:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:環境行動與群體效能教學模組之教學效果研究
書刊名:衛生教育學報
作者:邱詩揚 引用關係晏涵文
作者(外文):Chiou, Shy-yangYen, Han-wen
出版日期:2002
卷期:17
頁次:頁89-108
主題關鍵詞:環境教育環境行動群體效能跨理論模式Environmental educationEnvironmental actionCollective efficacyTranstheoretical model
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:29
  • 點閱點閱:39
本研究的目的在探討「環境行動與群體效能教學模組」之教學效果,並與「傳統教師中心環境教學」比較教學效果之差異。「環境行動與群體效能教學模組」乃依據社會認知理論、群體效能概念及跨理論模式,並掌握影響環境行為之重要變項,融合環境議是調查行動、行為改變策略及小組合作學習方法所發展的環境教育教學模組。 本研究採「不相等實驗組、控制組實驗設計」,立意選取宜蘭縣立羅東國中一年級(實驗組)及國華國中一年級(對照組),共374位學生為研究對象。實驗組中有三個班級為實驗組A,接受「環境行動與群體效能教學模組」之教育介入,另中三個班級為實驗組B,接受「傳統教師中心環境教學」之教育介入。本研究之評量包括形成評量、過程評量及成效評量,以問卷調查、訪談、觀察記錄收集量性及質性之評量資料。 研究結果顯示「環境行動與群體效能教學模組」可有效增進國中生的「環境意識」、「環境議是知識」、「增強管理技巧」、「自我效能」、「群體效能」、「小組合作經驗」、「個人環境行動」及「團體環境行動」;也可增進「家人的支持」及「同學、學長姐或朋有的支持」,並維持對行動預期結果的正向評價。「環境行動與群體效能教學模組」在各變項的立即教學效果均優於「傳統教師中心環境教學」,且對「個人環境行動」與「團體環境行動」持續教學效果也優於「傳統教師中心環境教學」。學生對「教學活動的整體感覺」、「教學活動與教學目標達成」、「教學活動的興趣與喜歡程度」、「小組互動情形」、「教學媒體」及「學生手冊」等方面,整體評價及滿意程度約在八成左右。 以往的環境教育教學多著重在個人環境行為,然而許多的環境問題的解決,卻常結合群體的力量。未來進行環境教育教學時,也應將目標放在團體環境行為,透過團體合作過程來增進學生之群體效能,進而促進學生採取團體環境行動來解決環境問題。
This study compared the instructional effects of Environmental Action and Collective Efficacy Module (EACEM) with traditional teacher-centered environmental teaching. The EACEM is based on social learning theory, conceptions of collective efficacy and Transtheoretcal Model, and it also incorporates Hungerford’s Issue Investigation Skill, strategies of behavior change and methods of cooperative learning. A nonequivalent experiment control group design was used with 10 intact classes from two junior high schools in Ilan county. Experimental group A received EACEM instruction and Experimental group B received traditional teacher-centered environmental teaching during the intervention period (three weeks), while the control group received no treatment during the same period. Formation evaluation, process evaluation and outcome evaluation were taken with questionnaire surveys, interviews and observations to collect quantitative and qualitative data. A closed-ended pretest-posttest questionnaire and another closed-ended follow-up test questionnaire were the instruments used to evaluate the outcome effects. The results support the fact that EACEM instruction can produce a positive increase in students’ environmental awareness, knowledge about environmental issues, reinforcement and management skills, self-efficacy, collective efficacy, group cooperation, social support and environmental action, and maintain students’ positive outcome expectancy. A follow-up test provides support for the continuous educational effects on students’ individual and collective environmental actions. In addition, the effects of EACEM instruction proved to be better than traditional teacher-centered environmental teaching in all variables.
期刊論文
1.Wals, A.、Beringer, A.、Stapp, W.(1990)。Education in action: A community problem solving program for schools。Journal of Environmental Education,21(4),13-19。  new window
2.Velicer, W. R.、Prochaska, J. O.、Bellis, J. M.、DiClemente, C. C.、Rossi, J. S.、Fava, J. L.(1993)。An expert system intervention for smoking cessation。Addict Behav,80,269-290。  new window
3.Ballantyne, R.、Connell, S.、Fien, J.(1998)。Factors contributing to intergenerational communication regarding environmental programs: preliminary research findings。Australian Journal of Environmental Education,14,1-10。  new window
4.Ballantyne, R.、Connell, S.、Fien, J.(1998)。Students as catalysts of environmental change: a framework for researching intergenerational influence through environmental education。Environmental Education Research,4(3),285-298。  new window
5.Hungerford, H. R.、Volk, T. L.(1983)。The challenges of K-12 environmental education。Mathematics, and Environmental Education,1,3-30。  new window
6.Sutherland, D.、Ham, S.(1992)。Child-to-parent transfer of environmental ecology in Costa Rican families an ethnographic case study。Journal of Environmental Education,23(2),9-16。  new window
7.Campbell, M. K.、Reynolds, K. D.、Havas, S.、Curry, S.、Bishop, D.、Nicklas, T.、Palombo, R.、Buller, D.、Feldman, R.、Topor, M.、Johnson, C.、Beresford, S. A. A.、Motsinger, B. M.、Momll, C.、Heimendinger, J.(1999)。Stages of change for increasing fruit and vegetable consumption among adults and young adults participating in the National 5-a-Day for Better Health Community Studies。Health Education & Behavior,26(4),513-534。  new window
8.Prochaska, J. O.、Redding, C. A.、Harlow, L. L.、Rossi, J. S.、Velicer, W. F.(1994)。The Transtheoretical Model of change and HIV prevention: a review。Health Education Quarterly,21(4),471-486。  new window
9.Hungerford, Harold R.、Volk, Trudi L.(1990)。Changing learner behavior through environmental education。The Journal of Environmental Education,21(3),8-21。  new window
10.Hines, Jody M.、Hungerford, Harold R.、Tomera, Audrey N.(1987)。Analysis and synthesis of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis。The Journal of Environmental Education,18(2),1-8。  new window
11.Prochaska, James O.、Velicer, Wayne F.(1997)。The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change。American Journal of Health Promotion,12(1),38-48。  new window
12.Prochaska, J. O.、DiClemente, C. C.(1983)。Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change。Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,51(3),390-395。  new window
會議論文
1.許世璋(2000)。大學環境教育課程對於學生環境行動與其他環境素養變項之成效分析。八十九年環境教育研討會,301-314。  延伸查詢new window
2.Hungerford, H. R.、Peyton, R. B.(1976)。Environmental action: a paradigm。North American Regional Seminar on environmental education。Columbus. OH:SMEAC。  new window
3.劉潔心、晏涵文(1997)。師範院校環境教育介入研究--著重師院學生負責任環境行為及其相關因素之成效分析。八十六年度環境教育研討會。高雄:高雄師範大學。49-70。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.(1978)。Tbilisi lntergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education, Toward an action plan: A report on the Tbilisi conference on environmental education (計畫編號:017-080-01838-1)。Washington. D. C:U. S. Government Printing Office。  new window
學位論文
1.車參賢(1996)。臺北市國中生對資源回收的知識、態度、行為相關研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.蔡孟宜(2000)。大學生環境認知、態度與行為相關研究--以逢甲大學為例(碩士論文)。逢甲大學,臺中。  延伸查詢new window
3.Baker, D. F.(1997)。The Formation of Collective Efficacy and Its Relationship to Self Efficacy, Goals, Effort and Group Performance A longitudinal perspective(博士論文)。University of Oklahoma。  new window
4.巫偉鈴(1989)。五專學生對環境問題的知識、信念及行動取向之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
5.王懋雯(1997)。師範學院學生環境行為影響因素之研究--以台北市立師範學院學生為例(博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
6.柯惠珍(1998)。台北市國中學生家中資原回收行為意圖及相關因素之研究(碩士論文)。國立師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
7.陳麗淑(1998)。運用互動式平面媒體促進國小學童家長資源回收行為之介入研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
8.趙宏邦(1999)。台北市社區民眾資源回收信念與行為意圖研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Stapp, W. B.、Wols, A.、Staukoub, S. L.(1996)。Environmental Education for Empowerment: Action Research and Community Problem Solving。Dubuque, IA:Michigan:Ken:dall/Hunt Publishing Co.。  new window
2.Hungerford, H. R.、Litherland, R. A.、Peyton, R. B.、Ramsey, J. M.、Volk, T. L.(1992)。Investigating and evaluating environmental issues and actions: Skill development modules。Stripes Publishing Company。  new window
3.Hungerford, H. R.、Litherland, R. A.、Peyton, R. B.、Ramsey, J. M.、Volk, T. L.(1992)。Investigating and evaluating environmental issues and actions: Skill development modules。Champaign, IL:Stripe publishing Company。  new window
4.Campbell, Linda、Campbell, Bruce、Dickinson, Dee、郭俊賢、陳淑惠(1999)。多元智慧的教與學。遠流出版事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
5.Armstrong, Thomas、李平(1997)。經營多元智慧:開展以學生為中心的教學。遠流出版事業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
6.徐西森(1997)。團體動力與團體輔導。台北市:心理出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.李郁文(1998)。團體動力學:群體動力的理論與實務。桂冠。  延伸查詢new window
8.Bandura, A.、Wessels, S.(1997)。Self-efficacy: The exercise of self-control。New York:Freeman。  new window
9.Bandura, Albert(1986)。Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory。Prentice-Hall。  new window
圖書論文
1.Hungerford, H. R.、Volk, T. L.(1983)。The challenges of K-12 environmental education。Monographs in Environmental Education and Environmental Studies。Columbus, Ohio:Clearinghouse for Science。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE