摘要
網際網路與資訊科技的蓬勃發展，已對我們的日常生活方式產生了深遠影響。資訊科技不僅改變了人們處理事務及商業經營的方式，同時也改變了人們對教育與學習的要求與期望。這些外在環境的變化與新需求的產生，已成為網路學習盛行的推動力量。
為了因應網路學習斬新的學習方式，國內學者提出了使命式學習模式，希望培養學生學習創業家一樣，具有主動積極進取、願意承擔風險、能夠從失敗經驗中學習以及具有革新與創新能力的創業家精神。因此，使命式學習活動在設計上刻意提高學習活動的難度，希望能激發學生的潛能，創新策略，達成使命，但是這樣的設計也造成學生容易掉入失敗的情境中。為了能讓學生從失敗的經驗中學習，瞭解與控制學生的失敗反應，是影響學生能從失敗中學習的重要關鍵。
因此，本研究旨在探討影響學生產生建設性失敗反應的相關因素，本研究採用文獻分析及問卷調查法，而研究對象為252位參與使命式學習活動的學生，本研究在問卷資料回收後，以SPSS for Windows 10.0來進行資料的處理與分析工作。本研究之主要研究發現如下：
一、 使命式學習活動中，學生的失敗容忍力、歸因型態和知覺目標結構是影響學生產生建設性失敗反應的重要因素。
二、 學生年級的差異對其失敗容忍力、自我概念及失敗反應沒有顯著的影響。
三、 學生在使命式學習活動中，不同的知覺目標結構對其失敗容忍力及失敗反應會有顯著的影響。
四、 學生對失敗不同的歸因型態對其失敗容忍力、自我概念及失敗反應會有顯著的差異。
最後本研究根據研究結果，提出結論與建議，以做為未來教育工作者在設計以及推動使命式學習活動之參考。

Abstract
Internet and information technology have changed our daily life extremely. Information technology affects not only the way people running the business but also their expectation to learning and education. All this external shift and new requirement have become the driving force of e-learning.
Mission Based Learning (MBL), which proposed by pedagogical experts, are a new learning model to address the new learning pattern of e-learning. MBL would like students to be trained as entrepreneur, with entrepreneurship, willing to take risk and can learning from failure experience. Thus, MBL activity increases the difficulty of the learning tasks in order to motivate students’ potential and hope that students can use innovative strategy to overcome the mission. However, this may causes students to fail in the learning activity easily. Therefore, understanding students’ failure response is the key point to teach students learning from failure experience.
The main purpose of this study is to investigate the factors affecting students’ failure response in participating MBL. The study depends on prior-research and uses questionnaires to collect data. A total of 252 students attending the MBL activity are the research subjects. The collected data is processed and analyzed with SPSS for Windows 10.0.
The main findings show that students’ failure tolerance, failure attribution and perceived goal structure will significantly affect students’ constructive failure response. Furthermore, students’ age will not affect students’ failure tolerance, self-concept and failure response. Students’ perceived goal structure will affect their failure tolerance and failure response in MBL activity. This research also finds that failure attribution will significantly affect students’ failure tolerance, self-concept and failure response.
Finally, according to the research result, this thesis proposed conclusions and suggestions for the educators and the follow-up.

目 錄
第1章 緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 7
1.3 論文架構與流程 9
第2章 文獻探討 11
2.1 使命式學習活動理論基礎與架構 11
2.2 建設性失敗理論 14
2.3 歸因理論 19
2.4 自我概念 28
2.4.1 自我概念的意義與內涵 28
2.4.2 自我概念的發展及其相關因素 31
第3章 研究架構與方法 35
3.1 使命式學習活動簡介 35
3.2 研究架構 38
3.3 研究假說 39
3.4 研究變數之操作型定義 43
3.4.1 社會人口變項 43
3.4.2 自我概念 43
3.4.3 失敗容忍力 44
3.4.4 歸因型態 45
3.4.5 失敗反應 46
3.4.6 知覺目標結構 46
3.5 研究方法與工具 47
3.5.1 發展問項 47
3.5.2 問卷內容與題目來源 48
3.6 資料分析方法 51
第4章 資料分析結果與討論 53
4.1 樣本之基本資料描述 53
4.2 問卷信效度檢測 56
4.2.1 使命失敗歸因量表 57
4.2.2 失敗容忍力量表 60
4.2.3 失敗反應量表 62
4.2.4 自我概念量表 63
4.2.5 知覺目標結構量表 64
4.3 不同年級的學生在失敗容忍力、失敗反應反自我概念的差異情形 66
4.3.1 不同年級的學生其失敗容忍力的差異情形 66
4.3.2 不同年級的學生在自我概念的差異情形 69
4.3.3 不同年級的學生在失敗反應的差異情形 72
4.4 不同知覺目標結構對失敗容忍力、失敗反應及自我概念的差異情形 74
4.4.1 不同知覺目標結構的學生其失敗容忍力的差異情形 74
4.4.2 不同知覺目標結構的學生其自我概念的差異情形 75
4.4.3 不同知覺目標結構的學生其失敗反應的差異情形 76
4.5 不同歸因型態對學生失敗容忍力、失敗反應及自我概念的差異性分析 77
4.5.1 不同歸因型態的學生在失敗容忍力的差異情形 77
4.5.2 不同歸因型態的學生在失敗反應的差異情形 81
4.5.3 不同歸因型態的學生在自我概念的差異情形 85
4.6 失敗容忍力、自我概念、知覺目標結構和歸因型態對失敗反應的影響 88
4.7 假說檢定結果 90
第5章 結論與建議 94
5.1 研究發現與結論 94
5.1.1 學生年級的差異對其失敗容忍力、自我概念及失敗反應的影響 94
5.1.2 學生對使命式學習活動不同的知覺目標結構對其失敗容忍力、自我概念及失敗反應的影響 96
5.1.3 對使命失敗做不同型態歸因的學生其在失敗容忍力、自我概念及失敗反應的差異影響 97
5.1.4 失敗容忍力、自我概念、知覺目標結構和失敗歸因型態對學生失敗反應的影響 99
5.2 研究建議 100
5.2.1 未來在使命式學習活動設計與帶領的建議 100
5.2.2 後續研究的建議 102
參考文獻 105

參考文獻
一、 中文部份：
[1] 王保進(民85)，統計套裝程式SPSS與行為科學研究，台北市，松崗。
[2] 王保進（民92），視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究（第二版），台北市，心理出版社。
[3] 吳幸宜譯（民83），Gredler, M.E. 著，學習理論與教學應用，台北：心理出版社。
[4] 吳松林（民71)，“成敗經驗對不同焦慮程度學生心理反應之影響”，國立高雄師範學院教育研究所碩士論文。
[5] 林宜貞（民83），“國中生的教師期望、歸因型態、失敗容忍力與失敗反應關係之研究”，國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
[6] 林淑美（民78），“目標設定、失敗容忍力、歸因型態與失敗反應的關係”，國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
[7] 張春興（民78），張氏心理學辭典，第586頁，台北市，東華書局。
[8] 郭為藩（民68），自我心理學，台南市：開山書店。
[9] 郭為藩（民85），自我心理學。台北市，師大書苑有限公司。
[10] 陳李綢（民72），“國小兒童自我概念發展之研究”，中國測驗學會測驗年刊，第30 輯，第93-100頁。
[11] 游淑燕（民76），“年級、性別、自我統整與成敗歸因關係之研究”，政大教育研究所碩士論文。
[12] 楊國樞（民63），“小學與初中學生自我概念的發展及其相關因素”。載於楊國樞、張春興編著，中國兒童的行為發展，第417-463頁。台北市，環宇出版社。
[13] 廖祐宏，石岳峻，陳年興（民91），“使命式學習模式核心價值與小組成敗歸因之相關性研究”，第八屆資訊管理研究暨實務研討會，第157-164頁。
[14] 趙曉美（民90），“自我概念多層面階層結構之驗證暨增進自我概念課程之實驗效果”，國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
[15] 盧欽銘（民68），“國兒童及青少年自我觀念的發展”，師大教育心理學報，12 期，第123-132頁。
[16] 盧欽銘（民69），“我國國小及國中學生自我觀念發展之研究”。師大教育心理學報，13 期，第75-84頁。
[17] 謝毓雯（民87），“青少年挫折經驗與挫折容忍度之關係研究：建設性思考與社會支持的角色”。國立政治大學心理研究所碩士論文。
二、 英文部份：
[1] Alawiye, O. (1986), “The self-concept of children, and the perceptions of parents and teachers, from schools in Ghaha and Gambia”, Dissertation Abstracts International, Vol. 48, no. 01, pp. 100.
[2] Ames, C., (1978), “Children’s achievement attributions and self-reinforcement: Effects of self-concept and competitive reward structure”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 70, pp. 345-355.
[3] Ames, C., Ames, R. and Felker, D.W. (1977), “Effects of a competitive reward structure and valence of outcome on chldren’s achievement attributions”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 60, pp. 1-8.
[4] Atkinson, J.W. (1964), “An introduction to motivation”, Princeton, NJ: D. Van Nostrand.
[5] Battle, J. (1982), Enhancing self-esteem and achievement, Seattle, WA: Special Child Publications.
[6] Burns, R.B. (1984), The self-concept: Theory, measurement, development, and behavior, New York: Longman.
[7] Chan, T.W., Hue, C.W., Chou, C.Y. and Tzeng, Ovid J.L. (2001), “Four Spaces of Network Learning Models”, Computer & Education.
[8] Chen, N.S. and Shih, Y.C. (2001), “The Analysis and Implementation of E-Learning Park”, ICCE2001, Korea, pp. 690-693.
[9] Clifford, M.M. (1984), “Thoughts on a theory of constructive failure”, Educational Psychology, Vol. 19, pp. 108-120.
[10] Clifford, M.M. (1986a), “The Comparative effects of strategy and effort attribution”, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 56, pp. 75-83.
[11] Clifford, M.M. (1986b), “The effects of ability, strategy, and effort attributions for educational, business, and athletic failure”, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 56, pp. 169-179.
[12] Clifford, M.M. (1988), “Failure tolerance and academic risk-taking in ten to twelve-year-old students”, British Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 58, pp. 15-27.
[13] Clifford, M.M. (1990), “Academic risk taking, development, and external constraint”, Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 45-64.
[14] Cooley, C.H. (1902), Human nature and social order. New York:Scribner's.
[15] Cooper, D.R. and Schindler, P.S. (1998), Business Research Methods (6rd ed.), McGraw-Hill.
[16] Diener, C.I. and Dweck, C.S. (1978), “An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy and achievement cognitions following failure”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 36, pp. 451-462.
[17] Drucker, P. (1985), “Innovation and entrepreneurship”, New York: Harper and Row.
[18] Dusek, J.B. (1978), “The development of the self-concept in adolescence”, ERIC: ED 189484.
[19] Dweck, C.S. (1989), “Motivation”, In R. Glaser & A. Lesgld (Eds.), The handbook of psychology and education, Vol. 1, pp. 187-239, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[20] Dweck, C.S. and Litch, B.G. (1980), “Learned helplessness and academic achievement”, In J. Garber & M. Seligman (Eds.), Human helplessness: Theory and application, pp. 197-221, New York: Academic.
[21] Dweck, C.S. and Litch, B.G. (1980), “Learned helplessness and academic achievement”. In J. Garber & M. Seligman (Eds.), Human helplessness: Theory and application, pp. 197-221, New York: Academic.
[22] Dweck, C.S., and Reppucci, N.D. (1973), “Learned helplessness and reinforcement responsibility in children”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 25, pp. 109-116.
[23] Elliott, E.E., and Dweck, C.S. (1988), “Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 5-12.
[24] Epstein,S. (1973), “The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory”, American Psychologist, Vol. 28, pp. 404-416.
[25] Fontana, A. (1966), “Toward the measurement of self-esteem”, Perceptual and Motor Skills, Vol. 23, pp. 607-612.
[26] Gergen, K.Ｊ. (1971), The concept of self, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
[27] Glasser, W. (1969), Schools without failure, New York：Harper ＆ Row.
[28] Gronlund, N.E. and Linn (1990), Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching(6rd ed.), New York: Macmillan.
[29] Hämäläinen, M., Whinston, A. B. and Vishik, S. (1996), “Electronic markets for learning: Education broker-ages on the Internet”, Communications of the ACM, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 51-58.
[30] Heider, F. (1958), “The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations”, New York: Wiley.
[31] Jones, B.F., Rasmussen, C.M. and Moffitt, M.C. (1997), “Real-life problem solving : A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning”, Washington, DC.: American Psychological Association.
[32] Jones, C.J. (1988), “Evaluation and educational programming Of deaf-blind / severely multi-handicapped students: sensorimotor stage”, Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
[33] Julianne C.T., Carol M., Debra K.M., Margaret G., Eric M.A. and Yongjin K. (2002), “The Classroom Environment and Students’ Reports of Avoidance Strategies in Mathematics: A Multimethod Study”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 88-106.
[34] Kaiser, H.F. (1974), “An index of factorial simplicity”, Psychometrika, Vol. 39, pp. 31-36.
[35] Kelley, H. (1973), “The processes of causal attribution”, American Psychologist, Vol. 28, pp. 107-128.
[36] Kuhl, J. (1984), “Volitional aspects of achievement motivation and learned helplessness：Toward a comprehensive theory of action control”, In B. A. Maher (Ed.), Progress in Experimental Personality Research, Vol. 13, pp. 99-171, New York：Academic Press.
[37] Lerner, R. and Shea, J. (1982), “Social behavior in adolescence”, In B. Wolman, ed.. Handbook of Developmental Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
[38] Locke, E.A., Shaw, N.R., Saari, L.M. and Latham, G.P. (1981), “Goal Setting and Task Performance”, Psychologyical Bulletin, Vol. 90, no. 1, pp. 125-152.
[39] Lynch, M.D. (1978), “Self concept development in childhood”, Paper presented at the national symposium on self-concept, Baston, Mass.
[40] Lynch, M.D., Norem-Hebeisen, A.A. and Gergen, K.J. (1981), Self-concept, advances in theory and research, Ballinger Publishing Company. Cambridge, MA: A Subsidiary of Harper & Row.
[41] Marsh, H.W. (1990a), “A multidimensional, hierarchical model of self-concept: Theoretical and empirical justification”, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 77-170.
[42] Marsh, H.W. (1990b). Self-Description Questionnaire-I(SDQ- I) manual, University of Western Sydney, Sydney: Macarthur.
[43] Marsh, H.W.﹐Barnes, J., Cairns, L. and Tidman, M. (1984), “The Self- Description Questionnaire﹕Age effects in the structure and level of self - concept for preadolescent children”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 76, pp. 940-956.
[44] Marsh, H.W., Parker,J. and Barnes, J. (1985), “Multidimensional adolescent self-concepts: Their relationships to age, sex, and academic measures”, American Educational Research Journal, Vol. 22, pp. 422-444.
[45] Martin-Kniep, G.O., Feige, D.M. and Soodak, L.C. (1995), “Curriculum integration: An expanded view of an abused idea”, Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, Vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 227-249.
[46] Mead, G.H. (1934), Mind, self and society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[47] Montemayor, R. and Eisen, M. (1977), “The development of self-conceptions from children to adolescence”, Developmental Psychology, Vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 314-319.
[48] Rankin, C.I. and Parish, T.S. (1995), “A cross-sectional study of self-concepts: Do they vary across grade levels?”, Reading Improvement, Vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 99-101.
[49] Rest, S., Neirenberg, R., Weiner, B. and Heckhausen, H. (1973), “Further evidence concerning the effects of perceptions of effort and ability on achievement evaluation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 28, pp. 187-191.
[50] Roessler, R. and Bolton, B. (1978), Psychosocial adjustment to disability. Baltimore, University Park Press.
[51] Rosenberg, M. (1979), Conceiving the self. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
[52] Roth, S., and Bootzin, R.R. (1974), “The effect of experimentally induced expectancies of external control：An investigation of learned helplessness”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 29, pp. 253-264.
[53] Roth, S., and Kubal, L. (1975), “Effects of noncontingent reinforcement on tasks of differing importance：facilitation and learned helplessness”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 32, pp. 680-691.
[54] Rotter, J.B. (1966), “Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement”, Psychological Monographs, Vol. 1, pp. 609.
[55] Seligman, M.E.P. (1975), Helplessness. San Francisco: Freeman.
[56] Shavelson, R.J. and Bolus, R. (1982), “Self-concept: The interplay of theory and methods”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 74, pp. 3-17.
[57] Shavelson, R.J., Hubner, J.J. and Stanton, G.C. (1976), “Self-concept: Validation of construct interpretation”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 46, pp. 407-441.
[58] Shih, Y.C. and Chen, N.S. (2003), “Theoretical Analysis of Mission-Based Learning Model”, ICALT.
[59] Tennen, H., and Eller, S.J. (1977), “Attributional components of learned helplessness and facilitation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 35, pp. 265-271.
[60] Thomas, J.W., Mergendoller, J.R. and Michaelson, A. (1999). “Project-based learning: A handbook for middle and high school teachers”, Novato, CA: The Buck Institute for Education.
[61] Tubbs, M.E. (1986), “Goal Setting：A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Empirical Evidence”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 474-483.
[62] Videbeck, R. (1960). “Self-conception and the reaction of others”, Sociometry, Vol. 23, pp. 351-359.
[63] Weibe, D.J. (1991), “Hardiness and stress moderation：A test of proposed Mechanisms”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 89-99.
[64] Weiner, B. (1972), Theory of Motivation from Mechanism to Cognition, Chicago: Markham.
[65] Weiner, B. (1974), “An attributional interpretation of expectancy-value theory”, In B. Weiner (Ed.), Cognitive views of human motivation, pp. 51-69, New York: Academic Press.
[66] Weiner, B. (1977), “An Attributional Approach for Educational Psychology”, In L. Shulman (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, Vol. 4, pp. 179-209.
[67] Weiner, B. (1979), “A Theory of Motivation for Some Classroom Experience”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 3-25.
[68] Weiner, B. (1979), “A Theory of Motivation for Some Classroom Experience”, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 71, pp. 3-25.
[69] Weiner, B. (1985a), “An Attributional Theory of Achievement Motivation and Emotion”, Psychological Review, Vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 548-573.
[70] Weiner, B. (1985b), Human motivation, New York: Springer-Verlag.
[71] Weiner, B. and Kukla, A. (1970), “An Attributional Analysis of Achievement Motivation”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 15, pp. 1-20.
[72] Weiner, B. and Peter, N. (1973), “A cognitive-developmental analysis of achievement and moral judgments”, Developmental Psychology, Vol. 9, pp. 290-309.
[73] Weiner, B., Graham, S., Stern, P. and Lawson, M. (1982), “Using affective cues to infer causal thoughts”, Developmental Psychology, Vol 18, pp. 278-286.
[74] Weiner, B., Graham, S., Taylor, S. and Meyer, W. (1984), “Social cognition in the classroom”, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 18, pp. 109-124.
[75] Williams, J.H. (1973), “The relationship of self-concept and reading achievement in first grade children”, Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 378-381.
[76] Zahra, S.A., Jennings, D.F. and Kuratko, D.F. (1999), “The antecedents and consequences of firm-level entrepreneurship：The State of the field”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 24, no. 2, pp.45-65.