學生參與跨領域敘事力創新課程之學習動機和學習滿意度研究

A Study on Learning Motivation and Learning Satisfaction of College Students towards Participating in Interdisciplinary Narrative Innovation Courses

游功揚(YU, KUNG-YANG)

跨領域 ； 敘事力 ； 學習動機 ； 學習滿意度 ； Interdisciplinary ； Narrative ； Learning motivation ； Learning satisfaction

嶺東學報

47期（2020 / 12 / 01）

1 - 26

繁體中文

近年來高等教育嘗試發展跨領域敘事創新課程，藉以提升學生學習動機和跨領域的溝通能力。儘管過去諸多文獻探討學習動機對學習滿意度的影響，然針對跨領域敘事創新課程相關的實證研究仍不多。本研究以偏最小平方法分析學生參與跨領域敘事力創新課程之學習動機與學習滿意度兩者之關係。研究對象為嶺東科技大學參與跨領域敘事力創新課程之學生，問卷有效樣本為148份。研究結果發現：（1）學習動機包含「自我效能」、「學科價值」、「同儕學習」與「目標導向」等四個構面。（2）學習滿意度包含「教師教學」、「課程內容」、「同儕關係」與「能力提升」四個構面。（3）學習動機以「目標導向」最高；學習滿意度以「教師教學」最高。（4）學生參與跨領域敘事力創新課程之學習動機能有效預測學習滿意度，其中以學習動機對「能力提升」之學習滿意度的預測力最高。最後，根據研究結果提出若干建議予學校、教師及未來研究者參考。

Institutions of higher education have attempted to enhance students' learning motivation and the skills of performing appropriate interdisciplinary communication through developing interdisciplinary narrative innovation courses. Although several studies have examined the impact of learning motivation on learning satisfaction, empirical evidence validating the relationships between learning motivation and learning satisfaction regarding interdisciplinary narrative innovation courses is scant. This study implemented the method of partial least squares-structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze the correlation of learning motivation and learning satisfaction from 148 college students who participated in interdisciplinary narrative innovation courses. The results demonstrated (a) the four dimensions of learning motivation including self-efficacy, the value of the course, peer-assisted learning and goal orientation; (b) the four dimensions of learning satisfaction containing teaching, course contents, peer relationship and enhancement of abilities; (c) goal orientation as the highest aspect of learning motivation while teaching as the highest factor of learning satisfaction; and (d) learning motivation significantly predicted learning satisfaction, especially the aspect of enhancement of the abilities. According to the results of this study, some suggestions are proposed for universities, teachers and future research.

1. Bagozzi, R. P.,Yi, Y.(1988).On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,16(1),74-94.
2. Bandura, A.(1977).Social learning theory.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
3. Diamantopoulos, A.,Siguaw, J. A.(2006).Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: a comparison and empirical illustration.British Journal of Management,17(4),263-282.
4. Domer, D. C.,Carswell, J. W.,Spreckelmeyer, K. F.(1983).,The University of Kansas School of Architecture and Urban Design.
5. Fornell, C.,Larcker, D. F.(1981).Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.Journal of Marketing Research,18(1),39-50.
6. Hair, J. F.,Black, W. C.,Babin, B. J.,Anderson, R. E.,Tatham, R. L.(1998).Multivariate Data Analysis,5(3),207-219.
7. Hair, J. F.,Hult, G. T. M.,Ringle, C.,Sarstedt, M.(2016).A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM).Thousand Oaks, California:Sage Publications.
8. Henseler, J.,Hubona, G.,Ray, P. A.(2016).Using PLS Path Modeling in New Technology Research: Updated Guidelines.Industrial Management & Data Systems,116(1),2-20.
9. Herzberg, F.,Mausner, B.,Peterson, R. O.,Capwell, D. F.(1957).Job attitudes: Review of research and opinion.Pittsburgh, Penn.:Psychological Services.
10. Hulland, J.(1999).Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research: A Review of Four Recent Studies.Strategic Management Journal,195-204.
11. Marcoulides, G. A.,Saunders, C.(2006).Editor's comments: PLS: A Silver Bullet?.MIS Quarterly,iii-ix.
12. Piccoli, G.,Ahmad, R.,Ives B.(2001).Web-Based Virtual Learning Environment: A Research Framework and a Preliminary Assessment of Effectiveness in Basic IT Skill Training.MIS Quarterly,25(4),401-426.
13. Pintrich, P. R.,Smith, D. A. F.,McKeachie, W.J.(1989).A Manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire(MSLQ).Mich:National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL). School of Education, The University Michigan.
14. Ringle, C. M., Wende, S. and Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3: Boenningstedt. SmartPLS GmbH. Retrieved from http://www.smartpls.com
15. Stipek, D.(1995).Effects of different instructional approaches on young children’s achievement and motivation.Child Development,66(1),209-223.
16. 孔柔涵(2016)。屏東縣，國立屏東大學。
17. 王姿懿(2017)。屏東縣，國立屏東大學。
18. 李佩芸(2007)。屏東縣，國立屏東教育大學。
19. 林玉苑(2019)。新竹縣，中華大學。
20. 花木蘭(2017)。高雄市，正修科技大學。
21. 張春興(2003).教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐.台北市:東華.
22. 曾柏凱(2017)。宜蘭縣，國立宜蘭大學。
23. 童鈺云(2016)。新竹縣，中華大學。
24. 經濟部工業局(2011)。,台北市:經濟部。
25. 蓋浙生(1994).教育經濟學.台北市:三民.
26. 鄭采玉(2008)。屏東縣，國立屏東教育大學。
27. 蕭雅云(2008)。台北市，國立臺灣師範大學。
28. 蕭慈芳(2017)。高雄市，義守大學。

1. 林嘉琪,林彥伶,何其芸(2023)。史學敘事結合服務學習之課程設計與學習成效。通識學刊：理念與實務，11(1)，129-163+165。
2. (2023)。五專學生知覺學習動機、學習策略與自我導向學習成效關係之研究——以彈性學習課程為例。教育行政與評鑑學刊，34，39-72。