臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：教師、學生及家長對體罰意見的調查研究
書刊名：教育心理學報
作者：陳榮華
出版日期：1980
卷期：13
頁次：頁57-73
主題關鍵詞：家長；教師；學生；體罰
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(6) 博士論文(2) 專書(4) 專書論文(1)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:445
　　The purposes of this study are threefold: (1) to find the views on corporal punishment by teachers, students and parents in this country; (2) to investigate the forms of corporal punishment presently taken by teachers and their respective percentage; (3) to compare and analyze the views of corporal punishment by the Western countries and their ways of practicing corporal punishment. And basing on such comparison coupled with the result of this survey, a plausible and practicable scheme in proposed for corporal punishment so that the government may have reference basis in amending the relevant rules and that the function of education may be promoted. 　　The subjects of this investigation are from twenty elementary and secondary schools of a city in Taiwan, including 1073 teachers; 1111 parents and 4582 students. Three sets of queitionnaires are provided, for teachers, parents and students respectively. The main items of these questionnaires are: (1) Favor or disfavor corporal punishment (2) The timing for practicing corporal punishment (3) The used of habitual forms of corporal punishment (4) The reasons for practicinng corporal punishment; and (5) The effects of corporal punishment. 　　The result of this investigation reveals: 1. Most teachers (91%), parents (85%) and students (84%) think that as long as no injury is inflicted, proper corporal punishment is permissible. 2. Parents and teachers, 90% respectively, admit that they have been forced to practice corporal punishment, though it is not a usual practice. 3. Cognitively most teachers, parents and students regard exhortation as the better way to correct students' misbehaviors. 4. The most salient reason for disciplining students or children is their misbehaviors. 5. Most teachers and parents think that if corporal punishment is prohibited by educational authorities, the obvious effect on the teachers' attitudes would be "no more strict discipline on the students" 6. The most pervasive forms of corporal punishment suppoorted by teachers, parents and students are "palm swatting" "standing" and "extra homework.” 7. Most teachers feel sad but calm when paddling students. but most parents feel very angry and very sad. 8. After paddling students, most teachers and parents feel themselves cruel, but some feel they have done their duty in discipline.
期刊論文
1.林金悔(19770600)。我國國小教師體罰態度與其人格特質的關係。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所集刊，19，399-482。  延伸查詢new window
2.張文益(19770600)。從心理學的觀點看體罰行為。今日教育雜誌，32，60-64。  延伸查詢new window
3.劉國光(19721000)。論體罰學生的問題。臺灣教育輔導月刊，22(10)，7-9。  延伸查詢new window
4.孔承先(1973)。有關「體罰」問題之研究。臺北縣教育輔導研究月刊，51，4-7。  延伸查詢new window
5.孔承先(1973)。有關「體罰」問題之研究。臺北縣教育輔導研究月刊，52，6-7。  延伸查詢new window
6.伊文柱(1962)。談體罰的問題。國民教育，11(11)，2-7。  延伸查詢new window
7.林玉体(19760600)。藤條萬歲嗎？--從洛克的體罰論說起。今日教育雜誌，30，4-9。  延伸查詢new window
8.陳奎憙(19780500)。正視學校體罰問題。臺灣教育，329，59-62。  延伸查詢new window
9.郭義堃(19781200)。如何使用懲罰之探論？。今日教育雜誌，35，56-58。  延伸查詢new window
10.歐陽教(19761200)。懲罰在教育上的正用。臺灣教育，312，15-21。  延伸查詢new window
11.蔡典謨(19760600)。從教中學。今日教育雜誌，30，85-87。  延伸查詢new window
12.瞿立鶴(19781200)。論體罰與禁止體罰。今日教育雜誌，35，2-7。  延伸查詢new window
13.Anderson, L.(1978)。Behavioral contingencies and self-mutilation in Lesch-Nyhan disease。Journal of Consulting and Clinic Psychology，46(3)，529-536。  new window
14.Brown, D.(1974)。Using group contingencies with punishment and positive reinforcement to modify aggressive behaviors in Head State classroom。Psychological Research，24(4)，491-496。  new window
15.Delilty, M. Z.、Church, R. M.(1978)。Time-allocation matching between punishing situation。Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior，28(2)，191-198。  new window
16.Donnerstein, M.、Donnesstein, E.(1978)。Direct and vicarious censure in the control of interracial aggression。Journal of Personality，46(1)，162-175。  new window
17.Follick, M. J.、Knutson, J. F.(1978)。Punishment of irritable aggression。Aggressive Behavior，4(1)，1-17。  new window
18.Hill, C.、Delta, G.(1973)。A psychological view of corporal punishment。Delta，12，2-5。  new window
19.Kounin, J. B.、Group, P. V.(1961)。The comparative influence of punitive and non-punitive teachers upon children's concepts of school misconduct。Journal of Educational Psychology，52(1)，44-49。  new window
20.Lemley, C. R.(1977)。The supreme court and corporal punishment。Education，98(2)，228-231。  new window
21.Martin, R. R.、Hasbrouck, J. M.(1977)。The effects of punishment schedule on disfluency rate。Language and Speech，20(2)，127-135。  new window
22.Manner, A.(1974)。Corporal punishment。American Psychologist，29(8)，614-626。  new window
23.NEA(1970)。Corporal punishment: teacher opinion。NEA Research Bulletin，48，48-49。  new window
24.Sgro, J. A.、Porterfield, L. S.(1978)。The frustration effect when punishment in paired with reward。Journal of General Psychology，98(2)，245-252。  new window
25.Raichle, D. R.(1977)。School discipline and corporal punishment: An American retesport。Interchange，8(1/2)，71-83。  new window
26.Shope, G. L.(1978)。Physical verbal Aggression: Sex differences in style。Journal of Personality，46(1)，23-42。  new window
27.Spealman, R. N.(1978)。Pressurized air as a punisher。Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior，29(2)，341-345。  new window
28.Walters, G. C.(1978)。Amount of prior learning, density of reinforcement and vocation from punishment as determinants of punishment effectiveness: Some negative results。Bulletin of Psychonomic Society，11(1)，33-36。  new window
圖書
1.Hilgard, E. R.、Atkinson, R. L.、Atkinson, R. C.(1979)。Introduction to psychology。虹橋書店。  new window
2.歐陽鍾仁(1978)。兒童賞罰心理學。臺北：巨流圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
3.潘宗堯(1977)。現代各國的教育。香港：華商書報出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.潘宗堯(1978)。怎様辦理中小學。香港：華商書報出版社。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.卜眧祺(19790419)。體罰三原則。  延伸查詢new window
2.尤保善(19790325)。訓導觀念改變與體罰。  延伸查詢new window
3.李小慈(19720504)。美國學校的體罰方式。  延伸查詢new window
4.李淑淑(19790330)。因人而異。  延伸查詢new window
5.杜學知(19701004)。扑作教刑。  延伸查詢new window
6.林明森(19790406)。體罰印象四十年。  延伸查詢new window
7.林煌耀(19790327)。誤解和肯定。  延伸查詢new window
8.周天徤(19790425)。體罰本身無罪。  延伸查詢new window
9.周志勇(19730607)。體罰學生應該禁止嗎？。  延伸查詢new window
10.胡鍊輝(19790320)。體罰會傷身心。  延伸查詢new window
11.唐珊(19790402)。四個案例。  延伸查詢new window
12.高樹人(19790415)。誰願意體罰？。  延伸查詢new window
13.淨元(19790425)。消弭而不是嚴禁。  延伸查詢new window
14.梁恒正(19770612)。英國學校怎樣實施體罰。  延伸查詢new window
15.張渝(19790410)。從體罰理論談起。  延伸查詢new window
16.陳培康(19790318)。不能否定體罰的價值。  延伸查詢new window
17.(1979)。三、四月話體--體罰。  延伸查詢new window
18.(19770512)。臺灣時報社論：老師不能碰學生嗎？。  延伸查詢new window
19.輕颺(19790422)。最落伍的教育方式。  延伸查詢new window
20.潘嘉璐(19790404)。轉捩點。  延伸查詢new window
21.蔡慧瑛(19790328)。我實在打不下去。  延伸查詢new window
22.嘯雲(19790420)。弊多利少。  延伸查詢new window
23.樂瑤卿(19790308)。不得已才體罰。  延伸查詢new window
24.謝榮華(19790316)。用愛替代體罰。  延伸查詢new window
25.襄民(19790428)。如果你是教師。  延伸查詢new window
26.蘇安宜(19790326)。我是一個打人的老師。  延伸查詢new window
27.Mercueis, J. A.(1975)。Caming: Educational ritual。  new window
28.Thomes, B. A.(1973)。A study of the attitude of educators relative to the use and value of corporal punishment。  new window
圖書論文
1.邱連煌(1978)。美國學校的體罰。心理與教育。臺北：文景書局。  延伸查詢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

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：681（臺灣：680，外國：1） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1498098 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67295370
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上