中文摘要
本研究實作一個架構於全球資訊網上的理化分享平台「理化小站」，讓國內的國中理化教師有一個知識分享的平台，形成一個網路虛擬社群，使理化教師可以跨校、跨地區、不受時空限制的進行互動討論、知識分享、資源共享、經驗交換與情感交流。
本研究主要藉由「理化小站」的架設和經營和發展的問卷「影響理化教師上網分享知識調查問卷」，來探討影響理化教師上站分享知識的因素，結論可作為教育領域推動知識分享和知識管理時的參考依據，可以促進理化教師知識分享的動機和交流。
本研究採用問卷調查法和網站資料庫所蒐集的資訊，以平均數、標準差、one sample t-test、two pair t-test、two sample t-test、 One-way ANOVA等統計方法，進行分析。依據分析結果，可以歸納出以下幾項結論：
一、 「工作環境」是影響理化教師上網分享的最重要因素，而「知識分享負面動機」是影響最小的因素。
二、 網站中的排名機制，不會促進理化教師教師上網分享知識。
三、 理化教師分享「外顯知識」的意願明顯高於分享「內隱外顯知識」和「內隱知識」。
四、　理化教師分享知識時是比較期望得到無形的報酬。
五、　男性理化教師對於影響因素「工作環境文化」的知覺較女性理化教師高。
六、　男性理化教師對於影響因素「外顯知識」和「內隱外顯知識」的知覺較女性理化教師高。
七、　化學系畢業的理化教師對於影響知識分享因素「網站設計」的覺知程度高於物理系畢業的理化教師。
八、　「工作環境」是影響理化小站會員上網分享的最重要因素，「期望報酬（無形）」是影響非理化小站會員上網分享的最重要因素，「知識分享負面動機」是影響理化小站會員和非會員最不重要的因素。
九、　情境題中，各層面的得分高低順序均為期望貢獻、期望關係、組織中自尊、期望報酬。
十、　內隱和外顯知識情境中，期望無形報酬均明顯高於期望有形報酬。
十一、理化小站會員在分享外顯知識時，期望得到有形報酬明顯小於非理化小站會員的理化教師。
十二、「網站連結」為滿意度最高的功能，最低的為「新聞區」。
十三、理化小站會員最喜歡下載的資源為「生活中的化學」。
十四、理化小站會員最喜歡新聞區中的「生活類新聞」。
十五、理化小站會員最喜歡討論區中的「理化教學議題討論區」。
十六、理化小站會員最喜歡連結的網站為「Java物理教學/示範實驗室-黃福坤」。
十七、理化小站中「特殊功能」的滿意度明顯高於「操作介面」、「網站資訊內容」、「資源分類架構」。







關鍵字：虛擬社群、知識管理、知識分享、網站滿意度

ABSTRACT
This study implements a Physics and Chemistry knowledge-sharing platform (Physics and Chemistry Station) on WWW to offer a web-based virtual community for Physics and Chemistry teachers in junior high school. On Physics and Chemistry Station, teachers can discuss with each other, share knowledge and resources, exchange experience and emotion without the restrictions of time, space, and different schools.
This study proceeded mainly by managing Physics and Chemistry Station and a questionnaire was made to investigate the influential factors in Physics and Chemistry teachers sharing knowledge on line. The conclusion can be a reference for educators to advocate knowledge sharing and knowledge management. It also promotes the motive and exchange of knowledge-sharing of Physics and Chemistry teachers.
Data obtained from the questionnaire survey and web-based database were analyzed via mean, standard deviation, one sample t-test, two pair t-test, and One-way ANOVA.
Major conclusions are as follows:
1. Work environment is the most significant influence on teachers’ online sharing. On the other hand, knowledge sharing negative motive is the most insignificant influence.
2. The ranking system of Physics and Chemistry Station fails to encourage teachers to share knowledge on line.
3. Teachers show stronger intention to share tacit knowledge than explicit knowledge and tacit-explicit knowledge.
4. Physics and Chemistry teachers expect invisible rewards for sharing knowledge on the station.
5. Male Physics and Chemistry teachers show keener perceptions of work environment culture, explicit knowledge, and tacit-explicit knowledge than female Physics and Chemistry teachers.
6. Physics and Chemistry teachers graduated from Chemistry Department have higher awareness of website design than those graduated from Physics Department.
7. Work environment is the strongest influential factor to station members in sharing knowledge on line, whereas invisible expected rewards are the most important influential factor to nonmembers. Knowledge sharing negative motive is the most insignificant influential factor to both members and nonmembers
8. In context questions, the ranking of all dimensions is expected contribution, expected relationship, dignity in the organization, and expected rewards.
9. In the context of tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge, the expectation of invisible rewards is obviously higher than the expectation of concrete rewards.
10. On sharing explicit knowledge, station members’ expectation of concrete rewards is evidently lower than that of nonmembers.
11. Among the functions of the station, Website Link has the greatest satisfaction while News area has the least satisfaction.
12. The most popular resource downloaded is Chemistry in Life.
13. The most popular part of News area is life news.
14. The most popular discussion area is Physics and Chemistry Teaching Issue.
15. The most popular linked website on the station is Java Physics teaching/ demonstrated lab—Huang Fu Kun.
16. An apparently higher satisfaction is shown in specific function of the station than in operation interface, website information content, and resource classification structure.
Keywords: virtual community, knowledge management, knowledge sharing, website satisfaction.

目次
第壹章　緒論…………………………………………………………1
第一節　研究背景與動機……………………………………………………………… 1
第二節　研究目的與問題……………………………………………………………… 3
第三節　研究限制……………………………………………………………………… 4
第四節　名詞解釋……………………………………………………………………… 5
第貳章　文獻探討……………………………………………………7
第一節　網路學習社群………………………………………………………………… 7
第二節　知識管理………………………………………………………………………13
第三節　影響教育人員知識分享的因素………………………………………………18
第四節　慎思行動理論…………………………………………………………………27
第五節　網站滿意度……………………………………………………………………31
第參章　研究方法……………………………………………………39
第一節　研究設計與流程………………………………………………………………39
第二節　研究對象………………………………………………………………………51
第三節　研究工具………………………………………………………………………54
第四節　資料分析方式…………………………………………………………………58
第四章　研究結果與討論……………………………………………61
第一節　影響理化教師上站分享知識的因素調查……………………………………61
第二節　影響個人分享信念因素調查（情境問卷）…………………………………94
第三節　理化小站使用滿意度調查……………………………………………………100
第四節　開放式問題……………………………………………………………………109
第五節　網站使用情況…………………………………………………………………123

第五章　結論與建議…………………………………………………129
第一節　結論……………………………………………………………………………129
第二節　建議……………………………………………………………………………139
參考文獻………………………………………………………………141
附錄……………………………………………………………………147
附錄一　影響理化教師上網分享知識調查問卷（非會員）預試……………………147
附錄二　影響理化教師上網分享知識調查問卷（會員）……………………………155
附錄三　影響理化教師上網分享知識調查問卷（非會員）…………………………169
附錄四　理化小站各功能畫面（圖一～圖九）………………………………………179
附錄五　影響理化教師上站分享知識的因素試題對應表……………………………184
附錄六　影響理化教師上站分享知識的因素試題分配表……………………………187
附錄七　理化小站使用滿意度調查試題對應表………………………………………188
附錄八　理化小站使用滿意度調查試題分配表………………………………………190

參考文獻
中文部分
王文彥(2002)。知識分享內外在動機與知識分享行為之研究以Ａ公司為例。未出版碩士論文，國立中央大學，桃園縣。
王如哲(2000)。知識管理的理論與應用。台北：五南。
呂惠甄(2003)。影響教育人員知識分享因素之探究：以思摩特網路社群為例。未出版碩士論文，國立中正大學，嘉義縣。
李冠鼐(2006)。知識分享經驗影響個人知識分享策略傾向之探索性研究。未出版碩士論文，義守大學，高雄縣。
林文琦(2002)。教學網站專家評估系統之設計與建置。未出版碩士論文，國立交通大學，新竹市。
邱皓政(2006)。量化研究與統計分析。台北市：五南。
姜豐裕(2006)。國民小學教師對校園e化環境滿意度之調查研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台南大學，台南市。
凌瑋育(2005)。分享不分享？知識分享動機與知識類型之影響研究。未出版碩士論文，國立中央大學，桃園縣。
夏侯欣鵬(2000)。權力與信任對組織內知識分享意願影響之研究— 以銀行放款部門為例。未出版碩士論文，國立政治大學，台北市。
祝勤捷(2002)。國小自然科教學網站內容與介面設計評估指標之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台北師範學院，台北市。
張基成(1998)。教師專業成長網路學習社群之規劃及其預期效益與挑戰。教學科技與媒體，40，31-42。
張惠雅(2005)。大學校院教學網站評鑑指標之研究。未出版碩士論文，銘傳大學，台北市。
張超塵(2003)。地理教學網站評鑑指標建構之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台灣大學，台北市。
曹汝民(2002)。非同步網路教學網站評鑑指標發展之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台北科技大學，台北市。
許慧貞(2006)。國小資源班教師對於教材分享系統之數位學習教材庫使用滿意度調查研究。未出版碩士論文，國立新竹教育大學，新竹市。
郭恬如(1999)。虛擬社區顧客輪廓資料、關係行銷及其隱私權議題。未出版碩士論文，國立政治大學，台北市。
湯令儀(2000)。知識分享網路之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立政治大學，台北市。
劉得煒(2001)。主題式網路學習環境系統平台之建構與評鑑。未出版碩士論文，國立花蓮師範學院，花蓮縣。
蔡雅真(2004)。探討影響校園內部知識分享的相關因素及成效－以台南縣市中小學知識管理實務為例。未出版碩士論文，國立成功大學，台南市。
羅倫新(2002)。多媒體與網路基礎教學－理論、實務與研究。台北市：博碩。
羅綸新(2004)。教育類網站評鑑規準建構之研究。教學科技與媒體，68，4-22。
饒見維(1996)。教師專業發展理論與實務。台北市：五南。
英文部分
Ajzen, I. & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior. Englewood Cliffs. NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A. & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference Inventory：Assessing Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivational Orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.
Armstrong, A. & Hagel, J. (1996). The real value of on-line communities. Harvard Business Review, 74(4), 40-51.
Arthur Andersen Business Consulting (1999). Zukai Knowledge Management. Tokyo: Toyo Keizai.
Bartol, K. M. & Srivastava, A. (2002). Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, 9, 64-76.
Blau, P. (1967). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.
Bock, G. W. & Kim Y.G. (2002). Breaking the myths of rewards: An exploratory study of attitudes about knowledge sharing. Information Resources Management Journal, 14, 14-21.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W., Kim Y.G., & Lee J.N. (2005). Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Quarterly, 29, 87-112.
Chang, M. K. (1998). Predicting unethical behavior: A comparison of the theory of reasoned action and the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 1825-1934.
Chattopadhyay, P. (1999). Beyond direct and symmetrical effects: The influence of demographic dissimilarity on organizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 273-287.
Constant, D., Kiesler, S., & Sproull, L. (1994). What's mine is ours, or is it? A study of attitudes about information sharing. Information Systems Research, 400-421.
Davenport, T. H. (1997). Some Principles of Knowledge Management. Working Paper.
Davenport, T.H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working Knowledge：How Organizations Manage What They Know. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Delong, J., & Wideman, R.(1996). School improvement that honours teacher professionalism. The Ontario Public School Teachers’ Federation, 15-17.
Drucker, P. (1993). Post-Capitalist society. New York: Butterworth Heinemann.
Fortin D.R. (2000). Clipping coupons in cyberspace: A proposed model of behavior for deal-prone consumers. Psychology and Marketing, 17, 515-534.
Gomez-Mejia, L. R. & Balkin, D. B. (1990). Rethinking Rewards for Technical Employees. Organizational Dynamics, 18, 62-76.
Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-179.
Hagel, J. & Armstrong, A.G. (1997). Net Gain. Harvard Business School Press.
Hall, H. (2001). Input-friendliness: Motivating knowledge sharing across intranets. Journal of Information Science, 27, 139-146.
Hendriks, P. (1999). Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
Herzberg, F. (1987). One more time: How do you motivate employment. Harvard Business Review, 65(5), 109-120.
Herzberg, F. (1968). Work and the Nature of Man. London: Granada Publishing.
Herzberg, F. (1968). One more Time : How Do You Motivate Employees ? Harvard Business Review, 57.
Hidding, G. & Shireen, M. C. (1998). Anatomy of a learning organization: Turning knowledge into capital at Andersen Consulting. Knowledge and Process Management, 5(1), 3-13.
Hoffman, M. L. (1975). Altruistic Behavior and the Parent-Child Relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31.
Hollingshead, A. (1996). Information suppression and status persistence in group decision making：The effects of communication media. Human Communication Research.
Iivonen, M., & Huotari, M. L. (2000). The impact of trust on the practice of knowledge management. Proceedings of the ASIS Annual Meeting, 37, 421-429 .
Janz, B., Colquitt, J. & Noe, R. (1997). Knowledge worker team effectiveness: The role of autonomy, interdependence, team development, and contextual support variables. Personnel Psychology, 50 (4), 877-1004.
Jarvenpaa, S. L. & Staple D.S. (2001). Exploring perceptions of organizational ownership of information and expertise. Journal of Management Information System, 18, 151-183.
Jehn, K., Shah, A. & Pradhan, P. (1997). Interpersonal relationship and task performance: an examination of mediating processes in friendship and acquaintance groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Kapoun, J. (1998). Teaching undergrads WEB evaluation: A guide for library instruction.C&RL News, 59(2), 522-523.
Kelley, H. & Thibaut, J. W. (1978). Interpersonal Relations: A Theory of Interdependence. New York: Wiley.
Kim, W.C. & Mauborgne, R. A. (1997). Fair Process: Managing in the Knowledge Economy. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 65-75.
Koning, Jr. J. W. (1993). Three others R's: Recognition, reward and resentment. Research and Technology Management, 36, 19-29.
Laura, G. M. (1999). Evaluating net evaluators. Searcher,7(2), 57-66
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning：Legitimate peripheral participation. New York：Cambridge University Press.
Livengood, S. P. (1997). An evaluation instrument for Internet web sites. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Kent State University, Kent State.
Luppicini, R. (2003). Categories of virtual learning communities for educational design. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4, 4.
Master, M. (1999). Making it work. Across the Board, 36(8), 21-24.
McDermott, R. (1999). Why information technology inspired but cannot deliver knowledge management. California Management Review, 41(4), 103-117..
McDermott, I. E. (2000). Internet Instruction：Spreading the web . Searcher,8(7), 72-75
McMurdo, G. (1998). Evaluation web information and design. Journal of information Science,24(3), 192-204.
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, T. (1995). The knowledge-Creation Company. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ojala, M. (1999). Knowledge is power. Econtent.
Pierce, J. L. & Gardner, D. G. (2004). Self-esteem within the work and organizational context: A review of the organization-based self-esteem literature. Journal of Management, 30, 591-622.
Pierce, J. L., Gardner, D. G., Cummings, L. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1989). Organization-based self-esteem: Construct definition measurement and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 622-648.
Porter, C. E. (2004). A Typology of Virtual Communities：A Multi-Disciplinary Foundation for Future Research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication，10(1), 3.
Pujola, J. T. (1998). Ewebuation. Edinburg Working papers in Applied Linguistics, 9, 104-115.
Purser, R., Pasmore, W. & Tenkasi, R. (1992). The influence of deliberations on learning in new product development teams. Journal of Engineering & Technology Management, 9, 1-28.
Roblyer, M. D. & Edwards, J. (2000). Integrating educational technology into teaching.(2nd ed. ).USA:Prentice-Hill.
Schneider, J., & Cook, K. (1995). Status inconsistency and gender: Combining revisited. Small Group Research, 26, 372-399.
Sheppard, B. H., Hartwick, J., & Warshaw, P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 325-343.
Skov, A. (1998). Internet quality. Database Magazine, 21(4), 38-40.
Smith, A. G. (1997). Testing the surf: Criteria for evaluating Internet information resources. The Public-Access Computer System Review, 8, 3.
Stajkovic, A. D. & Luthans, F. (1998). Social cognitive theory and self-efficacy: Going beyond traditional motivational and behavioral approaches. Organizational Dynamics, 62-74.
Stauffer, D. (1999). Why people hoard knowledge. Across the board, 36(8), 16-31.
Stoot, K. & Walker, A. (1995). Teams, Teamwork & Teambuilding: The manager’s complete guide to teams in organizations . New York: Pretice Hall.
Sundstrom, E., Demeuse, K.P. & Futrell D. (1990). Work teams: Applications and effectiveness. American Psychologist, 45, 120-133.
Tampoe, M. (1993). Motivating knowledge workers-The challenge for the 1990s. Long Range Planning, 26(3), 49-55.
Weiler, R. M. (2000). The SiteLegend:tweleve components of a new strategy for providing website documentation. Journal of school health, 70(4), 148-152.
Wijnhoven, F. (1998). Knowledge logistic in business contexts: Analyzing and diagnosing knowledge sharing by logistic concepts. Knowledge and Process Management, 5, 143-157 .
Wilkinson, G. L., Bennett, L. T. & Oliver, K. M. (1997). Evaluating criteria and indicators of quality for Internet resources. Educational Technology, 37(3), 52-59.
Wilson, D., Zenda, A., McMaster, J., & Lavelle, S. (1992). Factors predicting Zimbabwean students' intentions to use condoms. Psychology and Health, 7, 99-114.