本研究旨在探討大學生在其自主校園環境行動中的學習，以台灣師範大學老樹古蹟保存及後續創意校園行動、東海大學反對工業區聯外道路穿越校園行動，及高雄醫學大學創意校園行動等三校大學生自主校園環境行動事件及行動參與者為研究對象。試圖找出引發大學生自主投入校園環境行動產生的原因，並進一步探討行動參與者在過程中的學習及引發學習的契機。
本研究所採行之研究方法有二，分別為文獻整理及個案研究。筆者首先透過文獻整理歸納80年代以來學生運動的發展歷程、校園參與在國內的推動狀況，以及古蹟保存論述的發展，藉由上述文獻整理描繪出支持三校學生自主環境行動產生的大社會環境條件；而運用質性個案研究的方法，研究者大量蒐集三校學生行動期間的相關文件，同時進行團體訪談及參與者的個別深度訪談，以便能更清楚呈現三個學生環境行動事件的歷程，及參與者在過程中的改變。
本研究發現投入校園環境行動，參與者的學習是很豐富的，包括行動議題的知識、行動技能、拓展經驗、批判性思考、謙卑、有力感、改變對校園的情感等大面向，而學習的具體成份則受到行動事件及團體特性的影響。進一步探究引發學習的契機，行動者的個人動機及團體的特性/經營是關鍵。行動者的動機是觸發這群年輕學生投入行動的內在趨力，包括年輕人的理想性、對空間議題有興趣、有人找、過去經驗的啟發，想要行動等。團體特性/經營則不僅影響行動者對行動的掌握，更攸關行動者在過程中的學習。東海人間/台研屬於常態性社團經營，因而行動者表現出掌握行動的信心，更強調成員的共同決策；台師大、高醫的成員因為議題而集結，一開始團體感不若東海人間/台研濃厚，研究者以其相對經驗，將成員分為菜鳥與老鳥，並將行動過程分為行動初期、轉變期、成熟期三個階段，發現到在過程中老鳥與菜鳥均有所轉變，而對於行動的決策權力趨於平等。
透過上述的研究發現，研究者進一步型塑出行動中學習的架構，並以大學生參與校園環境行動的學習成果與Hungerford ＆Volk（1990）所提之環境公民行為模式做一比較對話，指出真實情境中的學習是依每一行動事件的需要而發展、獲得的，而非如同環境公民行為模式指出的三類變項有次序性。最後，並據以提出建議：大學校園中應提供學生更多參與的機會與管道，讓學生得以在當中發展環境行動的能力。
關鍵字：環境行動、行動能力、行動中學習、培力

This research explores how university students learn through autonomous environmental action on campus. Three campus environmental actions and their participants are the subjects of this study: 1) an action to protect old trees and buildings at National Taiwan Normal University; 2) an action to protest development of an industrial-use road through Tunghai University; and 3) an action to encourage creativity on campus at Kaohsiung Medical University. The researcher has attempted to find why university students get involved with campus environmental actions and further discusses participants’ opportunities for learning through action.
Research methods consisted of document compilation and individual case studies. The researcher first gathered documentation from the 1990s on regarding the development of student movements, the promotion of campus participation, and the preservation of historical monuments. The above documents were drawn on to describe environmental conditions in the society at large that supported the development of these three autonomous university student environmental actions. Individual case studies consisted of gathering relevant documents pertaining to the three student actions and conducting in-depth interviews of involved groups and participants so as to more clearly present the development of the actions and the changes experienced by participants as the actions progressed.
It was found that participants of campus environmental actions learned a great deal in various areas including activism issues, action skills, opening up to new experiences, critical thinking, humility, empowerment, and the emotions behind changes on campus. Tangible aspects of learning were influenced by the actions and the nature of involved organizations. It was further discovered that opportunities for learning, individual motivations for getting involved and group characteristics and management were all key factors. Motivations for getting involved included youth idealism, interest in public space issues, recruitment by peers, past experiences, and desire to take action. Group characteristics and management not only influenced participants’ control over the actions but also affected their learning through action. Tunghai University group is a typical student group in terms of management; participants demonstrated confidence in their action and emphasized mutual decisions among members. As for the actions at National Taiwan Normal University and Kaohsiung Medical University, participants formed groups as a result of the issues and team spirit was not as strongly felt as in the Tunghai University group. The researcher classified participants into two groups according to their experience and divided each action into three stages: initial stage, transition stage and maturation stage. Both experienced and non-experienced groups went through a transition stage and both groups had equal power of decision during the actions.
Based on the above findings, the researcher further constructed a framework for learning through action and made a comparison of learning results of students involved in campus environmental action and the environmental citizenship behavior model proposed by Hungerford & Volk (1990). This comparison indicates that the development of learning in real situations is based on the needs of each individual action, rather than the three sequential changes proposed in the environmental citizenship behavior model. The researcher suggests that university campuses should provide students with more opportunities and channels for participation in which they can build capacity for environmental action.
Keyword：environmental action, action competence, learning through action, empowerment

王文科（2001）。 教育研究法（第六版）。台北：五南。
王美文（民90）。增權觀點之婦女學習。 社會教育學刊， 30， 25-45。
林妙香（2000）。社區義工參與社區問題解決的學習及其影響之探討－以嘉義是王功里社區義工為例。國立中正大學成人與繼續教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台灣嘉義。
邱淑娟（2002）。九二一震災重建區社區參與學習之研究－以埔里鎮桃米社區為例。暨南國際大學成人與繼續教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台灣南投。
沈姍姍（1996）。社區進行環境行動之研究－以台北市興家社區環保媽媽為例。國立台灣師範大學環境教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
吳麗雪（2001）。女性意識學省與增能經驗: 以鄉鎮型社區婦女教育為例。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
許世璋（2001）。我們真能教育出可解決環境問題的公民嗎？論環境教育與環境行動。中等教育，52（2），52-75。
黃建榮（2000）。探索劉力學（Pierre Loisel）的重要生命經驗與環境行動在環境教育上的意義。國立台灣師範大學環境教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
張英陣校閱（Deborah K Padgett著）（2000）：質化研究與社會工作。台北：洪葉文化。
張真嫚（2002）。環境公民教育歷程之探討－以國小學生校園惜水行動研究為例。國立東華大學環境政策研究所碩士論文，未出版，台灣花蓮。
楊冠政（1998）。環境教育。台北：明文。
釋自淳、夏曉鵑（2003）。識字與婦女培力－以「外及新娘識字班」為例。台灣教育社會學研究， 3（3）， 41-84。
夏鑄九（1994）。公共空間。台北市 : 文建會出版。
學習的弔詭 社會中的個人蛻變（王秋絨等合譯）（民91）。台北市：學富。（原著出版年:1992年）
成人學習者，成人教育與社區（李素卿譯）（民86）。台北市：五南。（原著出版年:1983年）
黃富順（民89）。成人的經驗學習。載於中華民國成人教育學會（主編），成人學習革命（1-30頁）。台北市：師大書苑。
蘇峰山（2004）批判思考與批判教育學。教育社會學通訊，55期，03-11。

Bjarne Bruun Jensen ＆ Karsten Schnack（1997）.The Action Competence Approach in Environmental Education. Environmental Education Research， 3（2）， pp.163-178.
Gutierrez， L.，Parson， R. J.，＆ Cox， E. O.(1998). A Model for Empowerment Practice. Empowerment in Social Work Practice：A Sourcebook，（pp.3-20）. Brooks: Cole Publishing Inc..
Griff Foley（1999）.Learning in a Green Campaign. Learning in Social Action：A contribution to understanding informal education，（pp27-46） .London: Zed Books.
Hungerford， H. R.， & Volk， T. L. (1990). Changing Learner Behavior through Environmental Education.
Jensen， B. ＆ Nielsen， K.（2003）. Action-oriented Environmental Education: Clarifying the concept of action.環境教育研究，1
Katherine M. Emmons（1997）.Perspectives on Environmental Action: Reflection and Revision Through Practical Experience. The Journal of Environmental Education， 29（1），pp.34-44.
Michale Newman（2000）.Learning， education and social action. In Griff Foley（Ed.），Understanding Adult Education and Training（pp.267-281）. Australia:Allen＆Unwin.
Jarvis， P.（1987）.Adult Learning in the Social Context.London: Croom Helm.
Finn Mogensen （1997）. Critical thinking：a central element in developing action competence in health and environmental education. Health education research theory & practice 12（4）:429-436.