大学キャンパスの認知マップ : (その2)教育プログラムの評価と教育環境の役割

概要

論文の詳細を見る
STUDY III Purpose The third study in a series of survey on the campus atmosphere aimed at to analyze the factorial constituents of "behavioral" environment, as well as to explore the relationships between the above and the "physical" environment in order to seek better ways of utilizing most fortunately blessed resources given to us for the ultimate educational goals of this university. Method Subjects were 60 college students including a few graduates. The same questionnair for the measurement of "physical" environment (Ooi et al., 1990) was employed. Instead of the names of facilities used for imagery in the former study, present study employed 24 stimulus words which were representing our campus activities. They were in the 4 categories as follows; (1) 10 academic programs-Language Program, Physical Education Program, General Education Program, Specialized Major Program, Matriculation, Registration, Final Examination, Library Service, Language Lab., Computer Service. (2) 4 guidance programs-Advisor System, Counseling, Placement, Clinic. (3) 6 formal events-Freshman Retreat, Christianity Week, Convocation, Faculty Home Visiting, International Campus, Religious Program. (4) 4 extra curricular activities-Cultural Clubs, Sports Clubs, ICU Festival, Part-time Job. Responses to the SD scales were treated by the same way as for the previous study, i.e. mean weighted scores in the 3 factorial dimensions were calculated for each stimulus word, and then factorial analyses were conducted on each dimension in order to further analyze the sub-factorial constituents and their interactions. Results and Discussion Weighted scores for all "hehavioral" environments for the 3 dimensions were calculated. Three sub-factors were extracted from each of those 3 dimensions. However, it was observed that they are not completely independent each others, because those weighted scores were positively correlated among two or three dimensions for the most of behavioral items. In the "Evaluative" dimension, such stimulus words as Faculty Home Visiting, Religious Programs, Christianity Week, and Convocation, all of which have been regarded as the most unique features of ICU, received relatively high levels of evaluation, while those academic programs such as Specialized Major Program, Language Programs, and General Education Program received rather low levels of evaluation. In the "Activity" dimension, such items like Final Examination, Registration, and Physical Education Program, all of which represented the college-wide events or programs, tended to be evaluated higher than others. Unlike to our expectation, however, these items were evaluated rather low in "Potency." Interestingly enough, evaluations of the "physical" and the "behavioral" environments more or less well corresponded each others. Front Gate and Cherry Boulevard, and University Chapel gained very high "Evaluative" scores in both "physical" and "behavioral" environments. On the other hand, University Hall, Diffendorfer Memorial Hall, and those activities taken place in these facilities received relatively low "Evaluative" scores in both environments. Since the above facilities and associated activities are most indispensable for the educational program of ICU, some remedial measures as well as a long-term plan for improvement should be acted at immediately in order to change the students' images of the campus, if they might have been deviated from which our founders had laied down for us as our ideals and goals to persuit.
国際基督教大学の論文

大学キャンパスの認知マップ : (その2)教育プログラムの評価と教育環境の役割

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク