家長賦權或奪權：美國《家長啟動法》的內容、內涵與爭議之探討   免費試閱

Parent Empowerment or Parent Takeover: A Study of the Content, Connotation and Controversy of “Parent Trigger Laws”

美國在2010年1月由加州率先通過激進革新的《家長啟動法》（Parent Trigger Laws），其乃基於家長參與及教育選擇權的理念，透過立法賦權的方式，讓家長有權利針對其子女所就讀之辦學不力的學校提出轉型改革或辦學方式的提議。《家長啟動法》著眼於賦權家長，由家長主動「扣板機」（pull the trigger）來逼迫學區進行教育官僚體制所怠惰或拖延的變革，其甫一登場即引起不少關注，目前全美已有包括加州在內的七個州通過相關法案，另有25州正在考慮立法賦予家長類似權利。本文之研究目的即以近年頗受關注的《家長啟動法》為標的，深入探討其內容、內涵及其所衍生之爭議。本文之研究採用質性的概念分析與文獻探討方法，並搭配相關法令、實際案例、媒體報導等研究資料。本文之結論包括《家長啟動法》的「內容明確及其介入模式各有特色」、「論述與實務基礎各有所本」與「爭議議題各有其角度立場」。本文所提出的三點啟示計有「強化家庭、社區與學校間的合作夥伴關係」、「省思家長參與學校決策的權力分享機制」以及「審視臺灣家長參與學校的相關法案與配套規定」。

The “Parent Trigger Laws” were the radical innovation passed by California in January 2010. Based on the ideals of parent involvement and school choice, this legislation authorizes parents to intervene in their child’s school under several options of “converting” or “turnaround,” if it is performing poorly. The “Parent Trigger Laws” that emphasize parent empowerment let parents “pull the trigger” to force school districts to accelerate the reform that is usually suspended within the educational bureaucracy. Parent trigger has drawn a lot of attention since its emergence, and as of 2013, at least 25 states have considered parent trigger legislation and seven others have enacted some versions of the laws. However, given that parent trigger has confronted the longstanding traditional scheme and altered the power dynamics between parents and schools, not only does it incur the furious opposition from district educators, but it also leads to the division and disruption in communities. Taking the “Parent Trigger Laws” as a research entity, this study aimed to explore in depth its content, connotation and controversy. This study employs the qualitative methodology of conceptual analysis and literature review by examining relevant legislations, media reports and practical cases. Three conclusions about “Parent Trigger Laws” can be drawn from this study: 1. they are content specific and have diverse models; 2. they have both theoretical and practical foundations; and 3. they have different standing points for pros and cons. Finally, the implications proposed include 1. strengthening the partnership among family, community and school; 2. reflecting on the power sharing mechanism for parents’ participation in school decision; and 3. examining the relevant legislations and matching regulations for Taiwanese parents’ involvement.