進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-2801201814503400
論文名稱(中文) 教師人格特質與教學品質對補教業經營之影響
論文名稱(英文) Impact of Teacher’s Personality Traits and Teaching Quality on Cram Schools Business
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 高階管理碩士在職專班(EMBA)
系所名稱(英) Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA)
學年度 106
學期 1
出版年 106
研究生(中文) 林銘珠
研究生(英文) Min-Chu Lin
學號 R07044490
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 123頁
口試委員 指導教授-呂執中
口試委員-翁家瑞
口試委員-邱垂昱
口試委員-彭泉
中文關鍵字 教師人格特質  教學品質  再購意願  學生續讀率  ANP分析網路程序法。 
英文關鍵字 Teacher’s personality traits  teaching quality  student retention rate  Analytic Network Process (ANP) 
學科別分類
中文摘要 隨著國人生育率的下降,日本官方在1990年提出的「少子化」一詞,已如影隨形的衝擊著台灣的教育產業。從國小減班到討論大專院校合併及退場機制的議題,在在顯示出整個台灣學齡層人口減少所面臨的問題,然而根據補習班資訊管理系統统計數字,補習班的數量非但不隨出生率滑落而降低,甚至在10年內逆轉成長兩倍以上,在學生客源漸漸消失及補習班數量過剩的雙重因素作用下,可以想見補教業勢必得面臨招生市場萎縮的大困境,因此留住原有的學生,提高舊生續讀率,甚或對內招生,成為管理者重要的經營課題。然而影響學生續讀的因素有許多,包含交通、經濟、家庭、教師、教學....等,其中教師與教學是補習班本身能夠控制與改進的重要因素,所以本研究從教學品質的角度切入探討教師人格特質、學生續讀率的相關性,並提出建議業者在嚴苛的環境中如何保持競爭力。
首先本研究以問卷訪談10位教育學界及補教業者專家,並根據Marsh所提出的準則為基礎,建構出教學品質衡量架構,同時採ANP分析網路程序法,運用Super Decisions 軟體,計算出衡量教學品質各構面要素之權重值。接著針對台南市補教協會合格立案之補習班的31位教師及其主管,共發放62份人格特質有效問卷,然後再對31位教師所執教班級的學生及家長發放420份教學品質問卷,剔除35份無效問卷,共回收385份有效問卷,此部分以SPSS 22.0軟體,進行Pearson 相關性及回歸分析,了解其相互影響性。
本研究分析結果發現在衡量教師教學品質各要素準則之權重排序為:熱心教學有活力>激發學習興趣>上課有幽默感>具專業知識、講解清晰>參與活動、配合招生>控班能力強、秩序好>課前備課、講義完整>課程進度掌握適中>鼓勵學生發問並答覆>向心力強、關係和諧>與家長互動良好>能否掌握學校考題>個別友善關懷學生>作業切合上課內容>評分方式適當與否。因此經營者在評估教師教學品質上應首重教師的教學熱忱,是否在教學上具有熱心、活力,能夠激發學生學習興趣。而在假說驗證的部分,教師人格特質的「謹慎負責性」對「教學品質」有顯著的影響,「教學品質」對「學生續讀率」有顯著影響,其他人格特質對教學品質及續讀率並無顯著影響。由此可看出管理者在應聘老師的同時,必須注意到教師本身是否具有「謹慎負責性」的人格特質,這對教學品質的提升有重要的影響性。而「教學品質」則是牽動「學生續讀意願」的最重要因素,因此業者希望永續經營最重要的條件是教學品質的控管。
英文摘要 SUMMARY
Along with the decline of birth rate in Taiwan, education industry has become closely associated to the phrase “low fertility”, which was firstly proposed by the Japanese government in 1990. However, the statistic from Cram School Information Management System has shown that there is an increase in the number of cram schools, despite the falling birth rate. It is obvious that owners of cram school business would face the threats of shrinking student recruitment and increasing competitors. Therefore, to develop effective practices in order to improve student retention rate and to improve competitive advantages are becoming critical to managers of cram schools. This research investigates the correlation among teachers' personality traits, teaching quality, and student retention rate, and use the results find out the factors that influence the management of cram schools.

The principles proposed by Marsh is used as basis for the establishment of teaching quality assessment mechanism, and experts in academia and cram schools are interviewed to revise the framework. The weighted values of elements in all dimensions of the framework are therefore calculated by using Analytic Network Process (ANP) process. Regression Analysis is further adopted to analyze the questionnaires distributed to representative teachers, supervisors, students and parents who are in the cram school to understand correlation among teachers’ personality traits, teaching quality and student retention rate. The results have shown out that the most important criteria for teaching quality is the teachers’ enthusiasm. Whether the teacher is passionate and vivid in teaching and is able to arouse students’ interest in study are the most practical prerequisites to assess teaching quality. In addition, the Regression Analysis results indicate that “teacher with conscientious personality trait” significantly influence “teaching quality” and “teaching quality” has significant positive effect on “student retention rate”. It is also found out that “teaching quality” is the most important factor that affects the “student retention”.

Instead of advertisement or other low cost strategy, cram schools could achieve their goal of sustainable development through the improvement of teaching quality.
論文目次 目錄
摘 要…………………………………………………………………… I
Extended Abstract …………………………………………………… III
誌 謝…………………………………………………………………… X
目 錄……………………………………………………………………XI
表 目 錄……………………………………………………………… XIII
圖 目 錄……………………………………………………………… XV
第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………… 1
第一節 研究背景與動機………………………………………… 1
第二節 研究目的………………………………………………… 5
第三節 研究範圍………………………………………………… 6
第四節 研究流程………………………………………………… 7
第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………… 8
第一節 人格特質………………………………………………… 8
第二節 教學品質…………………………………………………12
第三節 顧客再購意願……………………………………………17
第四節 各構面關係之研究與探討………………………………21
第三章 研究方法 ……………………………………………………28
第一節 補習教育產業探討………………………………………28
第二節 研究架構…………………………………………………33
第三節 研究假設…………………………………………………34
第四節 構面之操作型定義與衡量………………………………35
第五節 研究設計…………………………………………………41
第六節 資料分析法………………………………………………42
第四章 研究結果與分析………………………………………………47
第一節 教學品質ANP問卷結果分析……………………………47
第二節 相關性與迴歸分析………………………………………62
第五章 結論與建議……………………………………………………77
第一節 研究結論…………………………………………………77
第二節 研究建議…………………………………………………82
參考文獻 ………………………………………………………………85
一、中文文獻 ……………………………………………………85
二、英文文獻 ……………………………………………………87
三、網頁資訊 ……………………………………………………93
附錄一: 問卷調查表 …………………………………………………95
附錄二: ANP 問卷結果………………………………………………115
參考文獻 一、 中文文獻
王家通、吳裕益(1985)。我國國民中學優良教師之特質及其背之研究。 教育學刊,6,96-139。
王朝茂(1999)。技專校院教師信念與教學行為及學生知覺反應之相 關研究。高雄市:復文。
王秀美、李長燦(2011)。五大人格特質量表中文版之信效度研究。論文發表於2011年6月10日社會服務與休閒產業研討會。2010美和科技大學報,5,(頁1-13)。屏東:美和科技大學。
王淑怡(2002)。國民小學教師教學效能指標之建構。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
田振榮(2002)。建立技專院校提升教學品質指標之研究報告。臺北市:行政院國家科學委員會專題研究報告,NSC90-006。
危芷芬(譯)(2012)。人格心理學。(原作者:Jerry M. Burger)。台北:洪葉文化。
李仁豪、陳怡君(2016)。IPIP 五大人格量表簡版的發展及其跨年齡層的測量不變性檢定。教育研究與發展期刊,12 (4),87-120。
林欽榮(2002)。人力資源管理。台北:揚智文化。
林曜聖(2009)。「故事行銷」概念及其在兒童教育產業行銷的應用。國民教育,49 (6),29-39。
周談輝(1985)。中國職業教育發展史。台北:三民書局。
邱柏樹(2005)。我國高職專業科目教師教學品質知覺之研究。
國立彰化師範大學工業教育與技術學系碩士論文。
徐善德(1997)。高職教師工作價值觀、組織承諾與教學效能關係
之研究。國立政治大學教育研究博士論文。
黃堅厚(1999)。人格心理學。台北:心理出版社。
黃雪晴(2000)。國內資訊電子業聯盟夥伴選擇模式之研究。國立成功大學工業管理研究所碩士論文。
張春興(1998)。現代心理學。台北:東華出版社。
葉子明、謝佩伶、巫錦秀(2013)。工作投入與工作壓力對國小教師教學品質之影響。大葉大學工業工程與科技管理研究所碩士論文
曾嘉敏(2015)。國民小學教師人格特質、班級經營與效能關係之研究。萬能科技大學碩士論文。
詹益民(1996)。個人屬性、人格特質與內滋激勵與外附激勵關聯性之研究-以交通部數據通訊所員工為例。國立交通大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
趙志揚(1997)。技職教育之全面品質管理。技術職業教育雙月刊,42,28-34。
廖文靖(1999)。提升技能教師及訓練師的教學品質。就業與訓練,174,42-45。
劉宗明、黃德祥(2008)。國中教師人格特質與教學效能之研究。臺北市立教育大學學報,39(2),1-34。
劉煒仁(2001)。品質機能展開應用於教學品質研究-以國防管理學院為例。國防管理學院碩士論文。
饒達欽、鄭增財 (1997)。談教師教學品質。技術及職業教育雙月刊,42,16-20。
鄭靜妹(2013)幼兒教保服務人員工作壓力、人格特質與幸福感之 研究。南華大學幼兒教育學系碩士論文。
簡玉琴(2002)。桃園縣國民小學教師自我效能與教學效能關係之研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。

二、英文文獻
Allen, D., & Ryan, K. (1969). Microteaching, reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston. BF698. A39 1961.
Bolton & Katherine, N. L. (1999). A dynamic model of customers’ usage of service: Usage as an antecedent and consequence of satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.36, 171-186.
Bowen, J. T., & Shoemaker, K. (1998). Loyalty: A strategic commitment. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 39(1), 12-25.
Cattell, R.B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. Baltimore: Penguin Books.
Collier, J. E. & Bienstock, C. C. (2006). Measuring service quality in E-Retailing. Journal of Service Research, 8(3), 260-270.
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO five factor inventory (NEO-FFI). Odessa, Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Crosby, L. A., K. R. Evans, and D. Cowles (1990). Relationship quality in services selling : An interpersonal influence perspective. Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 68-81.
Cutchin, G. C. (1998). Relationship between the big-five personality factors and performance criteria for in service high school teachers. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation . Purdue University.
D. E. Beeby(1966)The quality of education in the developing countrie. Harvard University Press.
Dwyer, C. A., & Stufflebeam, D. (1996). Teacher evaluation. In Berliner, D. C., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.). Handbook of educational psychology. New York: Macmillan Library Reference USA.
Edward, S. (1993). Total quality management in education. London: Kogan Page.
Eysenck, H. J. (1970). The structure of personality (3rd ed.). London: Methuen.
Fairbrother, R. W. (1996). Helping students do open investigations in science. Australian Science Teacher Journal, Vol.42, No.4, 26-33.
Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56, No.1, January, 6-21.
Gibson, S. & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of Educational Psychology Vol. 76, No.4, 569-582.
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: The search for universal in personality lexicons. In L. Wheeler (ED.). Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(2), 141-165. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Goodman, J. (1989). The nature of customer satisfaction. Quality Progress, 37-40.
Hellier, P. K., Geursen, G. M., Carr, R. A., & Rickard, J. A. (2003). Customer repurchase intention : A general structural equation model. European Journal of Marketing, 37 (11/12), 1762-1800.
Howard, J. A., & Sheth, J. N. (1969). The theory of buyer behavior. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2001). Educational administration: Theory, research and practice (6th ed.). New York:McGraw-Hill.

Jones, T. O.,& Sasser, W. E. (1995a). Why satisfied customer defect. Harvard Business Review, 85(2), 88-99.
Jones, T. O., & Sasser, W. E. (1995b) Why satisfied customers defect. Harvard Business Review, 73: 94-102.
Kotler, P. (1994). Marketing management: Analysis, planning implementation and control, ( 8th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P. (1997). Marketing management: Analysis, planning implementation and using the servoual model. The Service Industries Journal, Vol. 11(3), 324-343..
Kotler, P. (1999). Marketing management: Analysis, planning implementation and control, (10th ed.). Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing management: Analysis, planning implementation and control, (9th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing management (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Lawn Martin (1991). Social constructions of quality in teaching. Evaluation and Research in Education, Vol.5, No1-2, 67-77.
Marsh, H. W. (1982). SEEQ: A reliable, valid, and useful instrument for collecting students' evaluations of university teaching. British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 52, 77-95.
Marsh, H. W., & Bailey, M. (1991). Multidimensional students' evaluations of teaching effectiveness: A profile analysis, Australia, New South Wales: Geographic srce. /country of publication. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 350310).
Medley, D. M. (1979). The effectiveness of teachers. In P. L. Peterson & H.J. Walberg (Eds.). Research on teaching: Concepts, finding, and implications. Berkeley, CA : McCutchan.
Money, S. M.(1992). What is teaching effectiveness? A survey of student and teacher perceptions of teacher effectiveness. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 351056).
Neal, W. D. (1999). Satisfaction is Nice, but value drives loyalty. Journal of Marketing Research, 11, 20-23.
Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574-583.
Parikh, J. C., Patel, P., & Patel, M. M. (1984). Personality characteristics visa- vis teachers’ effectiveness. Perspectives in Psychological Researches, 7(1), 8-12.
Parish, T. S. (1993). Do Teacher’s Attitudes and Behaviors, as well as Students’ Behaviors, Relate to One Another? Education, 114(1), 61-62.
Ryans, D.G. (1960). Characteristics of teachers: A research study. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education.
Saaty, T. L., (1971). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 40, 9-10.
Saaty, T.L. and Takizawa, M. (1986). Dependence and Independence: From Linear Hierarchies to Nonlinear Networks. European Journal of Operational Research, 26(2),229-237.
Saaty, T. L. (1996). Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process. Pittsburg, PA: RWS Publications.
Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2001). Models, methods, concepts and applications of the analytic hierarchy process. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Seiders, K., Glenn B., Voss, Grewal, D. & Godfrey, A. L. (2005). Do satisfied customers buy more? Examining Moderating Influences in a retailing context. Journal of Marketing, 69 (4), 26-43.
Singh, G. (2002). Educational consumers or educational partners:A critical theory analysis. Elsevier Science Vol.13, Issues 5-6, 681-700.
Szymanski, D. M., & Henard, D. H. (2001). Customer satisfaction: A meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(1), 16-35.
Tang, L. P. (1994). Teaching evaluation in the college of business (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 374716).
Taylor, S. A. & Baker, T. L. (1994). An Assessment of the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction in the formation of consumers’ purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, 70 (2), 163-178.
Travers, J. F. (1979). Educational psychology. Harper & Row Publishers.
Wenzlaff, T. L. (1998). Dispositions and portfolio development: Is there a connection? Education, 118(4), 564-572.

Wilson, R. (1998). Report blasts research universities for poor teaching of undergraduates. Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 44, No. 33, A12-A13 Apr. 24, ERIC EJ565330.
Witty, P. (1947). An analysis of the personality traits of the effective teacher. Journal of Educational Research, 40, 662-671.
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2019-07-01起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2019-07-01起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw