一、研究目的

本研究係以國民中學學生為研究對象，期能以被害者學之觀點，探討校園暴行之有關事項，驗證校園暴行學生受害之研究架構，並據以提出可行之建議：

(一)探討校園暴行之現況；

(二)探討受害而未向校方報告之情形與原因；

(三)探討學生自陳偏差行為之頻率；

(四)探討校園暴行受害學生與未受害學生之差異情形；

(五)探討各校校園暴行學生受害率之差異情形；

(六)探討各校校園暴行學生受害率之相關因素；並

(七)驗證校園暴行學生受害率之線性結構關係分析架構。

二、研究方法與過程

本研究採用被受害者調查法，以研究者自行設計的「國民中學校園暴行狀況調查表」為研究工具，針對台北市、基隆市及台北縣的國中學生，採分層叢集隨機抽樣在民國七十八年二、三月間進行集體施測，結果獲致有效樣本3,233人。根據資料之特性及研究目的，分別進行次數分配、卡方檢定、t檢定、變異數分析、因素分析、積差相關、逐步迴歸分析、線性結構關係分析等統計分析。

三、研究發現

(一)校園暴行學生受害現況

(1)學生受害率：在一個學期中，整體校園暴行學生受害率為27.1%，輕微型校園暴行學生受害率為26.1%，嚴重型校園暴行學生受害率為49%。

(2)學生平均受害次數：在一個學期中，整體校園暴行學生平均受害次數為1.27次，輕微型校園暴行學生平均受害次數為1.11次，嚴重型校園暴行學生平均受害次數為0.13次。

(3)發生時間：無論整體、輕微型或嚴重型校園暴行，最常發生的時間皆為下課期間及放學後。

(4)發生地點：無論整體、輕微型或嚴重型校園暴行，皆最常發生在教室，走廊次之，廁所居三；惟進一步分析，則發現嚴重型校園暴行發生在教室以外地點之比率比輕微型高出甚多。

(5)加害人人數：無論整體、輕微型或嚴重型校園暴行，加害人皆以一人最多，四人以上次之；但嚴重型部分則比輕微型較多結夥（尤其四人以上）行動的。

(6)加害人與被害人關係：無論整體、輕微型或嚴重型校園暴行，加害人與被害人之關係皆以朋友關係者居第一位；惟涉及武器時，朋友關係者即大量減少，而見過面但不認識及從未見過面者即大量增加。

(7)加害人學生身份：整體、輕微型或嚴重型校園暴行之加害人皆以本校學生佔絕大部分；惟加害人為外來者之比率，嚴重型比輕微型高出甚多。

(二)校園暴行受害學生報告情形

(1)報告情形：校園暴行受害學生計有21.4%向校方或家長報告，其中嚴重型校園暴行受害者向校方或家長報告之比率（31.6%）比輕微型校園暴行受害者（20.1%）多出許多。

(2)受害而未報告學校或家長之原因：受害而未報告學校或家長者在輕微型校園暴行部分以損失輕微為主要原因，嚴重型校園暴行部分則以害怕報復及自行處理為主要原因。

(三)學生自陳偏差行為之現況

(1)行為頻率：學生自陳偏差行為的比率以打電動玩具娛樂為最多（69.9%），考試作弊居次（44.8%），看限制級電影（44.5%）居三，打電動玩具賭博（30.4%）居四。此外，閱讀黃色小說或雜誌（28.0%）、破壞塗損學校牆壁設備財物（22.3%），以言詞（16.7%）、歐打他人，但未成傷（13.4%）、無故深液在外遊蕩（11.7%）等行為比率亦皆頗高，值得學校及家庭多加注意。

(2)性別差異：各項學生自陳偏差行為之頻率皆是男學生從事此等行為之頻率高於女學生。

(3)與校園暴行受害之關係：就校園暴行受害情形與自陳偏差行為分析之，發現皆是受害者從事該行為之頻率高於未受害者。

(4)校際間之差異：本研究發現各校學生從事自陳個人偏差行為之頻率有顯著差異存在。

(5)與學生受害率之關係：以學校為單位，學生自陳偏差行為頻率皆和各校整體、輕微型及嚴重型校園暴行成顯著正相關。

(四)校園暴行受害學生之特徽

校園暴行受害學生與未受害學生在許多方面皆有差異存在，而具有下列特徵者，較易受害；(1)男性，(2)體型高壯者，(3)較具強權取巧、衝動善變、尋求刺激、受害恐懼感、缺乏信任感等個人特質，而較不具容忍從眾之個人特質者，(4)五育成績較差者，(5)懲誡紀錄較多者，(6)缺席率較高者，(7)自我報告有較多虞犯行為、非法行為、在校不良行為，而較常從事賭博色情性娛樂者，暨(8)較多不良朋友者。

(五)校園暴行學生受害率之相關因素

本研究發現一個學校如具有下列特質者，該校之受害率高：(1)社區環境之犯罪活動較高者，(2)學校男生之比率高較者，(3)師生比及班級人數比較高者，(4)學校訓育明確、學校較常體罰、而學校教師較不適任、較不民主者，(5)學校學生傾向於強權取巧、焦慮緊張、缺乏信任感及受害恐懼感者，(6)學校學生從事虞犯行為及賭博色情性娛樂活動頻率較高者，(7)學生擁有較高懲誡紀錄者，(8)學生擁有較低五育成績者，(9)學生擁有較多不良朋伴者，暨(10)學生母親為家庭主婦之比率較低者。

(六)線性結構關係分析

以社區環境、學校結構、學校管理與學校氣氛、個人特質與個人感受、在校表現、不良交友情形、家庭狀況等投入線性結構關係模式中，以LISREL（Linear Structural Relationship）進行分析，結果如下：

(1)社區環境對校園暴行之影響甚微且不明確。

(2)學校結構之性別結合情形對校園暴行受害率有極大的影響力，惟此等影響力是經由學校管理之體罰或學生不良交友情形或學生自陳賭博色情性娛樂頻率而有間接性的影響，即男性學生比率越高，學校體罰情形越厲害，或不良交友情形越多，或參與賭博色情性娛樂的頻率越高，進而造成較高校園暴行學生受害率。

(3)學校管理與學校氣氛之體罰頻率、訓育明確性、學校民主性則對校園暴行或有直接影響，或透過不良交友情形而造成學校有較高的學生受害率；而學校訓育較明確的學校，因為記過多，學生記過比率高，自然同學交往的朋友中記過之比率也高，因而間接提高了學生受害率；反之，學校民主性則允許學生有較多之參與，減少學生對學校情境之無力感，且減低學生對學校行政權威之敵對，因而有助於減低校園暴行。

(4)學生參與賭博色情性活動頻率較高者，即表示其常打電動玩具賭博，看黃色書刊及電影等，較會涉及錢財勒索等事件中，也因而提高了學生受害率。

(5)學生虞犯行為雖和受害率有相關，且二者也都受不良交友情形之而直接影響，但二者並無因果關係。

(6)不良交友在整體及輕微型校園暴行學生受害率之結構關係架構中居最直接、最重要的地位，而在嚴重型校園暴行中則透過賭博色情性娛樂而間接影響學生受害率，其重要性是絕不容忽視的。

(7)家庭結構中以母親為家庭主婦之比率為最重要，間接減低整體、輕微型校園暴行學生受害率，但對嚴重型則無影響。

四、建議

(一)對教育行政當局之建議

(1)重視校園暴行問題，採取有效對策，預防校園暴行，並處理校園暴行所引發的後遺症。

(2)降低師生比率及平均班級人數。

(3)廣籌經費，設置學校警備安全人員，將其納入正式警察編制內，並給予更完善之設備與訓練。

(4)協調地方治安單位，建立聯絡網，在學校發生重大事故時，警方能機動地迅速支援。

(5)鼓勵並贊助學校或專家學者從事有關校園暴行之研究。

(6)重申禁止體罰之命令，務期禁絕學校之體罰。

(7)鼓勵並贊助學校或專家學者從事有關校園暴行之研究。

(8)協調警察單位嚴格取締學校附近之電動玩具店（尤其是賭博性電動玩具店）、黃色書刊及黃色電影院。

(二)對學校之建議

(1)全面檢討獎懲制度。

(2)對於懲誡之執行應採取更謹慎的作法。

(3)避免採用體罰來處理學生之不良行為。

(4)增進校園民主，允許學生參與學校決策。

(5)開放學校與學生溝通之管道。

(6)注意學生之交友情形。

(7)嚴格禁止學生進出電動玩具賭博場所、黃色雜誌書刊店或觀賞限制級電影。

(8)隨時注意學生出缺度紀錄，確實掌握缺席者之行蹤。

(9)主動聯絡警方，建立緊急聯絡網。

(10)建立或改善校警制度，提高校警素質與功能。

(11）學校應加強校園巡邏。

(12)加強與家庭之聯繫。

三、對後續研究的建議

(1)在從事鉅觀層面（macro-level）之研究時，應增加樣本學校數，並將其擴大到中、南、東部之學校。

(2)後續研究可以考慮以微觀層面來分析校園暴行，以個別學生為單位來探討個別學生受害與否之影響因素為何。

(3)被害者學之生活形態╱暴露理論中主張日常生活中的生活形態使得人暴露在某些易於受害之情境中，受害之概率因而提高，因此，日後之研究可以增加有關日常生活形態之項目來驗證此理論。

(4)在美國受害恐懼感嚴重影響人們，甚至於改變人們之生活形態，早已獨立於犯罪問題之外，而形成另外一個問師。根據NIE之校園安全研究，有相當比率的學生（6~10%）因為害怕到學校會成為暴力的犧牲者，因而不敢到校上課。所以，此問題亦值得加以探討。

(5)為了更精密地進行微觀層面之被害情形與受害恐懼感之研究，可以先透過簡單的問卷區別出受害組與未受害組，再以此二組為對象，採用隨機抽樣之方式，選出數目對等的受害者與非受害組，在徵得其同意的情況下，施予更詳細的、更精密的問卷調查和個案訪問，比較此二組在各方面之異同處，進而以區別分析（discrimination analysis）、洛基對數線性模式（logit loglinear model）或logistic analysis等方法來加以分析，真正找出影響學生受害與否與恐懼與否之因素。

---

I. RESEARCH PURPOSES

Violence in the school has getting more and more attention in Taiwan though the Japanese scholar ranked Taiwan as mind compared with the other 93 countries.

In this study, the reseacher aims to understand violence in the junior high school from the victimological aspect by means of victim survey. The main purposes of this research are:

(1)To explore the frequencies and the ration of personal violence happened in the junior high school;

(2)To explore the dark figures of school violence and why the victims do pot report to the schools of the parents;

(3)To explore the frequencies and the ratios of student self-reported delinqent behavior;

(4)To distinguish the different characteristics between the victimized students and the non-victimized students;

(5)To explore the variables which caused the different victimized ratios of different schools.

(6)To present an operational model by adding the student individual factors into the school victimization model of Gottfredson and Gottfredson (1985) and to testify and to verify it by utilizing the Linear Structural Relationship (LISPEL).

(7)To make suggestions for the prevention of school violence to the educational administration and the schools and to the researchers who are interested in this issuefor the further studies.

II. RESEARCH METHODS

In the first stage, the pilot study was undertaken to verify the final questionaire. In the final procedure, the researcher collected 3,233 questionaires form 20 junior high schools of Taipei City, Taipei County and Keelong City by using victim survey and self -report survey besides presenting the official statistics of school violence. According to the types of scales and the purposes of study, the statistics of Chi-square, t-test, ANOVA, factor analysis, correlation coefficient, stepwise multiple-regression, and LISREL were utilized.

II. MAJOR FINDINGS

(1)The school violence can be categorized into total, mild and serious types of which the victimized ratios are 27.1%, 26.1%, and 4.9% in one semester, respectively.

(2)The reported ratios of victims of total, mild, and serious school violence are 21.4%, 20.1%, and 31.6%, respectively.

(3)The percentages of self-reported deviant behaviors decrease according to the seriousness degree of deviant behaviors.

(4)The subjects, who are male, strong, impulsive, stimuli-seeking, week self-confidence, non-conformity, low achievement in the school, high disciplinary records, high frequencies of self-reported deviant behaviors, sexual recreation and gambling behaviors, and association with delinquent peers, are more easily victimized in the school.

(5)The victimized rates of school violence are positively related to high criminal activities in the school community, ratios of male students, student to teacher, corporal punishment in school administration, incompetent teacher, the disciplinary records of students, impulsive students, stimuli-seeking students, week-confident students, low-achieved students, self-reported deviant behavior students, and the working mothers. Also, the victimized rate increases with frequencies of students engaged in sexual recreation and gambling behaviors, and associated with delinquent peers.

(6)The school violence victimization model of Gottfredson and Gottfredson is vorified by adding the student individual factors into this model and testified it by utilizing the Linear Structural Relationship (LISREL). The study found that there should be bwo new models, which fit the data much better than the model of Gottfredson and Gottfredson, on for the total school violence victimization and the mild school violence victimization and the other for the serious school violence victimization, respectively. Furthermore, the reseacher caculates the direct effect, the indirect effect, the total effect, the spurious effect and the residual of each ovariable.

IV. SUGGESTIONS

In the conclusion, the researcher presented some suggestions about the prevention of school violence to the educational administration and the school and sonie ideas to the reseachers who are interested in this topic:

A. SUGGESTIONS TO THE EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND SCHOOL

(1)To reduce the ratio of student to teacher;

(2)To raise funds for security guard in the school;

(3)To help the school to build the security network with local police department, so police can support the school immediately;

(4)To reaffirm the inhibition of corporal punishment;

(5)To coordinate the police department to prohibit the gambling or sexual activity around the school neighborhood;

(6)To reexamine the system of reward and punishment;

(7)To open the channels of communication to students and to promote the democracy in campus;

(8)To pay attention to the students' peer relationship, especially their association with the juvenile delinquents;

(9)To keep eyes on the absence of students in order to prevent them from being exposed to the high-risk situation; and

(10)To strengthen the contact with the family.

B. SUGGESTIONS FOR THE FURTHER RESEARCH

(1)While doing the macro-level study, the samples should be increased and to be expanded to the every part of Taiwan.

(2)The micro-level study should be included in the future, so whether a student will be victimized or not can be predicted.

(3)The routin activities of students should be taken into account in order to testify the life-style/exposure theory.

(4)The fear of victimization which has changed the life-style of American people, is independet of the issue of vicimization per se, so it should be an important subject for the furture study.

(5)For predicting the possibility of victimization and for distinguishing the victims from the nonvictims, the future studies should screen the subjects of being victimized from those of not being victimized and group them into victimized group and non-victimized group, then collect the more detailed data from them by means of survey, interview or case study. And, the discrimination analysis, logit loglinear analysis or logistic analysis can be utilized to analyze the data and to fine the factors which causes the student victimized in the school.