臺東地區綜合高中二年級學生選修體育課程考量因素之調查研究

The Study of the Cogitating Factors of the Secand Grade Students Taking the Selective Physical Education Course in Taitung's Comprehensive High Schools

10.6222/pej.3903.200609.1109

陳司衛(Shih-Wei Chen)

綜合高中 ； 體育課程 ； 考量因素 ； comprehensive high school ； PE curriculum ； cogitating factors

體育學報

39卷3期（2006 / 09 / 01）

103 - 117

繁體中文

目的：在探討臺東地區綜合高中二年級學生選修體育課程時之考量因素為何？冀能對綜合高中學生選修體育課程的情形獲得深入的瞭解，提供辦理綜合高中學校體育課程規畫的參考依據。方法　以自編之「臺東地區綜合高中二年級學生選修體育課程考量因素調查問卷」為研究工具，採用普查的方式進行問卷調查，針對臺東地區之國立臺東高中、國立臺東女中、國立臺東高商、私立公東高工四所綜合高中二年級的學生為研究對象。結果 （一）臺東地區綜合高中二年級學生在選修體育課程時，其考量因素的優先順序為：體育目標因素、場地設備及器材因素、教師行為因素、課程內容因素、學習過程因素、學校行政因素、社會支持因素、傳播媒體因素。 （二）臺東地區綜合高中二年級男、女學生在本研究的八個考量因素中，達顯著差異的有「體育目標因素」、「學習過程因素」、「課程內容因素」、「傳播媒體因素」、「學校行政因素」等五個因素，其差異的情形皆為男生高於女生。 （三）臺東地區國立、私立綜合高中二年級學生在本研究的八個考量因素中，達顯著差異的有「學習過程因素」、「傳播媒體因素」等二個因素，其差異的情形皆為私立學校高於國立學校。 （四）臺東地區職業學校、普通高中轉型綜合高中二年級學生在本研究的八個考量因素中，除了「學習過程因素」未達顯著差異外，其餘因素皆達到顯著差異，其差異的情形在「體育目標因素」、「教師行為因素」、「課程內容因素」、「場地設備及器材因素」、「學校行政因素」為普通高中轉型高於職業學校轉型學校；而在「社會支持因素」及「傳播媒體因素」則是職業學校轉型高於普通高中轉型學校。 結論　從本研究發現，在臺東地區綜合高中二年級學生在選修體育課程時，體育目標因素、場地設備及器材因素、教師行為因素、課程內容因素是重要的考量因素，學校體育行政單位及體育教師在擬定體育課程時，可以參酌相關因素來編排授課內容；而職業學校轉型或是普通高中轉型綜合高中二年級學生在考量因素之差異情形，有待進一步的探討和研究。

Purpose: To investigate the cogitating factors of students taking the selective Physical Education (PE) course. The students are secand grade students in Taitung's comprehensive high schools. Hope the study could be the reference of PE course design for other comprehensive high schools. Methods: ”The Questionnaire of the reasons why students take the selective PE course in comprehensive high schools” was employed as a research tool. The study subjects were 2nd grade students of four comprehensive high schools in Taitung: National Taitung High School, National Taitung Girl's High School, National Taitung Vocational School and Private Gong Dong Industry Vocational School. Results: 1. The students' priorities of taking the selective PE course was PE goal, equipments and facilities, teacher behaviors, curriculum contents, learning achievement, school administration, social support and mass-media. 2. There was a significant difference between boys and girls in five categories listed below: PE goal, learning achievement, curriculum contents, mass-media and school administration. The difference in boys was much higher than in girls. 3. There was a significant difference between Taitung's public and private schools in two categories: learning achievement and mass-media. The difference in a private school was much higher than in national schools. 4. For the two comprehensive high schools transformed from one high school and one from vocational school, all categories except ”learning achievement” reached the significant difference. In categories like PE goal, teacher behaviors, curriculum contents, equipments and facilities, school administration, the difference in comprehensive high schools transformed from high schools was much higher than the one transformed from vocational schools, whereas in categories like social support and mass-media, the difference in Comprehensive High Schools transformed from vocational schools was much higher than the ones transformed from high schools. Conclusion: When the secand grade students in Taitung's comprehensive high schools take the selective PE course, they would take the following factors into consideration: PE goal, equipments and facilities, teacher behaviors, and curriculum contents are important preliminary consideration for them. Therefore, the school administration and the physical education teachers may take these factors into consideration when they design the PE curriculum. As for the difference between the students of comprehensive high school from vocational schools and from high schools, it still requires a further research.

1. Chen, A.,Ennis, C. D.(1996).Teaching value-laden curriculum in physical education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,15,338-354.
2. 李文田(1997)。大四學生修習體育課意願影響因素調查。大專院校八十六年度體育學術研究會專刊，嘉義縣:
3. 周宏室(1994)。臺北市學生對體育課程目標認知之調查研究。臺北市:文鶴。
4. 周靈山(2002)。。
5. 張思敏(1995)。大學體育選修課學生猶如顧客。大專體育，18，3-4。
6. 張耀騰(1996)。大專學生對體育課滿意度偏低原因之探討。大專體育，27，126-132。
7. 教育部(1996)。高級中學課程標準。臺北市:作者。
8. 教育部(1996)。綜合高中試辦學校實驗課程規畫與設計研究。臺北市:作者。
9. 教育部技職司(1999)。綜合高中課程實驗相關資料彙編。臺北市:教育部。
10. 莫季雍(1999)。運動節目閱聽眾：一個偏好閱聽眾群的社會人口面向及傳播行為分析。臺北市:中華傳播學會。
11. 許素琴(1998)。國立中央大學二、三年級學生選修體育課現況暨影響選修意願因素之調查研究。大專體育，40，40-46。
12. 許錫銘(1998)。。
13. 陳文長(1995)。大學生對興趣分組體育課之意見調查研究。大專院校八十四年度體育學術研究會專刊，高雄縣:
14. 陳司衛(2003)。改制綜合高中對學校體育的影響。學校體育雙月刊，70，67-71。
15. 程紹同(1998)。中學生運動休閒參與模式研究。臺北市:教育部。
16. 楊建隆(1996)。。
17. 楊豪森(2000)。。
18. 劉田修(1986)。我國大專院校運動場地之調查研究。國民體育季刊，15(1)，78-83。
19. 鄭金昌(1997)。東海大學學生對體育課興趣分組教學滿意度與修課態度調查研究。大專體育，29，22-32。
20. 戴國明(1999)。。

1. 潘義祥(2011)。高中學校本位體育課程發展評鑑指標之建構。體育學報，44(4)，571-592。