教師思考風格、成就動機與工作投入關係之研究

Abstract

本研究旨在探討教師思考風格、成就動機與工作投入之間的關係。採用調查研究法。問卷內容包含「教師基本資料」、「教師思考風格量表」、「教師成就動機量表」與「教師工作投入量表」四個部分，本研究以309位教師為研究對象，依據調查結果分別以描述性統計分析、t考驗、單因子變異數分析及皮爾森積差相關等統計方法進行分析。本研究獲得結論如下： 一、教師思考風格傾向整體而言偏向「司法型」，在思考風格「行政型」傾向最不明顯；教師的成就動機現況屬於中等以上程度；教師的工作投入現況屬於高度工作投入。 二、不同年齡、服務年資、服務單位、服務地區的教師在思考風格傾向「立法型」上有顯著差異：41歲以上教師高於31-40歲的教師；21年以上服務年資的教師高於服務年資6-10年的教師；高中、職與國小的教師高於國中教師；北北基地區的教師高於在北北基地區以外的教師。 三、不同年齡、婚姻狀況、服務單位的教師在思考風格「行政型」傾向上有顯著差異：41歲以上教師高於30歲以下的教師；已婚教師高於未婚教師；高中、職的教師高於國中小教師。 四、不同服務年資、服務單位、服務地區的教師在思考風格傾向「司法型」傾向上有顯著差異：教師服務年資在21年以上高於6-10年的教師；國小教師高於國中教師；教師服務地區在北北基地區高於北北基地區以外的教師。 五、不同年齡、服務年資、服務單位、擔任職務的教師，在「成就動機」上有顯著差異：41歲以上教師高於30歲以下教師與31-40歲教師；服務年資21年以上的教師高於6-10年的教師；高中職教師高於國中、小教師；兼任行政的教師高於導師。 六、不同性別、年齡、服務年資、服務單位、擔任職務、服務地區的教師，在「工作投入」上有顯著差異：男性教師高於女性教師；41歲以上教師高於31-40歲教師；服務年資21年以上的教師高於6-10年的教師；高中職教師得分高於國小教師，國小教師高於國中教師；兼任行政的教師高於導師；北北基地區的教師高於北北基地區以外的教師。 七、教師思考風格「立法型」、「行政性」、「司法型」與成就動機有正相關。 八、教師成就動機與工作投入有正相關。 依據上述的研究結果，本研究提出對教育實務工作者及未來研究的建議。The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships among teachers' thinking styles, achievement motivation, and job involvement. The analyzed data was collected through questionnaire with these effective samples of 309 from northern part of Taiwan.The questionnaire consisting of four parts: teachers’ demographic information, teacher thinking styles, teacher achievement motivation scale and teacher job involvement scale. The data was analyzed through t-test, one-way ANOVA, and Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient. The main results were summarized as follows: 1. The overall thinking styles of teachers had the most obvious tendency on “judical” in particular while the lowest tendency on “legislative”. Teachers possessed an above average level of achievement motivation. In addition, teachers’ job involvement belonged to high level. 2. Teachers with different ages, years of service, service units, service areas in thinking style legislative-type had significantly difference, i.e, such as teachers over the age of 41 is higher than the 31-40 year-old teachers; teachers more than 21 years of service is higher than years of service 6-10 years teachers; high school and elementary school teachers is higher than junior high school teachers; teachers service areas in metropolitan area was higher than in the other areas. 3. Teachers with different ages, marital status, service units in thinking style administrative-type had significantly difference, suc as teachers over the age of 41 is higher than the teachers under 30 years old; married teachers is higher than unmarried teachers; high school and vocational teachers were higher than elementary and junior high teachers. 4. Teachers with different years of service, service units, service area in thinking style judicial -type had significantly difference, such as teachers more than 21 years of service is higher than years of service 6-10 years teachers; elementary school teachers is higher than junior high school teachers; teachers service areas in metropolitan area was higher than in the other areas. 5. Teachers with different ages, years of service, service units, positions in achievement motivation had significantly difference, i.e., teachers over the age of 41 is higher than the teachers under 40 years old; service of more than 21 years is higher than service 6-10 years teachers; high school and vocational teachers were higher than elementary and junior high teachers; teachers with administrative position were higher than tutors. 6. Teachers with different genders, ages, years of service, service units, positions, service area, in job involvement had significantly difference, i.e., male teachers than female teachers; teachers over the age of 41 is higher than the 31-40 year-old teachers; teachers more than 21 years of service is higher than years of service 6-10 years teachers; high school and vocational teachers were higher than elementary teachers; elementary teachers were higher than junior high school teachers; teachers with administrative position were higher than tutors; teachers service areas in metropolitan area was higher than in the other areas. 7.There was a significantly positive correlation between teachers’ thinking style "legislative ", "executive" and "judical" and achievement motivation. 8. There was a significantly positive correlation between teachers’ achievement motivation and job involvement. Based on the above findings, the imlpication of this study suggested for the practice of education practitioners and future research.