通識課程是營養學分嗎？以教學與選課決策模型分析為例

Does a General Education Course Equal to an Easy Course? An Analysis by a Decision Model Combining Students’ Course Selection Behavior and Teachers’ Competitive Strategy

本文以「理性選擇」、「配合法則」與「道德情緒」建立一個老師在教學及學生在選課時的成本效益分析模型，用以分析兩個與放寬教學標準相關的問題：一、多數教師在面臨評鑑分數低落或倒課風險升高的「教學不順」困境時，是否會以放寬教學標準的方式來紓解其教學生涯中的壓力？二、因為教師在開通識課時面臨較高的「倒課風險」與較低的「道德風險」，通識課程是否會因此比系內專業選修課程更為簡單容易？本文以某國立大學的學生與老師為樣本，問卷調查結果顯示：一、受訪教師多傾向於認為他的同事們會因評鑑結果差或選課人數少而調高給分、降低不及格率並減少作業；二、教師與學生們普遍認為通識課的不及格比例及成績嚴格程度皆會低於專業選修課。本文的預測得到初步證實，通識課程比系內專業選修課程更寬鬆容易，是（該校）師生眼中的「營養學分」。

Does a general education course equal to an “easy” course? A general model of choosing and teaching elective courses, which combine Herrnstein’s matching law and Frank’s moral emotion theory, is build in order to answer this question. Based on the model, this paper focuses on analyzing the market competition and the teaching environment differences between departmental elective courses and general education courses. Because teachers confront higher competition and unfavoble environment to the general education course, the study predicts that the general education courses are easier than the departmental elective courses. A questionnaire was used to test the students and teachers in one national university in Taiwan. Firstly, statistics show that most teachers tend to believe that their colleagues will reduce the standard of course when the risk of courses being cancelled (due to insufficient enrollment) is high or when the scores of students’ evaluation teaching is low. Secondly, the results also support the prediction that teachers and students both feel that the general education courses are easier than in the departmental elective courses. More similar studies are suggested to do in the future to prove if the above statistic results are a general phenomena in Taiwan.