國中導師領導風格與學生學習態度、學業成就、生活適應 之關聯性研究 摘 要 本研究的目的旨在探討Hersey和Blanchard所提倡的情境領導理論在我國國民中學導師班級領導的適用性,以及研究導師情境領導風格與學生學習準備度間之關聯性。 本研究採問卷調查法,以桃園縣公立國民中學的八年級導師及在學學生為研究母群體,實際有效樣本為16位導師及553位學生,問卷回收率為98.8%。使用的工具包括「領導效能適應描述問卷」、「學生學習準備度量表」、「學生學習態度量表」及「學生生活適應量表」四種。 本研究獲得之結論如下: 一、導師自覺的情境領導風格與學生知覺的情境領導風格其結果互為獨立,且一致性偏低。 二、導師自覺主要的情境領導風格為授權式;學生知覺導師主要的情境領導風格為告知式。 三、導師知覺的學習準備度和學生自覺的學習準備度其結果互為獨立,且一致性偏低。 四、導師知覺學生主要的學習準備度為高準備度;學生自覺主要的學習準備度為低準備度。 五、學生的性別因素與其學習態度、學業成就及生活適應之間有顯著關聯性存在。 六、學生的學校地區因素與其生活適應間有顯著關聯性存在。然而與學習態度和學業成就間並無顯著關聯性存在。 七、導師自覺不同的情境領導風格對學生學習態度、學業成就及生活適應皆未造成顯著性差異;學生知覺不同的情境領導風格對學習態度及生活適應也未造成顯著性差異,但在學業成就層面有達顯著性差異。 八、導師自覺的情境領導風格與導師知覺學生的學習準備度間有顯著關聯性存在;學生知覺導師的情境領導風格與學生自覺的學習準備度間無顯著關聯性存在。 九、情境領導風格與學習準備度之相配合與未配合情形下,在學生學習態度、學業成就及生活適應的表現上並無顯著差異。因此,本研究結果未支持情境領導理論。
The Study of Relationships among Secondary Teachers’ Leadership Style and Students’ Learning Attitude, Academic Achievement and Life Adjustment Abstract This study aims at exploring the applicability of “Situational Leadership Theory” (Hersey & Blanchard, 1993) for class leadership of secondary teachers and investigating the correlation between secondary teachers’ situational leadership style and students’ learning readiness. Subjects were from public junior high schools in Taoyuan County. Valid sample included 16 secondary teachers and 553 secondary students. The percentage of recycling questionnaires is 98.8%. The methodology of this research was mainly a questionnaire survey. Four questionnaires were used: “Leader Effectiveness and Adaptability Description” (LEAD), “Students’ Learning Readiness Scale”, “Students’ Learning Attitude Scale” and “Students’ Life Adjustment Scale”. The conclusions are as the following: 1. There was low consistency between LEAD-self and LEAD-other. 2. Secondary teachers’ perceptions of main situational leadership style were “Delegating Style” and students’ perceptions of main situational leadership style were “Telling Style”. 3. The perceptions of secondary teachers and students toward learning readiness were low consistent. 4. Secondary teachers’ perceptions of main learning readiness were high readiness and students’ perceptions of main learning readiness were low readiness. 5. There was a significant correlation between secondary students’ sex and their learning attitude, academic achievement and life adjustment. 6. Secondary students’ school area was correlative with their life adjustment, but not correlative with their learning attitude and academic achievement. 7. Secondary teachers’ perceptions of different situational leadership style had no significant impact on students’ learning attitude, academic achievement and life adjustment. Secondary students’ perceptions of different situational leadership style also had no significant impact on learning attitude and life adjustment, but secondary students’ perceptions of different situational leadership style had a significant impact on academic achievement. 8. There was a significant correlation between secondary teachers’ perceptions of situational leadership style and learning readiness, but there was no significant correlation between secondary students’ perceptions of situational leadership style and learning readiness. 9. The relationship between situational leadership style and learning readiness had no significant impact on secondary students’ learning attitude, academic achievement and life adjustment. The findings did not support “Situational Leadership Theory”.