淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-0901202014180900
中文論文名稱 國小教師對於資訊科技融入教學的動機、態度與行為之間的關聯:以新北市與台南市教師為例
英文論文名稱 Exploring the association between motivation, attitudes, and behaviors of technology integration into teaching: Cases from elementary school teachers in New Taipei City and Tainan City
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 教育科技學系數位學習碩士在職專班
系所名稱(英) E-Learning Executive Master’s Program in Educational Technology
學年度 108
學期 1
出版年 109
研究生中文姓名 鄭舒馨
研究生英文姓名 Shu-Hsin Cheng
學號 706740296
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2020-01-06
論文頁數 83頁
口試委員 指導教授-沈俊毅
委員-劉遠楨
委員-賴婷鈴
中文關鍵字 外在動機  使用態度  教學行為  資訊科技融入教學  國小教師 
英文關鍵字 external motivation  usage attitude  elementary school teacher  technology integration into teaching  teaching behavior 
學科別分類
中文摘要 教育部自2006年便開始強調資訊科技融入教學的重要性,吸引了許多學者在探討相關之議題,這些研究指出相較於國中教師,國小教師所面對教學進度壓力較小,故資訊科技融入教學的頻率較高,研究也發現動機和態度是影響資訊科技融入教學行為重要的影響因素。不過,一方面,多數研究結果來自十年前,目前國小教師實施資訊科技融入教學的現況為何,較少研究。二方面,既有研究多僅探討動機或是態度變項和資訊科技融入教學行為間關聯,較少同時探討動機和態度因素和行為間關聯。因此,本研究欲探討目前新北市和台南市國小教師資訊科技融入教學的現狀並分析資訊科技融入教學動機、態度和行為間的關聯。本研究預測變項為兩種動機變項和三種態度變項,依變項為四種行為變項,包含:常見資訊科技融入教學、一般資訊科技融入教學、教學頻率和教學時間,控制變項包含教師背景資料與班級內的軟硬體設施。
本研究依據既有文獻設計了資訊科技融入教學的動機、態度和行為量表,以便利取樣方式對173位新北市和台南市教師進行抽樣,回收163份問卷,回應率為94%,扣除掉未完整回答的樣本,最後樣本數為156份。除了描述性統計外,本研究以因素分析、信度分析、獨立樣本t檢定、相關分析和線性迴歸模型來分析資料。
研究結果陳述如下:
一、國小教師資訊科技融入教學現況
(一) 新北市和台南市國小教師資訊科技融入教學的頻率頗高,比例高於之前的研究結果。就每天實施情況而言,每天實施1次以上者佔約80%。就整體實施情況而言,每天實施1次者,比例最高,佔44.9%,其次為每週實施1~3次者,比例為39.7%,再者為每月1-3次者,占11.5%。一學期僅實施1-2次者,僅占3.8%。
(二)新北市和台南市國小教師在資訊科技融入教學程度和頻率上,並未有顯著差異存在,不過,在實施時間上,新北市教師顯著高於台南市教師。
二、資訊科技融入教學動機、態度和行為面向
因素分析結果顯示資訊科技融入教學的動機可區分為內在和外在動機。態度可區分為一般態度、使用態度和成效信念,實施程度可分為常見資訊科技融入教學和一般資訊科技融入教學,量表的信度值皆達0.7以上。
三、資訊科技融入教學動機和態度間關聯
不論是內在動機或是外在動機皆和三種態度變項間呈現正相關,達到中度相關程度。
四、資訊科技融入教學動機、態度和行為間關聯
線性迴歸分析結果顯示,外在動機和使用態度能預測常見資訊科技融入教學和一般資訊科技融入教學行為,無法預測實施頻率和實施時間。內在動機、一般態度、成效信念和資訊科技融入教學行為間無顯著關聯。
五、資訊科技融入教學動機和態度變項對行為的相對影響力
由標準化迴歸係數可知,相較於外在動機,使用態度對常見資訊科技融入教學和一般資訊科技融入教學的影響力較高,代表教師的使用態度對於課堂中實施資訊科技融入教學影響較大。
本研究最後根據研究結果對學校、教育當局和未來研究提出一些相關的建議。
英文摘要 The importance of technology integration in teaching has been stressed by Bureau of Education since 2006, which attracts many scholars’ attention. Results of previous studies has pointed out that elementary schoolteachers had less pressure from teaching schedule and thus the frequency of their technology integration in instruction was higher than their counterparts in the junior high school. Motivational and attitudinal variables were found to be crucial determinants of behaviors related to technology integration into teaching. However, on the one hand, most of results derived from earlier studies ten years ago. It remains unclear what the current status of technology integrated in instruction is in the elementary school. On the other hand, extant research mainly focused on exploring the association of motive or attitudes with behaviors of technology integration in teaching. Little attention has been paid to the inclusion of both motivational and attitudinal variables in the analytic model. As such, this study aims to explore the current status of technology integration in teaching among elementary school teachers in New Taipei and Tainan cities and to analyze the association between motive, attitudes, and behaviors of technology integration in instruction. Predictors include two types of motivational variables and three types of attitudinal variables. There are four dependent variables including the most commonly seen technology integration in teaching, the general technology integration in teaching, the frequency of technology integration in teaching, and the amount of time spent on technology integration in teaching. Individual backgrounds, software, and hardware in the class are viewed as control variables.
Drawn on extant literature, there are three scales including motive scale, attitude scale, and behavior scale of technology integration in teaching are designed, this study uses convenience sampling to gather information from 173 elementary school teachers in the two counties. Of these respondents, 163 teachers return their questionnaires, yielding a response rate of 94%. After excluding the incomplete cases, a total of final sample is 156. Besides descriptive statistics, factor analysis, reliability analysis, independent sample t test, correlation analysis, and linear regression model are used to analyze data.
The results of the present study is shown below:
1. The current status of technology integration in teaching in elementary school teachers
(1) Among the elementary school teachers in New Taipei city and Tainan city, the frequency of the present technology integration in instruction is higher than that found in previous research. In terms of daily implementation, Approximately 80% of respondents report technology integrated in teaching once a day. With regard to the overall implementation, the proportion of implementation once a day is the highest (44.9%), followed by one to three times a week (39.7%), one to three times a month (11.5%), and one to two times a semester (3.8%).
(2) There are not significant differences in the extent and frequency of technology integration in teaching between elementary school teachers in the two counties. Nevertheless, teachers in New Taipei city score higher in the amount of time spent on technology integration in teaching than those in Tainan city.
2. The multi-dimension of motive, attitudes, and behavior of technology integration in teaching
Results of factor analysis show that motive of technology integration in teaching can be divided into two dimensions, that is, internal motive and external motive. Likewise, three factors are identified in factor analysis: general attitude, usage attitude, and beliefs in the effectiveness of this teaching style. The extent of implementation is divided into the most commonly seen technology integration in teaching and general technology integration in teaching. The values of Cronbach’s alpha for all scales are above 0.7.
3.The relationship between motive and attitudes toward technology integration in teaching
Results of correlation analysis reveal that both internal motive and external motive are positively correlated with three kinds of attitudinal variables, with the moderate correlation.
4. The relationship between motive, attitudes and behavior in technology integration in teaching
External motive and usage attitude are found to predict the most commonly seen and the general technology integration in teaching rather than the frequency and the amount of time of technology integration in teaching in the linear regression analysis. There are not significant correlation between internal motive, beliefs in the effectiveness of this teaching style, and behaviors related to technology integration in teaching.
5.The relative impacts of the motivational and attitudinal variables on behaviors of technology integration in teaching
Results from standardized regression coefficient reveal that as compared with external motive, the effect of usage attitude on the most commonly seen and the general technology integration in teaching appears stronger, representing that teachers’ attitudes toward usage of technology have stronger influence on technology integration in teaching in class.
Finally, according to the results of this study, some implications are offered to school, education authority, and future research.
論文目次 目次

中文摘要………………………………………………………………………………i
英文摘要……………………………………………………………………………iv
目次…………………………………………………………………………………vii
表次…………………………………………………………………………………ix
圖次……………………………………………………………………………………x
第一章 緒論…………………………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究背景與動機………………………………………………………1
第二節 研究問題………………………………………………………………3
第三節 研究假設………………………………………………………………3
第四節 名詞定義………………………………………………………………4
第五節 研究範圍與限制………………………………………………………6
第六節 預期研究貢獻…………………………………………………………6
第二章 文獻探討……………………………………………………………………8
第一節 資訊科技融入教學定義與相關理論…………………………………8
第二節 資訊科技融入教學內涵與現況………………………………………11
第三節 資訊科技融入教學動機、態度與行為間關聯………………………16
第四節 教師背景變項、軟硬體設施與資訊科技融入教學行為間關聯……21
第三章 研究方法……………………………………………………………………24
第一節 研究架構與設計………………………………………………………24
第二節 研究對象………………………………………………………………26
第三節 研究工具………………………………………………………………26
第四節 實施流程………………………………………………………………35
第五節 教學設計………………………………………………………………40
第六節 資料分析………………………………………………………………41
第四章 研究結果與討論……………………………………………………………42
第一節 樣本的描述性統計……………………………………………………42
第二節 新北市與台南市資訊科技融入教學現況與差異……………………44
第三節 資訊科技融入教學動機、態度與行為間關聯………………………46
第四節 線性迴歸的分析結果…………………………………………………50
第五章 研究結論與建議……………………………………………………………67
第一節 研究結果………………………………………………………………67
第二節 研究建議………………………………………………………………70
參考文獻 ……………………………………………………………………………72
一、中文部分 …………………………………………………………………72
二、外文部分 …………………………………………………………………74
附錄一 正式問卷……………………………………………………………………79

表次

表2-1 資訊科技融入教學的應用方式……………………………………………13
表2-2 資訊科技融入教學動機、態度與行為間的關聯…………………………19
表2-3 教師背景變項、軟硬體設施與資訊科技融入教學行為間關聯…………23
表3-1 資訊科技融入教學動機量表的信效度……………………………………28
表3-2 資訊科技融入教學態度量表的信效度……………………………………31
表3-3 資訊科技融入教學實施程度量表的信效度………………………………34
表4-1 受訪樣本的描述性統計……………………………………………………43
表4-2 新北市與台南市國小教師資訊科技融入教學實施頻率…………………45
表4-3 新北市與台南縣國小教師資訊科技融入教學實施行為的差異…………46
表4-4 資訊科技融入教學動機、態度與行為間關聯……………………………49
表4-5 常見資訊科技融入教學行為影響因素的迴歸分析………………………52
表4-6 一般資訊科技融入教學行為影響因素的迴歸分析………………………55
表4-7 實施頻率影響因素的迴歸分析……………………………………………58
表4-8 實施時間影響因素的迴歸分析……………………………………………61
表4-9 假設驗證的結果……………………………………………………………65

圖次

圖3-1 研究架構圖…………………………………………………………………25
圖3-2 研究流程圖…………………………………………………………………38
圖3-3 研究流程甘特圖……………………………………………………………39
參考文獻 一、中文部分
王千倖(2010)。「資訊科技融入教學」推廣政策之敘說研究」。教育實踐與研究,23(1),31-56。
王全世(2000)。資訊科技融入教學之意義與內涵。資訊與教育,80,23-31。
李曉伶(2003)。澎湖縣國小資訊科技融入教學實施現況與教師使用意願、困難之研究。台南師範學院教師在職進修課程與教學碩士學位班碩士論文,台南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/6ra958
余士迪、王瑜琳(2003)。「台灣地區人力運用調查」中「工作與否」調查偏誤之估計。人文及社會科學集刊,15(3),475-500。
宋曜廷、張國恩、侯惠澤(2005)。資訊科技融入教學:借鏡美國經驗,反思臺灣發展。教育研究集刊,51(1),31-62。
林佳蓉(2006)。以HPT模式及認知動機因素探討臺灣資訊種子小學科技融入教學之現況與相關因素研究。國立台北教育大學學報:數理科技教育類,19(1),117-148。
吳統雄(1985)。態度與行為之研究的信度與效度:理論、應用、反省。民意學術專刊, 29−53。
紀秋雲、蔡明貴(2016)。資訊科技融入教學策略對國小高年級學童學習成效之研究。學校行政,(103),34-60。doi:10.3966/160683002016050103003
袁媛、林意晨(2008)。桃園縣國民中學數學教師使用資訊融入教學之現況研究。科學教育學刊,16(5),543-561。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2008.1605.04
翁嘉豪(2014)。國中教師使用資訊融入教學心境歷程與信念之敘說性研究。國立台東大學教育學系(所)碩士論文,台東縣。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/qak3ff
許一珍(2018)。學童使用擴增實境之學習動機與學習成效研究-以八大行星學習為例。國際數位媒體設計學刊,10(1),32-38。
梁育維、陳芳慶(2015)。資訊融入教學對學習態度影響之後設分析。中等教育,66(2),100-125。doi:10.6249/SE.2015.66.2.07
教育部(2001)。教育部中小學資訊教育總藍圖。取自https://ws.moe.edu.tw/001/Upload/userfiles/guideline(9006).pdf
教育部(2008)。教育部中小學資訊教育白皮書。取自https://epaper.edu.tw/files/topical/%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E9%83%A8%E4%B8%AD%E5%B0%8F%E5%AD%B8%E8%B3%87%E8%A8%8A%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E7%99%BD%E7%9A%AE%E6%9B%B82008-2011.doc
教育部(2016)。2016-2020 資訊教育總藍圖。取自https://ws.moe.edu.tw/001/Upload/3/relfile/6315/46563/65ebb64a-683c-4f7a-bcf0-325113ddb436.pdf
教育部(2019)。重要教育統計資訊。取自https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ED4500/cp.aspx?n=002F646AFF7F5492&s=1EA96E4785E6838F
教育部(2019)。教育統計查詢網。取自https://stats.moe.gov.tw/qframe.aspx?qno=MQA3AA2
陸虹燕(2018)。影響國小教師資訊科技融入教學之因素。義守大學資訊管理學碩士論文,高雄市。取自:https://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=g_1h_A/record?r1=1&h1=1
陳萩紋、廖遠光(2017)。應用教育APP輔助國中生 數學閱讀理解之教學歷程與成效。中等教育,68(3),34-52。doi:10.6249/SE.2017.68.3.03
陳曉屏、歐陽誾(2015)。資訊科技融入注音符號教學對國小低年級低成就學生學習成效之影響。教育學誌,(33),67-123。
黃明達、蕭瑞祥、江雅玲(2007)。我國資訊教育資源落差之研究-以全國高中職、國中小為基礎。資訊管理學報,14(1),91-122。doi:10.6382/JIM.200701.0091
張雅芳、朱鎮宇、徐加玲(2007)。國小教師資訊科技融入教學現況之研究。教育資料與圖書館學,44(4),413-434。
張基成、王秋錳(2008)。臺北市高職教師資訊科技融入教學之影響因素。教育實踐與研究,21(1),97-132。doi:10.6776/JEPR.200803.0097
張國恩(2002)。從學習科技的發展看資訊融入教學的內涵。北縣教育,41,16-25。
黃維貞(2005)。臺北市國中教師運用資訊科技融入教學行為之研究。國立臺北科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文,臺北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/6waff8
劉世雄(2011)。臺灣不同城鄉地區國小教師的教學信念與其運用資訊科技融入教學之探討。課程與教學,14(3),47-76。doi:10.6384/CIQ.201107.0048
蔡秀月(2013)。公立幼兒園教師資訊科技融入教學之研究。康寧大學資訊傳播研究所碩士論文,台南市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/rgu679
韓善民(1998)。我國資訊教育基礎建設簡介。研習資訊,152,16-21。
嚴雅麗、廖益興(2015)。新竹市公立國中教師使用數位教學資源之影響因素研究。中華行政學報,(16),73-101。doi:10.6712/JCPA.201506_(16).0004

二、英文部分
Albirirni, A. (2006). Teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies: The case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computers & Education, 47, 373–398.
Baş,G.,Kubiatko,M.,Sünbül,A.M.(2016).Teachers' perceptions towards ICTs in teaching-learning process: Scale validity and reliability study. Computers in Human Behavior,61,176-185.
Becker, H. J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
ChanLin, L. J., Hong, J. C., Horng, J. S., Chang, S. H., & Chu, H. C. (2006). Factors influencing technology integration in teaching: a Taiwanese perspective, Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 57-68.
Cullen,T. A., & Greene,B. A.(2011).Preservice teachers' beliefs, attitudes, and motivation about technology integration.Journal ofEducational Computing Research, 45(1), 29-47.
Dexter, S. L., Ronald, E. A., & Becker, H. J. (1999). Teacher’s views of computers as catalysts for changes in their teaching practice. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 221–232.
Dias, L. B. (1999). Integrating Technology. Learning & Leading with Technology, 27(3), 10-21.
Eteokleous,N.(2008). Evaluating computer technology integration in a centralized school system. Computers & education, 51(2), 669-686.
Festinger, L.(1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row Peterson.
Gorozidis, G., and Papaioannou, A.G.,( 2014). Teachers’ motivation to participate in training and to implement innovations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39,1-11.
Hew, K. F., & Tan, C. Y. (2016). Predictors of Information Technology Integration inSecondary Schools: Evidence from a Large Scale Study of More than 30,000Students. PLoS ONE, 11(12): e0168547. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168547
Howard, S. K., Chan, A., & Caputi, P. (2015). More than beliefs: Subject areas and teachers' integration of laptops in secondary teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 360-369. doi: 10.1111/bjet.12139
Jhang, F. H. (2019). Teachers’ attitudes towards lesson study, perceived competence,and involvement in lesson study: evidence from junior highschool teachers. Professional DevelopmentinEducation,https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1585383
Joan, D. R. Robert& Denisia, S. P.& Sheeja, Y.(2013). Technology Integration in Curriculum Progress to Meet Knowledge Explosion .Journal on School Educational Technology, 8(3), 23-31.
Jonassen, D.H. (2000).Computers as mindtools for schools: Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Liu,F., Ritzhaupt, A., Dawson,K.&Barron, A.(2017). Explaining technology integration in K-12 classrooms: a multilevel path analysis model. Educational Technology Research & Development, 65(4),795-813.
Liu, P. (2016). Technology integration in elementary classrooms: Teaching practices of student teachers. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education,41 (3), 87-104.
McCulloch,A.W., Hollebrands,K., Lee,H., Harrison,T.,& Mutlu.A., (2018)Factors that
influence secondary mathematics teachers' integration of technology in mathematics lessons.Computers & Education,123,26-40.
Min, K., & Siegel, C. (2011). Integration of SMART board technology and effective teaching. Journal on School Educational Technology, 7(1), 38-47.
Morton, C. (1996). The modern land of Laputa. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(6), 416-419.
Ryan, R. M.,& Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American sychologist, 55, 68-78.
Sang,G., Valcke,M., Braak,J. V., Tondeur, J., & Zhu,C. (2011). Predicting ICT integration into classroom teaching in Chinese primary schools: exploring the complex interplay of teacher-related variables. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 160–172.
Schafer, J. L. (1999). Multiple imputation: a primer. Statistical methods in medical research, 8, 3–15.
Shalendra,K.,& Kei, D.B. (2016)Integration of learning technologies into teaching within Fijian polytechnic institutions .International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13,1-17.
Snoeyink, R& Ertmer, P. A.(2001-2002). Thrust into technology: How veteran teachers respond.Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 30(1), 85-111.
Stone, J., Aronson, E., Crain, A. L., Winslow, M. P., & Fried, C. B. (1994). Inducing hypocrisy as a means of encouraging young adults to use condoms. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20(1), 116-128.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167294201012
Sullivan,N.B., Bhattacharya, K.,(2017) Twenty years of technology integration and foreign language teaching: A phenomenological reflective interview study.The Qualitative Report ,22 (3), 757-778
Taimalu,M.& Luik,P.,(2019) The impact of beliefs and knowledge on the integration of technology among teacher educators:A path analysis.Teaching and Teacher Education.79,101-110.
Wang, C.S.& Li, C.C. (2000). An assessment framework for information technology integrated instruction. Proc. 8th Inter. Conf. on Computers in Educ.: Inter. Conf. on Computer-Assisted Instruction, Hsinchu, Taiwan: National Tsing Hua University, 443-450.
Wilson, K. L. ,& Boldeman, S.U.(2012). Exploring ICT Integration as a tool to engage young people at a flexible learning centre. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6) ,661-668.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2020-01-16公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2020-01-16起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2486 或 來信