請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/9917
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 黃崇興 | |
dc.contributor.author | Kuo-Wei Chu | en |
dc.contributor.author | 朱國維 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-05-20T20:49:19Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2010-07-03 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-05-20T20:49:19Z | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2008-07-03 | |
dc.date.issued | 2008 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2008-06-27 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 鄧維兆、李友錚,「北投溫泉旅館關鍵服務品質屬性確認-Kano模式與IPA之應用」,品質學報,第十四卷,第一期,99-113。
尚榮安、劉宗哲、林炳文,「教育與服務-推廣教育學員品質之絕對滿意度之影響 」,顧客滿意學刊,第二卷 第一期,27-54。 楊錦洲,「二維品質模式在服務品質上之應用」,品質管制月刊,第二十九卷,第五期,349-355。 劉常勇,「管理教育中的個案教學」,教育研究資訊.第六卷,第二期,101-114,民國87 年。 王麗雲,「個案教學法之理論與實施」,課程與教學季刊,第二卷,第三期,117-134,民國88年。 高熏芳、蔡宜君,「案例教學法在中小學統整課程教學之應用」,新世紀中小學課程改革與創新學術研討會,335-344,民國88年。 張民杰,「案例教學法之研究及其試用:以教育行政課程試用為例」,國立台灣師範大學,博士論文,民國89年。 楊正瑀,「不同程度產品知識及多重外在提示對網路購物意願之影響」,國立交通大學管理科學系,碩士論文,民國91年。 張麗儀,「案例教學法應用於七年級社會學習領域人權教育之行動研究」,國立台灣師範大學,碩士論文,民國95年。 Barnes, Lee B., Chris R. Christensen , and Hansen A. Jolly(1994), “Teaching and The Case Method 3rd,” Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Blumenthal, J. (1991), “Use of The Case Method in MBA Education,” Performance Improvement Quarterly, 4(1), 5-14. Brucks, Merrie (1985), “The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 12 (January), 1-15. Darby, Michael R. and Edi Karni (1973), “Free Competition and The Optimal Amount of Fraud,” Journal of Law and Economics, 16, 67-88. Emery, Charles R. and Robert G. Tian (2002), “Schoolwork as Products, Professors as Customers: A Practical Teaching Approach in Business Education,” Journal of Education for Business, 78 (November/December), 97-102. Fundin, Anders and Lars N. Witell (2003), “Using Kano’s Theory of Attractive Quality to Better Understand Customer Satisfaction with E-services,” Asian Journal on Quality, 4(2), 32-49. -------------------------------------------(2005), “Dynamics of Service Attributes: A Test of Kano’s Theory of Attractive Quality,” International Journal of Service Industry Management, 16 (2), 152-68. Harrington, H.L. (1995), “Fostering Reasoned Decisions: Case-Based Pedagogy and The Professional Development of Teachers,” Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3), 203-14. Herzberg, Frederick, Mausner Bernard , and Barbara B. Snyderman(1959), “The Motivation to Work, ” NY: Wiley Press. Kano, Noriaki, Nobuhiko Seraku, Fumio Takahashi, and Shinichi Tsuji (1984), “Attractive Quality and Must-be Quality,” The Journal of the Japanese Society for Quality Control,14(2), 39-48. Kano, Noriaki (2001), “Life cycle and Creation of Attractive Quality,” paper presented at the fourth International QMOD Conference on Quality Management and Organizational Development, University of Linko¨ping, Linko¨ping. Knirk, F. G. (1991), “Case Materials: Research and Practice,” Performance Improvement Quarterly, 4(1), 73-81. Levitt, Theodore (1965), “Exploit the Product Life Cycle,” Harvard Business Review, 25( November/December), 81-94. ---------------------(1980), “Marketing Success through Differentiation of Anything,” Harvard Business Review, 58(January/February), 83-91. Lofgren, M. and Lars N. Witell (2005), “Kano’s Theory of Attractive Quality and Packaging,” The Quality Management Journal, 12(3), 7-20. --------------------------------------(2006), “20 Years of Using Kano’s Theory of Attractive Quality,” The Quality Management Journal, 15(4), 10-23. Matzler, Kurt and Hans H. Hinterhuber (1998), “How to Make Product Development Projects more Successful by Integrating Kano’s Model of Customer Satisfaction into Quality Function Deployment,” Technovation, 18(1), 25-38. Matzler, Kurt, Matthias Fuchs, and Astrid K. Schubert (2004), “Employee Satisfaction: Does Kano’s Model Apply,” Total Quality Management, 15(9), 1179-98. Merseth, K. K. (1996), “Case and case methods in teacher education,” Handbook of research on teacher education, 2, 722-44. Mittal, Vikas and Jerome M. Katrichis (2001), “Distinctions between New and Loyal Customers,” Marketing Research, 12(1), 26-32. Mittal, Vikas, Jerome M. Katrichis, Frank Forkin, and Mark Konkel (1994), “Does Satisfaction with Multi-attribute Products Vary over Time? A Performance-based Approach,” Advances in Consumer Research, 21(6), 412-7. Mittal, Vikas, Jerome M. Katrichis, and Pankaj Kumar (2001), “Attribute Performance and Customer Satisfaction over Time: Evidence from Two Field Studies”, Journal of Service Marketing, 15(5), 343-56. Mittal, Vikas, Pankaj Kumar, and Michael Tsiros (1999), “Attribute-level Performance, Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intentions over Time: A Consumption-System Approach,” Journal of Marketing, 63(April), 88-101. Mittal, Vikas, William T. Ross, Jr , and Patrick M. Baldasare (1998), “The Asymmetric Impact of Negative and Positive Attribute Level Performance on overall Satisfaction and Repurchase Intentions,” Journal of Marketing, 62(2), 33-47. Nelson, Phillip (1970), “Information and Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Political Economy, 78, 311-29. Parasuraman, A. (1997), “Reflections on Gaining Competitive Advantage through Customer Value,” Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 25(2), 154-61. Shulman, J. H. (1992), “Case Studies for Teacher Problem Solving,” Teachers College Press. Tontini, G. (2000), “Identification of Customer Attractive and Must-be Requirements Using A Modified Kano’s Method: Guidelines and Case Study,” ASQ’s 54th Annual Congress Proceedings, University of Blumenau-SC, Brazil. Wassermann, Stella (1993), “Getting Down to Cases: Learning to Teach with Case Studies,” NY : Teachers College Press. -------------------------(1994), “Introduction to Case Method Teaching : A Guide to The Galaxy,” NY : Teachers College Press. -------------------------(1995), “Getting Down to Cases: Learning to Teach with Case Studies,” NY : Teachers College Press. Witell, Lars N. and Lofgren M. (2007), “Classification of Quality Attributes,” Managing Service Quality, 17(1), 54-73. Woodruff, Robert B. (1997), “Customer Value: The Next Source for Competitive Advantage,” Journal of The Academy of Marketing Science, 25(Spring), 139-53. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/9917 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 台灣的高等教育近年來高度擴張,但是其中始終有幾項問題無法有效的解決,第一,許多學生在專業知識與實務經驗間存有鴻溝,無法將所學理論在實務面上有效發揮,第二,缺乏團隊合作、分析與批判的能力,如何改善此一問題,讓教學單位在教育品質上有所提升,成為目前國內各大專院校竭力發展的方向,於是部分學院便開始引入一項國外的教學方式:個案教學法(Case Method Teaching)期望該教學法能夠彌平這些落差。該教學方式由美國哈佛法學院於1870年率先使用,後由哈佛商學院於1907年引進商業管理教育當中,個案教學法的多元化與互動性,成為國內各商管學院爭相推行的新教學方式。
若要發揮個案教學法的教學成效,必須要學生方面積極的配合,學生對於個案教學法的瞭解程度,將對該教學法的教學成效產生極大的影響。除此之外,學校資源的不足,也使得教學單位無法提供全部個案教學法所需要的教學要素與內容,因此掌握學生對個案教學法教學要素的看法以及學生在學習過程中不同階段所重視的項目,對教學單位來說非常重要。 本篇研究從學生的主觀角度出發,利用個案教學法的教學要素,取得學生對這些教學要素的主觀看法與分類,並配合產品知識(Product Class Knowledge)與魅力品質理論(Attractive Quality),希望能藉此獲知學生對於個案教學法的瞭解與認知。 本研究以問卷形式進行調查,並透過國立台灣大學管理學院的學生協助作答,以SPSS統計軟體作數據分析,最後得到以下結果。一、具備不同程度個案教學法相關知識的學生,對於個案教學法要素具有不同的看法與認知。二、若具備不同的知識程度與學生對要素的分類有關,此兩者的關係與Kano所提的理論部分相符。三、個案教學法相關知識與學生參與個案教學法課程的時間、接觸次數具正向關係。四、學生對於整體個案教學法與教學要素在分類上是具有一致性的。 研究結果使得教學單位能夠深入瞭解學生對於個案教學法的認知,可針對學生所處的不同知識階段提供不同的個案教學法要素方案,並投入資源改善其相對重視之教學要素。也可在教育資源日漸緊縮的情況下,配合線性規劃模式,有效率的配置教育資源,以有限的資源投入,完成最大的品質提升,對於不管是教學服務提供單位或學生來說,都是一個雙贏的結果。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | There was a highly growth of higher education in Taiwan, but there still were two problems which were not been solved efficiently. The first, there is a gap between theories and practices, and students can’t apply these theories to practices very well. The second, students lack capabilities of cooperation, critical and analytical. How to make a solution to these problems and how to improve the quality of higher education are the two important goals for many schools in Taiwan. Some of these schools introduce a new teaching method been called Case Method Teaching, and hope it can make some improvement for these difficulties. The Harvard Law School applied this method first in 1870, and the Harvard Business School followed in 1970. This method was push by many colleges in Taiwan because of its interaction and interesting.
If the teacher want to do the method justice, it is very important for students’ close cooperation. The degree of students’ knowledge about it will affect the performance of this method very much. Aside from, resource of the school is not sufficient, so it is very important for schools to know how students think and what students need in every level. This research based on students’ subjective thought and got their classification and perception of some teaching elements. Applying Attractive Quality and Product Class Knowledge theories, this research hope it can get students’ thought and perception. This research collected data by using questionnaire, and asked some students in management school to answer it. Processing by SPSS software, this research got some conclusions. First, the students who classified differently to an element would be different level of the product knowledge. Second, if there was a clear relationship between students’ knowledge and classification, its patent would be fit to Kano’s theory. Third, the product knowledge is positive correlated with time and access times. Finally, it is consistent for students to classify the whole teaching method and unique element. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-05-20T20:49:19Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-97-R95741060-1.pdf: 813150 bytes, checksum: d27f2c4bbc5cd5e64a143c7cf0e4fbac (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 目錄
口試委員會審定.....................................i 誌謝..............................................ii 中文摘要.........................................iii 英文摘要...........................................v 第一章、導論.......................................1 第二章、文獻回顧與研究假說...........................4 第一節、個案教學法概要與成效關鍵.................4 第二節、消費者產品知識...........................6 第三節、品質要素分類模型.........................7 第四節、要素分類與產品知識的關係.................9 第五節、要素分類的變動..........................11 第六節、要素分類變動與時間、接觸次數的關係......13 第七節、整體個案教學法分類與教學要素分類的關係..14 第三章、研究設計....................................15 第四章、結果分析與討論..............................18 第一節、要素分類與學生產品知識分數的關係........18 第二節、要素分類的變動趨勢..........................20 第三節、產品知識與時間、次數的關係..................23 第四節、整體教學與教學要素分類的一致性..............24 第五節、要素整體分類................................27 第五章、結論與管理意涵..............................29 第一節、結論....................................29 第二節、管理意涵................................33 參考文獻............................................35 附錄 附錄一、研究問卷................................39 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 大學教育個案教學法要素分類與學生產品知識關係之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | A Study of Relationship between Elements Classification
and Students’ Product Class Knowledge of Case Method Teaching in College Education | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 96-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 葉明義,翁崇雄 | |
dc.subject.keyword | 個案教學法,產品知識,Kano,魅力品質理論,教學要素,要素分類, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | case method teaching,product class knowledge,Kano,attractive quality,element classification, | en |
dc.relation.page | 41 | |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(全球公開) | |
dc.date.accepted | 2008-06-27 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 管理學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 商學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 商學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-97-1.pdf | 794.09 kB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。