根據維基百科的數據顯示，每十億千米的出行距離，飛機的死亡率僅0.05，相比之下，轎車的死亡率達到3.1，是飛機的三倍。以上的數據，似乎都已證實了「飛機是最安全的出行方式」的觀點。雖然飛機的事故率確實要比汽車、火車、輪船等交通工具要低不少，但是這樣的比較卻恰恰忽略了一個最重要的點，那就是飛機失事常在瞬間，再加上如果飛機在高空失事，除非能順利迫降，否則一旦墜毀往往同時引發爆炸，旅客生還機率極小。而發生意外的同時，機組人員的正確判斷及即時反應格外顯得極為重要。
情境模擬教學在醫學界及飛行訓練行之有年，而其教學成效和益處在各項研究中也多次被提到，然而情境模擬教學在空服員的緊急狀況演練中一直都是擔任最重要的訓練方式，但卻極少其相關研究。因「T」航空公司為本國唯一一間低成本航空，在硬體設備上較傳統航空較為不足。如何在有限的資源下，得到有效的訓練成果。故此研究以「T」航空公司空服員年度複訓為例，作情境模擬教學成效之探究。本研究目的為：ㄧ、透過Kirkpatrick學習評估模式探討情境模擬教學課程設計對空服員年度複訓之成效。二、綜合不同空服員觀點，評核在訓練上之課程內容安排、訓練場地設備、講師教學、學習心態上之現況滿意度，以提供未來空服訓練部門的教學方向建議。3.依研究結果提出建議，提供未來其他低成本航空在空服員培訓中之借鏡。
本研究以Kirkpatrick的四層次學習評估模式為基礎，進行量化的研究。問卷設計以Kirkpatrick學習評估模式為依據，包含反應層次、學習層次及行為層次來設計前後測問卷，並請三位專家學者作問卷效度分析及信度分析。研究資料收集對象為「T」航空公司空服員共208位。預試對象共30位，有效回收問卷27份。正式問卷施測對象178位，回收問卷共178份。
本研究主要結論如下：一、空服員在年度複訓中情境模擬教學中在三個構面中，其中項目包含「講師的專業技能」、「講師的口語表達能力」、「講師的教學態度」「對緊急狀況發生時有助於提升正確的處理流程能力」、「在緊急狀況發生時有助於正確且適時地使用緊急狀備」、「對緊急狀況發生時有助於提升應變能力」、「讓我可以減少工作上的錯誤」、「讓我能解決工作上所面零的問題」、「讓我再飛行前簡報時，更能明確回答緊急狀況之提問」、「讓我在接收機長緊急指令時，可正確接收並執行接續之動作」、「讓我更能有效地執行雙向溝通 (CRM) 」等部分呈顯著差異。二、不同人口統計變項中有差異的是性別及有無其他航空公司空服員經驗在學習層次及行為層次上有部分呈顯著差異。三、反應層次、學習層次、行為層次之間呈顯著正相關。四、年度複訓前及後無顯著之差異。五、情境模擬教學中在Kirkpatrick學習成效理論中的反應層次、學習層次、及行為層次三個部分，對課程內容實用價值面無顯著影響。本研究依據研究結果提出分析及建議，提供各航空之訓練部門於培訓課程內容設計規劃及時間上安排之參考，亦提供未來相關研究方向。

According to Wikipedia, the death rate of airplanes is only 0.05 per billion kilometers of travel distance. In contrast, the death rate of cars is 3.1, which is three times that of airplanes. The above data seems to have confirmed the view that "aircraft is the safest way to travel." Although the accident rate of airplanes is indeed much lower than that of vehicles, trains, ships and other means of transportation, this comparison just ignores one of the most important points, that is, airplane crashes are often instantaneous, plus if the airplane is at high altitude In a crash, unless it can be forced to land smoothly, it will often cause an explosion at the same time, and the chance of survival of passengers is extremely small. When an accident occurs, the crew's correct judgment and immediate response are extremely important.
Scenario simulation teaching has been practiced in the medical field and flight training for many years, and its teaching effectiveness and benefits have been mentioned many times in various studies. However, scenario simulation teaching has always been the most important role in the emergency drills of flight attendants. An important training method, but there is very little research on it. Because "T" airline is the only low-cost airline in the country, it is less than traditional airlines in terms of hardware equipment. How to get effective training results with limited resources. Therefore, this study takes the recurrent training of "T" airline flight attendants as an example to explore the effectiveness of scenario simulation teaching. The purpose of this research is: 1. To explore the effectiveness of scenario simulation teaching curriculum design on the recurrent training of flight attendants through the Kirkpatrick learning evaluation model. 2. Synthesize different perspectives of flight attendants, evaluate the current situation satisfaction in training course content arrangement, training venue equipment, lecturer teaching, and learning attitude, so as to provide suggestions for the future teaching direction of the flight attendant training department. 3. Make suggestions based on the research results, and provide reference for other low-cost airlines in the training of flight attendants in the future.
This research is based on Kirkpatrick's four-level learning evaluation model and carries out quantitative research. The questionnaire design is based on the Kirkpatrick learning assessment model, including response levels, learning levels and behavior levels to design the pre- and post-test questionnaires, and three experts and scholars are invited to analyze the validity and reliability of the questionnaire. The research data collection object is a total of 208 "T" airline flight attendants. There were 30 pre-test subjects, and 27 questionnaires were effectively returned. The official questionnaire was administered to 178 subjects, and a total of 178 questionnaires were returned.
The main conclusions of this study are as follows: 1. The scenario simulation teaching of flight attendants in the recurrent training is in three aspects, among which the items include "the lecturer's professional skills", "the lecturer's oral expression ability", and "the lecturer's teaching attitude" "It helps to improve the correct handling process ability when an emergency occurs", "It helps to use emergency equipment correctly and in a timely manner when an emergency occurs", "It helps to improve the ability to respond to an emergency when an emergency occurs.", "Allows me to reduce work errors", "Allows me to solve zero problems at work", "Let me more clearly answer questions about emergencies when briefing before the flight", "Allow me to receive When the captain is in urgent order, he can correctly receive and execute the subsequent actions", "Let me perform two-way communication (CRM) more effectively", etc. There are significant differences. 2. The differences in different demographic variables are gender and the experience of other airline flight attendants. There are some significant differences in the level of learning and behavior. 3. There is a significant positive correlation among the response level, learning level and behavior level. 4. There is no significant difference before and after the recurrent training. 5. The three parts of the Kirkpatrick's learning effectiveness theory in the context simulation teaching, the reaction level, the learning level, and the behavior level, have no significant impact on the practical value of the course content. Based on the research results, this research puts forward analysis and suggestions, provides reference for the training course content design planning and time arrangement of each aviation training department, and also provides relevant research directions in the future.

中華民國交通部民用航空局 (2018)。航空器飛航作業管理規則。取自https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=K0090041
王冠智 (2004)。臺北市立圖書館人員教育訓練之研究 (未出版碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學，臺北市。
吳明隆、涂金堂 (2014)。SPSS 與統計應用分析。臺北市：五南。
李吉林 (2008)。情境課程的案例與操作。中國北京市：教育科學出版社。
李勇輝 (2017)。學習動機、學習策略與學習成效關係之研究-以數位學習為例。經營管理學刊，(14)，68-86。
李隆盛、黃同圳 (2000)。人力資源發展。臺北市：師大書苑。
李黛娜 (2007)。一枚螺絲帽脫軌華航那霸機場爆炸。取自https//:www.epochweekly.com/b5/034/3593.htm
林怡君 (2003)。因應加入WHO證卷業管理才能需求分析之研究 (碩士論文)。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/q4fcw8
林哲瑩、鄭晏甄 (2016)。運用個案研討會建構充權式的居家服務督導模式。發展與前瞻學報，(13)，51-66。
林進財、陳瑞全、陳啟斌、歐陽玉萍 (2007)。E-learning 學習績效運用模糊法評估。東華大學資訊管理學報，14(2)，247-271。
林嘉玲、林君萍、蘇美禎、張媚 (2014)。情境模擬教學在護理教育。台灣醫學，18(2)，238-243。
邱淑芬、蘇秀娟、劉桂芬、黃慧芬 (2015)。翻轉教室—資訊科技融入護理教育的新教學策略。護理雜誌，62(3)，5-10。
邱皓政 (2010)。量化研究與統計分析： SPSS (PASW) 資料分析範例。臺北市：五南。
施雪初 (2014)。服飾製作專業人才教育訓練評估之研究。康大學報，4，43-67。
洪纓 (2019)。體驗教育課程學習成效之研究 (碩士論文)。Airiti Library華藝線上圖書館。取自doi:/10.6345/NTNU202000700
孫靜波 (2018，5月18日)。川航20分鐘奇蹟備降副機長：短袖上衣長褲都被撕碎。中國新聞網。取自https://web.archive.org/web/20180515041154/http://www.chinanews.com/sh/2018/05-15/8513738.shtml
馬輝 (2012)。本科空乘專業教學中模擬教學法的應用。瀋陽大學學報，14(2)。
國家運輸安全調查委員會 (2020)。台灣飛安統計報告。取自https://www.ttsb.gov.tw/media/4303/%E5%8F%B0%E7%81%A3%E9%A3%9B%E5%AE%89%E7%B5%B1%E8%A8%88-2010-2019_final.pdf
張瓊玲 (1993)。人力資源培訓理論的探討。人事月刊。1(5)，52-57。
郭振昌 (2012)。柯氏訓練評估模式的修正與反省。臺灣勞工季刊，29，115-124。
陳勁甫、鍾武侖 (2007)。工作滿足、組織承諾、工作尋找與離職傾向關係之研究-以某 國際航空公司客艙組員為例。運輸學刊，19(2)，191-213。
黃添進 (2006)。我國消防人員常年訓練成效評估之研究-以嘉義市消防局為例 (碩士論文)。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/bdu77g
劉淑芬 (2007)。企業教育訓練評鑑方法應用之研究 Kirkpatrick 四層次模式理論分析的觀點 (未出版博士論文)。國立中正大學，嘉義縣。
蔡功明 (2009)。員工培訓計劃落實度對員工組織承諾與離職傾向之影響：某速食連鎖餐廳之實證研究 (碩士論文)。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/hcej3g
戴錫瑩、孫耀東、李岩 (2009)。基於 Kirkpatrick 評估模式的網路學習績效評價模式設計。中國遠程教育，(1)，45-48。
謝明蓁 (2011)。臨床情境模擬教學回顧檢討技巧。台灣醫學，15(5)，543-550。
鍾瑞英，高毓秀 (2012)。專科護理師訓練課程成效評估之探討。護理暨健康照護研究，8(3)，201-211。
顏志龍、鄭中平 (2019)。給論文寫作者的統計指南：傻瓜也會跑統計。臺北市：五南。
Beardwell, I., & Holden, L. (2001). Human resource management: A contemporary approach. Essex, U.K: Pearson Education Limited.
Bubb, S., & Earley, P. (2007). Leading & managing continuing professional development: Developing people (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Chatzimouratidis, A., Theotokas, I., & Lagoudis, I. N. (2012). Decision support systems for human resource training and development. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(4), 662–693. doi:/10.1080/09585192.2011.561235
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1999). Development and adaptations of the seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. New directions for teaching and learning, 80, 75-81. doi:10.1002/tl.8006
David, S. (2020, January 2). Major commercial plane crash deaths worldwide fell by more than 50% in 2019:group. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airlines-safety-idUSKBN1Z0242?taid=5e0d6060b19b7e000192c33b&utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter
Decker, S., Utterback, V. A., Thomas, M. B., Mitchell, M., & Sportsman, S. (2011). Assessing continued competency through simulation: A call for stringent action. Nursing Education Perspectives, 32(2), 120-125.
Dye, K. L. (2002). Effective HRD evaluation: An expanded view of Kirkpatrick's Four Levels (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Indiana, Bloomington, IN.
Goodall, J., Day, C., Lindsay, G., Muijs, D., & Harris, A. (2005). Evaluating the impact of continuing professional development. London: Department for Education and Skills.
Guay, F., Ratelle, C. F., & Chanal, J. (2008). Optimal learning in optimal contexts: The role of self-determination in education. Canadian Psychology/Psychologies Canadienne, 49(3), 233.
Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Ironside, P. M., Jeffries, P. R., & Martin, A. (2009). Fostering patient safety competencies using multiple-patient simulation experiences. Nursing Outlook, 57, 332-7. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2009.07.010
Jeffries, P. R. (2005). A framework for designing, implementing and evaluating simulations used as teaching strategies in nursing. Nursing Education Perspectives, 26, 96-103.
King, J.A., & Evans, K. M. (1991). Can we achieve outcome-based education? Educational leadership, 49, 73-75.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1975). Evaluating training programs: A collection of articles from the Journal of the American Society for Training and Development. Madison, WI: ASTD.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1976). Evaluating of training. In R. L. Craig. (Ed.). Training and development: A guide to human resources development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Another look at evaluating training programs: Fifty articles from training & development and technical training: Magazines cover the essentials of evaluation and return-on-investment. Alexandria, VA: ASTD.
Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
Kohn, L. T., Corrigan, J. M., & Donaldson, S. (2000). To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Kornett, B. A. (2004). Assessing training effectiveness: International deployment of six sigma methods and lean concepts supported by knowledge management (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Walden, Minneapolis, MN.
Lloyd L. B., & Leslie W. R (1999). Human resource management (6th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
McCaughey, C. S., & Traynor, M. K. (2010). The role of simulation in nurse education. Nurse Education Today, 30(8), 827-832. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2010.03.005
National Transportation Safety Board. (2001). Survivability of Accidents Involving Part 121 U.S. Air Carrier Operation,1983 Through 2000. Safety Report NTSB/SR-01/01. Washington, DC: Author.
National Transportation Safety Board. (2009). Safety Recommendation. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20131101131338/http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2009/A09_17_18.pdf
National Transportation Safety Board. (2010). Aviation Accident Report. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20190612094322/https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR1003.pdf
Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (2012). The mediating effects of student engagement on the relationships between academic disciplines and learning outcomes: An extension of Holland’s theory. Research in Higher Education, 53(5), 550-575.
Posavac, E. J. (2011). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Reilly, A., & Spratt, C. (2007). The perceptions of undergraduate student nurses of high- fidelity simulation-based learning: a case report from the University of Tasmania. Nurse Education Today, 27(6), 542-550.
Shepherd, C. K., McCunnis, M., Brown, L., & Hair, M. (2010). Investigating the use of simulation as a teaching strategy. Nurs Stand, 24(35), 42-48.
Smith, S. J., & Roehrs, C. J. (2009). High-fidelity simulation: Factors correlated with nursing student satisfaction and self-confidence. Nursing education perspectives, 30(2), 74-78.
Stufflebeam, D. (2001). Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation, 2001(89), 7-98.
United States Office Personnel Management. (2011). Field guide to training evaluation: Demonstrating the value of training at every level. Retrieved from http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/training-and-delevlopment/reference-materials/training_evaluation.pdf
University of Cranfield (2021). Cabin evacuation facility. Retrieved from https://www.cranfield.ac.uk/facilities/cabin-evacuation-facility
Wajdi, M., Khalil, A., & Maria Nieves, P. A (2014). Training strategies, Theories, and Types. Journal of Accounting-Business & Management. 21(1),12-26.
Wilford, A., & Doyle, T. J. (2006). Integrating simulation training into the nursing curriculum. British Journal of Nursing, 15, 926-930.
Yuan, H. B., Williams, B. A., & Fang, J. B. (2012). The contribution of high-fidelity simulation to nursing students' confidence and competence: a systematic review. International Nursing Review, 59, 26-3.