本研究從教育社會學及教育變革的角度，以參與成功專案之四個試辦學區19所國中小為研究對象，透過文件分析及質性訪談，分析成功專案籌備及實施第一年期間（103至104年）在四個試辦學區的運作情況，主要研究目的包括：（1）分析各區計畫書內容及計畫書規劃策略與困境；（2）探討四區之整合與領導類型及學區整合之困難與因應；（3）分析成功專案在學校及教室層級的推動策略及所遭遇的困難與挑戰；（4）探討學校整合社區資源及提升弱勢家長參與的挑戰與策略；（5）剖析成功專案在學區、學校及教室層級所造成的改變及促進學區與學校產生變革的因素。
主要研究發現：首先，在區計畫書規劃層面：（1）計畫書的經費配置取決於規劃者對基本學力的重視程度；（2）計畫書規劃策略深受學校行政教學分工及教育優先區計畫執行經驗之影響，惟部分學校能善用經費使用彈性調整補救教學之實施。其次，在學區之領導整合與學校層級之推動情形方面：（1）各區整合類型可分為聚焦學力型與凸顯特色型整合兩類，學區領導類型可分為校長主導及主任主導兩類；（2）特色課程與基本學力的競合不利於成功專案的推動，部分學校藉由調整補救教學運作有效提升學生基本學力；（3）共同命題與研習可望整合區內國小教師能量，實作或教練式之研習工作坊可激發教師改變教學方式；（4）缺乏行政權、共同討論時間及整合經驗是學區整合之挑戰。第三，在學校整合社區資源提升弱勢家長參與學生學習策略與挑戰方面：（1）部分學校未能慎選外部資源，以至占用學習時間；（2）多數學區改採積極的促進弱勢家長參與策略，惟透過教育家長提升學生基本學力所產生的力道仍顯薄弱。最後，成功專案促進區內學校交流、跨校合作與資源共享、部分學校亦修正補救教學與親子教育之實施方式，惟尚未顯見有教室層級之改變。聚焦提升基本學力、具備權能的核心領導團隊及行政人員與教師的對話機制是促進成功專案在學區層級及學校層級改變的關鍵因素。
本研究依據研究結果建議調整成功專案推動策略之順序，並提出四點成功專案實施策略之修正建議：（1）以提升學生基本學力為國中小整合主軸，發展行政人員課程領導能力；（2）建立區內及校內行政人員與教師對話討論機制，提供討論的鷹架與伴隨；（3）引進具備相同偏鄉教學經驗教師，搭配與現場教學工作銜接的、持續進行的，且專注於課程與教學的培訓課程，提升教師分析學生學習成效及差異化教學知能；（4）促進跨部會合作，擴大政府社福部門之參與介入，協助學校改善家庭失能之社會結構性因素，以提升專案的綜效。

Taiwan has launched the Education Priority Area (EPA) program in order to reduce the regional and socio-economic effects on the learning outcome of disadvantaged students since 1996. Yet research has shown that the widening academic achievement gaps persist between Taiwanese disadvantaged students and their well-off counterparts. There is a growing imperative of the adjustment of EPA program to ensure equitable education and to close the achievement gap. This study aims to investigate the implementation process of an experimental EPA Program in Taiwan. This study use content analysis and semi-structured interviews with school principals, adminitrators and teachers to analyze challenges, difficulties and compromises during the implementation process.
Results: (1) The allocation of budget depended on schools' perceived importance of basic competence. (2) The planning strategies of zone proposal were dominated by the logic of division of labor and formal education priority area program implementation experiences, however, some schools managed the budget flexibility to adjust the implementation of remedial program. (3) Two types of zone integration have formed: competence-centered and featured-curriculum-centered. (4) The coopetition between different education goals was unfavorable to the implementation of the EPA experimental Program. (5) Teacher teamwork within the zone and school-based workshops facilitated the educational change from bottom-up. (6) Lacking of administrative authority and executive power, short of discussion time and insufficient collaboration skills were three main challenges of zone integration. (7) Some schools failed to manage the external educational resources, and some extracurricular activities even took up student learning time. (8) The majority of zones deployed active parental involvement strategies, but the effect of parental involvement on students' learning outcomes was still tiny.
Policy recommendations: (1) the revision of the implementation strategies of the experimental EPA program is proposed. (2) Fostering the development of curriculum leaders and concentrating the focus of zone integration on basic competence. (3) Establishing the mechanism of discussion between school administrators and teachers and providing resources to scaffold collaborative discussions. (4) Introducing experienced rural teachers and school-based workshop to strengthen instruction and empower teachers. (5) Successful educational change and good educational performance require improvements in social welfare and economic sectors, it is therefore essential that public sectors support each other to create social capital and mutual trust in order to increase the efficiency of education system.

中文部分
內政部（2015）。內 政 統 計 通 報104年第14週（我國15歲以上人口教育程度統計）。線上檢索日期：2015年5月19日。網址：http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/week/week10414.doc
王佳蕙、許添明（2003）。原住民學童服務機制困境與整合式服務學校。彰化師大教育學報，4，167-192。
王政忠（2011）。老師，你會不會回來。臺北市：時報出版。
王政忠（2016）。我的草根翻轉MAPS教學法。臺北市：親子天下。
王增勇（2002）。從原鄉經驗看社會救助政策與原住民文化的相容性。中央社會文化學報，14，131-166。
何瑞珠（1999）。家長參與子女教育：文化資本與社會資本的闡釋。教育學報，27（1），233–261。
吳佳綺（譯）（2010）。G. R. Gibbs著。質性資料的分析（Analyzing Qualitative Data）。臺北縣永和市 : 韋伯文化國際。
宋曜廷、邱佳民 、張恬熒 、曾芬蘭（2011）。以國中基本學力測驗成績探討學習成就落差。教育政策論壇，14(1)，85-117。
李佩嬛、黃毅志（2011）。原漢族群、家庭背景與高中職入學考試基測成績、教育分流：以臺東縣為例。教育科學研究期刊，56（1），193-226。
林宜城（2011年2月17日）。林校長辦學想法【學校網頁文字資料】。網址：http://www.chps.ntct.edu.tw/ezfiles/2/1002/img/39/691211863.doc
林陳涌、任宗浩、李哲迪、林碧珍、張美玉、曹博勝、楊文金（2014）。國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查2011國家報告。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究中心。
林曉欽（譯）（2013）。P. Sahlberg著。芬蘭教育這樣改（Finnish Lessons：What can the world learn from educational change in Finland？）。臺北市：商周出版。
柯華葳、詹益綾、丘嘉慧（2013）。PIRLS 2011報告─臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養。桃園縣：國立中央大學學習與教學研究所。
高淑清（2001）。在美華人留學生太太的生活世界：詮釋與反思。本土心理學研究，16， 225-285。
張宜君、林宗弘（2015）。臺灣的高等教育擴張與階級複製：混合效應維續的不平等。臺灣教育社會學研究，15（2），85-129。
教育部（2014）。國民小學及國民中學補救教學實施方案。網址：http://priori.moe.gov.tw/download/2014-2-5-10-15-30-nf1.pdf
教育部（2015a）。教育部 105 年度推動教育優先區計畫。網址：http://www.boe.chc.edu.tw/sub/education_02/upfile/undefine1508141453.pdf
教育部（2015b）。國民教育階段學生學習精進規劃情形報告投影片。行政院第3442次院會。線上檢索日期：2015年9月21日。網址：http://www.ey.gov.tw/Upload/RelFile/3179/723453/216738df-067d-4183-b784-3526087400a0.pdf
教育部（無日期）。教育部推動教育優先區計畫歷年執行經費。線上檢索日期：2015 年5月5日。網址：https://stats.moe.gov.tw/files/ebook/others/year16/T503.xls
許添明（2003）。教育財政制度新論。臺北市：高等教育出版社。
許添明、侯世昌、黃淑玲（2015）。教育優先區─成功專案計畫結案報告。教育部國教署委託專案。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學教育研究與評鑑中心。
許添明、葉珍玲（2015）。城鄉學生學習落差現況、成因及政策建議。臺東大學教育學報，26（2），63-91。
許勝雄（1997）。法國之教育優先區。收錄於吳明清（專案主持人），教育優先區計畫之檢討與規劃研究。教育部委託專案。臺北市：國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所。
郭為藩（1971）。法國教育及其它。臺南：開山書店。
陳佩英、卯靜儒（2010）落實教育品質和平等的績效責任制：美國NCLB 法的挑戰與回應。當代教育研究，18（3），1-47。
陳建州、劉正（2001）。重探學校教育功能--家庭背景因素影響力變化之研究。台東師院學報，12（1），115-144.
陳淑麗、洪儷瑜（2011）。花東地區學生識字量的特性：偏遠小校—弱勢中的弱勢。教育心理學報，43（閱讀專刊）。
陳淑麗、曾世杰、洪儷瑜（2006）。原住民國語文低成就學童文化與經驗本位補救教學成效之研究。師大學報：教育類，51（2），147-171。
陳淑麗、曾世杰、張毓仁（2015）。國小二年級不同補救教學方案之實施與成效之比較：攜手計畫與永齡 希望小學。當代教育研究季刊，23（2），35-74。
曾世杰、陳淑麗（2014）。找方法，不找藉口的反敗為勝學校。載於陳淑麗、宣崇慧主編，帶好每一個學生：有效的補救教學（頁187-223）。台北：心理出版社。
曾世杰、陳淑麗、蔣汝梅（2013）。提升教育優先區國民小學一年級學生的讀寫能力－多層級教學介入模式之探究。特殊教育研究學刊，38（3），55 - 80。
湯維玲、蔡佩娟（2013）。一位國小校長推動攜手計畫補救教學之行動研究。課程與教學，16（1）， 69-92。
黃武雄（2010）。教改中的左與右。線上檢索日期：2016 年6月5 日。網址：https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/16427145/%E6%95%99%E6%94%B9%E4%B8%AD%E7%9A%84%E5%B7%A6%E8%88%87%E5%8F%B3%28%E9%BB%83%E6%AD%A6%E9%9B%84-2010%29.pdf
黃武雄（2013）。學校在窗外（教改二十週年紀念版）。臺北市：左岸文化。
黃毅志、陳俊瑋（2011）。重探學科補習的階層化與效益：Wisconsin模型的延伸，師大教育研究集刊，54（1），117-149。
葉珍玲、許添明（2011）。法國教育優先區的實施及其借鑑。當代教育研究，19（2），81-118。
詹宜璋（2011）。原住民對族群社會福利的經驗認知與發展期待。台灣原住民族研究季刊，4（4），85-107。
甄曉蘭（2007）。偏遠國中教育機會不均等問題與相關教育政策初探。教育研究集刊，53（3），1-35。
臺灣 PISA國家研究中心（2014）。臺灣PISA2012精簡報告。線上檢索日期：2015年6 月1 日。網址： http://pisa.nutn.edu.tw/download/data/TaiwanPISA2012ShortReport.PDF
鄭鈐華、吳昭容（2013）。與八年級課程同步實施的數學補救教學：成效與反思。臺東大學教育學報，24（2），1-31。
賴清標、彭富源、楊銀興、侯世昌（2003）。九年一貫課程改革的現況與成效評析。國民教育研究集刊，11，1-18。
藍郁平、何瑞珠（2013）。從PISA剖析家庭社會資本對學生基礎能力的影響。教育學報，41（1-2），65-83。
西文部分

Ainscow, M., Muijs, D., & West, M. (2006). Collaboration as a strategy for improving schools in challenging circumstances . Improving Schools, 9(3), 192-202.
Akiba, M., LeTendre, G. K., & Scribner, J. P. (2007). Teacher quality, opportunity gap, and national achievement in 46 countries. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 369-387.
Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S., & Mazzeo, C. (2009). The Schools Teachers Leave: Teacher Mobility in Chicago Public Schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved on April 11, 2016 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED505882.pdf
Armand, A. (2011). Les questions pédagogiques et curriculaires au cœur de la politique d'éducation prioritaire? Revue française de pédagogie, 177, 37-46.
Armand, A., & Gille, B., Billiet, J.-C., Bouysse, V., Robine, F., Dontenville, F. et al. (2006). La contribution de l’éducation prioritaire à l’égalité des chances des élèves. Paris, France: Ministre de l'Éducation nationale, de l'Enseignement supérieur et de la Recherche.
Assemblée Nationale (2013). Rapport d’information sur la politique d’éducation prioritaire. Paris, France: Assemblée Nationale.
Astor, R. A., Benbenishty, R., & Estrada, J. N. (2009). School violence and theoretically atypical schools: The principal’s centrality in orchestrating safe schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 423-461.
AuCoin, A., & Goguen, L. (2004). L’inclusion réussie: un succès d’équipe. In N. Rousseau & S. Bélanger (Eds.), La pédagogie de l’inclusion scolaire, (pp. 281-292). Québec, Canada: Press de l'Université du Québec.
Ballion, R. (1982). Les consommateurs d'école. Paris, France: Stock.
Barber, M., Chijioke, C., & Mourshed, M. (2011). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. New York, NY: McKinsey & Company.
Barrère, A. (2014). Travailler ensemble dans l’établissement scolaire: le management pédagogique des chefs d’établissement. Administration & Éducation, 3(43), 111-113.
Baudelot, C., & Establet, R. (2009). L'élitisme républicain: l'école française à l'épreuve des comparaisons internationales. Paris, France: Seuil.
Bautista, J. (2015, April). The cycle. The players' tribune. Retrieved on Novemebr 10, 2015 from http://www.theplayerstribune.com/jose-bautista-dominican-baseball-prospects-mlb/
Boudieu, P., & Passeron, J-C. (1970). La reproduction: Éléments pour une théorie du système d’enseignement. Paris, France: Éditons de Minuit.
Boudon, R. (1984). L'inégalité des chances. Paris, France: Hacette Litératures.
Bourdieu, P. (1966). L’école conservatrice. L’inégalité sociale devant l’école et devant la culture. Revue française de sociologie, 3, 325-347.
Bourdieu, P. (1979). La distinction: critique sociale du jugement. Paris, France: Éditons de Minuit.
Bransford, J. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Bressoux, P. (1994). Les recherches sur les effets-écoles et les effets-maîtres. Revue française de pédagogie, 108, 91-137.
Bressoux, P. (2001). Réflexions sur l’effet-maître et l’étude des pratiques enseignantes. Les Dossiers des Sciences de l’Education, 5, 35-52.
Bucher, R., & Strauss, A. (1961). Professions in process. American journal of sociology, 66(4), 325-334.
Caille, J. P. (2001). Les collégiens de ZEP à la fin des années quatre-vingt-dix: caractéristiques des élèves et impact de la scolarisation en ZEP sur la réussite. Éducation et formations, 61, 111-140.
Chang, L. C. & Sheu, T. M. (2013). Effective investment strategies on mathematics performance in rural areas. Quality & Quantity, 47, 2999-3017.
Chapman, C., Harris, A. (2004). Improving schools in difficult and challenging contexts: strategies for improvement. Educational Research, 46(3), 219-228.
Charlot, B., Bautier, É., & Rochex, J. Y. (1992). École et savoir dans les banlieues et ailleurs. Paris, France: Armand Colin.
Chester, M. D., & Beaudin, B. Q. (1996). Efficacy beliefs of newly hired teachers in urban schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 233-257.
Chicago Policy Research Team (2009). Chicago promise: A policy report on reinventing the Harlem Children’s Zone. Retrieved December 5, 2015, form http://cprt.uchicago.edu/0809/reports/CPRTFullReportChicagoPromise.pdf
Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of education, 77(3), 211-244.
Coleman, J. (1968). The concept of equality of educational opportunity. Harvard Educational Review, 38(1), 7-22.
Commission du débat national sur l'avenir de l'école (2004). Le miroir du débat. Paris, France: Author.
Cuban, L. (2003). Why is it so hard to get good schools? New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Cummings, C., & Dyson, A. (2007). The role of schools in area regeneration. Research papers in Education, 22(1), 1-22.
Cummings, C., Dyson, A., & Todd, L. (2011). Beyond the school gates. Can Full Service and Extended Schools Overcome Disadvantage? New York, NY: Routledge.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement. A review of state policy evidence. Periodical Policy Analysis Archives, 8. Retrieved on December 29, 2015 from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n1.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to equity will determine our future. NY: Teachers College Press.
David, J. L., & Cuban, L. (2010). Cutting through the hype: The essential guide to school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Day, L., Martin, K., Sharp, C., Gardner, R. & Barham, J. (2013). Summer schools programme for disadvantaged pupils: Key findings for schools. UK: NFER & Ecorys.
Deniger, M.-A. (2012). Les politiques québécoises d’intervention en milieux scolaires défavorisés : regard historique et bilan critique [Quebec’s policy-making in disadvantaged school environments: A historical outlook and critical evaluation]. Revue française de pédagogie, 178, 67-84.
DEPP (2013). L’éducation prioritaire –État des lieux. Note d'information 13.07. Paris, France: Author.
Dérouet, J. (1993). Les zones d’éducation prioritaires dans l’Éducation nationale. Diffusion et appropriations d’un nouveau dispositif. Revue Française des affaires sociales, 47(3), 49-62.
Dobbie, W., & Fryer Jr, R. G. (2011). Are high-quality schools enough to increase achievement among the poor? Evidence from the Harlem Children's Zone. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 3(3), 158-187.
Dubet, F., & Martuccelli, D. (1996). A l'école. Sociologie de l'expérience scolaire. Paris, France: Seuil.
Duckworth, K. (2008). The influence of context on attainment in primary school: Interactions between children, family and school contexts [Wider Benefits of Learning Research Report No. 28]. Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning, Institute of Education, University of London. London, UK.
DuFour, R. (2004). What is a "professional learning community"? Educational leadership, 61(8), 6-11.
Dupriez, V. (2015). Peut-on réformer l’école. Approches organisationnelle et institutionnelle du changement pédagogique. Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Dyson A., Kerr K., & Raffo C. (2012). Area-based initiatives in England: do they have a future? Revue française de pédagogie, 178, 27-38.
Dyson, A., Kerr, K., Raffo, C., & Wigelsworth, M. (2012). Developing children's zones for England: what's the evidence. London: Save the Children.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Midgley, C., Reuman, D., MacIver, D., & Feldlaufer, H. (1993). Negative effects of traditional middle schools on students’ motivation. Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 553–574.
Emin, J.-C. (2002). Table ronde: Logique de recherche et logique d'action. Revue française de pédagogie, 140, 9-20.
Enthoven, S., Letor, C., & Dupriez, V. (2015). Réformes pédagogiques et autonomie professionnelle: un couple en tension. Revue française de pédagogie, 192, 95-108.
Epstein, J. L. (1987). Toward a theory of family-school connections: Teacher practices and parent involvement. In K. Hurrelmann, F. Kanfmaun, & F. Losel (Eds.), Social intervention: Potential & constraints (pp. 121–136). New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Farah, M.J., Shera, D.M., Savage, J.H., Betancourt, L., Giannetta, J.M., Brodsky, N.L., Malmud, E.K. & Hurt, H. (2006). Childhood poverty: Specific associations with neurocognitive development. Brain Research, 1110, 166-174.
Field, S., Kuczera, M., & Pont, B. (2007). No More Failures: Ten Steps to Equity in Education. Paris, France: OECD.
Flandin, S., & Ria, L. (2011). Former à l'intervention en milieu difficile. Retrieved on April 10, 2016 from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Simon_Flandin/publication/272059971_Entrer_dans_le_mtier_en_milieu_difficile/links/54d9c9370cf24647581f7258.pdf
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th edition). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Fullan, M. (2009). Large-scale reform comes of age. Journal of Educational Change, 10(2), 101-113.
Fullan, M., & Boyle, A. (2014). Big-city School Reforms: Lessons from New York, Toronto, and London. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Gersten, R., & Dimino, J. (2001). The realities of translating research into classroom practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 120-130.
Greenwood, G. E., Olejnik, S. F., & Parkay, F. W. (1990). Relationships between four teacher efficacy belief patterns and selected teacher characteristics. Journal of research & Development in Education, 23(2), 102-107.
Guskey, T. R. (1981). Measurement of the Responsibility Teachers Assume for Academic Successes and Failures in the Classroom. Journal of Teacher Education, 32(3), 44-51.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 8(3), 381-391.
Haahr, J. H., Nielsen, T. K., Hansen, M. E., & Jakobsen, S. T. (2005). Explaining student performance. Evidence from the international PISA, TIMSS and PIRLS surveys. Retrieved on August 17, 2015 from https://www.oecd.org/edu/school/programmeforinternationalstudentassessmentpisa/35920726.pdf
Hargreaves, A. (2000). Contrived collegiality: The micropolitics of teacher collaboration. Sociology of education: Major themes, 3.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. G. (1992). Understanding teacher development. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Harlem Children's Zone (2012). Harlem Children's Zone: A look inside. Retrieved on January 5, 2014 from http://hcz.org/books/Promise_Academy/HCZspring11_12_a/index.html#/1/zoomed
Harlem Children's Zone (n. d.) Whatever it takes: A white paper on the Harlem Children's Zone. Retrieved on January 15, 2014 from http://www.hcz.org/images/stories/HCZ%20White%20Paper.pdf.
Harris, A., Chapman, C., Muijs, D., Russ, J., & Stoll, L. (2006). Improving schools in challenging contexts: Exploring the possible. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(4), 409-424.
Hart, B. & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H. Brookes Publishing, Baltimore.
Hart, B. & Risley, T. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap by age 3. American Educator, Spring, 4-9.
Heckman, J. J. (2008). Schools, skills, and synapses. Economic inquiry, 46(3), 289-324.
Heckman, J. J. (2013). Giving kids a fair chance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Henderson, A. T., & Mapp, K. L. (2002). A new wave of evidence. The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin [Texas]: National Center for Family & Community: Connections with Schools.
Henriot-van Zanten, A. (1988). Les ressources du "local". Revue française de pédagogie, 83, 23-30.
Heurdier, L. (2011). La politique ZEP, laboratoire de nouveaux outils de pilotage du système éducatif (1981-2001)?. Revue française de pédagogie, 177, 25-36.
Hirsch, E., & Emerick, S. (2007). Teacher Working Conditions Are Student Learning Conditions: A report on the 2006 North Carolina Teacher Working Conditions Survey. Hillsborough, NC: Center for Teaching Quality. Retrieved on April 11, 2016 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED498770.pdf
Hopkins, D., Stringfield, S., Harris, A., Stoll, L., & Mackay, T. (2014). School and system improvement: A narrative state-of-the-art review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 257-281.
Hoxby, C. M., Murarka, S., & Kang, J. (2009). How New York City’s charter schools affect achievement. Second report in series. Cambridge, MA: New York City Charter Schools Evaluation Project.
Institut Français de l’Education. (2013). Les leviers pour une efficacité renforcée de l’Éducation prioritaire: Eléments de problématisation et ressources pour la réflexion des acteurs. Lyon: Institut Français de l’Education.
Kherroubi, M., Rochex, J. Y., & Chanteau, J. P. (2002). La recherche en éducation et les ZEP en France. Politique ZEP, objets, postures et orientations de recherche. Revue française de pédagogie, 140, 103-132.
Kliebard, H. M. (2002). Changing course: American curriculum reform in the 20th century. NY: Teachers College Press.
Kohn, M. (1977). Social competence, symptoms and underachievement in childhood: A longitudinal perspective. New York : VH Winston & Sons.
Kohn, M. L., & Schooler, C. (1983). Work and personality: An inquiry into the impact of social stratification. Norwood, N.J. : Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Ladd, H. F. (2009). Teachers' Perceptions of Their Working Conditions: How Predictive of Policy-Relevant Outcomes? Working Paper No. 33. Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research. Retrieved on April 11, 2016 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED509680.pdf
Ladson-Billings, G.J. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in diverse classrooms. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lahire, B. (1995). Tableaux de familles. Heurs et malheurs scolaires en milieux populaires. Paris, France: Le Seuil / Gallimard.
Langouet, G. (1985). Suffit-il d’innover. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
Laparra, M. (2011). Les ZEP, miroir grossissant des évolutions et contradictions du système éducatif français. Revue française de pédagogie, 177, 47-60.
Lareau, A. (2000). Home advantage: Social class and parental intervention in elementary education. MD: Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham.
Lareau, A. (2003). Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA, USA: University of California Press.
Leana, C. R. (2011). The missing link in school reform. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 9(4), 30-35.
Leithwood, K., Aitken, R., & Jantzi, D. (2006). Making schools smarter: Leading with evidence (3rd. edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lelièvre, C. (1990). Histoire des institutions scolaires:(1789-1989). Paris, France: Nathan.
Lessard, C., & Barrère, A. (2005). Travailler ensemble? Des réformes éducatives aux pratiques enseignantes. Recherche et formation pour les professions de l’éducation, 49, 5-15.
Levin, B., & Fullan, M. (2008). Learning about system renewal. Educational management administration & leadership, 36(2), 289-303.
Lieberman, A. (2000). Networks as learning communities shaping the future of teacher development. Journal of teacher education, 51(3), 221-227.
Liensol, B. (1987). Les zones prioritaires. Education & formation, 12, 59-66.
Liensol, B., Oeuvrard, F. (1992). Le fonctionnement des zones d’éducation prioritaires et les activités pédagogiques des établissements. Education & formations, 32, 35-45.
Lionsol, B. (1988). Quelques données sur l’évolution des résultats en zones prioritaires entre 1982-1983 et 1987-1988. Document de travail, n° 375. Paris, France: Ministère de l’Education Nationale.
Little, J. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers’ professional relations. Teachers college record, 91(4), 509-536.
Longuet, G. (2008). Rappot d’information. (Sénat N˚ 453, Session extraordinaire de 2007-2008). Paris, France: Sénat.
Lothaire, S., Dumay, X. & Dupriez, V. (2012). Pourquoi les enseignants quittent-ils leur école ? Revue de la littérature scientifique relative au turnover des enseignants. Revue française de pédagogie, 181, 99-126.
Luft, J. A., Roehrig, G. H., & Patterson, N. C. (2003). Contrasting landscapes: A comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers' practices, beliefs, and experiences. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 77-97.
Lupton, R. (2010). Area based initiatives in English Education: What place for place and space? In C., Raffo, A., Dyson, H., Gunter, D., Hall, L., Jones, & A., Kalambouka (Eds.). Education and poverty in affluent countries. (pp. 111-123). London: Routledge.
Marable, M. A., & Raimondi, S. L. (2007). Teachers’ perceptions of what was most (and least) supportive during their first year of teaching. Mentoring & Tutoring, 15(1), 25-37.
Mariage, T. V., & Garmon, M. A. (2003). A Case of Educational Change Improving Student Achievement Through a School—University Partnership. Remedial and special education, 24(4), 215-234.
Maroy, C. (2006). Les évolutions du travail enseignant en France et en Europe: facteurs de changement, incidences et résistances dans l’enseignement secondaire. Revue française de pédagogie, 155, 111-142.
Meuret, D. (1994). L'efficacité de la politique des zones d'éducation prioritaire dans les collèges. Revue française de pédagogie, 109, 41-64.
Meuret, D. (2001). Les recherches sur la réduction de taille des classes. Retrieved October 15, 2015, form http://www.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/var/storage/rapports-publics/024000197.pdf
Midgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Eccles, J. S. (1989). Change in teacher efficacy and student self-and task-related beliefs in mathematics during the transition to junior high school. Journal of educational Psychology, 81(2), 247-258.
Mingat, A., & Richard, M. (1991). Les activités de rééducation GAPP à l'école primaire. Analyse du fonctionnement et évaluation des effets. Revue française de sociologie, 32(4), 515-549.
Ministère de l’Éducation national (2012). L'élargissement du programme CLAIR au programme ECLAIR (année scolaire 2011-2012). Paris, France : Author.
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (1981). Circulaire n° 81-536 du 28 décembre 1981. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://dcalin.fr/textoff/zep_1981-2.html
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (1990). Circulaire n° 90-028 du 1er février 1990. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://rhe.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/fichiers_pdf/educprio/circ90-028.pdf
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (1997). Circulaire n° 97-233 du 31 octobre 1997. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://rhe.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/fichiers_pdf/educprio/circ97-233.pdf
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (1998). Circulaire n° 98-145 du 10 juillet 1998. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://rhe.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/fichiers_pdf/educprio/circ98-145.pdf
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (1999). Circulaire n° 99-007 du 20 janvier 1999. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://rhe.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/fichiers_pdf/educprio/circ99-007.pdf
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (2003). Circulaire n° 2003-133 du 1er septembre 2003. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://rhe.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr/fichiers_pdf/educprio/circ99-007.pdf
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (2006a). Circulaire n°2006-058 du 30 mars 2006. Retrieved July 25, 2015, form http://www.education.gouv.fr/bo/2006/14/MENE0600995C.htm
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (2006b). La relance de l'éducation prioritaire: Discours - Gilles de Robien - 08/02/2006. Retrieved August 25, 2015, form http://www.education.gouv.fr/cid843/la-relance-de-l-education-prioritaire.html
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (2017). Les principes de la refondation de l'éducation prioritaire. Retrieved July 17, 2017, form http://www.education.gouv.fr/cid187/l-education-prioritaire.html#L_education_prioritaire_pour_l_annee_scolaire_2016-2017
Ministère de l’Éducation nationale (n.d.). Repères historiques. Retrieved September 25, 2015, form https://www.reseau-canope.fr/education-prioritaire/comprendre/reperes-historiques.html
Moisan, C. (2001). Les ZEP: bientôt ving ans. Education et formations, 61, 13-21.
Moisan, C. (2002). L’ éducation prioritaire en Europe. Ecrit d’identié, 99, 42-47.
Moisan, C., Simon, J. (1997). Les Déterminants de la réussite scolaire en zone d'éducation prioritaire. Paris, France: La Documentation française.
Morrison, G. M., Wakefield, P., Walker, D., & Solberg, S. (1994). Teacher preferences for collaborative relationships: relationship to efficacy for teaching in prevention‐related domains. Psychology in the Schools, 31(3), 221-231.
Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2006). Teacher led school improvement: Teacher leadership in the UK. Teaching and teacher education, 22(8), 961-972.
Muijs, D., West, M., & Ainscow, M. (2010). Why network? Theoretical perspectives on networking. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 21(1), 5-26.
Ng, P. T. (2008). Education policy rhetoric and reality gap: A reflection. International Journal of Educational Management, 22(6), 595-602.
Nicaise, I. (Ed.). (2000). The Right to learn: educational strategies for socially excluded youth in Europe. Bristol: Policy Press.
Nixon, J., Martin, J., McKeown, P., & Ranson, S. (1997). Towards a learning profession: changing codes of occupational practice within the new management of education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 18(1), 5-28.
Odden, A. R. (2009). 10 strategies for doubling student performance. Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA.
OECD (2012). Equity and quality: Supporting disadvantaged students and schools. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD (2013a). PISA 2012 Results: Excellence through equity: Giving every student the chance to succeed (Volume II) [Preliminary Version]. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD (2013b). OECD Skills Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD (2013c). OECD Economic Surveys: France 2013. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD (2014). Education at a Glance 2014: OECD Indicators. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD. (2000). Knowledge management in the learning society. Paris, France: OECD.
OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environment: First results of Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/preschoolandschool/43023606.pdf
Orr, L., Feins, J. D., Jacob R., Beecroft, E., Sanbonmatsu, L., Katz, L. F., Liebman, J. B. (2003). Moving to Opportunity Interim Impacts Evaluation: Final Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development & Research. Retrieved December 25, 2015, form http://www.abtassociates.com/reports/2003302754569_71451.pdf
Orton, J. D., & Weick, K. E. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of management review, 15(2), 203-223.
Périer, P. (2005). Un partenariat sans partenaires? : Les familles populaires face au modèle de participation de l'école. La Revue internationale de l'éducation familiale, 9(1), 87-108.
Périer, P. (2012). De quelques principes de justice dans les rapports entre les parents et l'école. Education & didactique, 6(1), 85-96.
Pil, F. K., & Leana, C. (2009). Applying organizational research to public school reform: The effects of teacher human and social capital on student performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1101-1124.
Popkewitz, T. S. (1982). Educational Reform as the Organization of Ritual: Stability as Change. Journal of Education, 164(1), pp. 5-29.
Rey, O. (2016). Le changement, c’est comment? Dossier de veille de l'IFÉ, 107, 1-28.
Ricciuti, A.E., St. Pierre, R.G., Lee, W., Parsad, A. & Rimdzius, T. (2004). Third National Even Start Evaluation: Follow-Up Findings from the Experimental Design Study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved December 25, 2015, form http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pdf/20053002.pdf
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417-458.
Robinson, K. (2009). The element: How finding your passion changes everything. NY: Viking.
Rochex, J. Y. (1995). Adolescence, rapport au savoir et sens de l'expérience scolaire en milieux populaires. L'Orientation scolaire et professionnelle, 24(3), 341-359.
Rochex, J. Y. (2008). Vingt-cinq ans de politique d’éducation prioritaire en France: une spécificité incertaine et des résultats décevants. In M. Demeuse, D. Frandji, D. Greger & J-Y. Rochex (Eds.), Les politiques d’éducation prioritaire en Europe. Tome I: Conceptions, mises en oeuvre, débats (pp. 135-174).
Rochex, J. Y., & Crinon, J. (2011). La construction des inégalités scolaires. Au cœur des pratiques et des dispositifs d’enseignement. Renne: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Rochex, J-Y. (2012). General conclusion: Priority education policies in Europe, from one 'Age' and one country to another. In M. Demeuse, D. Frandji, D. Greger & J-Y. Rochex (Eds.), Educational policies and inequalities in Europe (pp. 288-319). Retrieved on 21 November, 2015 from http://0-www.palgraveconnect.com.opac.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/pc/doifinder/10.1057/9780230358652
Rosenholtz, S. J. (1989). Teachers' workplace: The social organization of schools. New York: Longman.
Sarason, S. (1996). Revisiting "the culture of school and the problem of change". New York: Teacher College Press.
Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change (2nd edition) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Schoon, I. (2006). Risk and resilience: Adaptations in changing times. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and science of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.
Silberman, C. E. (1970). Crisis in the Classroom: the remaking of American education. New York: Random House.
Smith, G. (1987). Whatever happened to educational priority areas? Oxford Review of Education, 13(1), 23-38.
Smith, G., Smith, T., Smith, T. (2007) Whatever Happened to EPAs? Part 2: Educational Priority Areas - 40 years on, Forum, 49(1 & 2), 141-156. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/forum.2007.49.1.141
Stefanou, A. (2001). Les caractéristiques des collèges de l'éducation prioritaire et le destin scolaire de leurs élèves. Education et formations, 61, 97-101.
Stephens, D. B. (2010). Improving Struggling Schools: A Developmental Approach to Intervention. MA: Harvard Education Press.
Suchaut, B. (1990). L’aide aux élèves: diversité des formes et des effets des dispositifs. Dialogue, 135, 4-10.
Tough, P. (2009). Whatever it takes: Geoffrey Canada's quest to change Harlem and America. NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A. W., & Hoy, W. K. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of educational research, 68(2), 202-248.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (2010). Head Start Impact Study. Final Report. Retrieved December 25, 2015, form http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/hs_impact_study_final.pdf
van Zanten, A. (2001). L’école de la périphérie. Scolarité et ségrégation en banlieue. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
van Zanten, A. (2009). Choisir son école. Stratégies familiales et médiations locales. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
van Zanten, A., & Grospiron, M. F. (2001). Les carrières enseignantes dans les établissements difficiles: fuite, adaptation et développement professionnel. Diversité Ville-école-intégration (VEI), 161, 71-93.
Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature. Paris, France: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001330/133010e.pdf.
Wagner, T., Kegan, R., Lahey, L. L., Lemons, R. W., Garnier, J., Helsing, D., Howell, A., & Rasmussen, H. T. (2006). Change leadership: A practical guide to transforming our schools. CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Webb, R., Vulliamy, G., Hämäläinen, S., Sarja, A., Kimonen, E., & Nevalainen, R. (2004). A comparative analysis of primary teacher professionalism in England and Finland. Comparative education, 40(1), 83-107.
Whatford, C. (1998). Rising from the ashes. In L. Stoll & K. Myers (Eds.), No quick fixes:　Perspectives on schools in difficulties (pp. 64–84). London: Falmer Press.
Whitehurst, G. J., & Croft, M. (2010). The Harlem Children's Zone, Promise Neighborhoods, and the broader, bolder approach to education. Washington, DC: Brown Center on Education Policy, The Brookings Institution.
Wohlstetter, P., Malloy, C. L., Chau, D., & Polhemus, J. L. (2003). Improving schools through networks: A new approach to urban school reform. Educational Policy, 17(4), 399-430.
Zhou, L., & Johnson, F. (2008). Revenues and Expenditures for Public Elementary and Secondary School Districts: School Year 2005-06 (Fiscal Year 2006) (NCES 2008-345). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.