Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/122449
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisor張奕華zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisorChang, I-Huaen_US
dc.contributor.author賴怡年zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorLai, Yi-Nienen_US
dc.creator賴怡年zh_TW
dc.creatorLai, Yi-Nienen_US
dc.date2019en_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-07T02:15:07Z-
dc.date.available2019-03-07T02:15:07Z-
dc.date.issued2019-03-07T02:15:07Z-
dc.identifierG0106171003en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/122449-
dc.description碩士zh_TW
dc.description國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description教育行政與政策研究所zh_TW
dc.description106171003zh_TW
dc.description.abstract1980年代開始臺灣開始推動發展觀光餐旅事業,不僅在高中職設有餐旅科,大專院校也設有專門的餐旅學校。餐旅業可以說是最國際化的一門事業,因為接待的客人來自四面八方,而臺灣的餐旅教育大多基於本國餐旅人才所需,針對我國高中職餐旅群所進行的國際教育研究可說是鳳毛麟角。有鑑於此,本研究的主要目的在建立高中職餐旅群國際教育指標,以作為教育行政機關推動國際教育的參考。\n本研究以目前大專院校任教且具有國際教育研究相關經驗、高中職餐旅群相關行政及課程教師為對象,共計10位專家學者作為研究對象。首先進行文獻探討,並以文獻探討的結果為基礎,建立高中職餐旅群國際教育指標初稿,經過兩次德懷術問卷調查建立指標體系,接著再以層級分析法建立各項指標之權重。\n本研究建構之高中職餐旅群國際教育指標及權重體系包括 4 個層面、40 項指標。4 個層面依其重要性依序為「情意」 (36.9%)、「認知」(29.0%)、「技能」 (18.6%)、「支持系統」(15.6%);最後依據研究結果提出建議,俾供我國行政機關以及後續研究之參考。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractTourism is always considered as the most international business because tourists come from every corner of the world. From 1980s, tourism becomes an important business in Taiwanese industrial market. More and more departments were established in vocational schools, as well as tourism college in advance education. However, the researches focused on the international education among students in tourism and restaurant department in high and vocational schools are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to construct indicators for international education of students of tourism and restaurant department in high and vocational schools.\nFollowing the Delphi method, ten experts including scholars’ expert in international education, teachers and educational administrators from tourism related high schools were invited to have two Delphi rounds questionnaire. Based on the determined indicator system and attributes, further surveys were conducted, in conjunction with analytic hierarchy process (AHP), to determine the priority weigh for each indicator.\nThere are four criteria and 40 indicators for the indicators for international education of students of tourism and restaurant department in high and vocational schools. In the order of importance, they are (1) Affective (36.9%), (2) Cognitive (29.0%), (3) Psychomotor (18.6%) and (4) Support (15.6%). According to the findings, suggestions were provided to educational administration authorities to provide guidelines for promoting international education in tourism and restaurant department in high and vocational schools.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents第一章 緒論 1\n第一節 研究動機 1\n第二節 研究目的與待答問題 7\n第三節 名詞釋義 8\n第四節 研究方法與步驟 9\n第五節 研究範圍與限制 11\n第二章 文獻探討 13\n第一節 國際教育的起源與發展 13\n第二節 國際教育的意涵 15\n第三節 美英紐日高中職國際教育之現況 19\n第四節 臺灣高中職國際教育的現況 28\n第五節 國際教育白皮書與國際教育初擬指標 33\n第三章 研究設計與實施 41\n第一節 研究架構 41\n第二節 研究對象與取樣方法 43\n第三節 研究工具 46\n第四節 實施程序 50\n第五節 資料處理與統計分析 54\n第四章 研究結果與結論 61\n第一節 德懷術問卷調查結果分析 61\n第二節 高中職餐旅群學生國際教育指標相對權重分析 93\n第三節 綜合討論 106\n第五章 結論與建議 111\n第一節 結論 111\n第二節 建議 116\n參考文獻 119\n專家審題邀請函 125\n附錄一 125\n附錄二 126\n附錄三 133\n附錄四 144\n附錄五 155zh_TW
dc.format.extent4507223 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.source.urihttp://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106171003en_US
dc.subject高中職zh_TW
dc.subject餐旅群zh_TW
dc.subject國際教育zh_TW
dc.subject層級分析zh_TW
dc.subjectHigh and vocational schoolsen_US
dc.subjectTourism and restaurant departmenten_US
dc.subjectInternational educationen_US
dc.subjectAnalytic hierarchy process(AHP)en_US
dc.title高中職餐旅群學生國際教育指標建構之研究:層級分析法之應用zh_TW
dc.titleA Research on the Indicators Construction for International Education of Students of Tourism and Restaurant Department in High and Vocational Schools: An Application of Analytic Hierarchy Processen_US
dc.typethesisen_US
dc.relation.reference壹、中文文獻\nCareer就業情報(2006),社會新鮮人就業力調查。Career 就業情報,48-50。 取自:http://blog.career.com.tw/managing/default_content.aspx?blogid=54\n田振榮(2003)。技職教育:找回技職教育的光榮與尊嚴。載於教育政策研究小組(主編),教育發展的新方向:為教改開處方研討會論文集(131-143)。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學教育政策研究小組。\n行政院主計總處(2017)。就業、失業速報統計表。取自:https://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=42616&ctNode=3102\n朱啟華(2013)。臺灣國際教育的反思—以《中小學國際教育白皮書》為例。嘉大教育研究學刊,30,1-20。\n朱經明(2014)。教育及心理統計學。臺北市:五南。\n宋方珺、楊振昇(2017)。從國際交流活動析論中小學國際教育之實施成效。學校行政,107 ,17-34。\n李英明(2004)。國際關係理論的啟蒙與反思。臺北市:揚智。\n李勝富(2001)。美國高中高職學生國際教育交流活動。教育部電子報,344。\n余鎮綸(2009)。跟著教育去旅行— 國際教育旅行實施現況與挑戰:以國立文華高級中學為例。第六屆研究生暨「高等教育教學發展與學習評量:國際經驗比較」國際學術研討會,南投縣。\n技專校院入學測驗中心(2018)。四技二專統一入學測驗各類別報名人數統計。取自:https://www.tcte.edu.tw/four/majtype107.php\n林生傳(2003)。教育研究法:全方位的統計與分析。臺北市:心理。\n林明地(2013)。我國中小學國際教育政策主軸與學校實踐分析。教育研究月刊,230,13-25。\n邱玉蟾(2012)。全球化時代國際教育中的意識型態。課程研究,7(2), 1-30。\n洪久賢(2003)。從美澳餐旅教育發展模式反思臺灣餐旅教育之發展。師大學報: 教育類,48(2),125-150。\n洪久賢、宋慧娟及呂欣怡(2013)。從英瑞餐旅高等教育之發展反思臺灣餐旅高等教育之發展。餐旅暨家政學刊,2(2),229-243。\n洪雯柔(2012)。紐西蘭中等學校推動國際教育之現況分析。教育資料集刊,54,207-230。\n施建裕、黃乃熒、謝念慈、蘇麗美(2009)。推動國際教育談中學教師專業發展。2009 年海峽兩岸基礎教育論壇,江蘇南京。\n徐明珠、王揚智(2006)。臺灣技職教育國際化之研究。致遠管理學院學報,1,37-50\n許嘉麟(2017)。臺灣西式料理廚師在餐飲教育和海外學習之現況和轉變。中國飲食文化,13(2),159-198。\n教育部(2017)。教育部統計簡訊。取自: http://stats.moe.gov.tw/files/brief/高級中等學校專業群科(高職)應屆畢業生流向概況.pdf。\n郭昭佑(2001)。教育評鑑指標建構方法探究。國教學報,13,251-278。\n教育部(2011)。中小學國際教育白皮書。臺北市: 作者。\n陳弘哲(2010)。英國中小學階段國際教育策略之研究(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/8p2n6p。\n陳怡如(2011)。臺灣中等學校國際教育實施現況與未來發展。教育資料輯刊,50,1-26。\n陳宗盈、連詠心(譯)多元文化主義與全球社會(原作者:Kivisto, P.)。臺北:韋伯文化。(原出版年2002)。\n陳美如、郭昭佑 (2017)。國際教育評鑑實踐之研究。中等教育,68(1), 22-40。\n陳意尹、蔡清華 (2014)。美國國際教育政策與做法現況之分析兼論其對臺灣國際教育之啟示。國民教育學報,11,153-176。\n陳瀅(2009)。日本國際教育旅行之研究(碩士論文)。取自華藝線上圖書館。(系統編號10.6846/TKU.2009.00199)。\n黃乃熒(2009)。臺灣推動中小學國際教育之行動建構。教育資料集刊,42,1-23\n黃冠勳(2014)。國民中小學推動國際教育之迷思與困境。學校行政,92,164-181。\n張鈿富、馬榕曼 (2004)。歐盟義務教育階段品質計畫。教育研究月刊,123, 32-48。\n張奕華、許正妹(2008)。研究方法與軟體應用。臺北市:心理。\n楊深坑(2009)。比較教育的意義、目的、研究類型與方法策略。載於楊深坑、李奉儒(主編),比教育國際教育(17-44)。臺北市:高等教育。
\n蔡靜儀(2013)。英國中小學國際教育之學校國際化研究。真理大學人文學報,14,29-48。\n詹盛如(2011)。國際教育政策: 中央與地方政府之比較分析。臺北市中等學校校長協會第 02期電子報。 取自 http://web/. fg. tp. edu. tw/~ tispa/blog/epaper/02/page. htm\n禇志鵬(2009)。Analytic Hierarchy Process Theory 層級分析法 AHP。\n劉協成(2006)。德懷術之理論與實務初探。教師之友,47(4),91-99。\n劉慶仁(2006)。英國中小學國際教育之推展。教育資料與研究,71,87-108。\n蘇恆安(2007)。美國大學餐旅教育通識課程的角色與份量:借鏡與省思。餐旅暨家政學刊,3(3),377-390。\n貳、英文文獻\nAllport, C. (2000). Thinking globally, acting loally: Lifelong learning and the implications for university staff. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(1), 37-46.\nAlger, C. F., & Harf, J. E. (1984). Global education: Why? For whom? About what ? Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.\nAltbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education 11, 290-305.\nAnttila-Muilu, S. (2004). Globalised education: The international baccalaureate. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 13(4), 364-369.\nCambridge, J., & Thompson, J. (2004). Internationalism and globalization as contexts for international education. Compass, 34(2), 161-175.\nCoulby, D., & Zambeta, E. (2005). Trends in globalization. In D. Coulby & E. Zambeta (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2005: Globalization and nationalism in education (pp.237-248). London, UK: Routledge Falmer.\nCrossley, M., & Watson, K. (2003). Comparative and international research in education: Globalization, context and difference. London, UK: Routledge Falmer.\nde Wit, H. (2002). Internationalization of higher education in the United States of America and Europe: A historical, Comparative and Conceptual Analysis, London: Greenwood Press.\nDalkey, N. C. (1969). An experimental study of group opinion. Futures, 1 (5), 408-426.\nDalkey, N. C., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9 (3), 458-467.\nEpstein, E. H. (1994). Comparative and international education: Overview and historical development. In T. Husen & T. N. Poslethwaite (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of education (pp.918-923). Oxford, UK: Pergamon.\nFriedman, T. L. (2000). The lexus and the olive tree. New York, NY: Anchor Book.\nHanvey, R. G. (1976). An attainable global perspective. New York, NY: Center for Global Perspectives in Education.\nHasson, F., Keeney, S., & Mckenna, H. (2000). Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32, 1008-1015. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x\nHayden, M. (2006). Introduction to international education: International schools and their communities. London, UK: Sage.\nHsu, C. C., & Sanford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12(10), 1-8. http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=12&n=10\nHuilan, W. (2007). Education and the discussions on globalization. Chinese Education and Society, 40(1), 22-35.\nInternational Division, MOE (2007). The international education agenda: A strategy for 2007-2012. Wellington, NZ: Author.\nInternational Division, MOE (2010). Export education innovation program strategic overview and operational guidelines. Retrieved from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/~/media/MinEdu/Files/EducationSectors/InternationalEducation/Initiatives/EEIPFinalPlanPDF.pdf\nJones, E., & Brown, S. (Eds.). (2007). Internationalizing higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.\nKagan, S. L., & Stewart, V. (2004). International education in the schools: The state of the Field. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(3), 229-235.\nKivisto, P. (2002). Multiculturalism in a global society. Great Britain, UK: Blackwell.\nKnight, J. (1999). A time of turbulence and transformation for internationalization. Research Monograph, 14. Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Bureau for International Education.\nMarshall, H. (2006). The global education terminology debate: Exploring some of the issues. In M. C. Hayden, J. Levy, & J. J. Thompson (Eds.), Handbook of research in international education (pp. 38-50). London, UK: Sage.\nPandit, K. (2009). Leading internationalization. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99(4), 645-656.\nSaaty, T. L. (1971). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 40, 9-10.\nSteger, M. B. (2009). Globalization: A very short introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.\nTrilokekar, R. D. (2015). From soft power to economic diplomacy? A comparison of the changing rationales and roles of the US and Canadian federal governments in international education. Research & Occasional Paper Series: CSHE. 2.15. Center for Studies in Higher Education.\nUNESCO (1974). Recommendation concerning education for international understanding, cooperation and peace and education relation to human rights and fundamental freedoms. Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.phpURL_ID=13088&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html\nvon der Gracht, A. (2012). Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: Review and implications for future quality assurance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(8), 1525-1536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.04.013\nZambeta, E. (2005). The survival of nationalism in a globalized system. In D. Coulby & E. Zambeta (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2005: Globalization and nationalism in education (pp. 193-212). London, UK: Routledge Falmer.zh_TW
dc.identifier.doi10.6814/THE.NCCU.EAP.001.2019.F02en_US
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypethesis-
item.grantfulltextrestricted-
Appears in Collections:學位論文
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat
100301.pdf4.4 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.