Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/95352| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 吳政達<br>張奕華 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | 高雅曼 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator | 高雅曼 | zh_TW |
| dc.date | 2009 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-05-09T07:45:30Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2016-05-09T07:45:30Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2016-05-09T07:45:30Z | - |
| dc.identifier | G0941710111 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/95352 | - |
| 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.description | 94171011 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | 本研究之主要目的在於透過文獻的探討，瞭解角色定義幅度與組織公民行為的相關研究，並輔以質性訪談瞭解教師角色定義幅度之內涵，最後運用量化統計分析方法探查國民中學教師組織公民行為與角色定義幅度之間的關連性，以及角色定義幅度對組織公民行為的預測力。\n本研究以700位國中教師為研究對象，有效問卷554份，問卷回收後以描述統計分析、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、皮爾森積差相關及結構方程模式等統計方法進行資料分析。根據研究之結果與分析，歸納主要結論如下：\n一、國民中學教師組織公民行為之表現屬於中等程度。\n二、國民中學教師角色定義幅度之界定屬於中等程度。\n三、性別、年齡與現任職務在組織公民行為上有顯著的差異。\n四、現任職務在角色定義幅度上有顯著的差異。\n五、國民中學教師角色定義幅度與組織公民行為有高度正相關。\n六、國民中學教師角色定義幅度可以預測組織公民行為。\n最後，根據研究結果，研究者提出若干建議以提供教育相關人員以及未來研究之參考。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The object of this study is to explore the influence of junior high school teachers’ Role Definition on Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). First of all, through literature review to understand related research of Role Definition and OCB. And then, explore connotation of teacher’s Role Definition by qualitative interviews. In the end, use quantitative analysis to explore relationship between Role Definition and OCB of junior high school’s teacher, and prediction of Role Definition to OCB.\n\nThis study conducts a questionnaire survey on 700 junior high school’s teachers; the usable surveys were 554. The collected data were analyzed by using the descriptive statistic, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Pearson Product-moment Correlation, structural equation modeling and other statistical methods.\n\nAccording to the finding, the conclusions of this study are:\n1. The OCB performance of junior high school teachers was moderate.\n2. The Role Definition of junior high school teachers was moderate.\n3. The gender, age and current position in the OCB have significant differences.\n4. Role Definition of current position has significant differences.\n5. School teachers’ Role Definition and OCB are highly positive correlation.\n6. School teachers’ Role Definition can predict OCB\n\nFinally, according to the result, the researchers bring up some suggestions as references for educational personnel and further studies. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 目 次\n目 次 i\n\n表 次 iii\n\n圖 次 v\n\n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 3\n第三節 名詞釋義 4\n第四節 研究方法與步驟 5\n第五節 研究範圍與限制 8\n\n第二章 文獻探討 9\n第一節 組織公民行為之內涵與相關研究 9\n第二節 角色定義幅度之內涵與相關研究 26\n第三節 角色定義與組織公民行為之相關研究 41\n\n第三章 研究設計與實施 49\n第一節 研究架構與假設 49\n第二節 研究對象 51\n第三節 研究方法 53\n第四節 研究工具 53\n第五節 研究流程 74\n第六節 資料分析 75\n\n第四章 研究結果分析與討論 79\n第一節 國民中學教師組織公民行為之現況 79\n第二節 國民中學教師角色定義之現況 81\n第三節 不同背景變項教師組織公民行為之差異 83\n第四節 不同背景變項教師角色定義幅度之差異 94\n第五節 國民中學教師角色定義幅度與組織公民行為關係 110\n\n第五章 結論與建議 115\n第一節 結論 115\n第二節 建議 117\n\n參考文獻 119\n壹、中文部分 119\n貳、英文部分 121\n\n附錄 125\n附錄一 內容效度之問卷 125\n附錄二 預試問卷 134\n附錄三 正式問卷 137\n\n \n表 次\n表2-1 組織公民行為構面分類的主要表現內涵 20\n表2-2 組織公民行為構面分類的主要影響對象 22\n表2-3 各縣市教師聘約準則之比較 31\n表2-4 各縣市教師聘約規定教師工作內容之趨勢表 38\n表2-5 國內有關教師工作內容研究之趨勢表 39\n表2-6 角色定義與組織公民行為之相關研究 44\n表3-1 預試之抽樣說明 52\n表3-2 正式施測之抽樣說明 52\n表3-3 教師工作內容量表初稿題目表 54\n表3-4 組織公民行為量表初稿題目表 60\n表3-5 內容效度名單 60\n表3-6 國民中學教師角色定義幅度量表內容效度統計表 61\n表3-7 國民中學教師組織公民行為量表內容效度統計表 64\n表3-8 角色定義幅度量表之預試題目 65\n表3-9 組織公民行為量表之預試題目 66\n表3-10 角色定義幅度量表信度分析摘要表 68\n表3-11 組織公民行為量表信度分析摘要表 68\n表3-12 角色定義幅度量表測量模式適配度分析表 71\n表3-13 組織公民行為量表測量模式適配度分析表 72\n表4-1 組織公民行為及其因素之平均數與標準差 N=554 79\n表4-2 組織公民行為各題目之平均數與標準差 N=554 80\n表4-3 角色定義幅度及其因素之平均數與標準差 N=554 81\n表4-4 角色定義幅度各題目之平均數與標準差 N=554 82\n表4-5 不同性別教師之組織公民行為t考驗摘要表 84\n表4-6 不同年齡組織公民行為變異數摘要表 86\n表4-7 不同教育程度組織公民行為t考驗摘要表 87\n表4-8 不同服務年資組織公民行為變異數摘要表 88\n表4-9 不同現任職務教師組織公民行為變異數摘要表 90\n表4-10 不同學校規模教師組織公民行為變異數摘要表 91\n表4-11 不同背景變項在組織公民行為之差異 94\n表4-12 不同性別角色定義幅度t考驗摘要表 96\n表4-13 不同教師年齡組織公民行為變異數摘要表 97\n表4-14 不同教育程度教師角色定義幅度t考驗摘要表 100\n表4-15 不同服務年資教師之角色定義幅度變異數摘要表 101\n表4-16 不同現任職務教師角色定義幅度變異數摘要表 104\n表4-17 不同學校規模教師組織公民行為變異數摘要表 105\n表4-18 不同背景變項在角色定義幅度之差異 109\n表4-19 國民中學教師角色定義幅度與組織公民行為各層面相關係數分析表 111\n表4-20 角色定義幅度與組織公民行為模式適配度分析 112\n表5-1 本研究假設驗證結果整理表 115\n\n \n圖 次\n圖1-1 研究步驟圖 7\n圖2-1 組織公民行為構面的同心模型 17\n圖3-1 研究架構圖 49\n圖3-2 角色定義幅度量表一階驗證性因素分析之初始結果模式圖 69\n圖3-3 角色定義幅度量表一階驗證性因素分析之刪題後結果模式圖 71\n圖3-4 組織公民行為量表之一階驗證性因素分析模式圖 73\n圖3-5 研究流程圖 74\n圖3-6 研究假設模式 76\n圖4-1 角色定義幅度與組織公民行為之結構方程模式 113 | zh_TW |
| dc.source.uri | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0941710111 | en_US |
| dc.subject | 組織公民行為 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 角色定義幅度 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 混合方法 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | 國民中學教師角色定義幅度對組織公民行為影響之研究-質量混合方法之應用 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | The influence of Junior High School teachers’ role definition on organizational citizenship behavior –The application of mixed method | en_US |
| dc.type | thesis | en_US |
| dc.relation.reference | 壹、中文部分\n王文中、陳雪珠（1999）。新進國中教師主要工作內容之分析。教育與心理研究，22(1)，87-122。\n台灣教育長期追蹤資料庫(2004)。教師的工作內容與時間調查。2009年1月16日，取自http://www.teps.sinica.edu.tw/TEPSNews/TEPS~News_014.pdf\n朱經明（2005）。教育及心理統計學。臺北市：五南。\n吳明清（1996）。臺灣地區國民小學教師服務狀況之調查研究。臺北市：國立教育資料館。\n李碧娟（2002）。國中教師教學自主之研究－以一位東部國中教師為例。國立東華大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。\n沈坤鴻(2005)。國民小學教師工作內容分析。國立中正大學心理學所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。\n周怡君（2006）。國小校長家長式領導與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。國立臺南大學教育經營與管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。\n周祝瑛、陳威任（1996）。國中日常教學活動之生態硏究。臺北市：行政院教育改革審議委員會。\n林佳潓（2004）。知覺組織支持與組織公民行為:角色定義幅度之中介效果。中原大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。\n林詩涵（2005）。角色界定與組織公民行為之關連性探討。國立東華大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。\n邱麗蓉、單小琳（2005）。國民小學組織公平與組織公民行為關係之研究。康寧學報，7，1-44。\n胡雅棠（2008）。教師覺知校長服務領導與教師組織公民行為的關係研究-以台南市國民中學為例。國立臺南大學教育經營與管理研究所學校經營與管理教學碩士班碩士論文，未出版，臺南市。\n徐玉真（2008）。幼稚園教師組織信任與組織公民行為關係之研究---兼論隱涵領導理論對信任的影響。國立政治大學幼兒教育所碩士碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。\n張瑛儒（2009）。學校教師組織信任與組織公民行為關係之研究以嘉義縣國民中學為例。國立嘉義大學教育行政與政策發展研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義是。\n許道然（2002）。公部門組織信任與組織公民行為關係之研究。國立政治大學公共行政學系博士論文，未出版，臺北市。\n許籐繼、羅綸新（2006）。國民中小學教師擔任校外交通導護工作之研究。師大學報，51(2)，237-256。\n陳新文（2004）。教師對行政工作的角色定義與兼任意願關係之研究---以桃園地區國中教師為樣本。元智大學管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。\n陳源豐（2000）。繁重的國小教師工作。2009年1月16日，取自http://forum.frontier.org.tw/hef/viewtopic.php?topic=6079&forum=1\n劉之穎（1998）。教師生涯起步走。臺北市：幼獅文化。\n蔡孟眞（2002）。角色定義幅度與組織公民行為：前置要素之探討。中原大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。\n蔡孟眞（2002）。角色定義幅度與組織公民行為：前置要素之探討。中原大學心理學研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。\n盧婉君（2004）。組織公民行為的角色定義對其與互動公正間關係之影響探討--以中華電信為例。國立交通大學管理學院碩士在職專碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。\n鍾蕙如(2004)。主管-部屬交換品質、工作角色認知與工作負荷量對員工績效之影響 。 國立東華大學企業管理學系碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。\n韓曉磊（2007）。自定義角色理論在知識型員工激勵中的應用。雲南財貿學院學報社會科學版，22（6），128-129。\n鐘晨芳（2008）。國民小學校長教學領導與教師組織公民行為關係之研究。國立新竹教育大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。\n貳、英文部分\nAnderson, R. D., Jerman, R. E., & Constantin, J. A. (1979). A causal analysis of environment-reward-satisfaction linkages for the sales representative. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 7(11), 154-162.\nBachrach, D. G., & Jex, S. M. (2000). Organizational citizenship and mood: An experimental test of perceived job breadth. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(3), 641-663.\nBateman, T. S., & Organ, D.W. (1983). Job satisfaction and the good soldier: The relationship between effect and employee “citizenship”. Academy of Management Journal, 26 (4), 587-595.\nBlakely, G. L., Srivastava, A., & Moorman, R. H. (2005). The effects of nationality, work role centrality, and work locus of control on role definitions of OCB. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 12(1), 103-117.\nBorman, W. C., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1997). Task performance and contextual performance: The meaning for personnel selection research. Human Performance, 10(2), 99-109. \nBrief, A. P., & Motowidlo, S. J. (1986). Prosocial organizational behaviors. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 710-725.\nColeman, V. I., & Borman, W. C. (2000). Investigating the underlying structure of the citizenship performance domain. Human Resource Management Review, 10, 25-44.\nCoyle-Shapiro, J. A-M., Kessler, I., & Purcell, J. (2004). Exploring organizationally directed citizenship behavior: Reciprocity or ‘it`s my job’? Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 85-106.\nDeluga, R. J. (1995). The relation between trust in the supervisor and subordinate organizational citizenship behavior. Military Psychology, 7(1), 1-16.\nDiPaola, M., & Tschannen-Moran, M. (2001). Organizational citizenship behavior in schools and its relationship to school climate. Journal of School Leadership, 11(5), 424-447.\nFarh, J. L., Earley, P. C., & Lin, S. C. (1997). Impetus for action: A cultural analysis of justice and organizational citizenship behavior in Chinese society. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(3), 421-444.\nFarth, J. L., Zhong, C. B., & Organ, D. W. (2004). Organizational citizenship behavior in the People’s Republic of China. Organization Science, 15, 241-253.\nGraen, G. (1976). Role-making processes within complex organizations. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp.1201-1245). Chicago: Rand McNally.\nGraham, J. W. (1991). An essay on organizational citizenship behavior. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 4, 249-270.\nHofmann, D. A., M. P. Frederick, & Gerras S. J. (2003). Climate as a moderator of the relationship between leader–member exchange and content specific citizenship: safety climate as an exemplar. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 170-178.\nKamdar, D., McAllister, D. J., & Turban, D. B. (2006). All in a day`s work: How follower individual differences and justice perceptions predict OCB role definitions and behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(4), 841-855.\nKatz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9, 131-146.\nKlieman, R. S., Quinn, J. A., & Harris, K. L. (2000). The influence of employee-supervisor interactions upon job breadth. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(6), 587-601.\nKonovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 656-669.\nKonovsky, M. A., & Pugh, S. D. (1994). Citizenship behavior and social exchange. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 656-669.\nLam, S. S. K., Hui, C., & Law, K. S. (1999). Organizational citizenship behavior: Comparing perspectives of supervisors and subordinates across four international samples. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(4), 594-601.\nLi, W., & Wan, W. (2007). A demographic study on citizenship behavior as in-role orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(2), 225-234.\nMoorman, R. H. (1991). Relationship between organizational and organizational citizenship behaviors: Do fairness perceptions influence employee citizenship? Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 845-855.\nMorrison, E. W. (1993). Toward an understanding of employee role definitions and their implications for organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1993, 248-252.\nMorrison, E. W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of the employee’s perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1543-1567.\nO’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychology attachment: The effect of compliance, identification and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 492-499.\nOplatka, I. (2006). Going beyond role expectations: Towards an understanding of the determinants and components of teacher organizational citizenship behavior. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(3), 385-423.\nOrgan, D. W. (1977). A reappraisal and reinterpretation of the satisfaction-causes-performance hypothesis preview. Academy of Management Review, 2(1), 46-53.\nOrgan, D. W. (1988a). Organizational citizenship behavior: The good soldier syndrome. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.\nOrgan, D. W. (1988b). A restatement of the satisfaction-performance hypothesis. Journal of Management, 14, 547-557.\nOrgan, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It’s construct clean-up time. Human Performance, 10, 85-97. \nOrgan, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(1), 157-164. \nOrgan, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775-802.\nOrgan, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.\nPodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers` trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behavior. Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142.\nPodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26 (3), 513-563.\nPodsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Moorman, R. H., & Williams, M. L. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on follows’ truth in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107- 142.\nPuffer, S. M. (1987). Prosocial behavior, noncompliant behavior, and work performance among commission salespeople. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 615-621.\nRobinson, S. L., & Morrison, E. W. (1995). Psychological contracts and OCB: The effect of unfulfilled obligations on civic virtue behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(3), 289-298.\nRousseau, D. M. (1989). Psychological and implied contracts in organizations. Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 2, 121-139.\nRousseau, D. M. (1990). New hire perceptions of their own and their employer’s obligations: A study of psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11, 389-400.\nSalancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(2), 224-253.\nSchappe, S. P. (1998). The influence of job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and fairness perceptions on organizational citizenship behavior. The Journal of Psychology, 132(3), 277-290.\nSchnake, M. (1991). Organizational citizenship: A review, proposed model, and research agenda. Human Relations, 44(7), 735-759.\nScholl, R. W. (1981). Differentiating organizational commitment from expectancy as a motivating force. Academy of Management Review, 6, 589-599.\nSmith, C. A., Organ, D. W., & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653-63.\nSomech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2000). Understanding extra-role behavior in schools: the relationships between job satisfactions, sense of efficacy, and teachers’ extra-role behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 649-659.\nTepper, B. J., Lockhart, D., & Hoobler, J. (2001). Justice, citizenship, and role definition effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 789-796.\nVan Dyne, L, Graham, J. W., & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship behavior: Construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal. 37(4), 765-802.\nVan Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L., & McLean Parks J. (1995). Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of construct and definitional clarity (a bridge over muddied waters). In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 215-285). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.\nWeiner, Y. (1982). Commitment in organizations: A normative view. Academy of Management Review, 7, 418-428\nWilliams, L. J., & Anderson S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behavior. Journal of Management, 17(3), 601-617. | zh_TW |
| item.fulltext | No Fulltext | - |
| item.grantfulltext | none | - |
| item.openairetype | thesis | - |
| item.openairecristype | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_46ec | - |
| item.cerifentitytype | Publications | - |
| Appears in Collections: | 學位論文 | |
Google ScholarTM
Check
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.