臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

由於網路的發達與大學教育的普及化，學生為完成學校交付之各種學習型任務，學生會利用網路科技來完成不同的學習型任務以達到良好的成果，然而，特定的任務需要與適當的科技做搭配才能夠達到最好的績效，且學生使用網路科技的信心程度也具有相對的影響，進而對自身的學業有所助益。
因此，本研究以Task/Technology/Individual Fit Model為基礎，希望能夠了解學習型任務、網路科技與網路自我效能對績效所造成的影響，主要研究發現：
一、當學習型任務為編篡任務與分析任務時，使用網路資料庫作為協助工具，能夠達到良好的適配效果，進而對績效產生影響；當學習型任務為口語表達任務、說服任務、共識建立任務時，使用網路討論工具作為協助工具，能夠達到良好的適配效果，進而對績效產生影響。
二、高網路自我效能的學生使用網路科技時，能夠同時完善運用兩種科技完成學習型任務；但低網路自我效能的學生則較傾向使用網路討論工具，透過網路討論工具詢問網友或者同儕來獲得解決方法。
對學術而言，TTIF理論多運用在資訊科技與工作績效上，本研究將TTIF運用在學生學習之績效影響，試圖完整呈現學生完成學習型任務之績效影響意涵。對實務而言，透過研究結果可提供老師與學生一個參考，當面對不同學習型任務時，可使用適當的網路科技做教學上的搭配，期望能達到良好的績效影響。

Due to the development of internet and the popularization of university education, students need to use internet technology to collect useful information to finish kinds of learning tasks. However, different kinds of tasks need to fit with right technology, and students’ confidence of using internet technology is also important to have good performance impact.
The study is based on Task/Technology/Individual Fit Model. The purpose of this study is to find out the relationship between learning tasks (WebQust Tasks), internet technology (Web Databases/Web Discussion Tools) and Internet Self-Efficacy.
The main finding of this study shows that Compilation Tasks and Analytical Tasks have the significant influence on Web Databases, and this could have good fit to have good performance impact. In addition, Retelling Tasks, Persuasion Tasks and Consensus Building Tasks also have the significant influence on Web Discussion Tools, and this could have good fit to have good performance.
This study suggests that when students faced different learning tasks, they may use fit internet technology to achieve a good performance impact.

目錄
摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vi
表目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 2
1.1 研究背景與動機 2
1.2 研究問題 2
1.3 研究目的 3
1.4 研究流程 3
第二章 文獻探討 5
2.1 資訊系統與績效 5
2.2 任務/科技/個人適配模式 9
2.2.1 任務特性 10
2.2.2 大學生之學習型任務分類 11
2.2.3 科技特性 13
2.2.4 個人特性 13
第三章 研究方法 16
3.1 研究架構與假說 16
3.2 研究假說 16
3.2.1 適配的評估準則 16
3.2.2 任務與科技之適配影響 17
3.2.3 高/低網路自我效能與任務/科技適配 19
3.3 變數衡量 21
3.3.1 學習型任務與網路科技適配之衡量 21
3.3.2 網路自我效能之衡量 23
3.4 研究樣本 23
第四章 資料分析 24
4.1 樣本基本資料分析 24
4.2 信度與效度分析 25
4.2.1 信度分析 25
4.2.2 效度分析 26
4.3 學習型任務與網路科技適配 26
4.4 不同網路科技對於不同學習型任務之績效影響 31
4.4.1 網路資料庫對於不同學習型任務之績效影響 31
4.4.2 網路討論工具對於不同學習型任務之績效影響 33
4.5 網路自我效能與任務科技適配 34
4.5.1 網路自我效能之分群 34
4.5.2 高/低網路自我效能與任務科技適配 35
4.5.3 高網路自我效能與任務科技適配 41
4.5.4 低網路自我效能與任務科技適配 43
4.6 任務/科技/個人適配 45
第五章 結論與建議 48
5.1 研究結論與建議 48
5.2研究限制與未來研究方向 50
參考文獻 51
附錄一 研究問卷 54
附錄二 網路科技對不同學習型任務之績效影響 57
附錄三 高網路自我效能與任務科技適配 63
附錄四 低網路自我效能與任務科技適配 69
著作清單 75

參考文獻
1.王世全，“資訊科技融入教學之意義與內涵”，資訊與教育雜誌，80期，1999，23-31頁。
2.行政院主計處，“電腦應用概況調查”，線上檢索日期：2011年10月17日，取自：http://www.dgbas.gov.tw/np.asp?CtNode=405。
3.高大威，築夢的人：大學生涯的自我實現，遠流出版公司，民1991年。
4.陳建志，知識管理系統之任務/科技/個人之適配模式探討，國立台灣大學資訊管理研究所，博士論文，1995。
5.教育部統計處，“大學校院學科標準分類新舊對照表”，線上檢索日期：2011年10月，取自：http://www.edu.tw/statistics/content.aspx?site_content_sn=12115
6.韓善民，“資訊教育基礎建設─加速篇”，資訊與教育，68期，1997年，14-16頁。
7.Bandura, A., “Self-efficacy mechanism in human Agency” , American Psychologist, Vol. 37, 1982, pp. 122-147.
8.Bandura, A., Social foundations of thought and action: A Social-cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1986.
9.Dodge, B. J., “WebQuest Taskonomy: A Taxonomy of Tasks”, 1999, Retrieved from http://edweb.sdsu.edu/webquest/taskonomy.html.
10.Compeau, D. R., &; Higgins, C. A., “Application of social cognitive theory to training for computer skill” , Information System Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1995, pp. 118-143.
11.Davenport, T., &; Prusak. L., Working knowledge: how organizations manage what they know, Harvard Business School Press, 1998.
12.Davis, F. D., “Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use , and User Acceptance of Information Technology”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3, 1989, pp. 319-340.
13.DeLone, W. H., &; McLean. E. R., “The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update”, Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol. 19, No. 4, 2003, pp. 9-30.
14.DeLone, W. H. &; McLean, E. R., “Informaiton System Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable”, Informaiton Systems Research, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1992, pp. 60-95.
15.Dodge, B., “WebQuest: A technique for internet-based learning”, Distance Educator, Vol. 1,No. 2, pp. 10-13.
16.Ferratt, T. W. &; Vlahos, G. E., “An Investigation of Task-technology Fit for Managers in Greece and the US”, European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 7, 1998, pp. 123-136.
17.Goodhue, D. L., &; Thompson, R. L., “Task-Technology Fit and Individual Performance”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1995, pp. 213-236.
18.Goodhue, D. L., “Development and Measurement Validity of a Task-Technology Fit Instrument for User Evaluation of Information Systems”, Decision Science, Vol. 29, No. 1, 1998, pp. 105-138.
19.Hansen, M. T. , Nohria, N., &; Tierney, T., “What’s your strategy for managing knowledge” , Harvard Business Review, Vol. 77, No. 2, 1999, pp. 106-116.
20.Hasan, H., &; Crawford, K., “Codifying or enabling: the challenge of knowledge management systems”, Journal of the Operational Research Society, Vol. 54, 2003, pp. 184-193.
21.Jonassen, D. H., Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1996.
22.Joo, Y. J., Bong, M., &; Choi, H. J., “Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, academic self-efficacy, and Internet self-efficacy in Web-based instruction”, Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 51, 2000, pp. 5-18.
23.Ma, Q., &; Liu, L., “The role of internet self-efficacy in the acceptance of web-based electronic medical records”, Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2005, pp. 38-57.
24. Murphy, C. A., Coover, D., &; Owen, S. V., “Development and validation of the Computer Self-Efficacyscale”, Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 49, 1989, pp. 893-899.
25.Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., &; Konno, N., “SECI, Ba and leadership: a unified model of dynamic knowledge creation”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 33, 2000, pp.5-34.
26.Pitt, L. F., &; Watson, R. T., “Service Quality: A Measure of Information System Effectiveness”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2, 1995, pp. 173-185.
27.Ren, W. H., “Self-efficacy and the search for government information”, Reference and User Services Quarterly, Vol. 38, No. 3, 1999, pp. 283-291.
28.Sarvary, R., &; Miklos, E., “Knowledge Management and Competition in the Consulting Industry”, California Management Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, 1999, pp. 95-107.
29.Seddon, P. B., &; Kiew, M. Y., “A partial test and development of DeLone and McLean’s model of IS success”, Australian Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1996, pp. 90-109.
30.Tsai, M. J., &; Tsai, C. C., “Information searching strategies in web-based science learning: The role of internet self-efficacy”, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, Vol. 40, 2003, pp. 43-50.
31.Venkartaman, N., “The Concept of Fit in Strategy Research: Toward Verbal and Statistical Correspondence” , Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 3, 1989, pp. 423-444.
32.Venkatraman, N., &; Prescott. J. E. “Environment Strategy Coalignment: An Empirical Test of Its Performance Implications”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 1, 1990, pp. 1-23.
33.Wang, C. S., &; Li, C. C., An assessment framework for information technology integrated instruction. Paper presented at ICCE (International Conference on Computers in Education) / ICCAI (International Conference on Computer-Assisted Instruction), 2000, Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved from: http://wcs.dgps.kh.edu.tw/wcs/research/an%20assessment%20framework%20for%20ITII_%E6%B5%81%E9%80%9A.doc
34.Zack, M. H., “Developing a Knowledge Strategy”, California Management Review, Vol. 41, No. 3, 1999, pp. 125-145.
35.Zigurs, I., &; Buckland, B. K., “A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Syetems Effectiveness”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 3, 1998, pp. 313-334.
36.Zigurs, I., Buckland, B. K., Connolly, J. R., &; Wilson, E. V., “A Test of Task-Technology Fit Theory for Group Support Systems”, Database for Advances in Information Systems, Vol. 30, No. 3, 1999, pp. 34-50.