Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/134453
題名: 我們這一班-國防大學政大領導決策專班的學習歷程與軍文交流
Our Class--the Learning Process and Military-Civilian Interaction of the NDU/NCCU Leadership and Decision-making Program
作者: 高國銘
Kao, Kuo-Ming
貢獻者: 黃東益
Huang, Tong-Yi
高國銘
Kao, Kuo-Ming
關鍵詞: 學習歷程
軍文交流
參與觀察
深度訪談
Learning history
Military-civilian interaction
Participant observation
In-depth interview
日期: 2021
上傳時間: 1-Apr-2021
摘要: 因應國際情勢脈動,未來戰爭須培養現代化卓越人才,國防部為健全軍事教育體制透過人力培育之近、中、長程規劃,推動多專培訓,以培育優質人力,自107年度在軍事指參方面結合國立政治大學社科院行政管理碩士學程開辦領導決策專班,本研究針對此專班第二屆學員運用參與觀察及深度訪談等方法研討其學習歷程窒礙及軍文交流發展,經由受訪者分享的經驗,反思專班制度窒礙和興革建議,以提供國防教育制度運用參考方向。\n十年樹木百年樹人,可見人才培育之不易,在兩校軍文交流過程雖然現階段僅提升各自思想、眼界及相互形象之了解,但以長遠觀點來看,軍人領導經驗與文官創意思考的交織,能引導更多公務部門投入國防事務活化軍文交流,以提升國家整體人員素質及政策執行力。在此軍文交流環境中,將本專班學習歷程中所見利益內涵及追求目標,經研究者解讀其對於個人行為策略暨組織決策模式調整之意義,並將反思結果以建構主義理論方式探究國防大學及政治大學政策現況,提出可行性建議以供後續政策參考。
According to the development of the international situation, it’s important to cultivate talents for further warfare. The Ministry of National Defense has promoted military education system to foster human resource by short-term, mid-term and long-term programs. They offers multi-aspect education to generate high-quality manpower. In military command and staff course, it has been cooperating with Master for Eminent Public Administrators to create a specific class for training leadership and decision-making since 2018. This study aimed at the second session of this class to conclude the difficulties of the learning process and the development of military-civilian interaction through participant observation and in-depth interview methods. Those gaps shared by the interviewees help us to introspect more about the innovations and, to give a reference for the national defense education system.\nIt takes much longer to educate a person than growing a tree, so human resource development is way difficult. The military-civilian interaction between these two universities only facilitate their understanding from their own perspective at this moment. To take a longer view, the interweaving of military leadership experience and civilian creative thinking can induct more public departments into defense affairs to enhance the quality of personnel management and policy implementation. Under this circumstance, we can take advantage of the findings regarding the motivations, strategies and learning effectiveness of this class to reflect on the follow-up cooperative policy between National Defense University and National Cheng-Chi University .
參考文獻: 中文文獻\n中華民國106年國防報告書編纂委員會(2017)。中華民國106年國防報告書。臺北:國防部。\n中華民國108年國防報告書編纂委員會(2019)。中華民國108年國防報告書。臺北:國防部。\n王克先(1987)。學習心理學。臺北:桂冠圖書公司。\n王昭正與朱瑞淵(譯)(1999)。參與觀察法(Danny L. Jorgensen原著)。臺北:弘智文化。\n江明修(2009)。研究方法論。臺北:智勝文化。\n江明修與曾冠球(2009)。政府再造:跨部門治理的觀點。國家菁英季刊,5-1,97-122。\n呂金燮、黃慈(2006)。人類學習與認知。臺北:國立空中大學。\n李勇輝(2017)。學習動機、學習策略與學習成效關係之研究-以數位學習為例。 經營管理學刊,14,68-86。\n李柏諭(2011)。跨部門治理的理論與實踐:以蓮潭國際文教會館的委外經驗為例。政治大學公共行政學報,40,41-76。\n林天祐(1996)。認識研究倫理。教育資料與研究,12,57-63。\n姜雪影(譯)(2018)。先問,為什麼。臺北市:天下雜誌。\n胡幼慧(1996)。質性研究的分析與寫成。載於胡幼慧 (主編),質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(159-170)。臺北:巨流。\n胡幼慧(1996)。轉型中的質性研究。載於胡幼慧 (主編),質性研究:理論、方法及本土女性研究實例(3-20)。臺北:巨流。\n夏林清(2004)。一盞夠用的燈:辨識發現的路徑。應用心理研究,23,131-156。\n孫本初。2001。 公共管理 Public Management 。臺北市:智勝文化。\n徐明、林至善(2008)。服務-學習的基本概念與理論基礎。載於黃玉(總校閱),從服務中學習:跨領域服務—學習理論與實務(19-56)。臺北:洪葉。\n翁明賢(2010)。解構與建構:台灣的國家安全戰略研究(2000-2008)。臺北:五南圖書出版\n國家教育研究院(2000)。學習歷程模式Model of the Learning Pr-ocess,2021年1月25日,取自:http://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1314450/?index=3\n國家教育研究院(2000)。動機理論Theories of Motivation,2021年1月25日,取自:https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1309154/\n張春興(2007)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北:台灣東華。\n莫大華(1998)。從美軍戰爭學院教育論我國官方戰略教育─文武關係的觀察。問題與研究,37(11),67-78。\n陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北:五南。\n鈕文英(2007)。教育研究方法論文寫作。臺北:雙葉。\n黃淑燕(2003)。學校行政人員反省思考與實踐之探討。學校行政雙月刊,24,35-42。\n黃富順(1985)。成人學習動機-成人參與繼續教育動機取向。高雄:復文。\n黃富順(1992)。成人的學習動機-成人參與繼續教育動機取向之探討。高雄:復文。\n黃富順(2002)。成人學習。臺北:五南。\n楊政學(2016)。研究方法。新北:普林斯頓國際。\n溫金豐(2016)。組織理論與管理(第四版)。臺北:華泰。\n葉重新(2004)。教育研究法。臺北:心理。\n劉若蘭、楊昌裕(2008)。連結服務與學習—反思。載於黃玉(總校閱),從服務中學習:跨領域服務—學習理論與實務(229-279頁)。台北:洪葉。\n劉真如(譯)(2018)。梅迪奇效應:跨界思考的技術,改變世界的力量(2018年經典修訂版)(Frans Johansson原著)。臺北:商周出版。\n蔡敦浩、洪富峰、李清潭、吳濟華、張玉山、李正芳與羅基益(2000)。高雄都會區建設方案之研究。政府研究資訊系統,2021年1月25日,取自:https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=610140\n瞿海源、畢恆達、劉長萱與楊國樞(2015)。社會及行為科學研究法。臺北:東華書局。\n顏章豪(2006)。我國全民國防教育之政經分析,1949-2005。臺灣大學政治學研究所學位論文,未出版,臺北。\n \n英文文獻\nAbramson, M. A., & Balutis, A. P. (2008). The Challenge of Managing across Boundaries. The Public Manager, 37(1): 52-54.\nBason, C., & Colligan, P. (2014). Look to Government—Yes, Gov-ernment—for New Social Innovations. Harvard Business Review Home. Retrieved November 20, 2020, from https://hbr.org/20-14/11/look-to-governmentyes-governmentfor-new-social-innovati-ons\nBerger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The Social Construction of Reality. London: Penguin Books.\nBoshier, R. (1977). Motivational Orientations Re-visited: Life-Space Motives and the Education Participation Scale. Adult Education, 27(2), 89-115\nBrooks, R. A., & Stanley, E. A. (2007). Creating Military Power: The Sourse of Military Effectiveness. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.\nBurck, C. (2005). Comparing qualitative research methodologies for systemic research: The use of grounded theory, discourse analysis and narrative analysis. Journal of Family Therapy, 27, 237-262.\nBurgess, P. (1971), Reasons for adult participation in-group educational activity, Adult Education. 22(1), 3-29.\nClandinin, D. J. (2006). Narrative inquiry: a methodology for studying lived experience. Research Studies in Music Education, 27, 44-54.\nKotter, J. P., & Cohen, D. S. (2002). The Heart of Change: Real-life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations, Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.\nLattuca, L. R., Voigt, L. J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Theoretical support and researchable questions. The Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 23-48.\nMezirow, J. (1991). Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.\nMezirow, J. (1995). Transformation Theory of Adult Learning. In M. Welton (Ed.), In Defense of the Lifeworld: Critical Perspectives on Adult Learning (39-70). New York: State University of New York Press.\nOllerenshaw, J., & Creswell, J. (2002). Narrative research: a comparison OF two re-storying data analysis approaches. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(3), 329-347.\nPeak, L., & Brown, J. M. (1980). A Conceptual Framework and Process for Identifying in the Service Needs of Vocational Educators Serving Special Needs Populations. Pilot Test Report. ERIC: ED198288.\nSpradley, J. P. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.\nTough, A. (1971). The Adult’s Learning Projects: A Fresh Approach to Theory and Practice in Adult Education. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.\nVan den Bulck, J. (1999). Mediation: Toward a media theory of the social construction of reality. Communication, 25(1-2), 3-11.\nWolf, A. (1995). Competence based assessment. In Raven, D & Stephenson, J. (Eds), Competence in the Learning Society(453-466). New York: Peter Lang.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
行政管理碩士學程
108921323
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108921323
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
132301.pdf2.64 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


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