政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/137128

政大典藏 > College of Education > Master of Education in School Administration > Theses > Item 140.119/137128

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/137128

Title:	宜蘭縣立國民中學學校設施品質、學校組織氣氛與學生學習成效關係之研究 A study on the Relationships among the Quality of School Facilities, School Organizational Climate, and Student Learning Outcomes in Junior High School in Yilan County
Authors:	蔡秀子 TSAI-HSIU-TZU
Contributors:	湯志民蔡秀子 TSAI-HSIU-TZU
Keywords:	學校設施品質學校組織氣氛學生學習成效 Student learning outcomes Quality of school facilities School organizational climate
Date:	2021
Issue Date:	2021-09-02 18:06:17 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	本研究主要了解目前宜蘭縣學校設施品質、學校組織氣氛與學生學習成效之現況，以及分析不同背景變項下對學校設施品質、學校組織氣氛與學生學習成效的差異顯著情形，進一步探究學校設施品質、學校組織氣氛對學生學習成效的相關性，以及驗證三者間線性結構關係模式。本研究係以宜蘭縣108學年度縣立國民中學共24所作為研究母群體，以各校規模不同作為抽樣範圍，利用分層比例隨機抽樣方式以國民中學學校教育人員為研究對象，包括校長、主任及教師等等。研究使用問卷調查法進行資料蒐集，透過信度分析、因素分析、敘述統計分析、差異分析、單因子變異數分析、皮爾森積差相關分析、多元迴歸分析以及結構線性方程式等統計方法進行研究。根據研究結果與分析後歸納之結論如下：一、學校設施品質現況達中高程度，以「舒適的學校環境」評價最好。二、學校組織氣氛現況達中高程度，以「教學順暢」評價最好。三、學生學習成效現況達中高程度，以「學習滿意度」評價最好。四、依據職務、教育程度、服務年資以及學校規模的異同，對學校設施品質有不同的評價，「教師兼行政」、「學士」、「服務年資5年以下」以及「12班以下」的族群對於學校設施品質評價較高。五、依據年齡、職務、教育程度的異同，對學校組織氣氛有不同的評價，「50歲以上」、「教師兼行政」以及「學士」的族群對於學校組織氣氛評價較高。六、依據教育程度之異同對於學生學習成效有不同的評價，「博士」的族群對於學生學習成效評價較高。七、學校設施品質與學校組織氣氛成中度正相關，學校設施品質與學生學習成效成中度正相關，學校組織氣氛與學生學習成效呈中度正相關。八、宜蘭縣國民中學學校設施品質、學校組織氣氛對學生學習成效具有預測效果，以「良好的教學設施」的預測力最佳。九、學校設施品質、學校組織氣氛與學生學習成效的關係是有直接和間接效果，模式具有良好的適配度。本研究根據研究結果，提出具體結論與建議，做為日後學校設施規劃、學校組織氣氛營造、學生學習成效提升等教育政策制定以及未來相關研究之參考。 The main purpose of this study is to investigate the performances of following three aspects of the contemparary secondary schools in Yilan County,(1)The quality of school facilities, (2)School organization atmosphere, and (3)student learning outcomes. Also, it indicates the dominant groups over the variations of above three aspects under the analysis. Furthermore, it explores the correlations of mentioned three aspects and proves the model fitness by using structural equational modeling SEM. This study chooses 24 municipal secondary schools in Yilan County in 2019. The sampling scale is based on individual campus scales and the main research objects are principals, directors and teachers, etc. Then use stratified random sampling methods and adopt the questionnaire method to collect data. The collected data is analyzed by the statistic methods such as descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient stepwise regression analysis and structural equation model. According to the findings, it can be concluded as follows, 1) The performance of the quality of school facilities indicates ‘medium-high’ level. Comfortable amenities are ranked highest. 2) The outcome of school organizational atmosphere shows ‘medium-high’ level. A fluent teaching result is presented. 3) The achievement of the student learning outcomes presents ‘medium-high’ level. It shows good satisfaction of student learning. 4) According to individual’s position, education degree and tenure, the evaluation of the quality of school facilities varies. The sampling groups of the followings appraise higher satisfaction of school organizational atmosphere than others. A) Groups of objects who take administrative tasks, B) Groups of objects who own bachelor degrees, C) Groups of objects who serve less than five years, D) Schools which consistof less than 12 classes. 5) Based on objects’ age, position and educational degree, the satisfactions of school organizational atmosphere vary. The sampling groups of followings provide a greater satisfaction than others. A) Objects’ age over 50, B) Objects with an additional administrative tasks, C) Objects who own bachelor degress. 6) In accordance with objects’ educational degree, the comments of student learning outcomes differ. The sampling group of the ones with doctoral degree appraise the best. 7) It presents moderate positive correlation between the quality of school facilities and school organizational atmosphere. Moderate positive correlation shows in the relations of the quality of school facilities and student learning outcomes. Furthermore, the moderate positive correlation exists in the interaction of school organizational atmosphere and student learning outcomes. 8) The analysis conducts predictable outcomes, the better the quality of school facilities and school organizational atmosphere are, the better the student learning outcomes. 9) The analysis represents the model is equipped with good model fitness and it has direct and indrect effects on the correlations of the quality of school facilities, school organizational atmosphere and the student learning outcomes. According to the research results, this study provides some useful conclusions and suggestions for researchers and practitioners. These suggestions can serve as references for practitioners to plan the layout of school facilities, build proper school organizational climate, and establish the policies for improving student learning performances. Key words: Quality of school facilities, school organizational climate, student learning outcomes
Reference:	參考文獻壹、中文部分丁一顧（2006）。教育行政組織。載於林天祐（主編），教育行政學，115-147。臺北市：心理。王如哲（2010）。解析「學生學習成效」。評鑑雙月刊，27，62-62。王穎（2019）。學校氣候與教師工作滿意度關係之研究：以臺灣、日本、韓國為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。田宜庭（2013）。我國大學學生學習成效評量指標建構之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。呂賢玲（2019）。新北市立國民中學學校設施品質、教師創新教學與學生學習成效關係之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。汪慧玲、沈佳生（2013）。合作學習教學策略對大專學生之學習成效與學習態度之影響：以兒童發展評量與輔導課程某單元為例。臺中教育大學學報：教育類，27（1），57-76。余民寧（2006）。潛在變項模式：SIMPLIS的應用。臺北市：高等教育。余民寧（2006）。影響學習成就因素的探討，教育資料與研究雙月刊，73，11-24。吳金香（2002）。教育政策分析概念探述。載於楊國賜主編：新世紀的教育學概論 ─ 科際整合導向，369-383。臺北市：學富文化。吳昌諭（2016）。竹苗區國民中學校長願景領導、學校組織氣氛與學校效能關係之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。吳勁甫（2008）。競值架構應用在國民小學校長領導行為、學校組織文化與組織效能關係之研究（未出版博士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。吳勁甫（2015）。國小校長正向領導對學校效能影響之研究：教師心理資本的多層次中介效果。教育與心理研究，38（3），1-36。吳珮青（2013）。國民小學教育空間品質評鑑指標建構之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。吳清山（2002）。學校效能研究。臺北市：五南。吳清山（2004）。學校創新經營理念與策略。教師天地，128，30-44。吳清山、林天祐（2007）。教育e辭書。臺北市：高等教育。吳璧如（2002）。組織文化與組織氣候理論。學校行政—理論與應用，117-163。臺北市：五南。吳璧純（2013）。從三種評量類型看多元評量的意義。新北市教育季刊，8，20-24。吳璧純（2017）。素養導向教學之學習評量。臺灣教育評論月刊，6（3），30-34。李安明、鄭采珮、劉志昀（2011）。國民小學校長教學領導與學生學習成就之研究。學校行政，75，1-20。李姿青（2007）。員工自我效能、學習策略與數位學習成效關係之研究(未出版碩士論文)。國立高雄應用科技大學，高雄市。李清偉（2015）。學校推動教師專業發展評鑑之困境與策進。臺灣教育評論月刊，4（1），194-198。李勇輝（2017）。學習動機、學習策略與學習成效關係之研究－以數位學習為例。經營管理學刊，14，68-86。李懿芳、江芳盛、喬麗文（2010）。國小校長領導行為、學校氣氛與學習成就之關聯研究。教育研究月刊，191，39-54。林明地（2004）。校長領導與學習型學校組織文化。教育政策與教育革新，243-266。臺北市：五南。林明地、陳威良（2010）。國民小學校長道德領導對學校組織文化與學生學習表現之影響。教育學刊，35，129-165。林天祐（2005）。教師行動研究準則：普及化的基石。學校行政，35，1-16。林新發（1990）。我國工業專科學校校長領導行為組織氣氛與組織績效關係之研究（未出版博士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，臺北市。秦夢群（2007）。學校行政。臺北市：五南。秦夢群、吳勁甫（2009）。國中校長轉型領導、學校組織健康與組織效能關係之研究：中介效果模式之驗證。當代教育研究，17（3），83-124。秦夢群、吳勁甫、鄧鈞文（2007）。國民中學學校組織健康層面之建構與衡量。教育政策論壇，10（3），75-102。秦夢群、張伯瑲（2013）。國小校長領導行為、學校組織文化與教學效能之中介效果分析：競值架構之應用。教育政策論壇，16（3），31-64。范欣華（2012）。大學生對學生學習成效品質保證機制滿意認知之關鍵事件研究（未出版碩士論文）。臺北市立教育大學，臺北市。張芳全（2010）。多層次模型在學習成就之研究。臺北市：心理。張芳全（2012）。統計就是要這樣跑。臺北市：心理。張芳全（2017）。家庭社經地位對英語學習成就之影響－以幸福感為中介，學校行政，108，204-221。張春興（2007）。教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北市：東華。張德銳（1992）。國民小學教師評鑑之研究。載於中華民國師範教育學會（主編），教育專業，241-284。郭紹儀（1973）。學校建築研究。臺中：臺灣省政府教育廳。陳淑蘭（2011）。新北市新移民與非新移民子女國小高年級學生學習態度與學習成效之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北教育大學，臺北市。陳俊安、李映慧（2014）。國民小學組織氣氛與兼任行政職務教師留任意願關係之研究—以苗栗縣為例。載於中華大學舉辦之「企業競爭力與經營管理學術」研討會論文集（頁1509-1516），新竹市。陳錫珍（2009）。學校行政人員與教師的知識策略。教育研究月刊，177，83-89。陳毓娟（2015）。新北市國民中學教師學術樂觀與學校組織氣候關係之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。陳清檳、黃文喜、張文宗（2010）。高職電機電子群學生父母管教方式、學習態度與學習成效知覺之研究。教育與多元文化研究，2，223-260。教育部（2002）。國民中小學設備基準。臺北市：教育部。曾雅慧（2011）。臺北市國民小學校長空間領導與學校組織氣氛關係之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。彭綉婷、何黎明（2013）。綜合高中商業服務學程與高職商業經營科學生之學習態度及學業成就分析-以南部地區為例。海洋休閒管理學刊，4，79-103。湯志民（2006）。學校建築與校園規畫（第三版）。臺北市：五南。湯志民（2008）。空間領導:理念與策略。教育研究月刊，174，18-38。湯志民（2010）。優質校園營造：2010新趨勢。「2009學校建築研究：校園建築優質化」發表之論文，中華民國學校建築研究學會。湯志民（2019）。臺灣校園空間與美感教育的現況與展望，中等教育，70（2），8-10。黃柏勳（2004）。國民中小學校長轉型領導、學校組織氣候與教師公民行為關係之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。黃芳銘（2004）。社會科學統計方法學：結構方程模式。臺北市：五南。黃芳銘(2007)。結構方程模式：理論與應用。臺北市：五南。黃淑玲、池俊吉（2010）。如何評估學生學習成效－以加州州立大學長灘分校系所訪視與測量中心之經驗爲例。評鑑雙月刊，28。黃淑玲（2013）。從知識到可觀察的能力：評估學習成效的策略與建議。評鑑雙月刊，44，16-23。楊瑩（2011）。以學生學習成效為評量重點的歐盟高等教育品質保證政策。評鑑雙月刊，30，27-34。楊念湘、陳木金(2010)。優質學校品質管理指標與績效管理指標適配度之研究。教育行政與評鑑學刊，9，1-26。廖文靜（2010）。學校設施品質與教育成果關係之研究（未出版博士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。蔡保田（1980）。學校建築的理論與實際之研究。臺北市：教育部。蔡保田、王煥琛、朱敬先、劉興漢（1984）。臺北市立學校建築設施功能與發展趨勢之評估，市政建設專輯研究報告，101。臺北市：臺北市政府研究發展考核委員會。蔡亞芝（2016）。國中主任領導行為與組織公平、組織氣氛、工作士氣之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺東大學，臺東縣。蔡華華、張雅萍（2007）。學習動機對學習成效之影響－以領導行為為干擾變數。中華管理學報，8(4)，1-17。蔡培村（1980）。國中校長領導型式、教師人格特質與學校組織氣候的關係（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。蔡培村（1985）。國民中小學校長領導特質、權力基礎、學校組織結構及組織氣候與教師工作滿足關係之比較研究。（未出版博士論文）。國立政治大學，臺北市。蔡進雄（2000）。國民中學校長轉型領導、互易領導、學校文化與學校效能關係研究（未出版博士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。鍾佩君（2017）。初探新版柯氏學習評估模式。評鑑雙月刊，68，34-38。謝文全（2004）。教育行政學。臺北市：高等教育。貳、英文部分 Ahmad, C. N. C., & Shaharim, S. A. (2017). Teacher-student interactions, learning commitment, learning environment and their relationship with student learning comfort. Journal of Turkish Science, 14(1), 58-71. Anderson, C. S. (1982). The search for school climate: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 368-420. Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman. Arop, F. O., Owan, F. J., & Ibor, I. O. (2019). School quality indicators and secondary school teachers job performance in Cross River State, Nigeria. International Journal of Education and Evaluation, 5(3), 19-28. Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation for Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94. Barrett, P. S., Davies, F., Zhang, Y., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils’ learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, 89, 118-133.doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013 Beckett, D. (2008). Holistic competence: Putting judgements first. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9(1) , 21–30. Bloom, B. S. (1956) . Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook the cognitive domain. New York :David McKay. Bosch, S. J. (2003). Identifying relevant variables for understanding how school facilities affect educational outcomes .Unpublished thesis of PhD, Georgia Institute of Technology, GA. Cheng, Y. C., & Tam, W. M. (1997). Multi-models of quality in education. Quality Assurance in Education, 5(1), 22-31. Cohen, J., McCabe, L., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 180-213. Collins III, J. W., & O`Brien, N. P. (2003). The greenwood dictionary of education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 754-761. Daigneau, W. A. (2002). Facilities and educational quality, Retrieved from http://www. oecd.org/pdf/M00021000/M2002195.pdf. Dellar, G. B., & Gidding, G. J. (1991). School organizational climate and school improvement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Chicago, IL. Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Centre for Advanced Educational Services. Fajriah, N., Gani, A.S., & Samad, I.A. (2019). Students’ perceptions toward teacher’s teaching strategies, personal competence, and school facilities. English Education Journal, 10(1), 16-34. Fan, W., & Williams, C. (2018). The mediating role of student motivation in the linking of perceived school climate and achievement in reading and mathematics. Frontiers in Education, 3, 50. Feigenbaum, A.V. (1983). Total quality control. New York :McGraw-Hill. Garvin, D.A. (1988). Managing quality: the strategic and competitive edge. New York: The Free Press. Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis（5th ed.).Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice-Hall. Hallinger, P., Bickman, L.,& Davis, K. (1996). School context, principal leadership, and student reading achievement. The Elementary School Journal, 96(5), 527-549. Hallinger, P.,& Heck, R.H. (1996). Reassessing the principal`s role in school effectiveness:A review of empirical research, 1980-1995. Educational administration quarterly, 32(1), 5-44. Halpin, A. W., & Croft, D. B. (1962). The organizational climate of schools. In A. W. Halpin (Ed.). Theory and research in administration. New York, NY: Macmillan. Harvey, L.,& Green,D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9-34. Haynes, N.M, Emmons, C.,& Ben-Avie, M. (1997). School climate as a factor in student adjustment and achievement. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 8(3), 321-329. Heschong, L., Elzeyadi, I., & Knecht, C. (2002). Re-analysis report: Daylighting in schools, additional analysis. Tasks 2.2.1 through 2.2.5(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED470978) Higgins, S., Hall, E., Wall, K., Woolner, P., & McCaughey, C. (2005). The impact of school environments: A literature review. Retrieved from http://www.cfbt.com/PDF/91085.pdf Hoy, W. K., & Clover, S. I. R. (1986). Elementary school climate: A revision of the OCDQ. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(1), 93-110. doi:10.1177/0013161X86022001007 Hoy, W. K., & Feldman, J. (1987). Organizational health: The concept and its measure. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20, 30-38. Hoy, W. K., & Feldman, J. (1999). Organizational health profiles for high schools. In J. Freiberg (Ed.). School climate: Measuring, sustaining, and improving. London: Falmer Press. Hoy, W. K., Hoffman, J., Sabo, D., & Bliss, J. (1996). The organizational climate of middle schools: The development and test of the OCDQ-RM. Journal of Educational Administration, 34(1), 41-59. Hoy, W. K., Miskel, C. G. (2013). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Hoy, W.K., & Sabo, D. (1998). Quality middle schools: Open and healthy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Hoy, W. K., Tarter, C. J., & Kottkamp, R. B. (1991). Open schools/healthy schools: Measuring organizational climate. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Hunley, S., & Schaller, M. (2006). Assessing learning spaces. In D. G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning spaces. Boulder, CO: Educause. James, M.,& Brown, S. (2005). Grasping the TLRP nettle: Preliminary analysis and some enduring issues surrounding the improvement of learning outcomes. Curriculum Journal, 16, 7-30. Kennedy, M. (2002). Creating ideal facilities. American School & University, 74(5), 30-33. Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1959). Techniques for evaluation training programs. Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, 13, 21-26. Kirkpatrick, J.D., & Kirkpatrick, W.K. (2010). ROE’s rising star. Retrieved from https://www.td.org/Publications/Magazines/TD/TD-Archive/2010/08/ROES-Rising-Star Kottkamp, R.B., Mulhern, J. A., & Hoy, W. K. (1987). Secondary school climate: A revision of the OCDQ. Educational Administration Quarterly, 23(3), 31-48. Lair, S. (2003). A study of the effect school facility conditions have on student achievement . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin, TX. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84-99. MacNeil, A.J., Prater, D.L., & Busch, S. (2009). The effects of school culture and climate on student achievement. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 12(1), 73-84. Maki, P.L. (2010). Building a sustainable commitment across the institution: Assessing for learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. OECD (2006). PEB organising framework for evaluating quality in educational facilities. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/48/57/37783219.doc Owens, R. G. (1998). Organizational behavior in education(6th ed.). Boston : Allynand Bacon. Rieker, W. S.,& Sullivan, S. J. (1985). Total quality management: A american model. ASQC 39th Quality Congress Transaction, 461-466. Rudd, P., Reed, F., & Smith, P.(2008). The effects of the school environment on young people`s attitudes towards education and learning. Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research. Retrieved from http://www.nfer.ac.uk/nfer/publications/BSY01/BSY01.pdf Samdal, O., Wold,B., & Bronis, M. (1999). Relationship between students` perceptions of school environment, their satisfaction with school and perceived academic achievement: An international study. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(3), 296-320. Scheerens, J., & Bosker, R. J. (1997). The foundations of educational effectiveness. Oxford, UK Pergamon. Schindlera, H.S., Kholoptseva, J., Oh ,S.S., Yoshikawa, H., Duncan, G.J., Magnusone, K.A., & Shonkoff, J.P. (2015). Maximizing the potential of early childhood education to prevent externalizing behavior problems: A meta-analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 53(3), 243-263. Schmidt, R. A. (1991). Frequent augmented feedback can degrade learning: Evidence and interpretations. In J. Requin, & G. E. Stelmach, Tutorials in motor neuroscience (pp. 59-75). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Schneider, B. (1975). Organizational climate: Individual preferences and organizational realities revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(4), 459–465. Sebastian, J., & Allensworth, E. (2012). The influence of principal leadership on classroom instruction and student learning: A study of mediated pathways to learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 626-663. Suskie, L. (2004) Assessing student learning: A common sense guide. San Francisco,CA:Jossey-Bass. Tapaninen, R. (2005). The nordic cooperation network: The school of tomorrow. Retrieved from http://www.aia.org/cae_confrep_spring05_nordic. Uline, C., & Tschannen‐Moran, M. (2008). The walls speak: the interplay of quality facilities, school climate, and student achievement. Journal of Educational Administration, 46(1), 55-73. Verdisi, A., Kriemadis T.,& Pashiardis P. (2003). Historical, comparative and statistical perspectives of school effectiveness research : Rethinking educational evaluation in Greece. The International Journal of Educational Management, 17(4), 155-169. Wang, M.T., Degol, J.,& Ye, F. (2015). Math achievement is important, but task values are critical, too: examining the intellectual and motivational factors leading to gender disparities in STEM careers. Frontiers in Psychology ,6, 36. Wang, M.T.,& Degol, J.L. (2016). School climate: a review of the construct, measurement, and impact on student outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 315–352.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學學校行政碩士在職專班 106911007
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106911007
Data Type:	thesis
DOI:	10.6814/NCCU202101253
Appears in Collections:	[Master of Education in School Administration] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
100701.pdf		6318Kb	Adobe PDF2	0	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...