以內容分析法探究繩索挑戰課程之成效

The Content Analysis of the Effects for the Challenge Ropes Courses

10.6783/JAAEE.201112.0037

吳崇旗(Chung-Chi Wu)；林菽嫻(Shu-Hsien Lin)

繩索挑戰課程 ； 反思日誌 ； 內容分析法 ； challenge ropes courses ； reflection journal ； content analysis

體驗教育學報

5期（2011 / 12 / 01）

37 - 51

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討繩索挑戰課程對大學生之成效。以內容分析法分析學生體驗繩索挑戰課程後的反思日誌，探究課程實施之成效。回收之反思日誌共計104份。根據研究者設計反思日誌的四個問題（能力獲得、重要體驗、發現自我與未來應用）進行分析，結果發現：一、能力獲得中以學習到團隊合作的56位（54%）為主，而確保技術的53位（50%）次之；二、重要體驗中認為是克服恐懼的有53位（51%）其次是團隊合作的有50位（48%）分居前兩位；三、發現自我以發現自己對高度恐懼46位（44%）為主，而發現自己缺乏勇於挑戰精神的17位（16%）次之；四、未來應用在學業的有26 位（25%）、應用在朋友間的有22位（21%）分居前兩位。

The purpose of this research aimed to explore the effects of the challenge ropes courses on college students. The student's reflection journals after courses were analyzed by the method of content analysis to explore the effects of course. In total, 104 reflection journals were retrieved. The findings were as follows: 1. In the category of ”Learned abilities”, there were 56 students (54%) expressing ”team cooperation” while 53 ones (50%) expressing ”technical skills”. 2. In the category of ”Significant experiences”, there were 53 students (51%) mentioning ”Fears overcoming” and 50 students (48%) mentioning ”team cooperation”. 3. In the category of ”Self discovering”, there were 53 students (51%) finding their ”Fears of Height” while 17 students (16%) finding ”Lacking the courage to challenge”. 4. In the category of ”Learning transfer”, there were 26 students (25%) applying to study while 22 students (21%) to friendship.

1. 吳崇旗(2007)。繩索挑戰課程效益量表之編製研究。國立體育學院論叢，18(1)，39-54。
   連結：
2. 吳崇旗、謝智謀(2010)。繩索挑戰課程對大學生冒險教育生活效能與團隊凝聚力之影響。人文社會科學研究，4(1)，74-91。
   連結：
3. Attarian, A.(2005).The research and literature on challenge courses: An annotated bibliography.Jonas Ridge, NC:Alpine Towers.
4. Autry, C. E.(2001).Adventure therapy with girls at risk: Responses to outdoor experiential activities.Therapeutic Recreation Journal,35(4),289-306.
5. Faubel, G.(1998).An Efficacy of a School-Based for Intervention Program for Emotionally Handicapped Students.Dissertation Abstracts International,58(11A),4183.
6. Gass, M. A.(Ed.)(1993).Adventure therapy.Dubuque, IA:Kendall/ Hunt.
7. Goldenberg, M. A.,Klenosky, D. B.,O''Leary, J. T.,Templin, T. J.(2000).A means-end investigation of challenge course experiences.Journal of Leisure Research,32,208-224.
8. Haras, K.,Bunting, C. J.(2005).The differences in meaningful involvement opportunities provided by ropes courses programs.Journal of Experiential Education,27(3),297-299.
9. Hatch, K. D.,McCarthy, J. C.(2005).Exploration of challenge courses' long-term effects on members of college student organization.Journal of Experiential Education,27(3),245-264.
10. Miles, J. C.(Ed.),Priest, S.(Ed.)(1990).Adventure education.State College, PA:Venture Publishing.
11. Miles, J. C.(Ed.),Priest, S.(Ed.)(1999).Adventure Programming.State College, PA:Venture Publishing.
12. Neuendorf, K. A.(2001).The content analysis guidebook.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
13. Rogers, D.(2000).To the top: Challenge courses for persons with disabilities.Parks and Recreation,35(3),76-87.
14. Rohnke, K.(1986).Project Adventure a widely used generic product.Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, Dance,57,68-70.
15. 王文科(2003)。教育研究法。台北市:五南。
16. 吳崇旗(2006)。博士論文(博士論文)。桃園，國立體育學院體育研究所。
17. 周文賢(2002)。多變量統計分析SAS/STAT使用方法。台北市:智勝文化。
18. 林進材(2008)。寫一篇精采的學位論文。台北市:五南。
19. 楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢、李亦園(2001)。社會及行為科學研究法。台北市:東華。
20. 廖炳煌(2008)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北，國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系活動領導在職專班。
21. 謝智謀、王玲雅、江婉彝、許淑真、韓宜玲、黃皇堯(2008)。繩索挑戰課程安全操作手冊。桃園縣:台灣亞洲體驗教育學會。
22. 謝智謀、王貞懿、莊欣瑋(2007)。體驗教育—從150個遊戲中學習。桃園縣:台灣亞洲體驗教育學會。

1. 陳修蕙、吳崇旗、王俊杰(2014)。繩索挑戰課程對高關懷青少年影響之研究。輔仁大學體育學刊，13，58-79。