生命教育課程對某科技大學新生生命意義、態度及正向心理之影響

本研究旨在評估生命教育課程對某科技大學新生生命意義、態度及正向心理之影響，本研究採準實驗設計，以某科技大學新生為研究對象，於2019年進行，實驗組進行5週(10堂課)每次2堂課計100分鐘的生命教育介入課程，對照組則完全不介入，共完成前後測87份問卷(實驗組40人，對照組47人)。分析生命教育課程介入對整體學生有無提升對生命意義、態度及正向心理之影響。研究結果顯示: 一、研究對象基本屬性因素中，學業表現有顯著差異，在性別、個人宗教信仰、家庭宗教信仰、家中排行第幾、曾經有親朋好友死亡經驗、家庭經濟狀，況均無顯著差異。二、生命意義比較實驗組前後測得分，在後測得分有提升，進一步分析，各分向中後測分數較前測分數均有提升，其中「生命的熱忱」及「生活目標」前測後測平均值分別增加最高，「逃避」前測後測平均值增加最低；對照組的生命意義前後測得分增加相較實驗組低，整體而言，實驗組前後測得分增加的幅度比對照組來的高，顯示生命教育課程介入能顯著提升學生生命意義。三、生命態度比較實驗組前後測得分，在後測得分有提升，進一步分析，各分向中後測分數較前測分數均有提升，其中「存在感」得分由前測後測平均值增加最高、「生命自主」得分由前測後測平均值最低；對照組的生命態度前後測得分增加相較實驗組低，整體而言，實驗組前後測得分增加的幅度比對照組來的高，顯示生命教育課程介入能顯著提升學生生命態度。四、正向心理比較實驗組前後測得分，在後測得分有提升，進一步分析，各分向中後測分數較前測分數均有提升，其中「樂觀進取」得分由前測後測平均值增加最高，「自我悅納」得分由前測後測平均值增加最低；對照組的正向心理健康前後測得分為整體降低，整體而言，實驗組前後測得分相較對照組增加，對照組則降低，顯示生命教育課程介入能顯著提升學生正向心理。依據結果顯示提出以下建議：雖然在整體成效有顯著提升，但生命教育課程非一般教育課程，亦非一朝一夕可以永久生植在學生心中，建議應在通識課程中納入更多的時間在生命教育課程介入，更多的是能提供「體驗及實踐」的部分，安排從事真實在實務上的服務及生命體驗活動，更可以強化學習成效。後續也可以採用追蹤研究方法探討生命教育理念對參與者長期的影響，以提供後續研究者的研究設計及課程介入。

關鍵字

生命意義；生命態度；生命教育課程；大學生；正向心理

並列摘要

This paper discusses quasiexperimental analysis on the effect of life education courses on the perceived life meaning, life attitudes, and positivity in new students in a university of science and technology in 2019. The 40-person experiment group received a 5-week life education course, conducted for 2 classes (100 min) per week. The 47-person control group received no intervention. A total of 87 valid responses to the pretest and posttest questionnaire were completed and analyzed. The results were as follows: (1) Regarding the demographic information, the respondents differed significantly in academic performance but not in sex, personal religious belief, family religious belief, order as a sibling in family, experience on the death of family members or friends, and family economic status. (2) The average score of the experiment group on perceived life meaning increased from 96.5 in the pretest to 107.53 in the posttest. Further analysis revealed that the group’s scores in all items increased from the pretest to the posttest. Particularly, the average scores on “passion for life” and “life goal” increased the highest (by 4.48 and 3.55, respectively); the average score on “escapism” increased the lowest (by 0.9). The average score of the control group on perceived life meaning increased from 98.38 in the pretest to 99.79 in the posttest; the increase was lower than that in the experiment group. Overall, the amount of score increase in the experiment group (11.03) was higher than that in the control group (1.41), indicating that the life education course intervention significantly improved students’ perceived life meaning. (3) The average score of the experiment group on life attitudes increased from 126.55 in the pretest to 138.32 in the posttest. Further analysis revealed that the group’s scores in all items increased from the pretest to the posttest. Particularly, the average score on “sense of presence” increased the highest; the average score on “life autonomy” increased the lowest . The average score of the control group on life attitudes increased from 132.96 in the pretest to 133.45 in the posttest; the increase was lower than that in the experiment group. Overall, the amount of score increase in the experiment group was higher than that in the control group , indicating that the life education course intervention significantly improved students’ life attitudes. (4) The average score of the experiment group on positivity increased from 95.05 in the pretest to 103.75 in the posttest. Further analysis revealed that the group’s scores in all items increased from the pretest to the posttest. Particularly, the average score on “optimism” increased the highest ; the average score on “self-acceptance” increased the lowest . The average score of the control group on positivity decreased from 90.51 in the pretest to 90.02 in the posttest. Overall, the score on positivity increased in the experiment group but decreased in the control group, indicating that the life education course intervention significantly improved students’ positivity. According to the analysis results, although the life education course significantly improved students’ perceived life meaning, life attitudes, and positivity overall, it is not a general education course, and students may not keep their learning from the course, which they acquired within only a few weeks, permanently at heart. Additional time from general education should be used for service and life education course intervention. Moreover, activities relevant to practical service and life experience should be arranged to reinforce students’ learning outcomes. Follow-up studies should be conducted to examine the long-term effect of life education concepts on life education course participants, providing a reference to future studies in designing the frameworks of research and course intervention.