淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


  查詢圖書館館藏目錄
系統識別號 U0002-2406201101075500
中文論文名稱 永續課程開設的因素探討
英文論文名稱 Determinated factors of sustainability courses.
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 會計學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Accounting
學年度 99
學期 2
出版年 100
研究生中文姓名 賴若微
研究生英文姓名 Jo-Wei Lai
學號 698600045
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2011-06-04
論文頁數 54頁
口試委員 指導教授-郭樂平
委員-李光廷
委員-徐志順
中文關鍵字 永續發展  內容分析法  倫理  探索性研究 
英文關鍵字 Sustainable Development  Content analysis  Ethics  Exploratory study 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學商學
中文摘要 本研究分作兩部分進行探討,第一部分探討全球商管學院教師對永續發展議題是否有興趣,而第二部分針對影響永續課程開設的因素探討。第一部分,從資源基礎的觀點來看,師資是高等教育裡不可或缺的「資源」,本研究以通過AACSB認證的413間全球商管學院為研究基礎並蒐集24,080位教師的研究興趣及發表,採用了39個永續議題項目,進行網路基礎的內容分析法。首先,實證結果發現,全球商管學院教師對於永續發展議題有興趣(或專長)的比率為4.16%,呈現出較低的研究興趣現況(公立教師的永續研究興趣比例為3.7%,私立為5.25%;排名百大學校的教師永續研究興趣比例為3.25%,非百大學校為4.38%),然而,實際有發表永續相關議題的教師比例更低僅3.51%。其次,在4.16%的比率中,有高達70%以上的教師興趣偏重於倫理議題。
自全球金融海嘯後,實務及學術界再次呼籲倫理道德在商學教育的重要性,本研究結論與此現象相呼應。然而,這項結果也反映出全球商管學院教師對於倫理以外的永續發展議題相對較不關心。最後,若將商管學院教師分為會計系及非會計系教師,結果顯示,會計系教師對倫理議題的興趣顯著高於非會計系教師。
第二部分,採用了迴歸方程式來探討七個變數與永續課程開設之間有無顯著正向的關系,變數分別為「歷史悠久程度」、「師生比率」、「治理」、「商管學院預算」、「排名」及第一部分所調查出來的「教師研究興趣(專長)比率」與「教師相關發表比率」。結果發現「商管預算」的高低顯著影響永續課程的開設堂數。而「教師研究興趣(專長)比率」及「教師相關發表比率」與永續課程開課數也呈正向關係,呼應了第一部分的研究結果。目前文獻中較缺乏永續議題在全球高等教育中的揭露現況,本研究企圖以地毯方式進行探索性研究,試圖彌補相關學術文獻上探討不足之處。
英文摘要 First is to probe the degree of interest faculties of business administration have regarding sustainability issues. From the perspective of resource base, teachers are essential resources of higher education. This research base on studies of 413 AACSB accredited global college of business administration and data collection of 24,080 teachers’ research interests and publication. The web-based content analysis is done using 39 issues of sustainability projects. Research shows global business administration faculties’ interest in issues of sustainability development(or expertise)are 4.16%, a lower research interest rate(research interest on sustainability issues for public school educators are 3.7% and 5.25% for private school educators; Research interest on sustainability issues for Top-Ranked School teachers is 3.25%, and Non-Top-Ranked School is 4.38%). Actually, teachers’ publication on sustainability issues is even lower (3.51%) .More over, 70% of teachers that have interest regarding sustainability development issues are directed on moral issues. Recent global financial crisis have raise both academic interests and practical interests on the importance of education regarding ethics.
This phenomenon is consistent with our research, however, the results also shows the lack of interests business administration faculty teachers have on other sustainability development issues. When business administration faculty teachers are divided into accounting and non-accounting department, research shows accounting faculty teachers have higher interests on moral issues.
The second part, using a regression equation to explore the creation of the seven variables and sustainable course without significant positive relationship between, variables are "Year", "Ratio of students to teaching staff ", "Governance", " Budget", "Rank", "Research interests rates" and "Research publication rates". The results showed that "Budget" significantly affect the level of the creation of sustainable curriculum lessons. The "Research interest’s rates" and "Research publication rates" and sustainable course commencement also showed a positive relationship between the numbers, echoing the first part of the study results. This exploratory study attempts to make up for the lack of research on status of higher education interests on sustainability issues.
論文目次 目錄
感謝辭……………………………………………………………………I
中文摘要…………………………………………………………………II
英文摘要…………………………………………………………………III
目錄………………………………………………………………………IV
圖目錄……………………………………………………………………V
表目錄……………………………………………………………………V

第壹章 緒論……………………………………………………………1
    第一節 研究動機與背景……………………………………1
    第二節 研究目的……………………………………………4
    第三節 研究流程與論文架構………………………………6
第貳章 文獻探討………………………………………………………7
    第一節 永續性………………………………………………7
    第二節 永續發展……………………………………………8
    第三節 會計教育……………………………………………14
    第四節 資源基礎理論應用…………………………………15
    第五節 過去相關的研究……………………………………17
第參章 研究方法………………………………………………………19
    第一節 研究方法的選擇……………………………………20
    第二節 樣本選擇與樣本確立………………………………21
    第三節 資料收集……………………………………………22
    第四節 影響永續課程開設的因素…………………………24
第肆章 實證結果………………………………………………………29
    第一節 商管學院教師對永續發展議題有興趣嗎?………29
    第二節 永續課程開設因素之探討…………………………38
第伍章 結論與建議……………………………………………………46
    第一節 結論…………………………………………………46
    第二節 研究限制……………………………………………48
參考文獻…………………………………………………………………49






圖目錄
圖1-1 研究架構圖………………………………………………………6
圖3-1 研究流程圖………………………………………………………19
圖3-2 假說架程圖………………………………………………………24
表目錄
表3-1 樣本確立過程……………………………………………………21
表3-2 永續相關議題-關鍵字…………………………………………23
表3-3 預估自變數對依變數影響的方向………………………………27
表3-4 研究假說彙總表…………………………………………………28
表4-1 AACSB商管學院教師對永續相關興趣(專長)及發表之資訊…31
表4-2 AACSB會計系教師對永續相關興趣(專長)及發表之資訊……32
表4-3 AACSB商管學院教師永續相關研究興趣(專長)分配的比重…33
表4-4 AACSB商管學院教師永續相關論文發表分配的比重…………34
表4-5 AACSB商管學院教師公私立學校之間的差異…………………35
表4-6 AACSB商管學院教師百大非百大學校間的差異………………36
表4-7 AACSB商管學院教師永續相關研究興趣(專長)分配的比重彙總表
……………………………………………………………………36
表4-8 AACSB商管學院教師公私立及排名之間研究興趣(專長)的差異彙總表
……………………………………………………………………37
表4-9 敘述性統計量(n=413)…………………………………………38
表4-10 敘述性統計量(n=243)…………………………………………39
表4-11 相模型變數相關係數-Pearson相關系數分析(n=413)………40
表4-12 相模型變數相關係數-Pearson相關系數分析(n=243)………41
表4-13 迴歸結果(n=413)………………………………………………43
表4-14 迴歸結果(n=243)………………………………………………44
表4-15 自變數對依變數影響的方向 結果彙總表………………………45
參考文獻 參考文獻
吳清山,2002,知識經濟社會的校園倫理,學生輔導第八十二期:18-29。
杜榮瑞,2002,理事長的話,中華會計教育學會會訊季刊 : 1-2。
張鳳燕,2000,教師道德推理與教學關係之初探,教育資料集刊,第二十五卷:21-45。
顏信輝、楊淑玲,2004,會計實務與學習行為道德態度之探討,會計與公司治理,第一卷第一期:47-71。
台灣永續發展指標,http://www.li-kuang.com/index.htm. 2011/03/15瀏覽
行政院國家永續發展委員會全資訊網,http://ivy2.epa.gov.tw/nsdn//index.asp 2011/03/15瀏覽
AACSB, http://www.aacsb.edu/ 2011/03/15瀏覽
Arthur, A and Co, 1987, National commission on fraudulent financial reporting, summary of recommendations, Accounting News Briefs, Supplement, April/May, 4.
Baden-Fuller, C., Ravazzolo, F. R. and Schweizer, T, 2000, Making and measuring reputations: the research ranking of European business schools, Long Range Planning, 33(5), 621-50.
Barney, J. B, 1991, Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage, Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120.
Bonnett, M, 2002, Education for sustainability as a frame of mind, Environmental Education Research, 8, 9-20.
Brickley, J. A. and Zimmerman, J. L, 2001, Changing incentives in a multitask environment: evidence from a top-tier business school, Journal of Corporate Finance, 7(4), 367-96.
Briloff, A. J, 1991, Ethics and accounting education, Presentation Before the Canadian Academic Accounting Association, Queen’s University, Kingston, Out, June 7.
Christensen, L. J., Peirce, E., Hartman, L. P., Hoffman, W. M. and Carrier, J, 2007, Ethics, CSR, and sustainability education in the financial times top 50 global business schools: baseline data and future research directions, Journal of Business Ethics, 73, 347-368.
Collis, D. J. and Montgomery, C. A, 1995, Competing on resource: strategy in the 1990s, Harvard Business Review, 73(4), 118-128.
D’Aveni, R. A, 1996, A multiple-constituency, status-based approach to interorganizational mobility of faculty and input-output competition among top business schools, Organizations Science, 7(2), 66-189.
De Onzono, S. I. and Carmona, S, 2007, The changing business model of b-schools, Journal of Management Development, 26(1), 22-32.
DeAngelo, H. L. and Zimmerman, J. L, 2005, What’s really wrong with US business schools? working paper, University of Southern California and University of Rochester.
Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S. and Brown, C, 2009, The social dimension of sustainable development: defining urban social sustainability, Sustainable Development, Published online.
Enderle, G, 1997, A worldwide survey of business ethics in the 1990s, Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 1475-1483.
Evans, F. and Marcal, L, 2005, Educating for ethics: business dean’s perspectives, Business and Society Review, 110, 233-248.
Fess, R. C. 1987, Ethics in accounting: can it be taught? Outlook, Summer, 60.
Forsyth, D. R, 1992, Judging the morality of business practices: the influence of personal moral Philosophies, Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 461-470.
Funk, K, 2003, Sustainability and Performance, Sloan Management Review, 44, 65–70.
Gardiner, L., Rubbens, C. and Bonfiglioli, E, 2003, Big Business, Big Responsibilities, Corporate Governance, 3, 67–77.
George, R. J, 1987, Teaching business ethics: is there a gap between rhetoric and reality? Journal of Business Ethics, Oct, 513-518.
Ghoshal, S, 2005, Bad management theories are destroying good management practices, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 75-91.
Giacalone, R. A. and Thompson, K. R, 2006, Business ethics and social responsibility education: shifting the worldview, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5, 266-277.
Gioia, D. and Corley, K. G, 2002, Being good versus looking good: business school rankings and the Circean tranformation from substance to image, Academy of Management Learning and Education, 1(1), 107-20.
Holsti, O. R, 1969, Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Hopwood, B., Mellor, M. and O’Brien, G., 2005, Sustainable development: mapping different approaches, Sustainable Development, 13, 38-52.
Howard, T. and Xiaoying, L, 2009, Mapping globally branded business schools: a strategic positioning analysis. Management Decision, 47, 9, 1420-1440.
Jeffrey, C, 1993, Ethical Development of Accounting Students, Non-Accounting Business Students, and Liberal Arts Students, Accounting Education 8, 86–96.
Katz, P. C, 1986, Teaching business ethics, Bottomline, Oct, 41-42.
Krippendorff, K, 1980, Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Leftridge, A. and James, R. K, 1980, A study of the perceptions of environmental issues of urban and rural high school students, Journal of Environmental Education, 12(1), 3-7.
Lo, S. F and Sheu, H. J, 2007, Is corporate sustainability a value-increasing strategy for business? Journal compilation, 15(2), 345-358.
Malovics, G., Csignene, N. and Kraus, S, 2008, The role of corporate social responsibility in strong sustainability, The Journal of Socio-Economics, 37, 907-918.
Matten, D. and Moon, J, 2004, Corporate social responsibility education in europe, Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 323-337.
Maurice, B., Andrew T., Zayna K., Balu B., Martin R., Michael S., Hopkins and Nina K, 2009, Sustainability and Competitive Advantage, MITSloan, 51(1), 19-26.
Min, H. k., Song, and Kim, J. S, 1993, Accounting education in korea: Current tredds and the challenge for the future, The International Journal of Accounting, 28, 78-87.
Navarro, P, 2008, The MBA core curricula of top-ranked U.S. business schools: a study in failure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7, 108-123.
Nazario, S. L, 1990, Schoolteachers say, Wall Street Journal, April 6, B1, B6.
NCSE, 2003, Recommendations for education for a sustainable and secure future, National Council for Science and the Environment.
Neubaum, D. O., Pagell, M., Drexler, J. A., McKee-Ryan, F. M. and Larson, E, 2009, Business education and its relationship to student personal moral philosophies and attitudes toward profits: an empirical response to critics, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8, 9-24.
Orhan, C. and Alaattin, E, 2008, Efficiency in accounting education: evidence from Turkish Universities.
Penrose, E. T, 1959, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, John Wileym: New York.
Pfeffer, J, 2005, Why do bad management theories persist? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4, 96-100.
Pfeffer, J. and Fong, C. T, 2004, The business school “business”: some lessons from the US experience, Journal of Management Studies, 41(8), 1501-19.
Policano, A. J, 2007, The rankings game: and the winner is? Journal of Management , 26(1), 43-48.
Porter, M. E, 1980, Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors, New York: Free Press.
Prahalad, C. K. and Hamel, G., 1990, The Core Competence of the Corporate, Harvard Business Review, May-June, 277-299.
Rest, J. R. and Thomas, S. J, 1985, Relation of moral judgment to formal education, Developmental Psychology, July, 709-714.
Schoenfeldt, L. F., McDonald, D. M. and Youngblood, S. A, 1991, The teaching of business ethics; a survey of AACSB member schools, Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 237-241.
Selznick, P, 1957, Leardship in administration: a sociological interpretation, Row, Peterson and Company, New York s: Free Pres.
Smith, L. M. and Bain, C, 1990, The challenge of professional accounting ethics, Internal Auditing, Spring, 20-31.
Stemler, S, 2001, An overview of content analysis, Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17).
Stubbs, W. and Cocklin, C, 2008, Teaching sustainability to business students: shifting mindsets, International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9, 206-221.
Thomas, C, 1988, The death of ethics in america, Word Books, Waco, Texas.
Thomas, H, 2007, An analysis of the environment and competitive dynamics of management education, Journal of Management Development, 26(1), 10-21.
Thomposon, J. H., McCoy, T. L. and Wallestad, D. A, 1992, The incorporation of ethics into the accounting curriculum, Advances in Accounting, 91-103.
UNESCO, 2008, Media as partners in education for sustainable development: a training and resource kit. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Van Kleef, J. A. G. and Roome, N. J, 2007, Development capabilities and competence for sustainable business management as innovation: a research agenda, Journal of Cleaner Production, 15, 38-51.
Weber, R. P, 1990, Basic content analysis, 2nd ed, Newbury Park: CA.
Wernerfelt, B, 1984, A resource-based view of the firm, Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180.
Wimmer, R. D. and Dominick, J. R, 2005, Mass media research: An introduction, Baker and Taylor Books.
Wu, Y. C, 2007, Contemporary logistics education: an international perspective, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37, 504-528.
Wu, Y. C., Huang, S., Kuo, L. and Wu, W. H, 2010, Management education for sustainability: A Web-based content analysis, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(3), 520–531.
Zimmerman, J. L, 2001, Can American business schools survive, working paper, University of Rochester.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2016-07-19公開。
  • 不同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信