國民中學現任教師對零體罰教育政策態度之研究-以桃竹苗區四縣市為例

Abstract

本研究目的在探討目前桃竹苗區四縣市國中現任教師對於立法院於95年12月12日所修訂之教育基本法中第八條及第十五條規定（一般將之稱為「零體罰教育政策」）的態度。分析在桃竹苗區現任國中教師在不同背景變項下，對於體罰態度，零體罰教育政策的態度及零體罰教育政策實施後各構面的態度，根據研究結果，提供具體建議作為教育主管單位推動零體罰教育政策時之參考。 本研究以問卷調查的方式進行。使用工具為「桃竹苗區四縣市現任國中教師對零體罰教育政策態度調查問卷」。研究對象為桃竹苗區四縣市156所公私立國民中學現任教師，共發出問卷800份，有效問卷583份，有效回收率為72.875％。資料分析採用描述性統計分析、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析等統計方法。綜合研究發現，歸納結論如下： 一、持體罰態度的現任國中教師比例者較高，佔全部的73.24％。 二、對於「零體罰教育政策」實施，贊成者佔24.7%，無意見者佔38.9%， 不贊成者佔36.4%。比例相近，但仍以不贊成者居多。 三、不同背景變項教師對零體罰教育政策實施後的負面影響構面多呈現顯 著差異，並以最高學歷，職務，學校所在城鄉及不同體罰態度差異最 顯著。 四、在零體罰教育政策實施後，對管教學生的方式上偏向正向。但教師管 教態度並不會因為零體罰教育政策的實施而有改變。 五、多數教師均認為主管教育行政機關應儘早釐清「管教」、「處罰」與「體 罰」之關係，並研擬可行相關配套措施，藉以落實政策之推行。The purposes of this research were to understand how the current junior high school teachers in Tao-Chu-Miao District, Taiwan, feel about the “Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy (according to the Basic Educational Regulations Number 8 and Number 15, which were emended on the 12th of December, 2006)”, and to analyze the teachers’ attitudes towards corporal punishment, zero corporal punishment policy, and the application of zero corporal punishment policy under a variety of different backgrounds. Furthermore, this research is also aimed to provide specific suggestions for the governmental administration to boost the implementation of the Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy in Tao-Chu-Miao District. This research is conducted through making a questionnaire survey “The Attitudes of Current Junior High School Teachers in Tao-Chu-Miao District towards Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy.” The objects of the study are current teachers from 156 public and private junior high schools. Altogether 800 questionnaires are distributed and 583 of them are considered effective, with a 72.875% effective return rate. Statistical methods as the descriptive statistical analysis, the independent sample t test and the one-way ANOVA are used to analyze all the collected data. The study shows: I. The majority of the teachers think it is proper to adopt reasonable corporal punishment in their teaching, which takes up to 73.24% of the total effective objects.

II. 24.7% of the objects are for “Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy,” 36.4% of the objects are against “Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy,” and 38.9% of the objects have no comments towards it. The proportions of those who are for and against Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy are close, yet that of the latter is still larger than that of the former.

III. The teachers’ negative attitudes towards the Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy vary enormously because of different personal backgrounds, among which the most dominant factors are the teachers’ own academic backgrounds, job positions, and the locations of the schools where they work (whether the school is in the city or countryside) IV. After the government brought the Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy into force, a teacher’s methods of disciplining students have become more appropriate. Yet, a teacher’s attitudes of disciplining students haven’t changed much.

V. The majority of the teachers think that the educational administration should clarify the differences and relations among “discipline”, “punishment” and “corporal punishment” as soon as possible, and that the administration should also have feasible relevant supplementary plans in order to implement the Zero Corporal Punishment Education Policy successfully.