年第3期(總第269期)，214-218。
王聲平、楊曉萍(2017)。構建學前教育品質保障體系的國際經驗及其對我國的啟示。比較教育學報，5，51-58。
王昱舒(2021)。我國近二十年學前教育變遷研究。呂梁學院學報，11(1)，85-89。
行政院(2017)。我國少子女化對策計畫。
行政院(2019)。我國少子女化對策計畫(修正版)。
李宜學(2019)。中小學融合教育推動成效評估指標建構之研究〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺南大學特殊教育學系。
何華國(2013)。澳洲幼兒教育與照顧人力培育之探討，幼兒教保研究期刊，2013年第10期，19-38。
邢俊利(2019)。香港學前教育的發展現狀、辦學經驗與啟示。世界教育信息 ，2019年19期，69-72。
吳清山(2006)。教育品質管理精義。品質月刊，42(6)，60-63。
吳政達（2008）。教育政策分析：概念、方法與應用。高等教育文化。
底會娟、王藝芳(2019)。發達國家學前教育品質監測體系的比較與啟示
——以美國、英國、澳大利亞為例。現代教育管理，2019年第5期， 77-82。
林佩蓉、張斯寧(2011年10月29日)。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表的編製研究。國立東華大學2011年建國百年教育新趨勢—幼教之創新與實踐學術與實務交流研討會，花蓮市，臺灣。
林佩蓉(2012)。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表。教育部國教司委託之計畫。
林佩蓉(2020)。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表-2020版。教育部委託
之計畫。
林天祐(2006)。教學評鑑。評鑑雙月刊，3，22-23。
幸曼玲、楊金寶、丘嘉慧、柯華葳、蔡敏玲、金瑞芝、林玫君（2015）。新課綱想說的事──幼兒園教保活動課程大綱的理念與發展。心理。
尚燕紅(2020)。21世紀初新加坡學前教育課程改革及其啟示。教育導刊(下半月)，2020年04期,93-96。
段慧瑩(2011)。我國幼兒教育發展之議題與興革。載於吳清山(主編)，我國百年教育回顧與展望( 頁105-120)。國家教育研究院。
段蘇穎(2019)。美國學前教育政策及對中國的啟示。西部學刊，第95期，81-84。
洪秀敏、朱文婷、魏若玉(2019)。國際托幼機構品質評估的價值取向與啟示——基於六國評估指標體系的視覺化圖譜分析。教育研究，總第473期，95-104。
馬錦華、陳圓圓、李曉寧(2019)。幼兒園教育質量評估指標體系比較及其啟示。教育研究與實驗，2019年第5期，76-82。
徐聯恩、白育綺(2003年4月18-19日)。幼兒園品質之內涵與變遷。童年沃野變遷與創化學術研討會，臺北市，臺灣。
國家教育研究院(2012)。第七次中華民國教育年鑑- 03第參篇幼兒教育。引自
https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-7986,c1311-1.php?Lang=zh-tw
張寧珊(2019)。英國近二十年學前教育政策及其對我國的啟示。外國中小學教育，2019年11期，39-47。
Harm.T.,Clifford,R.M.& Cryer.D (2006)。幼兒學習環境評量表修訂版（Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale Revised Edition）(郭李宗文、陳淑芳譯)。心理。(原著出版於1980年)。
教育部(2017a)。擴大幼兒教保公共化計畫(106-109年度)(核定本)。取自：https://www.edu.tw/News_Plan_Content.aspx?n=D33B55D537402BAA&sms=954974C68391B710&s=5BA0F84A2D2B8326
教育部(2017b)。幼兒園教保活動課程大綱。
教育部國民及學前教育署(2017)。研商107學年至111學年幼兒園基礎評鑑指標(草案)會議紀錄。
陳德枝、李克建、周競(2021)。《走向優質———中國幼稚園教育品質評價標準》的測量學屬性分析———基於我國100所幼稚園與1670名兒童的測評數據。學前教育研究，2021年第3期，3-16。
陳曉紅(2019)。新加坡提升學前教育質量的主要舉措及其啟示。青海教育，2019年Z1期， 30-33。
陳娟娟(2019)。托嬰中心教保品質評估工具比較分析。幼兒教育，327期， 129–143。
陳錫鴻(2020)。我國高級中等學校資優教育評鑑指標建構之研究〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺南大學教育政策與行政學系。
黃旭鈞（1995）。國民小學教育人員「全面品質管理」信念研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。台北市立師範學院初等教育學系。
單文頂、曹紫楊(2021)。美國學前教育品質評級與提升系統（QRIS）
對我國開展學前教育品質監測的啟示。中國考試，2021年第10期，33-42。
趙強(2017)。澳大利亞幼稚教育與保育的政府干預研究。浙江師範大學學報(社會科學版)，209(42)，106-114。
劉海、林新發(2019)。中國大陸幼教產業與教育的關係。臺灣教育評論月刊，8（1），103-110。
駐波士頓辦事處教育組（2016年9月6日）。美國幼兒教育者能力不足依舊是個問題。國家教育研究院國際教育訊息電子報。https://moebos.org/2016/09/06/%E7%BE%8E%E5%9C%8B%E5%B9%BC%E5%85%92%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E8%80%85%E8%83%BD%E5%8A%9B%E4%B8%8D%E8%B6%B3%E4%BE%9D%E8%88%8A%E6%98%AF%E5%80%8B%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C/
駐英國代表處教育組（2017）。英格蘭「幼兒基礎階段架構」政策簡介。國家教育研究院國際教育訊息電子報。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/PDFReader?xmlId=1985998&fileName=1503043866355&format=pdf&OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=IT2H-4I1W-E4OB-FZDI-GHB4-U6HU-JM2S-9JNZ
蔡春美（1998）。透視當前幼教教學—回顧與期許。載於台北市立師院兒童發展中心主編，台灣地區幼稚園教學法（頁11-21）。教育部國民教育司。
蔡春美(2015)。簡介「幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表」。幼兒教育，319期，26-29。
歐姿秀（2012）。幼托整合後幼兒園教師之任用與培育。臺灣教育評論月刊，1（4），52。
賴協志(2018)。英美改善幼兒教育品質之實際作為。國家教育研究院電子報第 176期。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/ct?ctNode=655&mp=teric_b&xItem=2016238&resCtNode=453&OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=IT2H-4I1W-E4OB-FZDI-GHB4-U6HU-JM2S-9JNZ
戰寶華、陳惠珍、楊金寶(2019)。優質幼兒園品質評量指標建構之研究。慈濟大學教育研究學刊，第15期，35-68。
薛二勇、傅王倩、李健（2019）。學前教育立法的政策基礎、挑戰與應對。中國教育學刊，40（12），37-44。
聶晨(2020)。破解不均衡不充分：福利主義視角下英國學前教育政策的發展及其啟示。學前教育研究，2020年第3期。
羅恩冕、郭昭佑(2018)。我國大學學生評鑑教師教學指標之研究：概念構圖法的調整應用。教育研究與發展期刊，14(1)，1-34。
寶童早教網(2016年12月26日)。全球幼教市場發展趨勢。https://kknews.cc/education/893q55n.html
黨榮蓉（2017）。遼寧省學前教育管理資訊化應用現狀及對策研究。中國教育
資訊化，23（1），14-16。
龔芮誼(2015)。NAEYC幼兒園課程認證標準與幼兒園課程品質評估之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立政治大學幼兒教育所。

貳、外文部分
Abrahamson, L.(2015). The early Years Teacher`s Book：Achieving Early Years Teachers Status[M]. SAGE Publication inc.
ACECQA(2018). National Quality Standard.
https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard
Anderson, S. & Phillips , D.(2017). Is Pre-K Classroom Quality Associated With Kindergarten and Middle-School Academic Skills? Developmental Psychology, 53(6), 1063–1078
Ann-Marie F., Laura H., Ivan M. ,Nora B., Michelle C. (2015). Examining changes to Michigan’s early childhood quality rating and improvement system (QRIS). Midwest.
Ann-Marie F., Laura H., Ivan M. , Nora B., Michelle C. (2017). The “I” in QRIS Survey: Collecting data on quality improvement activities for early childhood education programs. Midwest.
Buettner C. K., &Andrews , D. W.(2009).United States child care policy and systems of care: the emerging role of Quality Rating and Improvement Systems[J]. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 3（1）, 43-50.
Cassidy, D. J., Hestenes, L. L., Hedge, A., Hestenes, S., & Mims, S. (2005). Measurement of quality in preschool childcare classrooms: An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale—Revised. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20, 345–360. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2005.07.005.
Carr ,R. C., Mokrova,i. L., Vernon-Feagans,L.,& Burchinal, M. R.(2019). Cumulative classroom quality during pre-kindergarten and kindergarten and children’s language, literacy, and mathematics skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly ,47(2), 218-228.
Cortes J., Hallam R. A. (2016). QRIS: Empowering Family Child Care Providers as Leaders. Young Children, 71(4). 14-19.
Cryer, D. (2003). Defining program quality. In Biley, D. B. (Series Ed.) & Cryer, D. &Clifford, R. M. (Vol. Eds.), Early childhood education and care in the USA (pp.31-46). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Department for Education.(2016). Government Response: Early Years National Funding Formula and Changes to the Way The Three-and Four year Old Entitlements to Childcare are Funded, England, [R]. London.
Diane S., Iheoma I., Harriet D.& Debi M.(2015). Quality Rating and Improvement Systems: Stakeholder Theories of Change and Models of Practice. BUILD.
Gretchen K.,Pia C., Lizabeth M. M.& Kimberly B.(2015). What do quality rating levels mean? Examining the implementation of QRIS ratings to inform validation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly，30，291–305.
Government of the HKSAR Education Bureau(2017). Free Quality Kindergarten Education Scheme Performance Indicators (Kindergartens). Education Bureau Circular No. 20/2017
Head Start(2015). Head Start Early Learning Outcomes Framework.
https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/school-readiness/article/head-start-early-learning-outcomes-framework
Hertzman, C., Siddiqi, A., Hertzman, E., Irwin, L. G., Vaghri, Z., & Houweling, T. A. (2010). Bucking the inequality gradient through early child development. BMJ, 340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c468
Hoang, N., Holopainen, L. & Siekkinen, M.(2018). Quality of teacher–child interactions and its relations to children’s classroom engagement and disaffection in Vietnamese kindergartens. International Journal of Early Years Education, 26(4), 387–402.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2018.1478281
Hofer, K. G. (2008). Measuring quality in pre-kindergarten classrooms: assessing the early childhood environment rating scale. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Vanderbilt.
https://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/etd-03272008-205550
Holod, A., Faria,A.-M., Weinberg,E.&Howard, E.(2015). Moving Up the Ladder［EB / OL］. http：//www. air.org/sites/default / files/downloads/ report /Quality-rating and-Improvement-System-QRIS-Early-Childhood-Sept-2015rev.pdf.
Horowitz, M., Squires, J.(2014). Do state QRIS standards support the learning needs of all children?
http://ceelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ceelo_fast_fact_qris_inclusion.pdf
Howes, C., Burchinal, M., Pianta, R., Bryant, D., Early, D., Clifford, R., & Barbarin, O. (2008). Ready to learn? Children’s pre-academic achievement in pre-kindergarten programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 27–50.
Hu, B. Y., (2015). Comparing cultural differences in two quality measures in Chinese kindergartens: the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised and the Kindergarten Quality Rating System. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 45(1), 94–117.
Ip, P., Rao, N., Bacon-Shone,J., Li, S. L., Ho, F. K.-w., & Jiang, F.(2016). Socioeconomic gradients in school readiness of Chinese preschool children: The mediating role of family processes and kindergarten quality. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,35,111–123.
Martine, L.B., Irina L. M., Margaret R. B.& Patricia T. G.(2016). Classroom quality at pre-kindergarten and kindergarten andchildren’s social skills and behavior problems. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,36, 212-222.
Mashburn, A. J., Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., Downer, J. T., Barbarin, O. A., Bryant, D., Burchinal M., Early ,D. M.,& Howes, C. (2008). Measures of classroom quality in prekindergarten and children’s development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79, 732–749.
Mathers, S., Singler, R.,& Karemaker, A.(2012). Improving Quality in the Early Years: A Comparison of Perspectives and Measures.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270747368_Improving_Quality_in_the_Early_Years_A_Comparison_of_Perspectives_and_Measures
NAEYC(2019).NAEYC Early Learning Program Accreditation Standards and Assessment Items. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/accreditation/early-learning/standards_assessment_2019.pdf
OECD(2012). Starting Strong III - A Quality Toolbox for Early Childhood Education and Care.
http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/startingstrongiii-aqualitytoolboxforearlychildhooded ucationandcare.htm#4
OECD(2017).Starting Strong IV：Monitoring Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care.
https://www.oecd.org/publications/starting-strong-iv-9789264233515-en.htm
Peisner-Feinberg, E., Burchinal, M. R., Clifford, R. M., Culkin, M. L., Howes, C., Kagan, S. L., & Yazejian, N. (2001). The relation of preschool child-care quality to children’s cognitive and social developmental trajectories through second grade. Child Development, 72, 1534–1553.
Perry, K. E., Donohue, K. M., & Weinstein, R. S. (2007). Teaching practices and the promotion of achievement and adjustment in first grade. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 269–292.
Phillips, D. A. (2016). Stability, security, and social dynamics in early childhood environments. In S. M. Jones & N. Leseau (Eds.), Leading edge in early childhood education (pp. 7–28). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pianta, R., &Hamre, B. (2009). Conceptualization, Measurement, and Improvement of Classroom Processes: Standardized Observation Can Leverage Capacity. Educational Researcher,38(2), 109-119.doi:10.3102/0013189X09332374
Quinn D. M. (2015). Kindergarten Black–White Test Score Gaps: Re-examining the Roles of Socioeconomic Status and School Quality with New Data. Sociology of Education, 88(2), 120-139.
Salminen, J., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Poikkeus,A.-M., Pakarinen, E., Siekkinen, M., Hännikäinen,M., Poikonen ,P.-L.& Rasku-Puttonen,H.(2012).Observed Classroom Quality Profiles of Kindergarten Classrooms in Finland. Early Education and Development, 23，654–677.
Sandilos, L. E. , DiPerna , J. C.& The Family Life Project Key Investigators(2014). Measuring Quality in Kindergarten Classrooms: Structural Analysis of the Classroom Assessment. Scoring System (CLASS K–3). Early Education and Development，25(6)，894-914.
Scrivner, S.&Wolfe, B.(2002).Universal Preschool: Much To Gain But Who Will Pay? Working Paper Series. Foundation for Child Development.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED473930
Siekkinen, M. E., Pakarinen, M. K. ,Lerkkanen, A. M., Poikkeus, J. ,Salminen, E., Poskiparta, & J. E. Nurmi(2013).“Social Competence among 6-year-old Children and Classroom Instructional Support and Teacher Stress”. Early Education and Development ,24 (6), 877–897.
Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Wong, Y. (1999). Defining and Evaluating ‘Quality’ Early Childhood Education in an International Context : Dilemmas and Possibilities. Early YearsM,20(1), 7-18.
Slot, P. L., Leseman, P. P. M., Verhagen, J., & Mulder, H. (2015). Associations between structural quality aspects and process quality in Dutch early childhood education and care settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 33, 64–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.06.001.
Tan ,C. T. (2017）.Enhancing the quality of kindergarten education in Singapore: policies and strategies in the 21st century. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, volume 11, Article number: 7 .
Winterbottom, C. & Piasta, S. B.(2015). Does Accreditation Matter? School Readiness Rates for Accredited Versus Nonaccredited Child Care Facilities in Florida’s Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program . Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 29,60–72.
Zaslow, M., Martinez-Beck, I., Tout, K., & Halle, T. (2011). Quality measurement in early childhood settings. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
描述 博士
國立政治大學
教育學系
101152511
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101152511
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 郭昭佑zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Kau, Chao-Yuen_US
dc.contributor.author (作者) 蔡詩欣zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (作者) Tsai, Shih-Hsinen_US
dc.creator (作者) 蔡詩欣zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Tsai, Shih-Hsinen_US
dc.date (日期) 2022en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-八月-2022 18:42:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-八月-2022 18:42:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-八月-2022 18:42:07 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0101152511en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/141314-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 教育學系zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 101152511zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究目的為建構桃園市幼兒園品質評估指標，並以桃園市為例，針對桃園市公立、非營利、準公共及私立幼兒園抽樣300間園所進行指標重要性及表現情形調查。

本研究除關注結構及歷程品質外，並加入結果品質觀點，關注幼兒學習發展與表現，研究方法為問卷調查法，由研究者先蒐集國內外品質評估指標進行品質評估指標初構，再透過模糊德懷術及概念構圖專家問卷確認指標內容與構面。所得指標據以對桃園市幼兒園進行重要性及表現情形問卷調查，並進行IPA分析及以單因子變異數分析探究各類型幼兒園表現是否有所差異。

研究所得結論與建議如下：
一、結論
(一)本研究所建構之幼兒園評估指標共計六構面40個指標。
(二)「幼兒保育」為桃園市幼兒園人員認為最重要及表現最佳之指標構面，不同類型幼兒園所認為之指標重要性及表現情形有所差異。
(三)不同類型幼兒園品質評估指標重要性與表現情形分析(IPA)結果因幼兒園特性而有所差異。
(四) 公立和準公共幼兒園在「課程與教學」構面表現情形差異達顯著；公立與準公共及私立幼兒園在「學習表現」表現情形差異達顯著，惟因自評者效應影響，分析結果未必能代表桃園市不同類型幼兒園之實際表現情形。
二、建議
(一)對教育行政機關之建議
1、參考本研究建構之品質評估指標擬定幼兒園品質評估機制。
2、可參酌美國 QRIS 品質評估機制提供幼兒園診斷建議及支持措施。
3、關注幼兒發展與學習表現並建構合適之幼兒發展與學習評估工具。
4、持續挹注幼兒園經費與資源協助提升品質。
(二)對幼兒園經營者之建議
1、參考本研究所建構之指標適時自評以提升品質。
2、對各類幼兒園共同認為重要性高之品質指標加強關注。
3、兼顧品質指標與構面，加強課程與教學及學習表現構面之表現。
(三)對未來研究之建議
1、幼兒園品質評估指標構面及內容宜持續做適當之更新。
2、幼兒園品質評估指標建構應參酌多方利害關係人意見。
3、可就幼兒園品質表現情形採實地觀察、訪談等多元調查方式以求客觀。
4、針對影響幼兒園品質表現之其它背景變項進行研究。
5、發展合適之幼兒發展與學習評估指標。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The purpose of this research was to construct a quality evaluation index for kindergartens, and take Taoyuan City as an example to investigate the importance and performance of indicators in a sample of 300 public, non-profit, quasi-public and private kindergartens in Taoyuan City.

In addition to emphasizing the quality of structure and process, this study also contained the viewpoint of result quality, focusing on children`s learning development and performance. The research was conducted by a questionnaire survey method. The Fuzzy Delphi Method and Concept mapping expert questionnaires confirmed the content and dimensions of the indicators. The obtained index data was used to conduct a questionnaire survey on the importance and performance of kindergartens in Taoyuan City, and IPA analysis and One-way ANOVA analysis of variance were used to explore whether the performance of various types of kindergartens was different.

The conclusions and recommendations of the study are as follows:
1.Conclusion
(1) The kindergarten evaluation index constructed by this research had a total of 40 indicators in six dimensions.
(2) "Early child care" was the most important and best-performing indicator aspect considered by Taoyuan City kindergarten staff. The importance and performance of indicators varied in different types of kindergartens.
(3) The results of the Importance and Performance Analysis (IPA) of different types of kindergarten quality assessment indicators differed according to the characteristics of kindergartens.
(4) The performance of public and quasi-public kindergartens in the dimension of "curriculum and teaching" is significantly different; the performance of public and quasi-public and private kindergartens in "learning performance" is significantly different. However, the analysis results may not be representative of the actual performance in different types of kindergartens in Taoyuan City due to the influence of the self-evaluator effect.
2. Suggestion
(1) Suggestions to educational administrative agencies
A. With reference to the quality assessment indicators constructed in this study, a kindergarten quality assessment mechanism was formulated.
B. Kindergarten diagnostic advice and support measures can be provided with reference to the QRIS quality assessment mechanism in the United States.
C. Pay attention to early childhood development and learning performance and construct appropriate early childhood development and learning assessment tools.
D. Continue to inject funds and resources to help kindergartens improve their quality.
(2) Suggestions for kindergarten operators
A. Refer to the indicators constructed by this research to self-evaluate in a timely manner to improve the quality.
B. Pay more attention to the quality indicators that all kinds of kindergartens consider to be highly important.
C. Take the quality indicators and aspects into account, and strengthen the performance of curriculum and teaching and learning performance aspects.
(3) Suggestions for future research
A. The dimensions and content of the quality assessment indicators for kindergartens should be updated continually and appropriately.
B. The construction of kindergarten quality assessment indicators should take into account the opinions of multiple stakeholders.
C. Multiple survey methods such as field observation and interview can be used to achieve objectivity in relation to the quality performance of kindergartens.
D. Conduct research on other background variables that affect the quality performance of kindergartens.
E. Develop appropriate evaluation indicators for early childhood development and learning.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 2
第二節 研究目的與待答問題 6
第三節 名詞釋義 7
第四節 研究方法與步驟 8
第五節 研究範圍與限制 14
第二章 文獻探討 16
第一節 幼兒園品質與評估之相關概念 16
第二節 各國幼兒園品質提升與評估政策探究 24
第三節 臺灣幼兒教育品質提升與評估機制 39
第四節 幼兒園品質評估指標初構 49
第三章 研究設計與實施 74
第一節 研究架構 75
第二節 研究對象 76
第三節 研究工具 81
第四節 實施程序 83
第五節 資料處理與統計分析 85
第四章 研究結果分析與討論 97
第一節 「模糊德懷術問卷」結果 97
第二節 概念構圖專家問卷分析 105
第三節 「幼兒園品質指標重要性及表現情形問卷」結果 118
第四節 綜合討論 168
第五章 結論與建議 175
第一節 結論 175
第二節 建議 180
參考文獻 184
附錄一 我國幼兒園專業認證評鑑指標草案 192
附錄二 幼兒園品質評估指標建構專家問卷（專家效度） 208
附錄三 「幼兒園品質評估指標建構」模糊德懷術問卷 214
附錄四 「幼兒園品質評估指標建構」概念構圖專家問卷 220
附錄五 桃園市幼兒園品質指標重要性/及表現情形問卷 225
附錄六 桃園市不同類型幼兒園品質評估指標重要性排序表 230
附錄七 桃園市不同類型幼兒園品質評估指標表現情形排序表 235		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 10621616 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0101152511en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 幼兒園zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 品質zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 評估指標zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Preschoolen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Qualityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Evaluation Indicatorsen_US
dc.title (題名) 幼兒園品質評估指標建構與應用之研究- 以桃園市為例zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Research on the Construction and Application of Evaluation Indicators for Preschool Quality-Taking Taoyuan City as an Exampleen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 壹、中文部分
王萍、薛媛媛(2014)。臺灣地區提高托幼教育品質的新舉措—《幼稚園教保活動與課程大綱》的框架性內容及啟示。東北師大學報（哲學社會科學版），2014年第3期(總第269期)，214-218。
王聲平、楊曉萍(2017)。構建學前教育品質保障體系的國際經驗及其對我國的啟示。比較教育學報，5，51-58。
王昱舒(2021)。我國近二十年學前教育變遷研究。呂梁學院學報，11(1)，85-89。
行政院(2017)。我國少子女化對策計畫。
行政院(2019)。我國少子女化對策計畫(修正版)。
李宜學(2019)。中小學融合教育推動成效評估指標建構之研究〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺南大學特殊教育學系。
何華國(2013)。澳洲幼兒教育與照顧人力培育之探討，幼兒教保研究期刊，2013年第10期，19-38。
邢俊利(2019)。香港學前教育的發展現狀、辦學經驗與啟示。世界教育信息 ，2019年19期，69-72。
吳清山(2006)。教育品質管理精義。品質月刊，42(6)，60-63。
吳政達（2008）。教育政策分析：概念、方法與應用。高等教育文化。
底會娟、王藝芳(2019)。發達國家學前教育品質監測體系的比較與啟示
——以美國、英國、澳大利亞為例。現代教育管理，2019年第5期， 77-82。
林佩蓉、張斯寧(2011年10月29日)。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表的編製研究。國立東華大學2011年建國百年教育新趨勢—幼教之創新與實踐學術與實務交流研討會，花蓮市，臺灣。
林佩蓉(2012)。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表。教育部國教司委託之計畫。
林佩蓉(2020)。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表-2020版。教育部委託
之計畫。
林天祐(2006)。教學評鑑。評鑑雙月刊，3，22-23。
幸曼玲、楊金寶、丘嘉慧、柯華葳、蔡敏玲、金瑞芝、林玫君（2015）。新課綱想說的事──幼兒園教保活動課程大綱的理念與發展。心理。
尚燕紅(2020)。21世紀初新加坡學前教育課程改革及其啟示。教育導刊(下半月)，2020年04期,93-96。
段慧瑩(2011)。我國幼兒教育發展之議題與興革。載於吳清山(主編)，我國百年教育回顧與展望( 頁105-120)。國家教育研究院。
段蘇穎(2019)。美國學前教育政策及對中國的啟示。西部學刊，第95期，81-84。
洪秀敏、朱文婷、魏若玉(2019)。國際托幼機構品質評估的價值取向與啟示——基於六國評估指標體系的視覺化圖譜分析。教育研究，總第473期，95-104。
馬錦華、陳圓圓、李曉寧(2019)。幼兒園教育質量評估指標體系比較及其啟示。教育研究與實驗，2019年第5期，76-82。
徐聯恩、白育綺(2003年4月18-19日)。幼兒園品質之內涵與變遷。童年沃野變遷與創化學術研討會，臺北市，臺灣。
國家教育研究院(2012)。第七次中華民國教育年鑑- 03第參篇幼兒教育。引自
https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-7986,c1311-1.php?Lang=zh-tw
張寧珊(2019)。英國近二十年學前教育政策及其對我國的啟示。外國中小學教育，2019年11期，39-47。
Harm.T.,Clifford,R.M.& Cryer.D (2006)。幼兒學習環境評量表修訂版（Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale Revised Edition）(郭李宗文、陳淑芳譯)。心理。(原著出版於1980年)。
教育部(2017a)。擴大幼兒教保公共化計畫(106-109年度)(核定本)。取自：https://www.edu.tw/News_Plan_Content.aspx?n=D33B55D537402BAA&sms=954974C68391B710&s=5BA0F84A2D2B8326
教育部(2017b)。幼兒園教保活動課程大綱。
教育部國民及學前教育署(2017)。研商107學年至111學年幼兒園基礎評鑑指標(草案)會議紀錄。
陳德枝、李克建、周競(2021)。《走向優質———中國幼稚園教育品質評價標準》的測量學屬性分析———基於我國100所幼稚園與1670名兒童的測評數據。學前教育研究，2021年第3期，3-16。
陳曉紅(2019)。新加坡提升學前教育質量的主要舉措及其啟示。青海教育，2019年Z1期， 30-33。
陳娟娟(2019)。托嬰中心教保品質評估工具比較分析。幼兒教育，327期， 129–143。
陳錫鴻(2020)。我國高級中等學校資優教育評鑑指標建構之研究〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立臺南大學教育政策與行政學系。
黃旭鈞（1995）。國民小學教育人員「全面品質管理」信念研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。台北市立師範學院初等教育學系。
單文頂、曹紫楊(2021)。美國學前教育品質評級與提升系統（QRIS）
對我國開展學前教育品質監測的啟示。中國考試，2021年第10期，33-42。
趙強(2017)。澳大利亞幼稚教育與保育的政府干預研究。浙江師範大學學報(社會科學版)，209(42)，106-114。
劉海、林新發(2019)。中國大陸幼教產業與教育的關係。臺灣教育評論月刊，8（1），103-110。
駐波士頓辦事處教育組（2016年9月6日）。美國幼兒教育者能力不足依舊是個問題。國家教育研究院國際教育訊息電子報。https://moebos.org/2016/09/06/%E7%BE%8E%E5%9C%8B%E5%B9%BC%E5%85%92%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E8%80%85%E8%83%BD%E5%8A%9B%E4%B8%8D%E8%B6%B3%E4%BE%9D%E8%88%8A%E6%98%AF%E5%80%8B%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C/
駐英國代表處教育組（2017）。英格蘭「幼兒基礎階段架構」政策簡介。國家教育研究院國際教育訊息電子報。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/PDFReader?xmlId=1985998&fileName=1503043866355&format=pdf&OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=IT2H-4I1W-E4OB-FZDI-GHB4-U6HU-JM2S-9JNZ
蔡春美（1998）。透視當前幼教教學—回顧與期許。載於台北市立師院兒童發展中心主編，台灣地區幼稚園教學法（頁11-21）。教育部國民教育司。
蔡春美(2015)。簡介「幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表」。幼兒教育，319期，26-29。
歐姿秀（2012）。幼托整合後幼兒園教師之任用與培育。臺灣教育評論月刊，1（4），52。
賴協志(2018)。英美改善幼兒教育品質之實際作為。國家教育研究院電子報第 176期。https://teric.naer.edu.tw/wSite/ct?ctNode=655&mp=teric_b&xItem=2016238&resCtNode=453&OWASP_CSRFTOKEN=IT2H-4I1W-E4OB-FZDI-GHB4-U6HU-JM2S-9JNZ
戰寶華、陳惠珍、楊金寶(2019)。優質幼兒園品質評量指標建構之研究。慈濟大學教育研究學刊，第15期，35-68。
薛二勇、傅王倩、李健（2019）。學前教育立法的政策基礎、挑戰與應對。中國教育學刊，40（12），37-44。
聶晨(2020)。破解不均衡不充分：福利主義視角下英國學前教育政策的發展及其啟示。學前教育研究，2020年第3期。
羅恩冕、郭昭佑(2018)。我國大學學生評鑑教師教學指標之研究：概念構圖法的調整應用。教育研究與發展期刊，14(1)，1-34。
寶童早教網(2016年12月26日)。全球幼教市場發展趨勢。https://kknews.cc/education/893q55n.html
黨榮蓉（2017）。遼寧省學前教育管理資訊化應用現狀及對策研究。中國教育
資訊化，23（1），14-16。
龔芮誼(2015)。NAEYC幼兒園課程認證標準與幼兒園課程品質評估之研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立政治大學幼兒教育所。

貳、外文部分
Abrahamson, L.(2015). The early Years Teacher`s Book：Achieving Early Years Teachers Status[M]. SAGE Publication inc.
ACECQA(2018). National Quality Standard.
https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/national-quality-standard
Anderson, S. & Phillips , D.(2017). Is Pre-K Classroom Quality Associated With Kindergarten and Middle-School Academic Skills? Developmental Psychology, 53(6), 1063–1078
Ann-Marie F., Laura H., Ivan M. ,Nora B., Michelle C. (2015). Examining changes to Michigan’s early childhood quality rating and improvement system (QRIS). Midwest.
Ann-Marie F., Laura H., Ivan M. , Nora B., Michelle C. (2017). The “I” in QRIS Survey: Collecting data on quality improvement activities for early childhood education programs. Midwest.
Buettner C. K., &Andrews , D. W.(2009).United States child care policy and systems of care: the emerging role of Quality Rating and Improvement Systems[J]. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 3（1）, 43-50.
Cassidy, D. J., Hestenes, L. L., Hedge, A., Hestenes, S., & Mims, S. (2005). Measurement of quality in preschool childcare classrooms: An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale—Revised. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20, 345–360. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2005.07.005.
Carr ,R. C., Mokrova,i. L., Vernon-Feagans,L.,& Burchinal, M. R.(2019). Cumulative classroom quality during pre-kindergarten and kindergarten and children’s language, literacy, and mathematics skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly ,47(2), 218-228.
Cortes J., Hallam R. A. (2016). QRIS: Empowering Family Child Care Providers as Leaders. Young Children, 71(4). 14-19.
Cryer, D. (2003). Defining program quality. In Biley, D. B. (Series Ed.) & Cryer, D. &Clifford, R. M. (Vol. Eds.), Early childhood education and care in the USA (pp.31-46). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Department for Education.(2016). Government Response: Early Years National Funding Formula and Changes to the Way The Three-and Four year Old Entitlements to Childcare are Funded, England, [R]. London.
Diane S., Iheoma I., Harriet D.& Debi M.(2015). Quality Rating and Improvement Systems: Stakeholder Theories of Change and Models of Practice. BUILD.
Gretchen K.,Pia C., Lizabeth M. M.& Kimberly B.(2015). What do quality rating levels mean? Examining the implementation of QRIS ratings to inform validation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly，30，291–305.
Government of the HKSAR Education Bureau(2017). Free Quality Kindergarten Education Scheme Performance Indicators (Kindergartens). Education Bureau Circular No. 20/2017
Head Start(2015). Head Start Early Learning Outcomes Framework.
https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/school-readiness/article/head-start-early-learning-outcomes-framework
Hertzman, C., Siddiqi, A., Hertzman, E., Irwin, L. G., Vaghri, Z., & Houweling, T. A. (2010). Bucking the inequality gradient through early child development. BMJ, 340. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c468
Hoang, N., Holopainen, L. & Siekkinen, M.(2018). Quality of teacher–child interactions and its relations to children’s classroom engagement and disaffection in Vietnamese kindergartens. International Journal of Early Years Education, 26(4), 387–402.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2018.1478281
Hofer, K. G. (2008). Measuring quality in pre-kindergarten classrooms: assessing the early childhood environment rating scale. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Vanderbilt.
https://etd.library.vanderbilt.edu/etd-03272008-205550
Holod, A., Faria,A.-M., Weinberg,E.&Howard, E.(2015). Moving Up the Ladder［EB / OL］. http：//www. air.org/sites/default / files/downloads/ report /Quality-rating and-Improvement-System-QRIS-Early-Childhood-Sept-2015rev.pdf.
Horowitz, M., Squires, J.(2014). Do state QRIS standards support the learning needs of all children?
http://ceelo.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ceelo_fast_fact_qris_inclusion.pdf
Howes, C., Burchinal, M., Pianta, R., Bryant, D., Early, D., Clifford, R., & Barbarin, O. (2008). Ready to learn? Children’s pre-academic achievement in pre-kindergarten programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 27–50.
Hu, B. Y., (2015). Comparing cultural differences in two quality measures in Chinese kindergartens: the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised and the Kindergarten Quality Rating System. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 45(1), 94–117.
Ip, P., Rao, N., Bacon-Shone,J., Li, S. L., Ho, F. K.-w., & Jiang, F.(2016). Socioeconomic gradients in school readiness of Chinese preschool children: The mediating role of family processes and kindergarten quality. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,35,111–123.
Martine, L.B., Irina L. M., Margaret R. B.& Patricia T. G.(2016). Classroom quality at pre-kindergarten and kindergarten andchildren’s social skills and behavior problems. Early Childhood Research Quarterly,36, 212-222.
Mashburn, A. J., Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., Downer, J. T., Barbarin, O. A., Bryant, D., Burchinal M., Early ,D. M.,& Howes, C. (2008). Measures of classroom quality in prekindergarten and children’s development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79, 732–749.
Mathers, S., Singler, R.,& Karemaker, A.(2012). Improving Quality in the Early Years: A Comparison of Perspectives and Measures.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270747368_Improving_Quality_in_the_Early_Years_A_Comparison_of_Perspectives_and_Measures
NAEYC(2019).NAEYC Early Learning Program Accreditation Standards and Assessment Items. https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/accreditation/early-learning/standards_assessment_2019.pdf
OECD(2012). Starting Strong III - A Quality Toolbox for Early Childhood Education and Care.
http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/startingstrongiii-aqualitytoolboxforearlychildhooded ucationandcare.htm#4
OECD(2017).Starting Strong IV：Monitoring Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care.
https://www.oecd.org/publications/starting-strong-iv-9789264233515-en.htm
Peisner-Feinberg, E., Burchinal, M. R., Clifford, R. M., Culkin, M. L., Howes, C., Kagan, S. L., & Yazejian, N. (2001). The relation of preschool child-care quality to children’s cognitive and social developmental trajectories through second grade. Child Development, 72, 1534–1553.
Perry, K. E., Donohue, K. M., & Weinstein, R. S. (2007). Teaching practices and the promotion of achievement and adjustment in first grade. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 269–292.
Phillips, D. A. (2016). Stability, security, and social dynamics in early childhood environments. In S. M. Jones & N. Leseau (Eds.), Leading edge in early childhood education (pp. 7–28). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pianta, R., &Hamre, B. (2009). Conceptualization, Measurement, and Improvement of Classroom Processes: Standardized Observation Can Leverage Capacity. Educational Researcher,38(2), 109-119.doi:10.3102/0013189X09332374
Quinn D. M. (2015). Kindergarten Black–White Test Score Gaps: Re-examining the Roles of Socioeconomic Status and School Quality with New Data. Sociology of Education, 88(2), 120-139.
Salminen, J., Lerkkanen, M.-K., Poikkeus,A.-M., Pakarinen, E., Siekkinen, M., Hännikäinen,M., Poikonen ,P.-L.& Rasku-Puttonen,H.(2012).Observed Classroom Quality Profiles of Kindergarten Classrooms in Finland. Early Education and Development, 23，654–677.
Sandilos, L. E. , DiPerna , J. C.& The Family Life Project Key Investigators(2014). Measuring Quality in Kindergarten Classrooms: Structural Analysis of the Classroom Assessment. Scoring System (CLASS K–3). Early Education and Development，25(6)，894-914.
Scrivner, S.&Wolfe, B.(2002).Universal Preschool: Much To Gain But Who Will Pay? Working Paper Series. Foundation for Child Development.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED473930
Siekkinen, M. E., Pakarinen, M. K. ,Lerkkanen, A. M., Poikkeus, J. ,Salminen, E., Poskiparta, & J. E. Nurmi(2013).“Social Competence among 6-year-old Children and Classroom Instructional Support and Teacher Stress”. Early Education and Development ,24 (6), 877–897.
Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Wong, Y. (1999). Defining and Evaluating ‘Quality’ Early Childhood Education in an International Context : Dilemmas and Possibilities. Early YearsM,20(1), 7-18.
Slot, P. L., Leseman, P. P. M., Verhagen, J., & Mulder, H. (2015). Associations between structural quality aspects and process quality in Dutch early childhood education and care settings. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 33, 64–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.06.001.
Tan ,C. T. (2017）.Enhancing the quality of kindergarten education in Singapore: policies and strategies in the 21st century. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, volume 11, Article number: 7 .
Winterbottom, C. & Piasta, S. B.(2015). Does Accreditation Matter? School Readiness Rates for Accredited Versus Nonaccredited Child Care Facilities in Florida’s Voluntary Pre-Kindergarten Program . Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 29,60–72.
Zaslow, M., Martinez-Beck, I., Tout, K., & Halle, T. (2011). Quality measurement in early childhood settings. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.		zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202201057en_US