台灣青少年是否認為努力與學業成就關乎道德？

Do Taiwanese Adolescents Believe in the Moral Significance of Effort and School Performance?

過去雖有實徵研究認定努力與學業成就在儒家社會中具道德性，但其立論皆以參與者對學業活動的意見而間接推論，並未直接檢驗參與者對努力及學業成就之道德判定。一方面儒家文化以角色義務為基礎的道德觀可能將「努力」與「學業成就」視為學子應盡的道德義務；另一方面，社會—認知範疇理論則視盡義務與否僅代表社會成規議題而非道德議題。據此，本研究將探討台灣青少年對努力與學業成就的看法較符合由儒家學說衍生之道德義務假設、或較符合社會—認知範疇理論之推論。鑒於儒家文化視某些角色義務具有不分情況皆須積極奉行之無條件積極性，本研究亦探究青少年對努力及學業成就之無條件積極性的社會成規判定與道德判定，並對照學子對典型之無條件積極義務「孝道」之看法。共148位大學生與158位高中生填寫有關「努力」、「學業成就」、「孝道」是否具社會成規或道德屬性之問卷。以t檢定發現，「努力」具道德屬性的論述未被青少年認可；「努力」雖被視為具社會成規屬性但不具無條件積極性，且其強度仍不及「孝道」；「學業成就」則未被認可屬於道德或社會成規。換言之，努力具道德性並非台灣青少年之共識。

Prior empirical studies have argued that in culturally Confucian societies, academic effort and school performance are deemed role-based morality. Yet these studies have often arrived at their conclusions through inferences drawn from participants' opinions of achievement related acts but not their direct judgement on whether lack of effort or academic performance is immoral. Based on Confucian ethics, Hwang (2012) hypothesized that studying hard and striving for academic achievement are role-based responsibilities and obligatory moral conduct for young learners. Fwu, Wei, Chen, and Wang (2014) further postulated that the role obligation of effort is not only a ＂positive＂ moral duty that requires individuals to act, but also an ＂unconditional positive＂ moral duty that calls for total dedication without temporary exceptions. Alternatively, under the social-cognitive domain theory, role obligation may simply be regarded as a social convention rather than a moral code. Therefore, this study directly investigated whether Taiwanese adolescents viewed effortful learning (EL) and academic performance (AP) as essential moral duties or only duties arising from social convention. Each type of duty was examined twice, first as an obligation that one had better follow and then as an obligation one ought to perpetually observe without exception (i.e., unconditional positive duties). Because filial piety (FP) has typically been construed as an unconditional positive moral obligation in culturally Confucian societies, belief in FP was simultaneously explored for comparison. Overall, 148 college students and 158 tenth graders from Northern Taiwan filled out three forms of questionnaires addressing the target concepts of EL, AP, and FP. Each questionnaire comprised four subscales: social convention, moral code, unconditional positive social convention, and unconditional positive moral code. Analyses of t tests did not support the prior inference that Taiwanese adolescents regarded EL as a moral code. Instead, both high school and college students agreed that EL was a duty arising from social convention. However, from the perspective of Taiwanese adolescents, the social convention aspect of EL was limited, given that it was not accepted as a duty ascribed to unconditional positive social convention. In contrast, the same group of adolescents viewed FP as an unconditional positive moral code that one should observe at all times. AP was construed to be neither a social convention nor a moral duty. In conclusion, no direct evidence supported prior postulations that students in Confucian societies perceive EL and AP as morality-based obligations, not to mention as unconditional positive moral duties. The implications of the findings for Confucian role-based ethics were discussed.