期刊專區/ Periodical Section

技職大專生學習取向及其相關因素之研究

Learning Approaches and Its Related Factors of Undergraduate Students in a Technological University

所屬期刊：	第12卷第4期 「教育心理、輔導與測評」 主編：國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系兼任教授 陳秉華
系統編號：	vol047_03
主題：	測驗與評量
出版年份：	2016
作者：	鄭博真
作者(英文)：	Bor-Jen Jeng
論文名稱：	技職大專生學習取向及其相關因素之研究
論文名稱(英文)：	Learning Approaches and Its Related Factors of Undergraduate Students in a Technological University
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別：	中文
論文頁數：	30
中文關鍵字：	表面學習取向; 深度學習取向; 學習取向
英文關鍵字：	deep learning approaches; learning approaches; surface learning approaches
服務單位：	中華醫事科技大學幼兒保育系
稿件字數：	15739
作者專長：	課程與教學; 教育心理學; 多元智能教育
投稿日期：	2016/10/23
論文下載：
摘要(中文)：	本研究旨在探討技職大專生的學習取向及其相關因素。研究對象為某私立科 技大學日間部1,817 名學生。採用「大專生學習取向量表」作為研究工具蒐集實證 資料。以相依樣本及獨立樣本t 檢定、獨立樣本單因子變異數分析進行統計處理。 研究結果發現：技職大專生偏向採用深度學習取向及深度學習策略，然而偏向具 有表面學習動機。不同性別、學制、年級、學院及學業表現的技職大專生，在學 習取向的某些層面具有顯著差異。根據研究結果，本研究建議教師宜激勵學生的 深度學習動機，指導學生深度學習策略，輔導學業表現較弱學生使用深度學習取 向。未來可以與其他大學進行跨校研究。採用縱貫性研究追?學生學習取向在不 同年級的發展。亦可探究其它預示因素對學習取向的影響，以及學習取向對學習 成效的影響。
摘要(英文)：	The purpose of this study was to investigate the students’ learning approaches and examine its related factors. There were 1,817 students participating in this study at private technological university. The scale of learning approaches was utilized for collecting empirical data. The independent-samples, dependent-samples t-test and oneway analysis of variance were used to analyze the collected data. This study found that students preferred to take a deep learning approach. Furthermore, they also tended to adopt deep learning strategy. In the aspect of motive, they showed a tendency for higher surface motives. Besides, different gender, the educational systems, grades, college, and learning performances of undergraduate students had the significant impact on their learning approaches. Based on these results, this study suggests that teachers should motivate students to deepen their learning motivation, and guide students to adopt deep learning strategies. Teachers should counsel students with weak academic performance to use a deep learning approach. In the future, the inter-institutional research can be conducted with other universities, to employ longitudinal study tracking the development of students’ learning approaches in different grades as well as explore the impact of other factors on learning approaches, and the impact of learning approaches on learning outcomes.
參考文獻：	王保進（2011）。引導學生學習成效品質保證機制之推動與落實：論第二週期系 所評鑑之核心內涵。評鑑雙月刊，32，36-40。 宋花玲、黃品賢、董英、陳學芬、戎芬、金如鋒（2012）。研究生醫學統計學課 程的學習取向研究。中醫教育，31（6），43-46。 吳齊殷譯（1999）。量表的發展：理論與應用。臺北市：弘智。 梁丹嬰、王才康（2008）。基於Biggs 3P 學習模型之大學生學習取向研究。廣東 科技，22，42-44。 教育部（2006）。獎勵大學教學卓越計畫95 年度作業手冊。臺北市：作者。 黃政傑（2007）。我國大學課程教學的改革方向與未來。課程與教學季刊，10 （4），1-14。 符碧真（2007）。大學教學與評量方式之研究。台灣高教研究電子報，10，9-17。 劉鎔毓（2007）。大學生課業學習相關經驗分析：一般生與技職生之比較。課程 研究，2（2），91-121。 Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5, 243-260. Berberoglu, G., & Hei, L. (2003). A comparison of university students’ approaches to learning across Taiwan and Turkey. International Journal of Testing, 3(2), 173-187. Bernardo, A. B. I. (2003). Approaches to learning and academic achievement of Filipino students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 164(1), 101-114. Biggs, J. B. (1987). Students approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Vic: Australian Council for Educational Research. Biggs, J. B. (1989). Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching. Higher Education Research & Development, 8, 7-25. Biggs, J. B. (1993). What do inventories of student’s learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarifi cation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 1-17. Biggs, J. (2001). Enhancing learning: A matter of style or approach? In R. J. Sternberg & L. F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 73- 102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Biggs, J., Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. (2001). The revise two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Education Psychology, 71, 133-149. Biggs, J., & Moore, P. (1993). The process of learning (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Prentice Hall. Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press. Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Berkshire, England: Open University Press. Canakkale, B. C. (2016). Approaches to learning and age in predicting college students’ academic achievement. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 13(1), 21-28. Cantwell, R., & Grayson, R. (2002). Individual differences among enabling students: A comparison across three enabling programmes. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 26(4), 293-306. Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2009). Mainly openness: The relationship between the Big Five personality traits and learning approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 524-529. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences(2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Crawford, K., Gordon, S., Nicholas, J., & Prosser, M. (1998). Qualitatively different experiences of learning mathematics at university. Learning and instruction, 8, 455- 568. Dart, B., Burnett, P., Purdie, N., Boulton-Lewis, G., Campbell, J. & Smith, D. (2000). Students’ conceptions of learning, the classroom environment, and approaches to Learning. Journal of Educational Research, 93(4), 262-270. Diseth, A. (2007). Students’ evaluation of teaching, approaches to learning, and academic achievement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 51(2), 185-204. Donnon, T., & Hecker, K. (2008). A model of approaches to learning and academic achievement of students from an inquiry based bachelor of health sciences program. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 38(1), 1-19. Duff, A., Boyle, E., Dunleavy, K., & Ferguson, J. (2004). The relationship between personality, approach to learning and academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1907-1920. Edmunds, R., & Richardson, J. (2009). Conceptions of learning, approaches to studying and personal development in UK higher education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 295-309. Eley, M. G. (1992). Differential adoption of study approaches within individual students. Higher Education, 23, 231-254. Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. London, England: Croom Helm. Entwistle, N. J. (1987). Understanding classroom learning. London, England: Hodder and Stoughton. Entwistle, N. (2005). Learning outcomes and ways of thinking across contrasting disciplines and settings in higher education. The Curriculum Journal,16(1), 67 -82. doi: 10.1080/0958517042000336818 Furnham, A., Christopher, A. N., Garwood, J., & Martin, G. N. (2007). Approaches to learning and the acquisition of general knowledge. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1563-1571. Gijbels, D., Van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P. (2005). The relationship between students’ approaches to learning and the assessment of learning outcomes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 20(4), 327-341. Kember, D., & Leung, D. (1998). The dimensionality of approaches to learning: An investigation with confi rmatory factor analysis on the structure of the SPQ and LPQ. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 395-407. Kember, D., Biggs, J., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2004).Examining the multidimensionality of approaches to learning through the development of a revised version of the Learning Process Questionnaire. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 261-280. Kember, D., & Leung, D.Y. P. (1998). The dimensionality of approaches to learning: An investigation with confi rmatory factor analysis on the structure of the SPQ and LPQ. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68, 395-407. Kember, D., Leung, D. Y. P., & McNaught, C. (2008). A workshop activity to demonstrate that approaches to learning are infl uenced by the teaching and learning environment. Active Learning in Higher Education, 9, 43-56. Lucas, U. (2001). Deep and surface approaches to learning within introductory accounting: A phenomenographic study. Accounting Education, 10(2),161-184. Marrs, H., & Sigler, E. A. (2012). Male academic performance in college: The possible role of study strategies. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 13(2), 227-241. Marton, F. (1976). On non-verbatim learning: II. The erosion of a task induced learning algorithm. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 17, 41-48. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976a). On qualitative differences in learning I: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11. Marton, F., & Saljo, R. (1976b). On qualitative differences in learning II: Outcome as a function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(2), 115-127. Papinczak, T., Young, L., Groves, M., & Haynes, M. (2008). Effects of a metacognitive intervention on students’ approaches to learning and self efficacy in a first year medical course. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 13, 213-232. Paver, B., & Gammie, E. (2005). Constructed gender, approach to learning and academic performance. Accounting education: An international journal, 14(4), 427-444. Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The experience in higher education. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education. London, England: Routledge Falmer. Sadler-Smith, E. (1996). Approaches to studying: Age, gender and academic performance. Educational Studies, 22(3), 367-379 Saljo, R. (1975). Qualitative differences in learning as a function of the learner’s conception of a task. Goteborg, Sweden: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Schmeck, R. R. (1988). Strategies and styles of learning: An integration of varied perspectives. In Ronald Ray Schmeck (Ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles (pp. 317-347). New York, NY: Plemun Press. Serife, A. K. (2008). A conceptual analysis on the approaches to learning. Education Sciences: Theory & Practice, 8(3), 707-720. Sharma, D. S. (1997). Accounting students’ learning conceptions, approaches to learning, and the influence of the learning-teaching context on approaches to learning. Accounting Education, 6(2), 125-146. Smith, S. N., & Miller, R. J. (2005). Learning approaches: Examination type, discipline of study, and gender. Educational Psychology, 25(1), 43-53. Snelgrove, S. & Salter, J. (2003). Approaches to learning: Psychometric testing of a study process questionnaire. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 43(5), 496-505. Tetik, C., Gurpinar, E., & Bati, H. (2009). Students’ learning approaches at medical schools applying different curricula in Turkey. Kuwait Medical Journal, 41(4), 311- 316. Tiwari, A., Chan, S., Wong, E., Wong, D., Chui, C., Wong, A., & Patil, N. (2006). The effect of problem-based learning on students’ approaches to learning in the context of clinical nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 26, 430-438. Valk, A., & Marandi, T. (2005). How to support deep learning at a university? In F. E. H. Tay, T.S. Chuan & S. Han-Ming (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference on education 2005. National University of Singapore. Wong, N. Y., Lin, W. Y., & Watkins, D. (1996). Cross-cultural validation of models of approaches to learning: An application of confi rmatory factor analysis. Educational Psychology, 16(3), 317-327. Zeegers, P. (2001). Approaches to learning in science: A longitudinal study. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 115-132. Zeegers, P. (2002). A revision of the Biggs Study Process Questionnaire (R-SPQ). Higher Education Research and Development, 21, 73-92. Zeegers, P. (2004). Student learning in higher education: A path analysis of academic achievement in science. Higher Education Research and Development, 23(1), 35-56. Zhang, L. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (2000). Are learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two Chinese populations. The Journal of Psychology, 134(5), 469-489.