【摘要】：流動兒童是在我國城市化進程中產生的特殊群體,隨著進城務工群體規(guī)模的不斷壯大,跟隨父母進入城市的流動兒童越來越多。流動兒童隨父母來到城市,必然面臨學校環(huán)境、社區(qū)環(huán)境等方面的轉變,流動兒童所擁有的學校生態(tài)資產、社區(qū)生態(tài)資產等可能會對其正向成長產生影響。出于家庭原因等因素,有些流動兒童在城市順利地就讀于公立學校,而有些流動兒童只能在打工子弟學校就讀。打工子弟學校流動兒童和公立學校流動兒童所處的環(huán)境不同,二者所擁有的生態(tài)資產狀況可能存在差異。本研究以打工子弟學校流動兒童和公立學校流動兒童這一特定群體為研究對象,以公立學校本地兒童為參照樣本,采用問卷法,抽取北京市502名初中生為被試,其中189名打工子弟學校流動兒童,149名公立學校流動兒童和164名公立學校本地兒童,了解打工子弟學校流動兒童和公立學校流動兒童的生態(tài)資產和正向成長狀況,為促進流動兒童更好地健康發(fā)展提供實證依據。本研究主要包括以下幾個方面:一是分析打工子弟學校流動兒童、公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童三組正向成長的差異以及三組中兩兩之間的正向成長的差異,二是分析打工子弟學校流動兒童、公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童三組生態(tài)資產的差異以及三組中兩兩之間的生態(tài)資產的差異。研究結果如下:1.打工子弟學校流動兒童、公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童三組在抗逆力、一般自我效能感、學業(yè)感覺及精神健康上存在顯著差異。2.打工子弟學校流動兒童和公立學校流動兒童兩組在抗逆力、一般自我效能感、學業(yè)感覺及精神健康上存在顯著差異。3.公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童兩組在抗逆力、一般自我效能感、學業(yè)感覺及精神健康上不存在顯著差異。4.打工子弟學校流動兒童、公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童三組在社區(qū)生態(tài)資產上存在顯著差異,在家庭生態(tài)資產的大部分維度上存在顯著差異。5.打工子弟學校流動兒童和公立學校流動兒童兩組在社區(qū)生態(tài)資產上存在顯著差異,在家庭生態(tài)資產的大部分維度上存在顯著差異。6.打工子弟學校的生態(tài)資產小于公立學校的生態(tài)資產。7.公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童兩組在社區(qū)生態(tài)資產上不存在顯著差異,在家庭生態(tài)資產的大部分維度上不存在顯著差異。本研究分析了打工子弟學校流動兒童、公立學校流動兒童和公立學校本地兒童在正向成長和生態(tài)資產上的差異,為社會工作加強流動兒童的生態(tài)資產建設從而促進流動兒童的正向成長提供了啟示。
[Abstract]:Migrant children are a special group in the process of urbanization in China. With the increasing scale of migrant workers, more and more migrant children follow their parents into the city. Migrant children who come to the city with their parents will inevitably face changes in school environment and community environment. The school ecological assets and community ecological assets owned by migrant children may have an impact on their positive growth. For family reasons, some migrant children are enrolled in public schools in the city smoothly, while some migrant children can only study in working children's schools. Migrant children in school and floating children in public schools are in different environments, and their ecological assets may be different. In this study, 502 junior middle school students in Beijing were selected as subjects, taking migrant children of working children and floating children in public schools as research objects, and local children in public schools as reference samples. Of these, 189 were migrant children in schools, 149 were migrant children in public schools and 164 were local children in public schools, to understand the ecological assets and positive growth of migrant children in working children's schools and floating children in public schools. To promote the healthy development of migrant children to provide an empirical basis. This research mainly includes the following aspects: first, it analyzes the difference of positive growth among migrant children, floating children in public schools and local children in public schools, as well as the difference of positive growth between two and two groups. The second is to analyze the differences of ecological assets among migrant children, floating children in public schools and local children in public schools. The results are as follows: 1. There were significant differences in resistance, general self-efficacy, academic feeling and mental health among migrant children in working children, floating children in public schools and local children in public schools. 2. There were significant differences in resistance, general self-efficacy, academic feeling and mental health between migrant children in school and those in public schools. There was no significant difference in resistance, general self-efficacy, academic feeling and mental health between floating children in public schools and local children in public schools. 4. There were significant differences in community ecological assets among migrant children in schools, floating children in public schools and local children in public schools, and significant differences in most dimensions of ecological assets in families. 5. There were significant differences in community ecological assets between migrant children in school and floating children in public schools, and significant differences in most dimensions of ecological assets in families. 6. The ecological assets of the working children's school are smaller than the ecological assets of the public schools. 7. 7%. There was no significant difference in community ecological assets between floating children in public schools and local children in public schools, but there was no significant difference in most dimensions of household ecological assets. This study analyzed the differences in positive growth and ecological assets among migrant children, floating children in public schools and local children in public schools. It provides enlightenment for social work to strengthen ecological assets construction of floating children and promote positive growth of floating children.
【學位授予單位】：中國青年政治學院
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：G521

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 劉向英;石亞;余佳璐;劉曉宇;;打工子弟異地升學的困境及對策思考[J];北京科技大學學報(社會科學版);2010年01期

2 曾守錘;;流動兒童的心理適應:困境、問題、優(yōu)勢及建議[J];華東理工大學學報(社會科學版);2010年05期

3 馮玲;城市流動少年距離九年義務教育有多遠?——城市打工子弟學校的價值分析[J];教育理論與實踐;2003年05期

4 張玲;;論中學生學習效能感及培養(yǎng)策略[J];西南農業(yè)大學學報(社會科學版);2012年04期

5 劉慧涵;;北京打工子弟學校的困境及學校社會工作的介入——以北京石景山HA打工子弟小學為例[J];社會工作(下半月);2010年09期

6 王保民;;“受艾滋病影響的失依兒童”抗逆力特質解讀——基于河南省某地陽光家園的循證研究[J];社會工作;2012年04期

7 裴小茹;;學校社會工作介入外來務工人員子女抗逆力養(yǎng)成——以上海市MH區(qū)X學校為例[J];社會工作;2012年11期

8 陶歡歡;;復原力(resilience)研究的回顧[J];襄樊職業(yè)技術學院學報;2009年05期

9 袁立新;張積家;蘇小蘭;;公立學校與民工子弟學校流動兒童心理健康狀況比較[J];中國學校衛(wèi)生;2009年09期

10 張敏,雷開春,張巧明;中學生學習效能感的特點研究[J];心理科學;2005年05期

相關碩士學位論文 前2條

1 楊陽;青少年自我效能感與家長教育心理控制源的關系[D];北京林業(yè)大學;2010年

2 劉旭;初中生成就目標與社會比較、學業(yè)自我效能感的關系[D];湖南科技大學;2010年

，

本文編號：2353709