臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究之目的旨在探討不同學習風格以及不同電腦自我效能的學習者在非同步遠距學習上，其學習情形與學習成效，並比較其差異。
對於學習風格之研究頗多，研究結果亦指出學習風格是影響學習的重要因素。然而學習風格對於非同步遠距教學之學習成效影響，其文獻較為匱乏。因此，本研究欲進一步探討不同學習風格之學習者在接受非同步遠距教學後，對學習成效之影響。此外，電腦自我效能為個人對自己完成某些電腦任務的能力判斷與信心，也是一種個人對於自己電腦能力的自我判斷。非同步遠距學習是一種架構於電腦和網路上的學習型態，本研究也將探討電腦自我效能的高低和非同步遠距學習成效之間的關係。在研究過程中，本研究依受測者登入的記錄做簡要的歷程與學習成效等變項間的分析。
本研究於實驗處理後將資料以次數分配、百分比、平均數、標準差、單因子變異數分析及皮爾森相關分析等方式來進行統計。根據研究結果，歸納出下列幾點結論：
一、 性別與年齡在電腦自我效能之表現上並無顯著差異。
二、 非同步遠距學習學員之學習風格對學習成效無顯著差異。
三、 電腦自我效能的高低和學習成效間無顯著差異。
四、 上線時間和學習成效間並沒有顯著的相關；而上線次數方面，僅與單元評量一項有顯著的相關。
五、 學習風格和學習滿意度之間無顯著差異。
六、 電腦自我效能的高低和學習滿意度間無顯著差異。
七、 學習歷程與學習滿意度間有顯著的差異。
八、 受測的學員對於非同步遠距學習系統均感滿意。
最後根據本研究之發現與結論，研究者從網路教學、非同步遠距學習環境、及後續研究等三方面提出幾項建議。
關鍵字：學習風格、電腦自我效能、非同步遠距學習

The purpose of this study was to explore the learning circumstance and the efficacy of the different learning style and the computer self-efficacy learners in asynchronous distance learning and compare these differences.
There were so a lot of studies for the learning style that appealed the learning style was the important factor to effect the result of learning. The documents for the study of the effect of learning style in asynchronous distance learning were not enough. Therefore, this study was to discuss the effect of the different learning study men accepted the asynchronous distance learning way. Furthermore, the computer oneself effectiveness is the ascertained ability and faith to finish the computer assignment individually, and also the judgment of the computer ability by own self. The asynchronous distance learning is a kind of learning ways that established on the computer and internet. There was a discussion the relationship between the computer self-efficacy and the effect of the asynchronous distance learning in this study. During the period of the study, we analyzed the variables between the concise progress and the learning effect according to the record of the tester’s login time.
After the experimental treatment, we analyzed the data by frequency distribution, percentage, mean, SD, one-way analysis of variance and K. Pearson. According to the result of the research, we finally arrived at the following conclusions:
1. There is no significant difference between the sex and the age in the perform of the computer self-efficacy.
2. There is no significant difference in the learning style of the member of the asynchronous distance learning.
3. There is no significant difference between the computer self-efficacy and the learning effect.
4. There is no significant difference between the time in inter net and the learning effect: the times to inter net is related to one item of the unit grade.
5. There is no significant difference between the learning style and the learning satisfaction.
6. There is no significant difference between the computer self-efficacy and the learning satisfaction.
7. There is significant difference between the learning process and the learning satisfaction.
8. The tested members feel satisfied in the system of the asynchronous distance learning.
Finally, according to the findings and the conclusions, the researcher supported some suggestion by the internet teaching, the learning environments of the asynchronous distance learning and the future research.

中文摘要
Abstract
目錄 Ⅰ
表目次 Ⅲ
圖目次 Ⅴ
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 2
第二節 研究目的 3
第三節 研究範圍與限制 3
第四節 名詞釋義 4
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節　學習風格之相關理論及研究 7
第二節　個人變項與電腦自我效能之相關研究 17
第三節　非同步遠距學習之相關理論及研究 26
第四節　網路學習歷程之相關理論及研究 33
第三章 研究方法 41
第一節 研究架構 41
第二節 研究設計與實施 42
第三節 研究假設 43
第四節 研究對象 43
第五節 實施程序 44
第六節 研究工具 45
第七節 資料處理與分析 57
第四章 資料分析與結果 59
第一節 實驗教學之學員背景資料分析 59
第二節 性別、年齡之個人變項在電腦自我效能之差異分析 60
第三節 不同學習風格的學員之非同步遠距學習成效的差異分析 62
第四節 不同電腦自我效能的學員之非同步遠距學習成效的差異分析 65
第五節 不同學習歷程的學員之非同步遠距學習成效的相關分析 67
第六節 不同學習風格的學員之非同步遠距學習滿意度的差異分析 73
第七節 不同電腦自我效能的學員之非同步遠距學習滿意度的差異分析 74
第八節 不同學習歷程的學員之非同步遠距學習滿意度的差異分析 75
第九節 網路教學滿意度分析 79
第十節 研究結果彙集 81
第五章 結論與建議 83
第一節　研究發現 83
第二節　研究結論 88
第三節　研究建議 91
參考文獻 97
壹、中文部分 97
貳、英文部分 100
附錄一　電腦自我效能量表 105
附錄二　學習風格量表 106
附錄三　學習滿意度問卷 107

壹、中文部分
王受榮（民81）。我國國民中小學教師效能感及其影響因素之研究。臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
王宗斌(民88)。訓練方式、電腦自我效能即學習型態對學習績效的影響─網頁設計時地研究。中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
王秋華(民90)。網路教學之學生學習行為與學習滿意度及學習績效的關係。大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
王裕方(民87)。電腦態度與學習績效的影響因素探討─中學生網頁製作教學的實地實驗研究。國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
石岳峻，陳年興(民87)。網路教學系統之功能分析與實作。TANet''98 會議論文。
朱國光(民87)。網路輔助學習系統之研究。國立台南師範學院資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
李金泉(民90)。非同步式網路輔助教學之研究─以技職校院工業安全課程為例。國立彰化師範大學工業教育研究所博士論文。
李勝富(民88)，美國第一所認可的虛擬大學，美國教育新知選輯，卷3，23-26。
巫靜宜(民87)。比較網路教學與傳統教學對學習效果之研究。淡江大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
吳玉明(民86)。建構式教學策略中不同學習型態學生學習的探討。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
吳百薰（民87），「學習風格理論探究」，國教輔導，第37 卷第五期，47~53
吳明隆（民87 ）。以網路為主的教學環境（ Web-Based Instruction）內涵及規劃原則。教育部電子計算機中心簡訊，8712，22-38。
吳明隆(民88)。新時代資訊科技的教學應用與行政支援。教育部電子計算機中心簡訊，8806，16-32。
吳信賢(民88)。非同步式網路教學系統之發展及學習歷程檔案。國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
林生傳(民74)。國中學生學習式態之相關因素及其與學校教育態度、學業成就的關係。教育學刊，6，41-94。
林奇賢(民85)。全球資訊網輔助學習系統。(http://linbo.ntntc.edu.tw/document/wwwaided.htm)
林奇賢(民88)。電腦網路與教育改革。教育部電子計算機中心簡訊，8806，1-11。
林清賀(1999)，網路學習系統上之學習歷程評量輔助系統。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所未出版之碩士論文。
林麗琳(民84)。國小資優班與普通班學生學習風格、學習適應與學業成就關係之研究。國立台南師院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
陳自強（民85），教學新主張---遠距教學系統，教育資料文摘(37:6)，174-180。
陳年興、楊子青、賴宏仁（民86），以網際網路為基礎之學習環境，電腦學刊，第九卷，第二期，667-674。
陳年興、劉惠如（民88），「整合式網路教學之課程設計與教學成效」，第十屆全國資訊管理學術研討會，1150-1157。
陳銘憲（民88）。大專院校遠距教學教材上網計劃。教育部電子計算機中心簡訊，8803，15-21。
陳麗鈴（民87）。高職學生電腦焦慮之相關因素研究。大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
翁淑緣（民89）。影響國中學生電腦學習意願之個人特性探討。教育與心理研究，23，147-172。
郭汶川（民89）。警察人員電腦態度與電腦素養之研究。中央警察大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
郭重吉（民76）。評介學習風格之有關研究。資優教育季刊，23，7-16。
麥孟生（民89）。個人心理類型、自我效能及態度對電腦學習成效之影響。中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
張春興(民84)。教育心理學。台北：東華書局。
黃玉枝(民80)。國中資優學生與普通學生學習風格及學校適應之比較研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊育研究所碩士論文。
黃聰銘（民89）。綜合所得稅申報方式的電腦相關因素研究。大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
黃履峰(民86)。學習環境中追蹤及檢視學習者學習路徑的方法。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
彭成瑋(民88)。網路教學系統的理念、設計與實作。國立中正大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
資策會（ 民85 ），「遠距教學需求分析計劃」， (http://140.92.88.45/etd/dl/html/require2.htm)，台北：教育部。
資策會（ 民88 ），「專科以上學校開辦遠距教學作業要點」，(http://www.edu.tw/rules/index.htm)，台北：教育部。
溫嘉榮(民88)。資訊與電腦網路科技對教師的衝擊。資訊與教育，72，10-14。
趙美聲、陳姚真編譯（民88），遠距教育：系統觀，松崗出版， 2。譯自Moore, M. G., Kearsley, G. Distance Dducation: A System View, California:Wadsworth.
蔡旻芳(民90)。網路學習之學習歷程分析系統。國立中山大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文。
謝麗菁(民83)。認知特質與訓練型態對資訊系統使用者學習績效之影響－以文書處理系統為例。淡江大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
簡綜男（民88）。互動式多媒體輔助教材在電腦教學之學習成效影響研究。中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
貳、英文部分
Allinson, C. W., & Hayes, J. (1988). The learning styles questionnaire: An alternative to Kolb’s inventory,” Journal of Management Studies, 25(3), 269-281.
Andriole, S.J., Asynchronous education and training networks: Lessons learned well and in progress, October 9, 1995.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A., & Adams, N. E. (1977). Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1, 287-310.
Bandura, A., Adams, N. E., & Beyer, J. C. (1977). Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 125-139.
Bostrom, R. P., Olfman, L. and Sein, M. K., “End User Computing: A Framework to Investigate the Training/Learning Process,” in Human Factors in Management Information Systems, J.M. Carey (ed.), Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ, 1988, pp. 221-250.
Bostrom, R. P., Olfman, L. and Sein, M. K. (1990). The importance of learning style in end-user training. MIS Quarterly, 101-119.
Bozionelos N. (1996). Cognitive spontaneity and learning style. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 83, 43-48.
Burger, K., The networked classroom, Insurance &Technology, 21 (11), pp. 68-69,November 1996.
Burkhardt, M.E., & Brass, D. J. (1990). Changing patterns or patterns of change: The effects of a change in technology on social network structure and power.Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 104-127.
Cheney, P. H., & Nelson, R. R. (1988). A tool for measuring and analyzing end-user computing abilities. Information Processing and Management, 24(2), 199-203.
Clarina, R, B. & Smith, L. (1988). Learning style shifts in computer-assisted instructional settings. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED295796)
Coggins, C. C. (1988). Preferred learning styles and their impact on completion of external degree programs. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2(1), 25-37.
Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: Development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211.
Dede, C., Distance Learning —Distributed learning: Making the Transformation Learning and Leading With Technology, The ISTE Journal of Educational Technology Practice and Policy, 23(7), 25-30, April 1996.
Delcourt, M. A. B., & Kinzie, M. B. (1993). Computer technologies in teacher education: The measurement of attitudes and self-efficacy. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27(1), 35-41.
Ertmer, P. A., Evenbeck, E., Cennamo, K. S., & Lehman, J. D. (1994). Enhancing self-efficacy for computer technologies through the use of positive classroom experiences. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 45-62.
Geissler, J. E., & Horridge, P. (1993). University students’ computer knowledge and commitment to learning. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 25(3),347-365.
Gist, M. E., Schwoerer, C., & Rosen, B. (1989). Effects of alternative training methods on self-efficacy and performance in computer software training.Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(6), 884-891.
Harasim, L., Teaching by computer conferencing. In A.J. Miller (Ed.),Applications of computer conferencing to teacher education and human resource development. Symposium conducted at the meeting of the International Symposium on Computer Conferencing, Columbus, OH. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 377705), 1991.
Hill, T., Smith, N. D., & Mann, M. F. (1987). Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: The case of computers.Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 307-313.
Hollenbeck. J. R., & Brief, A. P. (1987). The effects of individual differences and goalorigins on goal setting and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Performance , 40(3), 392-414.
Huey-Wen Chou., & Tsung-Bin Wang. (2000). The influence of learning style and training method of self-efficacy and learning performance in WWW homepage design training.International Journal of Information management, 20(2000),455-472.
Keefe, J. W. (1988). Profiling and utilizing learning style. Reston,Va.: NASSP.
Kolb, D, A., & Wolfe, D. M. (1981). Professional education and career development: A cross sectional study of adaptive competencies in experimental learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED209493).
Kolb, D. A. (1985). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Levine, T. (1997). Commitment to learning: Effects of computer experience, confidence and attitudes. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 16(1),83-105.
Linn, M. C., & Dalbey, J. (1985). Cognitive consequences of programming instruction:Instruction, access and ability. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 191-206.
Loyd, B. H., & Gressard, C. (1984a). Reliability and factorial validity of computer attitude scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 44(2), 501-505。
Loyd, B. H., & Gressard, C. (1984b). The effects of sex, age and computer experience on computer attitudes. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 246878).
Moroz, P. A. (1997). Assessing and improving the factor of the computer self-efficacy scale. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Murphy, C. A., Coover, D., & Owen, S. V. (1989). Development and validation of the computer self-efficacy scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 49,893-899.
Nichols, L. M. (1992). The influence of student computer-ownership and in-home use of achievement in an elementary school computer programming curriculum.Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 8(4), 407-421.
Rafe, G., & Manley, J. H. (1997). Learning style and instructional methods in a graduate level engineering program delivered by video teleconferencing technology. IEEE 1997 Frontiers in Education Conference, 1607-1612.
Rasmussen, K. L., & Davidson-Shivers, G. V. (1998). Hypermedia and learning Styles: Can performance be influenced?. Journal of Education Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(4), 291-308.
Rocheleau, B. (1995). Computer use by school-age children: Trends, patterns, and predictions. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 12(1), 1-17.
Rosenberg, M.J. (1995, October 9). Reengineering education and training: The strategic role of technology. October 9, 1995.
Ruble, T. L., & Stout, D. E. (1993). Learning style and end-user training: An unwarranted leap of faith. MIS Quarterly,115-118.
Schunk, D. H. (1981). Modeling and attributional effects on children''s'' achievement: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(1), 93-105.
Sein, M. K., & Robey, D. (1991). Learning style and the efficacy of computer training methods. Perceptual and Motor skills.
Swisher, K. (1994). American Indian learning styles survey: An assessment of teachers knowledge. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 13, 59-77
Torkzadeh, G., & Koufteros, X. (1994). Factorial validity of a computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(3), 813-821.
Webster, J., Heian, J. B. & Michelman, J. E., “Computer Training and Computer Anxiety in the Educational Process: An Experimental Analysis, “Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Information System, 1990, pp.171-182.
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 201-226.
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1993). Turning work into play: Implications for microcomputer software training. Journal of Management, 19, 127-146.
Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers’ sense of efficacy and beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 81-91.
Young, B. J. (2000). Gender differences in student attitudes toward computers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 203-216.