「大學生學習力量表」之發展研究

因應21世紀社會與科技的快速變動，國際各個教育體系多視學習力為終身學習的核心要素，是教育成效之重要指標。然而，現階段對於學習力的評量仍未有學術上的共識。本研究透過學習力的文獻分析，歸納發展出四個向度的學習力評量架構：意義建構、自我調整、人際學習，以及堅持挑戰。研究者根據各向度的定義，擬出題項，以647位大一新生為預試對象，刪除題項與分量表總分相關較低，以及在探索性因素分析出現跨因素的試題，最後得到包含22個題項的正式題本。將正式題本施測於來自公私立大學學生323人，進行量表的信、效度檢驗。結果顯示，各分量表以及全量表的Cronbach's α信度分別為：意義建構.75、自我調整.78、人際學習.77、堅持挑戰.78、全量表.89，信度良好。驗證性因素分析的結果顯示，四個向度的量表資料與模式有良好的適配度、聚斂效度與區辨效度。量表分數與能力成長觀、嚴謹性、開放性、大學核心基礎能力，以及學測成績之關係符合預期，顯示本量表有不錯的建構效度。本量表可作為研究者後續探討大學生學習力測量與評估之研究工具。

關鍵字

大學生；學習力；學習力量表

並列摘要

In response to the rapid changes in society and technology in the 21st century, numerous international education systems have pointed out that “learning-to-learn” is the core ability of lifelong learners and an important indicator of educational effectiveness. However, there is still no academic consensus on the assessment of learning-to-learn at this stage. Based on the literature review, the authors formulated a four-dimension scale framework to assess college students' learning-to-learn: meaning-making, self-regulation, interpersonal learning, and per-severance/challenge. The authors initially designed scale items according to the definition of each dimension and recruited 647 freshmen as the pretest participants. After deleting the items having low corrected item-total correlation and the cross-loading items in the exploratory factor analysis, 22 items were left for the formal test. 323 college students from public and private universities were recruited to examine the reliability and validity of the scale. The Cronbach's α of meaning-making, self-regulation, interpersonal learning, perseverance/challenge, and the full scale are .75, .78, .77, .78, and .89, respectively, indicating good reliability. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a satisfactory fit for the four-factor solution with good convergent validity and discriminant validity. The relationship between scale scores and growth mindset, conscientiousness, openness, core competencies, and General Scholastic Ability Test scores was aligned with expectations. The results show that the scale has good construct validity and can be used as a tool for scholars to explore the study of college students' learning-to-learn disposition.

並列關鍵字

college students ； learning-to-learn ； learning-to-learn scale

參考文獻

Burman, J. T., Green, C. D., & Shanker, S. (2015). On the meanings of self-regulation: Digital humanities in service of conceptual clarity. Child Development, 86(5), 1507-1521.https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12395

Carr, M., & Claxton, G. (2010). Tracking the development of learning dispositions. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 9(1), 9-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695940220119148

Christopoulou, M., Lakioti, A., Pezirkianidis, C., Karakasidou, E., & Stalikas, A. (2018).The role of grit in education: A systematic review. Psychology, 9(15), 2951-2971.https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.915171

Cronbach, L., & Meehl, P. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. PsychologicalBulletin, 52(4), 281-302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957

Deakin Crick, R. (2014). Learning to learn: A complex systems perspective. In R. DeakinCrick, C. Stringer, & K. Ren (Eds.), Learning to learn international perspectives fromtheory and practice. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203078044

主題瀏覽