學校選擇環境教育場域進行戶外教學之影響因素探討

The Influencing Factors of Choosing Environmental Education Fields for Outdoor Teaching in Schools

林明瑞(Min-Ray Lin) ； 張廷鋐(Ting-Hong Jhang)

《臺中教育大學學報：數理科技類》 35卷2期 (2021/12) Pp. 1-33

摘要

戶外教學為108課綱之重大議題，教育部亦積極推動環境戶外教學；依環教法規範，學校師生戶外教學建議到環境教育場域進行。為了解學校在選擇環教場域到底考量哪些因素，及各因素的權重比例為何；本研究首先針對11位成員之專家小組進行德懷術兩回合的問卷調查；再針對中小學環境教育承辦人員進行問卷調查，依比例分層抽樣，發出問卷606份，有效問卷回收率為57%，問卷的Cronbach α為.948；再問卷結果的統計分析。研究結果發現：專家及學校承辦人員共同的趨勢，在五大構面中，以環教場域的環教人員之能力（專家=4.73，學校=4.39）、課程效能（專家=4.72，學校=4.42）、場域之客觀條件及吸引力（專家=4.42，學校=4.11）最為重要。子面向中以環教場域的課程能與學校連結（專家=4.70，學校=4.11）、符合師生需求（專家=4.73，學校=4.45）及場域的人員具有親和力與豐富的解說能力（專家=4.73，學校=4.43.）為最重要。各子題中，環教場域的課程符合學生需求（專家=4.70，學校=4.49）、環教人員解說專業（專家=4.70，學校=4.45）、場域提供多元的教學法（專家=4.64，學校=4.46）最為重要。專家與學校承辦人員認定差異比較大的子題為：專家認為學校主管或承辦人員對於戶外教學地點選擇具有較大的影響力，但中小學承辦人員卻認為學校師生的需求才是重要影響因素。

關鍵字

環境教育場域 ； 戶外教學 ； 影響因素 ； 課程 ； 解說能力

並列摘要

Outdoor teaching is an essential issue of the Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education. The Ministry of Education also actively promotes environmental outdoor teaching. According to the Environmental Education Act, environmental education fields are recommended for outdoor teaching at schools. To understand what factors are considered by schools and each factor's weight ratio when choosing environmental education fields, this study first conducted a two-round Delphi questionnaire survey on an expert group of 11 members; secondly, we conducted a questionnaire survey of those undertaking environmental education in elementary, junior high and senior high schools. The sample was stratified according to proportion, and 0 questionnaires were sent out. The valid questionnaire response rate was 57%. The Cronbach α of the questionnaire is .948. The results of the questionnaire were statistically analyzed. The results of the study found: The common trends of experts and school practitioners had many things in common. In the five major facets, the ability of environmental education personnel in the field of environmental education (expert = 4.73 , school = 4.39 ), curricula effectiveness (expert = 4.72 , school = 4.42 ), and the objective conditions and attractiveness of environmental education fields (expert = 4.42 , school = 4.11 ) were the most important facets. The commonly identified and most important subfacets were: the courses of environmental education fields can be connected with the schools (expert= 4.70, school= 4.49 ), meet the needs of teachers and students (expert= 4.73 , school= 4.45 ), and the fields' personnel have affinity and rich interpretation skills (experts= 4.73 , school= 4.43 ). As for sub-questions, the commonly identified and most important sub-questions were: the curriculum of environmental education fields meets the needs of the students (expert = 4.70, school = 4.49 ), the professional interpretation of education staff in the fields (expert = 4.70, school = 4.45 ) and the teaching methods provided by the fields are diversified and interesting (experts = 4.64 , schools = 4.46 ); The sub-facets identified by experts and school contractors as making a big difference were: the school's demand for environmental outdoor teaching (experts = 4.70, schools = 3.96 ), and whether the environmental education fields are managed well (expert = 4.75 , school = 4.27 ). The sub-question were the preferences of the school supervisors toward the fields (experts = 4.82 , school = 3.74 ), and the preferences of school students toward the fields (experts = 4.73 , school = 3.89 ). The experts considered school supervisors or environmental education practitioners to have the greatest influence on choosing outdoor teaching fields. However, environmental education practitioners regarded the needs of school teachers and students as the most important factor.

並列關鍵字

Outdoor teaching ； the ability of environmental education ； the field of environmental education