从1987年我国正式在高校试办高水平运动队至今，高校高水平运动队已经如火如荼的发展了25年，越来越多的国内高校拥有了自己的高水平运动队，高校高水平运动员的规模也逐渐壮大。在此背景下，一些学者开始对高校高水平运动员群体做了一些的研究。从以往研究来看，更多的涉及运动竞技、管理制度以及“学训矛盾”等方面内容，而关注他们心理健康、积极情绪的研究较少。训练满意度作为一种情感反应，它直接影响高校高水平运动员训练态度、训练水平进而影响运动成绩的提高。与专业队相比，高校特殊的训练环境、高校高水平运动员承担的学习压力和单薄的后勤保障等问题都将影响高校高水平运动员对训练的满意度评价。为此本研究在借鉴国内外一些学者研究的基础上，结合我国高校训练体制和运动员特点，通过访谈法、问卷调查法等，分别从以下三个方面进行研究：1、我国高校高水平运动员训练满意度量表开发与制定；2、我国高校高水平运动员训练满意度现状与原因分析；3、我国高校高水平运动员训练满意度指数模型的构建。研究结果表明：1、我国高校高水平运动员训练满意度结构要素包括：对训练状况的满意度、对教练因素的满意度、对自身情况的满意度和对后勤条件的满意度。在一系列验证的基础上，最终得出一份具有较好信度和效度的量表；2、我国高校高水平运动员总体训练满意度较高，而训练忠诚度评价仅处于一般水平。通过对数据结果的具体分析，同时表明：1）从训练经费保障总体调查来看，我国高校运动队伍的训练经费并不充足，各高校之间训练经费参差不齐。另外，高校高水平运动员总体对我国高校运动队伍经费保障的满意度偏低，亟需解决好我国高校运动队伍经费窘迫、经费开支透明度等问题；2）高校高水平运动员整体对教练员在训练时所实施的训练方法和训练内容较为满意。高校训练方法创新度强，且显示出了训练效果。另外，高校高水平运动员对教练员制定训练内容的评价与训练年限有关；3）高校高水平运动员对高校教练的执教能力满意度高，高校高水平运动员评价教练员执教能力与受教育年限有关；4）多数高校教练员的执教风格是合作式执教风格，整体对高校运动员的人文关怀程度偏低。在民主因素中，高校运动员最希望自己能够更多的参与训练计划的制定；5）高校高水平运动员对实现个人运动目标的信心指数较高，并对自己所从事的运动项目的发展前景有信心，其中集体项目运动员对项目发展的信心指数比个体项目高。另外，男运动员对自身的运动天赋期望值比女运动员高；6）高校高水平运动员对学校领导能重视和关注本运动队的发展的期望值高，重点高校的领导对运动队伍的关注度比非重点高校高；7）相比之下，高校高水平运动员对工资待遇的要求不高，他们更关注的是学业保障并如何能够顺利完成的问题。另外，高校高水平运动员对学习状况满意度不受训练年限的影响。3、高校高水平运动员训练满意度、忠诚度问卷所涉及的各个因素两两之间都是正向相关的，而且可以在99%的概率下呈现显著的相关性；4、高校高水平运动员心理期待、信心投入状况以及高校运动队伍的后勤条件应该受到社会的重点关注，而高校训练状况、教练因素两个方面应重点维持目前良好现状；5、高校高水平运动员基本能够认可自己的教练和自身所就读的高校，但是该群体罢训、退役的机率很大；6、高校高水平运动员对训练满意度的总体评价随着训练状况、后勤条件的改善而增高，随教练因素、自身情况评价的提高而降低；7、高校高水平运动员对自身身体条件、对运动技能和成绩提高越有信心，则他们的训练忠诚度越低，而对自己所从事运动项目的发展前景越有信心，则他们的训练忠诚度就越高；8、运动员感知满意度、运动员训练满意度、运动员训练忠诚度之间呈正相关，运动员感知满意度直接影响训练满意度，而通过训练满意度间接影响训练忠诚度；9、高校高水平运动员训练满意度模型的三个方案之间是互补的关系，相比方案A和方案B，高校高水平运动员训练满意度模型方案C外部关系、内部关系效果最好，模型内部关系整体拟合效果也最好。方案A、方案B的外部关系效果较好，内部关系效果较差，模型内部关系整体拟合效果亦可以接受。

Since 1987 the official pilot of high-level sports teams in colleges and universities, the high-level sports teams have been growing vigorously for 25 years. With more and more domestic universities having their own high-level sports teams, the scale of high-level athletes also expanded hugely. In this context, some scholars began to do some research on the group of college high-level athletes. From previous research, there are more involved in sports competition, management system and the “training of contradictions”, paying little attention to their mental health or their positive emotions. As an emotional reaction, training satisfaction is directly affecting their training levels and their scores improving of the high-level athletes in colleges and universities. Compared with the professional team, problems such as the special training environment, study pressure and thin logistics will affect their evaluation of satisfaction to the training.Therefore this study, which is based on some academic study at home and abroad, combined with the training system and the characteristics of athletes in colleges and universities in our country, through interview and questionnaire methods, research from the following three aspects:1. Development and make of high performance college athletes’training satisfaction in China;2. The present situations and reasons of high performance college athletes’ training satisfaction in China;3. The construction of the index model of high performance college athletes’ training satisfaction in China.The Result Proves That:1. Structural elements of high performance college athletes’training satisfaction includes: the satisfaction of training status, the satisfaction of coach factors, the satisfaction of their own situation and the satisfaction of logistics conditions. Based on a series of verification, we eventually got a good scale with reliability and validity;2. There are higher degrees on high performance college athletes’training satisfaction, lower evaluation on high performance college athletes’training loyalty. Through the analysis of the specific results of data, it indicates that:1）There is not enough college training funds and training funds is uneven during the colleges. Besides, some College training funds is wasted and the college athletes’ participation in using training funds is not high. Additionally, high performance college athletes are generally unsatisfied with the funding guarantee, so the urgently resolve is the problems such as funds distress and Funds expenditure transparency;2）High performance college athletes shows higher satisfaction totraining methods and training content. The innovation of the college training method is strong, showing the training effect. Additionally, evaluation of training content has to do with the training time;3）High performance college athletes shows higher satisfaction to the coaching ability of their coaches, which has to do with the athletes’education;4）The coaches show a low degree of humanistic care on their athletes, primarily with cooperation style. On the other hand, the athletes hope they can participate in training plans more;5）High performance college athletes shows higher confidence index in realizing the target of individual sports as well as the development potential of their own sport events．Among them the collective project athletes have higher confidence index than individual project athletes. In addition, male athletes have higher expectations to their own physical talent than female athletes;6）High-level college athletes shows higher expectations to school leaders’ attaching to the development of the sports teams and the leaders in the key universities pay more attentions to the sports team than the non-key universities;7）In contrast, high performance college athletes are less interested in the salaries and more in the school security, including how to finish it successfully. In addition, the training infects the satisfaction.3. All the factors in training satisfaction and loyalty questionnaire are positive related and 99% of the probability can be showed significant correlation;4. The individual situation of high performance college athletes and the logistics conditions of the sports team should be the society's “top concern”. And the attention should focus on maintaining the good situation of training state and coach factors;5. High performance college athletes can recognize their coach and their universities, but this group has a higher chance of refusing to train and retirement;6. The overall evaluation of the training satisfaction is heightened while the training status and logistics conditions is improved．It is reduced while the coach factors and the individual situation are strengthened;7. The more confidence on their own physical condition, motor skills and achievements high performance college athletes have the lower loyalty of their training. However, the more confidence on the prospects of their individual spots, the higher the loyalty of their training;8. There is a positive correlation among athletes perception satisfaction, athletes training satisfaction and athletes training loyalty and one of the dimensions of evaluation will directly affect the rest of the two;9. The three schemes of satisfaction model are complement relationship. Compared to plan A and plan B, the external and the internal relationship of plan C is the best and the whole fitting effect of the internal relationship is also the best. The effect of the external relations of plan A or plan B is good, while the effect of the internal relations is poorer. Therefore, whole fitting effect of the internal relationship is also acceptable.