Publication:

國中體育教育工作者對體適能納入超額比序的知與行-以臺中市為例

本研究目的：旨在探討不同背景變項臺中市國中體育教育工作者對體適能納入超額比序的認知、看法、應對策略及提出具體建議。方法：以自編之「臺中市國中體育教師對十二年國教超額比序納入體適能的認知與具體作法」問卷作為研究調查工具，經過描述性統計、獨立樣本t檢定、單因子變異數分析與Scheffe’s多重比較檢定等統計方法分析處理。結果：一、臺中市國中體育教育工作者對體適能納入超額比序的認知在不同工作項目變項達顯著差異。二、臺中市國中體育教育工作者對體適能納入超額比序的看法在不同學校類型、工作項目變項達顯著差異。三、臺中市國中體育教育工作者對體適能納入超額比序之應對策略在不同工作項目、學校規模變項達顯著差異。四、國中體育教育工作者認為學生不喜歡運動、坐式生活與3C產品盛行是體適能表現退步的主要原因；認為學生喜愛運動、體育教師要求與學校推廣會使學生體適能表現進步。五、國中體育教育工作者反對將體適能納入超額比序的主要原因為「成績有造假的疑慮」、「對身體殘弱或不適合施測體適能的學生不公平」與「體適能測驗本身誤差」等原因。建議：針對教育行政機關、學校與國中體育教育工作者及未來研究方向提出具體建議。

Purpose: This study purpose to understand different background junior high school physical educators cognition, view, coping strategies and offers specific suggestions for physical fitness included in comparing the ranking in Taichung City. Methods: This study was used the self-developed questionnaire of “ junior high school physical educators cognition and coping strategies for physical fitness which included in comparing the ranking over quotas in the 12-year compulsory education in Taichung City” as the research tool. Based on the data collected, this study used descriptive statistics, t-test , one-way ANOVA and Scheffe’s post hoc test to analyze the data. Results: 1. Different work items junior high school physical educators in Taichung City significant difference on cognition for physical fitness included in comparing the ranking. 2. Different types of schools, different work items junior high school physical educators in Taichung City significant difference on view for physical fitness included in comparing the ranking. 3. Different work items, different school size junior high school physical educators in Taichung City significant difference on coping strategies for physical fitness included in comparing the ranking. 4. High school physical educators think that students fitness performance had declined account of “not like exercise”, “sitting life”, and “3C products prevalent” , and they think that students fitness performance progress account of “like exercise”, “required by physical educators” and “promoted by school”. 5. High school physical educators oppose physical fitness included in comparing the ranking on account of “doubts about score fake”, “unfair for who body weak or unsuitable test students” and “physical fitness test itself error”. Proposal: According to the findings, the researcher offers some specific suggestions to “the relevant units of education”, “school”, “Physical Educators” and “future researchers”.