運動教育模式在國中「健康與體育學習領域」應用之行動研究

An Action Research of Application of the Sport Education Model in Junior High School

10.6580/JTSP.2009.3(2).01

林靜萍(Ching-Ping Lin)

運動教育模式 ； 體育教學 ； 行動研究 ； sport education model ； physical education teaching ； action research

臺灣運動教育學報

3卷2期（2009 / 07 / 01）

1 - 21

繁體中文

本研究旨在透過行動研究探討運動教育模式在國中實施的成效、遭遇的困難以及可行的解決策略。研究參與者為某新成立國中之三位體育教師，及其所教授的七年級學生十二班。依運動教育模式設計十二週廿四節之排球教學，資料蒐集方法包括參與觀察、教師反省札記、訪談以及學習反應量表，資料分析採持續比較法。研究結果發現：一、學生對運動教育模式抱持肯定的態度，在學習反應四點量表中多數得分超過3分，包括喜歡程度、對認知、技能、情意的學習成效。對團隊戰術的認知以及情意的學習尤高，未來也都願意再參與這樣的課程。二、學生肯定運動教育模式的主要原因：能有較全面、完整、深入的學習；學習過程中同儕指導技能學習效果較佳；團隊合作及分組競爭比較好玩等。三、學生們最喜歡擔任的角色是選手，最不喜歡擔任的角色是隊長。四、教師對運動教育模式也持相當肯定的態度，認為不僅學生學習成效好，且上軌道後能減輕教師的負擔，未來都願意繼續使用此模式。基於上述結果，運動教育模式在國中實施成效良好，值得推廣。未來研究可與合作學習、理解式等理念相近之教學策略結合探討。

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of using the sport education model in junior high school, the difficulties encountered, and the possible solutions by means of action research. The participants were three physical education teachers from a newly founded junior high school and the 12 classes they taught. According to the sport education model, 24 class periods of volleyball which lasted for 12 weeks were designed. Data collection methods comprised participant observations, teachers' reflective journals, interviews, and students’ learning feedback forms as well as their learning attitude scales. The constant comparison method was used for data analysis. The results were as follows. First, the students viewed the design of the sport education model positively. Most of them gave a score of more than three out of the four-point learning attitude scale, which rated how much they like the course and the learning effects on the cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains. They especially enjoyed learning the cognitive and affective aspects of the team tactics, and were all willing to attend this kind of curriculum again in the future. Second, the reasons why the students approved the sport education model were that they learned more comprehensively, the learning effects were better when taught by their classmates during the learning process, and that team cooperation and group competition were fun. Third, in terms of role playing, students loved playing the role of players the most. Their least favorite roles were captain. Finally, the teachers also held positive attitudes towards the sport education model. They considered the model capable of not only boosting the students' learning effects, but reducing their workload as well because many responsibilities were transferred to the students. The teachers were all willing to continue adopting this model in the future. Based on the findings, the sport education model worked well in junior high school and is worth promoting. Possible future research directions would be the playing of roles in teams, gender interaction, and other teaching strategies, for example, the combination of cooperative learning with TGfU.

1. Alexander, K.,Luckman, J.(2001).Australian teachers' perceptions and uses of the sport education curriculum.European Physical Education Review,7(3),243-268.
2. Alexander, K.,Taggart, A.,Thorpe, S. T.(1996).A spring in their steps? possibilities for professional renewal through sport education in Australian schools.Sport, Education and Society,1,23-46.
3. Bennett, G.,Hastie, P. A.(1997).A sport education curriculum model for a collegiate physical activity course.Journal of Physical Education Recreation,68(1),39-44.
4. Carlson, T. B.(1995)."Now I Think I Can." The reaction of eight low-skilled students to sport education.ACHPER Healthy Lifestyles Journa,42(4),6-8.
5. Carlson, T.B.,Hastie, P. A.(1997).The student social system within sport education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,16,176-195.
6. Curnow, J.,MacDonald, D.(1995).Can sport education be gender inclusive: a case study in an upper primary school.Australian Council for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation Healthy Lifestyles Journal,42,9-11.
7. Ennis, C. D.(1999).Creating a sense of family in urban schools using the "sport for peace" curriculum.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,70(3),273-285.
8. Grant, B. C.,Tredinnick, P.,Hodge, K. P.(1992).Sport education in physical education.New Zealand Journal of Health, Physical Education and Recreation,25,3-6.
9. Grant, B.C.(1992).Integrating sport into the physical education curriculum in New Zealand secondary schools.Quest,44,304-316.
10. Hastie, P. A.(2000).An ecological analysis of a sport education season.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,19,355-373.
11. Hastie, P. A.(1998).The participation and perception of girls within a unit of sport education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,17,157-171.
12. Hastie, P. A.(1998).Skill and tactical development during a sport education season.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,69(4),368-379.
13. Hastie, P. A.(1996).Student role involvement during a unit of sport education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,16,88-103.
14. Hastie, P. A.,Buchanan, A. M.(2000).Teaching responsibility through sport education: prospects of a coalition.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,71(1),25-35.
15. Hastie, P. A.,Sharpe, T.(1999).Effects of a sport education curriculum on the positive social behavior of at-risk rural adolescent boys.Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk,4(4),417-430.
16. Hastie, P. A.,Trost, S. G.(2002).Student physical activity levels during a season of sport education.Pediatric Exercise Science,14,64-74.
17. MacPhail, A.,Kirk, D.,Kinchin, G.(2004).Sport education: promotion team affiliation through physical education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,23,106-122.
18. O'Donovan, T. M.(2003).A changing culture? Interrogating the dynamics of peer affiliation over the course of a sport education season.European Physical Education Review,9(3),237-251.
19. Ormond, T. C.,DeMarco, G. M.,Smith, R. M.,Fischer, K. A.(1995).Comparison of the sport education and traditional approaches to teaching secondary school basketball.Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,Supplement,A-66.
20. Rink, J. E.,French, K. F.,Graham, K. C.(1996).Implication for practice and research.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,15,490-502.
21. Siedentop, D.(1994).Sport Education: Quality PE Through Positive Sport Experience.IL:Human Kinetics.
22. Siedentop, D.,Hastie, P. A.,van der Mars, H.(2004).Complete Guide to Sport Education.IL:Human Kinetics.
23. Synder, P. P.(1997).Columbus,The Ohio State University.
24. Wallhead, T. L.,Ntoumanis, N.(2004).Effects of a Sport Education Intervention on Students' Motivation Responses in Physical Education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,23,4-18.
25. Wallhead, T. L.,O'Sullivan, M.(2005).Sport education: physical education for the new millennium.Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy,10(2),181-210.
26. 呂天得(1998)。桃園縣，國立體育學院體育研究所。
27. 林永能(2008)。台中市，國立台中教育大學。
28. 翁國興(2006)。台北市，台北體院運科所。
29. 郭彥成(2005)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學體育學系。
30. 陳文亮(2004)。台北市，台北巿立體育學院運動科學研究所。
31. 陳建志(2005)。桃園縣，國立體育學院體育研究所。
32. 陳昭宇(2004)。台北市，國立臺灣師範大學體育學系。
33. 陳勝雄(2004)。桃園縣，國立體育學院體育研究所。
34. 黃月嬋、趙信賓、李翠玲(2005)。九年一貫健康與體育課程教學方案—運動教育模式的實踐。國教輔導，44(3)，23-28。
35. 黃至賢(2005)。新竹市，國立新竹教育大學。
36. 黃清祥(2004)。新竹市，國立新竹教育大學。
37. 甄曉蘭(1995)。合作行動研究—進行教育研究的另一種方式。嘉義師院學報，9，297-318。
38. 顏嘉生(2005)。桃園縣，國立體育學院體育研究所。

1. 連冠昱,莊哲偉,王李中羿(2022)。不同教學方法融入大專桌球課程對於職場共通職能的影響。臺灣運動教育學報，17(1)，27-44。
2. 劉兆達,許玫琇,李文心(2020)。大學生之運動能力及文化素養培養－以運動教育模式為例。大學教學實務與研究學刊，4(1)，1-34。
3. 闕月清、林彥伶(2012)。單元性體育課程在國中「健康與體育學習領域」實施現況之個案研究。臺灣運動教育學報，7(2)，41-58。
4. 謝沛蓁,劉記帆,莊哲偉(2020)。運動教育模式融入大專桌球教學對於課程滿意度與學習成效之差異。交大體育學刊，16，1-12。
5. 謝育臻、田仁秀(2017)。運動教育模式在體育課課程設計與應用。國教新知，64(2)，3-15。
6. 鄭漢吾,李翊誠(2020)。體育課實施合作學習教學模式學習成效之行動研究－以高雄某國中為例。靜宜體育，13，1-21。
7. 莊哲偉,張素珠,李建平,吳秋燕(2021)。大專桌球課程融入運動教育模式對於共通職能的影響。臺中科大體育學刊，17，81-91。
8. (2023)。排球課學生運動能力及運動競賽規則之學習成效。大學教學實務與研究學刊，7(2)，31-55。
9. (2024)。大專體育教師對運動教育模式實施知覺之探討。臺大體育學報，46，1-15。