教育服務品質之探索－以兩所教育大學體育系為例

An Exploratory Study of Educational Service Quality: Two Cases Studies of PE Department in Education University

楊亮梅(Liang-Mei Yang) ； 陳俊民(Chun-Ming Chen)

《中正體育學刊》 6期 (2016/12) Pp. 49-67

https://doi.org/10.30093/CCPEJ.201612_(6).0004

摘要

有品質的教育應具備持續的進步及全員的極積參與，以致提升學生滿意度的教育文化特質。學生既為主要利益關係人，了解與積極管理其需求與感受，乃學校教育規劃策略之基礎。然在學期間個人的發展及成熟度的變化，極可能影響其教育品質的需求與看法。本研究目的在透過兩個案學校教育服務品質的檢驗，分析、歸納學生普遍存在或差距較大的看法，以探索需要予以關注的問題與對象。參與對象包括台灣二所同質性高之教育大學體育系一至三年級的學生，調查工具為「體育教育服務品質評量量表」，包括承諾性、專業性、硬體、同理心、及可靠性五個因素。研究結果顯示：一、兩校學生的整體教育服務及五個因素之品質期望與知覺差距皆達到顯著水準；二、不同年級之主要效果考驗達顯著水準，其中二年級的教育服務品質缺口最大。整體結論，兩個案學生對系上之教育服務品質皆不滿意，但是性別及運動競技經驗兩個因素並不影響學生對教育服務品質的評價，僅年級間的看法差異大，其中影響二年級評價最差的因素，應進一步了解原因以規劃管理的策略。

關鍵字

品質缺口 ； 教育服務 ； 運動競技水準

並列摘要

A quality education can be characterized by continuous improvement, all employees and students involvement, and increased student satisfaction. The element of educational planning and strategy in academic department is to positively recognize and manage students' needs and perceptions for quality improvement, since students are the primary stakeholder in the system of education service. However, individual development and maturity variation during the university years might influence students' needs and perspectives about quality education. Hence, the primary purpose of this study was to discover if there was a universal phenomenon or significant disparity of education service quality among gender, athletic participation, and grade. Two cases study by educational universities' PE students from freshman, sophomore to junior collected a total of 218 valid data. A modified PE SERVQUAL questionnaire was used as the survey instrument. The PE SERVQUAL contained one expectation section and one perception section, each with 22 items distributed over the five dimensions of Commitment, Professionalism, Tangibles, Empathy, and Reliability. The results indicated significant discrepancies between expectation and perception of both cases' students on education service quality and all five quality factors of the department they study. The analyses of two-way MANOVA were found no interaction between gender and year of school, as well as between gender and athletic participation. But a significant difference appeared among years of the main effect test. The compared results indicated sophomore (year two) performed the largest quality gap than freshmen (year one) and junior (year three). Conclusively, both cases' students were all dissatisfied with the education service quality of the department they study. Though gender and athletic participation did not influence students' evaluation, years of study had made the perspective difference. Discussions and suggestions for further understanding and managerial tactics were presented whereas sophomore was the most dissatisfied with the education service quality.

並列關鍵字

quality gap ； education service ； athletic participation