影響大學生服務學習課程學習成果之相關因素研究-以國立臺灣大學為例

A Study of Influential Factors on Learning Outcomes of Service-Learning Curricula for College Students - Based on Data from National Taiwan University

楊上萱(Shang-Hsuan Yang)

指導教授 ： 劉若蘭

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/公民教育與活動領導學系/碩士(2012年)

摘要

本研究旨在探討影響大學生服務學習課程學習成果之相關因素。其中個人因素包括性別、學院別、年級、家庭社經地位、社團經驗、志工經驗等六個變項；課程部分則分為課程類別與課程因素，其中課程因素包括課程投入與課程品質等兩個面向；學習成果包括觀點轉換、人際互動、知識轉化、校園認同、問題解決與批判思考等六個面向。
　 研究方法為問卷調查法，以叢集取樣方式選取國立臺灣大學一百學年度第一學期參與不同服務學習課程學生為研究對象，運用「服務學習課程品質、課程投入與學習成果問卷」進行調查，共回收有效問卷461份。統計方法包括t檢定、單因子變異數分析、皮爾遜積差相關分析與多元迴歸分析。研究結果歸納如下：
一、不同個人因素大學生的服務學習課程投入與學習成果有差異。
二、不同課程類別之服務學習課程品質、課程投入與學習成果有差異。
三、大學生個人因素、課程品質可解釋課程投入
在情意關懷方面，服務準備、服務過程與反思服務為顯著預測因素，解釋力達95.3％；在認知理解方面，服務準備與課程品質為顯著預測因素，解釋力達41.3％；在技能行動方面，志工經驗、服務準備、服務過程與反思服務為顯著預測因素，解釋力達35.9％。
四、大學生個人因素、課程類別與課程因素可解釋學習成果
在觀點轉換方面，認知理解、服務過程、課程評量為顯著預測因素；在人際互動方面，學院、認知理解、課程評量顯著預測因素；在知識轉換方面，家庭社經地位、社團經驗、志工經驗、情意關懷、服務過程、反思服務與課程慶賀為顯著預測因素；在校園認同方面，家庭社經地位、認知理解、服務過程、反思服務與課程評量為顯著預測因素；在解決問題方面，認知理解、服務過程與課程評量為顯著預測因素；在批判思考方面，志工經驗、課程類型、情意關懷、服務準備、服務過程、反思服務與服務慶賀為顯著解釋因素，整體解釋力在36.5％至54.8％之間。
本研究根據以上結論，對大學校院建議包括：（一）強化服務學習課程品質，發展多元服務學習課程；（二）重視不同學院的學習情況，提升學生各面向學習成果；（三）加強教師對服務學習概念之輔導，促進學生成功學習；（四）尋求與協同機構（單位）之密切合作；（五）教師於服務學習課程進行學習成果評估。對學生的建議包括：（一）主動投入課程學習；(二) 了解課程規範與需求、展現積極行動力。另亦對於進一步研究提出相關建議。

關鍵字

大學生 ； 服務學習課程 ； 服務學習學習成果

並列摘要

The purpose of this study was to explore the influential factors on learning outcomes of service-learning curricula for college students. The personal factors include gender, college, grade, socioeconomic status (SES), experiences of student clubs and that as volunteer, the curricula factors includes the types, quality, involvement, and the learning outcomes includes perspectives transformation, interpersonal interaction, knowledge conversion, recognition for campus, problem solving and critical thinking.
The study used questionnaires to investigate the students of National Taiwan University (NTU) who participating in different Service-learning curricula in the first semester of school year 2011 chosen by cluster sampling method, using “ The questionnaire of the quality, involvement and learning outcomes of service-learning curricula”. The valid data was 461. Descriptive statistics, t test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson product-moment correlation and multiple regression analysis were conducted to analyze the data. Findings are as following:
1. There are differences in curricula quality and learning outcomes of service-learning among college students with different personal factors.
2. There are differences in curricula quality, involvement and the learning outcomes of service-learning among college students with different curricula types.
3. The curricula involvement can be explained by the personal factors and curricula quality:
The service preparation, service process and service reflection are the significant predictive indexes for affection and caring, R2 is 95.3 %. The service preparation and curricula quality are the significant predictive indexes for cognition and comprehension, R2 is 41.3 %. The experience as volunteers, service preparation, service process and service reflection are the significant predictive indexes for skill and action, R2 is 35.9 %.
4. The outcomes of service-learning curricula can be explained by the personal factors, curricula types and curricula factors:
Cognition and comprehension, service process and curricula assessment are the significant predictive indexes for perspectives transformation. College, cognition and comprehension and curricula assessment are the significant predictive indexes for interpersonal interaction. Socioeconomic status (SES), experiences of student clubs and that as volunteer, affection and caring, service process, service reflection, curricula celebration and curricula assessment are the significant predictive indexes for knowledge conversion. Socioeconomic status (SES), cognition and comprehension, service process, service reflection and curricula assessment are the significant predictive indexes for recognition for campus. Cognition and comprehension, service process and curricula assessment are the significant predictive indexes for problem solving. Experiences of student as volunteer, curricula types, affection and caring, service preparation service process, service reflection and curricula celebration are the significant predictive indexes for critical thinking. R2 is between 36.5% to 54.8%.
Based on the conclusion, the following are the suggestions for higher education institutions and students:
Suggestions for education institutions include: 1. Strengthen service-learning curricula by enhanced quality, Develop multiple service-learning curricula; 2. Advanced outcomes by valuing the diversity of colleges’ nature; 3. Successful learning by enhancing teachers’ guidance to students on service-learning; 4. Close collaborations with associated sponsors; and 5. Teachers’ assessment of outcomes during the process. Suggestions for students include:1.Active engagement 2.Active participation in terms of understanding the norm and demands thereof. Other suggestions for future research are presented.

並列關鍵字

College students ； Service-learning Curricula ； Learning outcomes of Service-learning curricula

參考文獻

文忠蓮（2010）。大學服務學習教育之研究。國立臺北科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。

岳修平、邱立安（2011）。學生對服務學習數位影音資源之使用經驗與知覺助益研究。圖書資訊學刊，9（1），123-160。

林梅琴（2009）。從人生哲學課程結合服務─學習探討學生獲益之研究。課程與教學季刊，12（3），27-56。

林慧貞（2006）大學生參與服務學習意願初探。開南大學通識研究集刊，10，171-192。

張同廟（2010）。大學生參與服務學習課程之動機、阻礙因素與滿意度研究-以六所私立大學校院為例。新竹教育大學教育學報，28，1-34。