資優兒童的學校環境因素與情緒智力之相關研究

The Relationship between School Environment Factors and Emotional Intelligence of the Gifted Students at Elementary Schools

10.7037/JNTUE.200612.0001

蔡玉瑟(Yuh-She Tsay)；張妤婷(Yu-Ting Chang)；謝孟岑(Meng-Chen Shieh)

教師教學行為 ； 同儕關係 ； 情緒智力 ； emotional intelligence ； teaching behaviors ； peer relationship

臺中教育大學學報：教育類

20卷2期（2006 / 12 / 01）

1 - 29

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討國小資優生學校環境因素與情緒智力之關係。研究對象取自中部地區七所國民小學五年級資優班學生共一百四十六人。研究過程中，採用「情緒反應量表」、「學生對教師教學行為知覺量表」、「同儕關係問卷」等工具，研究結果發現：（一）性別差異方面，在同儕關係上，有顯著差異，女生的得分優於男生；在知覺教師教學行為上，女生較男生多知覺到教師教學行為屬間接行為的類型；男生較女生多知覺到教師教學行為屬直接行為的類型。（二）情緒智力方面，知覺教師教學行為為間接類型的學生，得分高於知覺教師教學行為為直接類型的學生；同儕關係問卷得分高者，高於同儕關係問卷得分低者。（三）相關方面，國小資優生的情緒智力與知覺教師間接教學行為、同儕正向關係有顯著正相關；與知覺教師直接教學行為有顯著負相關；在性別差異比較上，女生與知覺教師教學行為上的「問問題」的相關最高，男生最低。（四）逐步多元迴歸分析發現，對情緒智力最重要的預測變項：1.全體資優生與資優男生各層面皆為「同儕正向關係」；2.資優女生在「人我」、「知己」層面為「同儕正向關係」、在「自我」層面為「知覺教師間接教學行為－問問題」、在「知人」層面為「知覺教師直接教學行為－權威」。（五）典型相關分析結果，學校環境因素可解釋國小資優生情緒智力總變異量百分之三十一。 最後，依據研究結果，提出具體建議，以作為教育、輔導以及未來研究的參考。

This study is to investigate the related factors which influence the emotional intelligence of the elementary gifted students, especially the effect of the school environment factors, such as teaching behaviors and the peer relationship, on the gifted students” emotional intelligence. In order to provide a theoretical framwork for educational and counseling programs for gifted students, this study also explores how theses factors are related to the emotional intelligence of the students. The results of this study showed: 1. Peer relationship and emotional intelligence were correlated among the gifted students with girls' scores being higher than boys'. With regard to the teaching behaviors, teachers tended to have more indirect teaching behaviors with girls. 2. The analysis of the ”school environment factors” indicated that teaching behaviors and students' emotional intelligence were correlated. Teacher's indirect teaching behaviors, instead of teacher's direct teaching behaviors, were more likely to enhance students' emotional intelligence. Positive peer relationship also had impact on the gifted students' emotional intelligence. 3. TReacher's indirect teaching behaviors and positive peer relationship were related to boys' emotional intelligence. 4. Teaching behaviors and positive peer relationship had influence on girls' emotional intelligence. 5. Teaching behaviors and peer relationship were correlated with the emotional intelligence for both genders. 6. Regressional analysis showed that the most important predictive variables for the emotional intelligence were: (1) Positive peer relationship was related to boys' school factors and their emotional intelligence. (2) There was a correlation between teaching behaviors and the students' awareness of others; and teacher's indirect teaching behaviors were found to be affective on the emotional intelligence for girls. (3) The school factors were positively correlated to peer relationship. 7. According to the results of the correlational analysis, the relative significance of the school factors in predicting the gifted elementary students' emotional intelligence in this study was: 31%. Finally, the results of the study provide a conceptual framework for designing the educational and counseling programs and the future research in the area of gifted education.

1. Bowles. A.K.(1992).An examination of the differences in teaching styles by grade level, Orientation toward college. And academic major?.Research in Higher Education,31(3),395-414.
2. Clark, B.(1997).Growing up gifted: developing the potential of children at home and at school.Upper Saddle River, N.J.:Merrill.
3. Conti, G.J.(1985).Assessing teaching style in adult education: How and why.Lifelong Learning: The Adult Years,8(8),7.
4. Cooper, R.K.,Sawaf, A.(1997).Executive EQ: In leadership and organization.New York:Grosset/Putnam.
5. Davis, G.A.,Rimm, S.B.(1998).Education of the Gifted and Talented.Needham Heights, MA:Allyn ＆ Bacon.
6. Denham, S.A.,Blair, K.A.,Demulder, E.,Levitas, J.,Sawyer, K.(2003).Preschool emotional competence: Pathway to social competence.Child Development,74(1),238-256.
7. Emanuel, R.C.,Potter, W.J.(1992).Do students` style preferences differ by grade level, Orientation toward college. And academic major?.Research in Higher Education,31(3),395-414.
8. Entwistle, N.(1981).Styles of learning and teaching.Chicheter:Johnson Wilsey and sons.
9. Flander, N.a.(1976).Analyzing teaching behavior.Reading, M.A.:Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
10. Gallagher, J.J.(1985).Teaching the gifted child.Massachusetts:Allyn and Bacon.
11. Goleman, D.(1995).Emotional Intelligence.New York:Bantam Books.
12. Lair, J.(1984).Change induction groups, group psychotherapy, integrity groups, peer counseling.Encyclopedia of Psychology,1(2),493-494.
13. Liff, S.B.(2003).Social and emotional intelligence: Applications for developmental education.Journal of Developmental Education,26,28-34.
14. Morris, R.V.(2001).Using first-person presentation to encourage student interest in social history.Gifted Child Today,24(1),46-53.
15. Renzulli, J.S.(1977).The enrichment triad model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented.Mansfield center, Connecticut:creative Learning Press.
16. Renzulli, J.S.,Smith, L.H.(1978).Learning Styles Inventory: A Measure of student preference for instructional techniques.Connecticut:Creative Learning Press.
17. Roeper, A.(1982).How the gifted cope with their emotions.Roeper Review,5(2),21-24.
18. Salovey, P.,Hsee, C.K.,Mayer, J.D.,D.M. Wenger(Eds.),J.W. Pennebaker(Eds.)(1993).Handbook of mental control.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:Prentice-Hall.
19. Salovey, P.,Mayer, J.D.(1990).Emotio nal intelligence.Imagination, Cognition and Personlity,9(3),185-211.
20. Schiamberg, L.B.(1988).Child and adolescent development.New York:Macmillan.
21. Schutte, N.S.,Malouff, J.M.,Bobik, C.,Coston, T.D.,Greeson, C.,Jedlicka, C.,Rhodes, E.,Wendorf, G.(2001).Emotional intelligence and interpersonal relations.The Journal of Social Psychology,141(4),523-536.
22. Tallent-Runnels, M.K.,Yarbrough, D.W.(1992).Effects of the future problem solving program on children`s concerns about the future.The Gifted Child Quarterly,36(4),190.
23. Wasserstein, S.B.,La Greca, A.M.(1996).Can peer support buffer against behavioral consequences of parental discord?.Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,25(2),177-182.
24. 王春展(1998)。博士論文(博士論文)。國立政治大學教育研究所。
25. 石培欣(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育學系研究所。
26. 江文慈(1997)。情緒智力(EQ)意涵的再解析。諮商與輔導，136，2-8。
27. 吳武典、陳秀蓉(1978)。教師領導行為與學生期待、學業成就與生活適應之關係。國立台灣師範大學教育心理學報，15，127-138。
28. 吳美玲(1996)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育學系。
29. 吳瓊洳(1997)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所。
30. 林雯菁(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。私立靜宜大學青少年兒童福利研究所。
31. 涂秀文(1999)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育學系。
32. 梁靜珊(1997)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所。
33. 莊千慧(1993)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立政治大學教育研究所。
34. 許惠子(1994)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台中師範學院初等教育研究所。
35. 郭生玉(1980)。教師期望與教師行爲及學生學習行爲關係之分析。教育心理學報，13，133-152。
36. 郭生玉(1985)。教師的間接與直接影響行爲和兒童創造力及學業成績之關係。教育心理學報，18，57-64。
37. 陳彥穎(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。私立中國文化大學兒童福利研究所。
38. 陳騏龍(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院教育心理與輔導研究所。
39. 黃牧仁(1999)。兒童到青少年期的友誼發展。台北:五南。
40. 黃悅菁(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台中師範學院諮商與教育心理研究所。
41. 黃淑玲(1995)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育學系。
42. 葉靜宜(1993)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所。
43. 劉慧慧(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台東師範學院教育研究所。
44. 蔡淑玲(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台中師範學院數學教育學系。
45. 盧雪梅譯(1999)。資優兒童親職教育。台北:心理。
46. 賴怡君(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所。
47. 韓幼賢(1990)。教育心理學。台北:國立編譯館。
48. 顏裕峰(1992)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學輔導學系。
49. 羅芝芸(1999)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所。
50. 羅品欣(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所。

1. 傅美慧(2016)。美甲營業環境對於消費者忠誠度之影響研究-以高雄地區為例。屏東科技大學時尚設計與管理系所學位論文。2016。1-98。