Title

國中綜合活動學習領域人際交往教學對學生親密關係態度之影響

Translated Titles

The Effects of Interpersonal Relationships Program on Junior High School Students' Attitudes toward Intimate Relationships

Authors

許怡文

Key Words

人際交往關係 ; 親密關係態度 ; 綜合活動學習領域 ; 實驗教學

PublicationName

臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2011年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

林如萍

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究旨在發展國民中學綜合活動學習領域之「人際交往」教學方案,並探討其對學生親密關係態度之影響。本研究採取實驗研究法,以臺北市某國中八年級學生為對象,每週一堂共計進行八週課程。研究蒐集量化與質性資料,包括:「青少年親密關係態度」問卷前後測、課堂觀察、學習單、作業,以及課後訪談。主要之研究結果如下: 一、本研究之人際交往教學方案,內容以學生為主體設計,由「自我瞭解」、「原生家庭對個人的影響」,再進入「親密關係中的人際交往」議題。立基於綜合活動體驗、省思、實踐的教學原則,運用多元教學方法與教具,除了講述法還設計體驗活動。 二、本研究之人際交往教學方案,對於學生的「親密關係態度」具有顯著影響。包括愈認同婚姻價值、愈不認同婚前同居,以及持有較低程度的親密關係浪漫態度。

English Abstract

The purpose of the study were:(1) to develop the interpersonal relationships program ;(2) to evaluate the effect of the program on junior high school students’ attitudes toward intimate relationships. In this study, one-group pretest-posttest design was used, in which 206 junior high school students participated in 8 classes, a class per week. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. In the quantitative part, pre- and post surveys were administered to understand the changes of students’ attitude toward intimate relationships. The qualitative part involves the observation on students’ classroom life, the collections of students’ works and the interview at the conclusion of the program. The major findings are as follows: 1.The interpersonal relationships program begins with lessons on self-understanding and the influences of family of origin, followed by the topics on relationships. The design of program emphasizes on the principle of experience, reflection and practice. The program uses diverse teaching methods and varied teaching aids, including not only lecturing but also active activities. 2.The program is effective in improving students’ attitudes toward intimate relationships. The students reported an increase in their likelihood of seeing marriage as a good and desirable thing, less likely to see cohabitation before marriage as a good thing, and a decrease in the attitudes toward romance- less “one and only” and “love is enough” attitudes.

Topic Category 人文學 > 人類學及族群研究
教育學院 > 人類發展與家庭學系
Reference
  1. 林小麗(2004)。幽默融入國中綜合活動課程對學生幽默感、情緒適應和人際因應之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
    連結:
  2. 林如萍(2007a)。家政的傳統與創新-談綜合活動之家政教學。人類發展與家庭學報,9,26-42。
    連結:
  3. 林隆儀(2010)。論文寫作要領。台北市:五南。
    連結:
  4. 范郁如(2006)。國中綜合活動實施創意教學方案對學生創造力影響之研究。國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭研究所在職進修碩士班碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
    連結:
  5. 許瀞尹(2006)。綜合活動實施創意教學方案之成效評估研究。國立臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭研究所在職進修碩士班碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
    連結:
  6. 黃政傑(2004)。教學原理。台北市:師大書苑。
    連結:
  7. 楊偉昱(2009)。高教育程度未婚者的擇偶限制信念之研究。國立台灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
    連結:
  8. 賴怡妏(2007)。情緒教育融入綜合活動課程對國中七年級學生情緒智慧、同儕人際關係之影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
    連結:
  9. Adler-Baeder, F., Kerpelman, J. l., Schramm, D. G., Higginbotham, B., & Paulk, A. (2007). The impact of relationship education on adolescents of diverse backgrounds. Family Relations, 56(3), 291-303.
    連結:
  10. Cobb, Larson, & Watson (2003). Development of the attitudes about romance and mate selection scale. Family Relations, 52, 222–231.
    連結:
  11. Gardner, S. P. (2001). Evaluation of the “Connections: Relationships and Marriage” Curriculum. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences Education, 19(1), 1-14.
    連結:
  12. Gardner, S. P., & Boellaard, R. (2007). Does youth relationship education continue to work after a high school class? A longitudinal study. Family Relations, 56, 490-500.
    連結:
  13. Gardner, S. P., Giese, K.,& Parrott, S. M. (2004). Evaluation of the connections: relationships and marriage curriculum. Family Relations, 53(5), 521-527.
    連結:
  14. Hawkins, A. J., Carroll, J. S., Doherty, W. J., & Willoughby, B. (2004). A Comprehensive framework for marriage education. Family Relations, 53, 547-558.
    連結:
  15. Kerpelman, J. L., Pittman, J. F., Adler-Baeder, F., Eryigit, S., & Paulk, A. (2009). Evaluation of a statewide youth-focused relationships education curriculum. Journal of Adolescence, 32(6), 1359-1370.
    連結:
  16. Martin, P. D., Specter, G., Martin, M., & Martin, D.(2003). Expressed attitudes of adolescents toward marriage and family life. Adolescence, 38(150), 359-367.
    連結:
  17. Silliman, B. (2003). Building Healthy Marriages through Early and Extended Outreach with Youth. Journal of Psychology and Theology,31(3), 270-282.
    連結:
  18. 一、中文部分
  19. 中國視聽教育學會、中國視聽教育基金會(主編)(1991)。系統化教學設計。台北市:師大書苑。
  20. 王文科(2001)。教育研究法。台北市:五南。
  21. 史倩玲(2011)。人際互動少 青少年談愛難。台灣立報。2011年3月6號,取自http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/110302/131/2n9xl.html
  22. 吳明隆、涂金堂(2005)。SPSS與統計應用分析。台北市:五南。
  23. 李坤崇(2005)。綜合活動學習領域概論。台北市:心理。
  24. 李坤崇(2006)。教學目標、能力指標與評量。台北市:高等教育。
  25. 李坤崇(2010)。活動課程的教學三訣。課程與教學,193,86-95。
  26. 李雅文(2004)。台中縣市青少年婚姻態度之研究-以高中職在學學生為對象。中國文化大學生活應用科學研究所在職專班碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
  27. 林如萍(2001)。家庭生活教育:婚姻教育議題。載於中華民家庭教育學會(主編),家庭生活教育(頁29-55)。台北市:師大書苑。
  28. 林如萍(2005)。綜合活動學習領域教學--由「生活技能」談「家庭生活活動」設計。屏縣教育季刊,23,4-9。
  29. 林如萍(2007b)。鄉村生活促進-以生活技能為導向之整合策略。農業推廣文彙,52,89-99。
  30. 林如萍(2007c)。由活動課程談高中家政教學。2010年9月26號,取自http://home.tngs.tn.edu.tw/home3/archives04.asp
  31. 林如萍(2008)。姻緣天註定?!大學生的關係信念對婚姻教育態度之影響。中華家政學刊,43,45-59。
  32. 洪久賢(2001)。綜合活動統整課程與教學策略。載於中華民國教材研究發展學會(主編),邁向課程新紀元(七)--九年一貫課程學習領域研討會論文集(頁397-415)。台北市:中華民國教材研究發展學會。
  33. 洪家愉(2008)。國高中生戀愛 4成青蘋果 都曾愛一場。聯合報。2010年11月13日,取自http://udndata.com/library/
  34. 張添洲(2002)。教材教法-發展與革新。台北市:五南。
  35. 教育部(2008a)。97年國民中小學課程綱要總綱。2010年9月10號,取自http://www.edu.tw/eje/content.aspx?site_content_sn=15326
  36. 教育部(2008b)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要重大議題(家政教育)。2010年9月10號,取自http://www.edu.tw/eje/content.aspx?site_content_sn=15326
  37. 教育部(2008c)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要重大議題(性別平等教育)。2010年9月10號,取自http://www.edu.tw/eje/content.aspx?site_content_sn=15326
  38. 教育部(2010)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要綜合活動學習領域。台北市:教育部。
  39. 許美瑞(1999)。家政教材教法。台北市:師大書苑。
  40. 郭雅惠(2004)。「創造思考教學融入綜合活動學習領域」對國中生創意表現影響之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
  41. 陳雅慧(2010)。培養孩子的挫折忍受力。親子天下,17,124-130。
  42. 溫春琳、范郁如(2008)。96學年度台北市綜合活動實施調查問卷分析報告。載於讓「綜合」「活動」起來(頁16-23)。台北市:台北市政府教育局。
  43. 鄭朝陽、梁玉芳(2008)。大人不准……愛與性 只能錯中學?。聯合報。2010年11月13日,取自http://udndata.com/library/
  44. 蘇碧麗(2008)。創造思考教學融入國小綜合活動學習領域對學生創造力之影響。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義縣。
  45. 二、西文部分
  46. AAFCS (n. d.). Do they still teach cooking and sewing? Retrieved September 26, 2010, from http://aafcs.org/AboutUs/FAQ.asp#4
  47. Adler-Baeder, F. (2005). Looking towards a healthy marriage: School‐based relationships education targeting youth. Retrieved November 11, 2010, from http://www.dibbleinstitute.org/?page_id=1103
  48. Albro, A. (1999). Skills for living. Teacher's instructional guide. Retrieved July 23, 2010, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=6&bk=1&hid=106&sid=7f998974-82fb-401b-97c8-389d9566e48b%40sessionmgr114&bdata=Jmxhbmc9emgtdHcmc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZl#db=eric&AN=ED439286
  49. Kerpelman, J. L. (2007). Youth focused relationships and marriage education. Retrieved December 10, 2010, from http://ncsu.edu/ffci/publications/2007/v12-n1-2007-spring/index-v12-n1-may-2007.php
  50. Laster, J. F., & Johnson, J. (2001). Family and consumer sciences. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/curriculum-handbook/394/chapters/Major-Trends-in-Family-and-Consumer-Sciences.aspx
  51. Louisiana Department of Education (n. d.). Louisiana family and consumer sciences framework. Retrieved October 11, 2010, from http://www.doe.state.la.us/lde/family/515.html
  52. Markman, H. J., Stanley, S. M., & Kline, G. H. (2003). Why marriage education can work and how government can be involved: Illustrations from the PREP approach. In W. D. Allen & L. L. Eiklenborg (Eds.), Vision 2003: Contemporary family issues (pp. 16-26). Minneapolis, MN: National Council on Family Relations.
  53. Martin, P. D., Martin, M., & Martin, D. (2001). Adolescent premarital sexual activity, cohabitation, and attitudes toward marriage. Adolescence, 36(143), 601-609.
  54. Minnesota Department of Education (2004). Frameworks for Family and Consumer Science Education. Retrieved October 18, 2010, from http://www.education.state.mn.us/MDE/Academic_Excellence/Academic_Standards/Family_Consumer_Sciences/index.html
  55. National Association of State Administrators of Family and Consumer Sciences (1998). National standards for family and consumer sciences. Retrieved July 20, 2010, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED441168&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED441168
  56. National Association of State Administrators of Family and Consumer Sciences (2008). National Standards for Family and Consumer Sciences Education ( 2nd ed.). Retrieved August 04, 2010, from http://www.doe.in.gov/octe/FCS/NASAFCS/index.html
  57. Pearson, M. (2000). Can Kids Get Smart About Marriage? Retrieved November 10, 2010, from http://www.virginia.edu/marriageproject/nextgenerationseries.html
  58. Popenoe, D., & Whitehead, B. D. (2001). The top ten myths of divorce. Retrieved June 28, 2010, from http://www.virginia.edu/marriageproject/tenthingsseries.html
  59. Powell, L. H., & Cassidy, D. (2001). Ch9: Education for relationships and marriage. In Family Life Education (pp. 163-184). CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
  60. Powell, L. H., & Cassidy, D. (2007). Ch10: Education for relationships and marriage. In Family Life Education: Working with families across the life span. (pp. 189-213). Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
  61. School /Youth Marriage Education Programs. (n. d.). Retrieved December 10, 2010, from http://www.smartmarriages.com/app/Directory.BrowsePrograms#type_7
  62. Stanley, S. M., & Rhoades, G. K. (2009). Sliding vs. deciding: Understanding a mystery. Family Focus, Summer 2009, F1-F3.
  63. The Dibble Institute. (n. d.a). The Connections Course. Retrieved January 8, 2011, from http://www.dibbleinstitute.org/?page_id=821
  64. The Dibble Institute. (n. d.b). Relationship Smarts PLUS. Retrieved January 8, 2011, from http://www.dibbleinstitute.org/?page_id=495
  65. Trella, D. (2009). Relationship smarts: Assessment of an adolescent relationship education program. Retrieved November 11, 2010, from http://www.dibbleinstitute.org/?page_id=1103
  66. Trella, D. (2010). Adolescent union beliefs and expectations: A focus on participants in relationship education programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH.
  67. University of the State of New York & New York State Education Department (2005). New York State Family and Consumer Sciences Education - Home And Career Skills Core Curriculum Grades 5-8. Retrieved October 10, 2010, from http://www.p12.nysed.gov/cte/FCSe/course.html
  68. Whitehead B. D., & Pearson, M. (2006). Making a Love Connection: Teen Relationships, Pregnancy, and Marriage. Retrieved November 10, 2010, from http://www.virginia.edu/marriageproject/specialreports.html
  69. Wild, P. (2004). National Standards Shape Today's FCS Curriculum. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 96(1), 11-12.
Times Cited
  1. 王莉婷(2012)。青少年的同居態度與婚姻期待之研究。臺灣師範大學人類發展與家庭學系學位論文。2012。1-116。