| Abstract: | 本研究旨在應用 PZB 模式的概念，以SERVQUAL 量表建構程序發展「大學軍訓教官服務品質調查問卷」並進行實證研究，調查大學生的看法，以瞭解大學軍訓教官的服務品質是否存在缺口五，並提出若干建議以供參考。本研究以淡江大學、真理大學、國立陽明大學、國立台北藝術大學、北台科學技術學院、聖約翰技術學院等六校大學部一至四年級學生為研究對象，採分層比例抽樣方式，計發出問卷625份，有效回收問卷605份。調查所蒐集之資料經描述分析、t檢定及單因子變異數分析後，獲致以下結論：
一、大學軍訓教官服務品質可分成六個構面，分別為「教學與服務能力」、「溝通與信用」、「反應與態度」、「可靠與信賴」、「主動與關心」和「設備與文書」。
二、大學生對大學軍訓教官服務品質在期望層面之看法
（一）大學生對大學軍訓教官服務品質整體與各構面皆有較高的期望。
（二）大學生在「性別」、「年級」、「學校類別」、「居住情形」、「工讀情形」等不同背景變項中對大學軍訓教官服務品質在期望層面有差異存在。
三、大學生對大學軍訓教官服務品質在實際感受層面之看法
（一）大學生對大學軍訓教官服務品質整體與各構面皆有正向且較高的實際感受。
（二）大學生在「學校類別」、「居住情形」、「擔任幹部情形」、「工讀情形」等不同背景變項中對大學軍訓教官服務品質在實際感受層面有差異存在。
四、大學生對大學軍訓教官服務品質在認知層面之看法
（一）大學軍訓教官服務品質有缺口五存在。
（二）大學生在「性別」、「年級」、「學校類別」、「擔任幹部情形」、「工讀情形」等不同背景變項中對大學軍訓教官服務品質在認知層面有差異存在。
This research aims at using the concept of PZB model to explore the service quality of the Military Instructor in higher education institution. By using the SERVQUAL scale construct procedure, we built up "The questionnaire of Service Quality for the Military Instructor in Higher Education Institution" and investigate empirically the views of the university students, in order to understand whether there is gap5 in the Military Instructors’ service quality, and proposing suggestions for reference.
This research adopted stratified random sampling, the questionnaires were issued to 625 copies, including the student of TamKang University, Aletheia University, Taipei National University of the Arts, National Yang-Ming University, St. John’s & Mary’s Institute of Technology, and Northern Taiwan Institute of Science and Technology. There were 605 effective respondents. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistical, t-test, one-way ANOVA, we obtained the following results:
1. There are six dimensions of Military Instructor’s service : “capability of counseling,”
“communication and credibility,” “responsiveness and attitude,” “reliability and
trustfulness,” “activeness and caring,” and “equipment and document.”
2. The viewpoints of university students about expected service quality in Military Instructor:
(1) The viewpoints of university students had high expectations for Military Instructor’s
service quality in “total,” and “six dimensions .”
(2) Differences exist in university students’ expectations for Military Instructor’s service quality according to different individual background variables, especially in “the gender,” “the year,” “school classification,” “residential choice ,” and “to serve as a student assistant.”
3. The viewpoints of university students about actual experiences service quality in
Military Instructor:
(1) The viewpoints of university students had positive and high actual experiences for Military Instructor’s service quality in “total,” and “six dimensions .”
(2) Differences exist in university students’ actual experiences for Military Instructor’s service quality according to different individual background variables, especially in “school classification,” “residential choice,” “the cadre of class,” and “to serve as a student assistant.”
4. The viewpoints of university students about perceived service quality in Military Instructor:
(1) There is a gap5 in the Military Instructor’s service quality.
(2) Differences exist in university students’ perceived for Military Instructor’s service quality according to different individual background variables, especially in “the gender,” “the year,” “school classification,” “the cadre of class,” and “to serve as a student assistant.” |
