The purpose of this research was to understand the college rugby athletes' satisfaction in their training. The study subjects were the 274 athletes who participated in Leagues A and B of the College Rugby Tournament in 2006. The tools of research were the questionnaires of ”Measurement Scale for Training Satisfaction of College Rugby Athletes”. Factor analysis of the questionnaires resulted in several conclusions as below: First, overall satisfaction in training reached upper medium level, and the athletes scored the highest in factor ”team rapport”, and the lowest in ”personal performance.” Second, Comparing the different background variables for the athletes with respect to their overall satisfaction, it was found that there was significant variance (p<.05) in year grade, league, game age, and weekly practice days. Third, Comparing the different background variables for athletes on different factors, it was found that the athletes of different year grades displayed significant variance in three factors namely ”coach's competence in instruction”, ”personal performance” and ”training feedback”. The athletes of different leagues showed significant variance in ”personal performance” and ”training feedback”. The athletes of different game age only showed significant variance in ”personal performance”. The athletes who had been selected to the highest level showed significant variance in both ”coach's competence in instruction” and ”team rapport”. Athletes with different practice days per week showed significant variance in all four factors of ”training plan and facilities”, ”team rapport”, ”overall feeling on training” and ”training feedback”.
The purpose of this research was to understand the college rugby athletes' satisfaction in their training. The study subjects were the 274 athletes who participated in Leagues A and B of the College Rugby Tournament in 2006. The tools of research were the questionnaires of ”Measurement Scale for Training Satisfaction of College Rugby Athletes”. Factor analysis of the questionnaires resulted in several conclusions as below: First, overall satisfaction in training reached upper medium level, and the athletes scored the highest in factor ”team rapport”, and the lowest in ”personal performance.” Second, Comparing the different background variables for the athletes with respect to their overall satisfaction, it was found that there was significant variance (p<.05) in year grade, league, game age, and weekly practice days. Third, Comparing the different background variables for athletes on different factors, it was found that the athletes of different year grades displayed significant variance in three factors namely ”coach's competence in instruction”, ”personal performance” and ”training feedback”. The athletes of different leagues showed significant variance in ”personal performance” and ”training feedback”. The athletes of different game age only showed significant variance in ”personal performance”. The athletes who had been selected to the highest level showed significant variance in both ”coach's competence in instruction” and ”team rapport”. Athletes with different practice days per week showed significant variance in all four factors of ”training plan and facilities”, ”team rapport”, ”overall feeling on training” and ”training feedback”.