跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.221.73.157) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/06/20 19:15
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:李育枝
研究生(外文):Lee, YU-CHIH
論文名稱:大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能之研究
論文名稱(外文):A Study of Organizational Learning and Job Self-Efficacy of College Student Affairs Staff
指導教授:梁朝雲梁朝雲引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chaoyun Liang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱:公民教育與活動領導學系在職進修碩士班
學門:教育學門
學類:普通科目教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2011
畢業學年度:99
語文別:中文
論文頁數:173
中文關鍵詞:大學校院學生事務人員工作效能組織學習
外文關鍵詞:College student affairs staffJob self-efficacyOrganizational learning
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:28
  • 點閱點閱:1028
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:395
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:4
本研究旨在瞭解大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能之現況及其在不同背景變項的差異情形,以及組織學習與工作效能的相關情形。
為達研究目的,本研究採橫斷式研究(cross-sectional study),以便利抽樣法選取台灣地區148所大學校院的學生事務工作人員為研究對象,並以「大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能調查問卷」進行調查,共發放2,400份問卷,回收問卷1,198份,其中有效問卷1,156份。
研究工具為「大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能問卷」,係參照國內外學者之量表依據研究對象加以修訂,其中組織學習構面為「知識獲取」、「資訊散播」、「資訊詮釋」及「組織記憶」;另工作效能構面為行政執行效能、學生輔導效能、自我發展效能、人際溝通效能及情緒調適效能。
根據研究結果發現:
一、大學校院學生事務人員知覺的組織學習為中等程度,其中以「資訊散播」構面之情況最為顯著,其次為「資訊詮釋」、「知識獲取」,而以「組織記憶」為最低。
二、大學校院學生事務人員知覺的工作效能為中等程度,其中以「自我發展」構面之效能最為顯著,其次為「行政執行」、「情緒調適」、「人際溝通」,而以「學生輔導」為最低。
三、不同職務、學校類型及學校地區大學校院學生事務人員之組織學習有部分顯著差異;不同性別、年齡、學歷、年資、組別、學校性質及學校規模之大學校院學務人員組織學習無顯著差異。
四、不同年齡、學歷、年資、職務、組別及學校性質之大學校院學務人員工作效能有部分顯著差異;不同性別、學校類型、學校規模及學校地區之大學校院學務人員工作效能無顯著差異。
五、大學校院學務人員組織學習與工作效能呈現正相關,且具有顯著典型相關。
本研究根據以上發現,提出建議,以作為大學校院學生事務相關單位、學生事務人員參考。
The purposes of this study were to understand the current organizational learning and job self-efficacy among college student affairs staff, and to examine the differences resulted from related demographic variables. In addition, this study also attempted to examine relations between staff’s organizational learning and job self-efficacy.
The study utilized a cross-sectional research design. A convenience sampling method was used to select the survey candidates from 148 universities and colleges in Taiwan. The questionnaire used in this study was the self-designed “Questionnaire of College Student Affairs Staff’s Organizational Learning and Job Self-efficacy.” A total of 2,400 questionnaires were distributed, and 1,198 completed questionnaires were returned. Out of these responses, 1,156 were valid for further analyses.
The questionnaire used in this study consisted of three parts. The first part is for demographic data. The second part “organizational learning” covers four domains including: “knowledge acquisition,” “information distribution,” “information interpretation,” and “organizational memory”. The third part “job self-efficacy” composed of five domains including: “administrative competence,” “guidance belifs,” “self-development,” “interpersonal communication,” and “emotional adaptation”.
The findings of this study were summarized as follows:
1.The perception toward organizational learning of college student affairs staff reached an intermediate-high level. The highest factor was “information distribution,” followed by “knowledge acquisition” and “information interpretation”. The lowest factor was found to be “organizational memory”.
2.The perception toward job self-efficacy of college student affairs staff also reached an intermediate-high level. The highest factor was “self-development,” followed by “administrative competence,” “interpersonal communication,” and “emotional adaptation”. The lowest factor was “guidance belifs”.
3.In the aspect of organizational learning, the statistics showed that there were significant differences in the analyses of “positions,” “types of universities,” and “regions of universities,” while there were no significant differences in the other demographic variables.
4.In the aspect of job self-efficacy, the statistics showed that there were significant differences in the analyses of “ages,” “educational levels,” “years of service,” “positions,” “service units,” and “types of universities,” while there were no significant differences in the other demographic variables.
5.The results also showed that there was a significant canonical correlation between organizational learning and job self-efficacy of college student affairs staff.
On the basis of the findings identified above, a set of recommendations for professional practices and an agenda for further research were proposed at the end of this thesis.
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與問題 4
第三節 名詞解釋 5
第四節 研究範圍與限制 7
第二章 文獻探討 9
第一節 大學校院學生事務工作的發展及功能 9
第二節 組織學習理論與相關研究 21
第三節 工作效能理論基礎與相關研究 34
第三章 研究方法 47
第一節 研究設計 47
第二節 研究對象 49
第三節 研究工具 53
第四節 研究步驟 71
第五節 資料分析 72
第四章 研究結果與討論 73
第一節 大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能之現況分析 73
第二節 背景變項對於大學校院學生事務人員組織學習之差異分析 88
第三節 背景變項對於大學校院學生事務人員工作效能之差異分析 106
第四節 組織學習與工作效能之相關分析 128
第五章 結論與建議 140
第一節 結論 140
第二節 建議 145
參考文獻 149
附錄 160
附錄一:「大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能」問卷回收情況一覽表 160
附錄二:「大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作自我效能」調查問卷(預試版) 165
附錄三:專家效度名單 169
附錄四:「大學校院學生事務人員組織學習與工作效能」調查問卷 170
中文部份
中正大學校務發展白皮書(2000)。2011年3月1日,取自http://inoffice.ccu.edu.tw/whitepaper/。
中華學生事務學會(2006)。2011年3月1日,取自http://w2.hwc.edu.tw/young/casa/index.html。
中華學生社團教育學會(2008)。2011年3月1日,取自http://www.scu.edu.tw/extracur/web/index.htm。
方海明、吳婉湘、李新宇(2009)。高校輔導員工作效能感問卷的編制。中國臨床心理學雜誌,17(3),327-332。
王世璋(2005)。國小校長轉型領導、學校組織學習與學校組織創新關係之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,台北。
王如哲(2009)。各國高等教育制度,台北:高等教育出版社
江志正(2000)。國民小學團體動力、組織學習、學校發展策略與學校效能關係之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系博士論文,未出版,高雄市。
余錦漳(2001)。國民小學組織學習與教師專業成長之相關因素研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
吳幸宜(譯)(1996)。Margaret E. Gredler 著。學習理論與教學應用(Learning and instruction:Theory Into Practice)。台北市:心理出版社。
吳明隆(2010)。SPSS操作與應用問卷統計分析實務(第二版)。台北市:五南。
宋潔、何甯、汪鑫、李豔剛(2008)。高校輔導員工作效能感的研究分析。思想理論教育,1,60-66。
李茂興(譯)(1998)。Gerald Corey 著。諮商與心理治療的理論與實務(Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy 5th ed.)。台北:揚智。
林文寶(2001)。技術知識整合、知識能量與組織學習對核心競爭力及創新績效關聯性之研究。國立成功大學企業管理研究所博士論文,未出版,台南。
林金穗(2008)。高雄市國民小學教師知識慣性、學校組織學習與學校效能關係之研究。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
林美真(2009)。國民中學校長轉型領導對學校組織學習影響之研究。國立政治大學學校行政碩士在職專班碩士論文,未出版,台北。
林麗惠(1999)。組織學習與學習型組織。台北:師大書苑。
邱皓政(2010)。量化研究與統計分析:SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析(第三版)。台北市:五南。
高景志(2005)。國民小學訓導人員角色壓力、人格特質與工作效能之相關研究-以高高屏地區為例。國立屏東科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,屏東。
國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系、中華學生事務學會、中華學生社團教育學會、中國輔導學會、公民與道德教育學會、台灣高等教育學會(2006)。2006台灣高等教育與學生事務國際學術研討會宣言。載於國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系舉辦之「2006台灣高等教育與學生事務」國際學術研討會論文集(頁656-667),台北市。
國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系、中華學生事務學會、中華學生社團教育學會、台灣高等教育學會、公民與道德教育學會(2010)。學生成功學習宣言。載於國立台灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系舉辦之「2010臺灣高等教育與學生事務」國際學術研討會論文集(頁391-400)。台北市。
張昭仁(2001)。國小校長轉型領導、互易領導與學校組織學習能力關係之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
張雪梅(1996)。學生發展:學生事務工作的理論與實踐。台北市:張老師文化。
張雪梅(2002)。當前學生事務工作的新職責。學生事務,41(2),9-16。
張雪梅(2003)。學生事務是個專業工作嗎?當前大學學生事務工作提升的策略與展望,載於學生事務與社團輔導第三輯,台北:東吳大學。
教育部訓育委員會(2004)。高等教育學生事務工作發展願景目標與策略規劃報告。檢索日期(2006年3月1日),取自www.edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/DISPL/EDU7189001/studentaffairs/vision.doc。
曹科岩,梁金玉(2009)。高校輔導員自我效能感現狀的調查研究。職業技術教育,26,78-80。
梁朝雲(2007)。從組織願景與使命談學務工作的發展趨勢。學生事務,46(1 & 2),1-15。
梁朝雲(2010)。學務工作的知識管理與文化創新。學生事務,49(1),51-72。
陳素勤譯(2001)。組織行為。台北:麥格羅.希爾台灣分公司。
傅木龍(2001)。跨世紀大學學生事務工作發展與輔導。載於林至善(主編),學生事務與社團輔導,台北:東吳大學。
黃玉(2001)。大學學生事務的理論與應用。載於林至善(主編),學生事務與社團輔導,台北:東吳大學。
黃玉(2003)。從環境中增進學生事務功能-論學校環境與學生發展。載於林至善(主編),學生事務與社團輔導第三輯,台北:東吳大學。
黃瓊容(2003)。國民小學組織學習與組織創新之相關研究。國立中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義。
楊昌裕(2007)。大學學生事務引導模式之研究。載於鄧毓浩(主編),高等教育與學生事務,台北:師範大學,75-79。
萬金生(2003)。資訊委外特殊自我效能與目標認同、工作績效及工作滿意的關係:結構方程模型的驗証性研究,商管科技季刊,4(1),125-147。
葉綉燕(2008)。台北縣國民小學學務人員角色知覺、工作壓力與自我效能之研究。淡江大學教育政策與管理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
劉昌仁(2007)。高職院校輔導員工作效能感狀況的研究。東北師範大學碩士學位論文。
劉若蘭(2004)。從環境中增進學生事務功能-論學校環境與學生發展。載於林至善(主編),學生事務與社團輔導第五輯(139-156),台北:東吳大學。
潘焱(2009)。重慶市高校輔導員工作效能感現狀及其與主觀幸福感的關係。西南大學碩士學位論文,未出版,重慶。
蔡進雄(1997)。組織結構之探討,教育資料文摘,39(6),115-124。
盧偉斯(1996)。組織學習的理論性探究。國立政治大學公共行政學系博士論文,未出版,台北。
顏朱吟(2009)。大學行政人員自我效能與工作競爭力關係之實徵研究。屏東教育大學學報-教育類,33,335-364。
英文部分
ACPA (1996). The student learning imperative: Implications for student affairs. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from http://www.acpa.nche.edu/sli/sli.htm
ACPA & NASPA (1997). Principles of good practice for student affairs. Retrieved March 21, 2011, from http://www.acpa.nche.edu/pgp/princip8.htm
ACPA (2007). Professional competencies: A report of the steering committee on professional competencies. Washington, DC: ACPA.
Angel, R. (2006). Putting an innovation culture into practice. IVEY Business Journal Online, January/February, 1-5. October 15, 2009, A PDF file retrieved from: http://www.iveybusinessjournal.com/view_article.asp?intArticle_ID=605.
Argote, L., McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. (2003). Managing knowledge in organizations: An integrative framework and review of emerging themes. Management Science, 49, 571-582.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. New York, NY: Addison-Wesley.
Ashworth, M. J., Argote, L., & Mukhopadhaay, T. (2006). The effect of information technology on knowledge acquisition, retention, and transfer. Retrieved November 28, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://opimweb.wharton.upenn.edu/documents/seminars/MS00226-2005-revision-april-2006.pdf
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A.(1980). In search of pure unidirectional determinants. Behavior Therapy, 12, 30-40.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A Social-cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. NY: Freeman.
Bandura, A. (2000). Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In E. A. Locke (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organization behavior. (pp. 120-136). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 586-598.
Bencsik, A., Lıre, V., & Marosi, I. (2009). From individual memory to organizational memory (intelligence of organizations). World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, Retrieved December 25, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://www.waset.org/journals/waset/v56/v56-1.pdf
Bocaneanu, S. (2007). Assessment of organizational lening within teams. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods, 2(4), 409-417.
Clark, N. M., & Dodge, J. A. (1999). Exploring self- efficacy as a predictor of disease management. Health Education & Behavior, 26(1), 72-89.
Conklin, J. (2001). Designing organizational memory: Preserving intellectual assets in a knowledge economy. Retrieved December 15, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://cognexus.org/dom.pdf
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizationas interpretation system. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284-295.
Dodgeson, M. (1993). Organizational learning: A review of some literature. Organization Studies, 14(3), 375-394.
Ducan, R., & Weiss, A. (1979). Organizational learning: Implications for organization design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, 75-123.
Edmondson, A. C., Dillon, J. R., & Roloff, K. S. (2007). Three perspectives on team learning: Outcome improvement, task mastery, and group process. In J. P. Walsh & A. P. Brief (Eds.), The Academy of Management Annals (Vol. 1, pp. 269–314). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Erwin, T. D. (1993). Outcomes assessment. In M. J. Barr & Associates (eds.), The handbook of student affairs administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Firestone, J. M., & McElroy, M. W. (2004).Organizational learning and knowledge management: The relationship. Learning Organization, 11(2), 177-184.
Forbes, D. P. (2005). The effects of strategic decision making on entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 599–626.
Garvin, D. A. (1993). Building a learning organization. Harvard Business Review, Jul-Aug, 78-91.
Gordon, J. (1996). Organization: Organization behavior. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Huber, G. P. (1991). Organizational learning: The contributing processes and the literatures. Organization Science, 2(1), 88-115.
Imam, S. S. (2007). Sherer et al. general self-efficacy scale: Dimensionality, internal consistency, and temporal stability. Proceedings of the redesigning pedagogy: Culture, knowledge and understanding conference, Singapore, May 2007.
Javernick-Will, A. (2009). Organizational learning during internationalization: Acquiring local institutional knowledge. Retrieved November 30, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://crgp.stanford.edu/publications/working_papers/Javernick-Will_Organizational_Learning_during_Interntlztn_WP0046.pdf
Judge, T. A., Jackson, C. L., Shaw, J. C., Scott, B. A., & Rich, B. L. (2007). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: The integral role of individual differences. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(1), 107-127.
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319-340.
Lewis, K., Lange, D., & Gillis, L. (2005). Transactive memory systems, learning, and learning transfer. Organization Science, 16(6), 581-598.
Locke, K. D., & Sadler, P. (2007). Self-efficacy, values, and complementarity in dyadic interactions: Integrating interpersonal and social-cognitive theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 94-109.
Lpez, S., Pen, J., & Ords, C. (2005). Organizational learning as a determining factor in business performance, The Learning Organization, 12(3), 227-245.
Luszczynska, A., Gutiérrez-Donã, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40(2), 80-89.
Mason, R. M. (1995). Knowledge acquisition and storage in organizational learning: A conceptual model and some empirical evidence. In Proceedings of the Pacific International Conference on Information Systems, 254-262.
Mcgill, M. E., Slocum, J. W., & Lei, D. (1992). Management practices in learning organizations. Organizational Dynamics, 21(1), 5-17.
McIntyre, S. G. (2009). Creating and sustaining meta-organizational memory: A case study. Building Organizational Memories. Hershey PA: Information Science Reference.
Melville, N., Kraemer, K., & Gurbaxani, V. (2004). Information technology and organizational performance: An integrative model of IT business value. MIS Quarterly, 28, 288-322.
Meyers, P. W. (1990). Non-linear learning in technological firms. Research Policy, 19(2), 97-115.
Muhaminad, N. M. N., & Isa, F. M. (2009). Impact of culture and knowledge acquisition to organizational success: Study on Chinese and Malay small firms. Asian Culture and History, 1(2), 63-71.
NASPA. (1998). Priciples of good practice for student affairs. Washington, DC: NASPA. from the World Wide Web:http://www.naspa.org/career/goodprac.cfm
Neece, O. E. (2002). A strategic systems perspective of organizational learning theory: Models for a case study at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Retrieved December 10, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=779325
Nevis, E. C., DiBella, A. J., & Gould, J. M. (1995). Understanding organizations as learning systems. Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 73-86.
Paajanen, P., Kantola, J., Karwowski, W., & Vanharanta, H. (2006). Applying systems thinking in the evaluation of organizational learning and knowledge creation. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 3(3), 79-84.
Parker, S. K. (1998). Enhancing role breadth self-efficacy: The roles of job enrichment and other organizational interventions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(6), 835-85.
Reagans, R., Argote, L., & Brooks, D. (2005). Individual experience and experience working together: Predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together. Management Science, 51(6), 869-881.
Ren, Y., Carley, K. M., & Argote, L. (2006). The contingent effects of transactive memory: When is it more beneficial to know what others know? Management Science, 52(5), 671-682.
Schippers, M. C., Den Hartog, D. N., & Koopman, P. L. (2007). Reflexivity in teams: A measure and correlates. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 56(2), 189-211.
Serrat, O. (2009). A primer on organizational learning. Retrieved December 10, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://www.adb.org/Documents/Information/Knowledge-Solutions/primer-on-organizational-learning.pdf
Shrivastava, P. (1983). A typology of organizational learning systems. Journal of Management Studies, 20(1), 7-28.
Spencer, J. C. (1996). Organizational knowledge, learning and memory: Three concepts in search of a theory. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 9(1), 63-78.
Stata, R. (1989). Organizational learning: The key to management innovation. Sloan Management Review, Spring, 63-74.
Switzer, K. C., Nagy, M. S., & Mullins, M. E. (2005). The influence of training reputation, managerial support, and self-efficacy on pre-training motivation and perceived training transfer. Applied Human Resource Management Research, 10(1), 21-34.
Tsai, C., Lin, J. L., & Chen, C. (2006). Core competence and core rigidity: Organizational memory perspective. Retrieved December 10, 2010, from the World Wide Web: http://www.isu.edu.tw/upload/28/3/29520/paper/9504/950408.pdf
Van der Vegt, G. S., & Bunderson, J. S. (2005). Learning and performance in multidisciplinary teams: The importance of collective team identification. Academy of Management Journal, 48(3), 532-547.
Weick, K.E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
WikiAnswers (2009). What is cultural innovation? October 20, 2009 retrieved from: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_cultural_innovation.
Yong, F. L. (2010). A study on the self-efficacy and expectancy for success of pre-university students. European Journal of Social Sciences, 13(4), 514-523.
Zellmer-Bruhn, M., & Gibson, C. (2006). Multinational organization context: Implications for team learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(3), 501–518.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top