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 U0002-2706200512255500
中文論文名稱 論選擇網路教學之決定:老師權威運用的問題
英文論文名稱 On the faculty's decision to adopt Web-based instruction: the issue of authority exercise
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 企業管理學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Business Administration
學年度 93
學期 2
出版年 94
研究生中文姓名 班伊弟
研究生英文姓名 Idrissa Mbengue
學號 692451494
學位類別 碩士
語文別 英文
口試日期 2005-06-10
論文頁數 88頁
口試委員 指導教授-徐悌
委員-徐悌
委員-白滌清
委員-洪明洲
中文關鍵字 網路教學  權力  自我效能  內外控取向 
英文關鍵字 Web-based instruction  authority  self-efficacy  locus of control 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學管理學
中文摘要 本研究欲探討「教師權威的運用」在決定選擇網路教學時所扮演的角色,研究對象為私立淡江大學之教師。本研究架構由六個獨立變項和二個依變項所組成。獨立變項包括:電腦自我效能、網路自我效能、內外控取向、行使權力、人口地理資料、以及電腦相關的變項,如:使用電腦的經驗、上網的經驗、每週使用網路的情況等。依變項則包括:網路教學之選擇,以及教師權威在網路教學中的重要性。

本研究以大量文獻探討為基礎,建立出研究架構和研究假說。本論文發展出八個主要假說來評量上述獨立變項與依變項之間的關係。本研究之參與者來自於淡江大學八個學院中的專任教職員。問卷中共包含59個問項,共發出256份問卷﹙佔教職員人員總數的35%﹚,有效回收問卷數為122份。

本研究使用三種鑑別分析來測量本研究模型的可預測性。第一種鑑別是使用過網路教學者和未使用過網路教學者。第二種鑑別是未來將會使用網路教學者與未來不會使用網路教學者。第三種鑑別是在網路教學上覺得權力行使很重要的使用者與覺得權力行使不重要的使用者。

研究結果發現,電腦自我效能是決定使用網路教學的重要因素,性別為權力行使在網路教學很重要的使用者的決定因素 本論文所採用的研究模式還不夠完善。因此,若要發掘淡江大學選用網路教學背後真正的原因,仍有待未來更進一步的研究。


英文摘要 The present study planed to identify the role of the exercise of authority in faculty decision to adopt Web-based instruction at Tamkang University. The proposed model of the study was composed by six groups of variables as independent variables: computer self-efficacy, internet self-efficacy, locus of control, exercise of authority, demographic data (age, rank, gender) and computer-related variables (computer experience, internet experience and weekly internet usage) and two dependent variables: adoption of Web-based instruction and perceived importance of authority in Web-based instruction.
A broad related literature review was made to build the framework of the study and to develop research hypotheses. Eight principal hypotheses were developed to measure relationships between the above independent variables with the adoption of Web-based instruction and with the perceived importance of authority in Web-based instruction.
The participants of the survey were full-time faculty in each of the eight colleges at Tamkang University. A questionnaire of 59 items was sent to 256 faculty members (35% of total number of faculty) and 122 responses were collected.
Three discriminant analyses were performed to measure the predictability of our model. The first one was to discriminate the current adopters from the current non-adopters of Web-based instruction; the second discriminant analysis was for future adopters from future non-adopters of Web-based instruction and the last one for those who perceived authority as important in Web-based instruction from those who were not.
The results show computer self-efficacy as discriminator for Web-based instruction adoption and gender as discriminator for perceived importance of authority in Web-based instruction. But the model used was less desirable and future research would be needed if we intend to find the real reasons behind the adoption of Web-based instruction at Tamkang University.
論文目次 Content
Chapter 1: Introduction ….…………………...…1
1.1. Background…………………………......…..1
1.2. Significance of the study.………….…...4
1.3. Purpose of the study…………………………5
1.4 Organization of the study……….......…5
Chapter 2: Literature review ……….………..…6
2.1. Faculty demographics and background....6
2.2. Computer and internet self-efficacy...7
2.3. Locus of control……….………..….….12
2.4. Authority………….……….………......19
2.5. Web-based instruction (WBI) ………….22
2.6. Theoretical framework…………………..27
2.7. Operational definition……..………….30
2.8. Research hypotheses……….…………….31
2.9. Delimitations……….……………...…..34
Chapter 3: Research methodology ……………….35
3.1. Sampling design………………..…………35
3.2. Participants.........................35
3.3. Instrumentation……………………………36
3.4. Data analysis………………….…….....39
Chapter 4: Statistical Results ………………….40
4.1: Response rates……………........…...……40
4.2: Reliability analysis……………........….42
4.3: Data transformations………………………….44
4.4: Descriptive statistics……………………….45
4.5: Correlation analysis………………………….50
4.6: Discriminant analysis…………………………51
Chapter 5: Discussion ……………………………. 57
5.1: Demographic data……………………………….58
5.2: Computer-related variables………………….60
5.3: Computer and internet self efficacy………62
5.4: Locus of control………………………….....64
5.5: Exercise of authority……………..…………66
Chapter 6: Conclusion ………………………………69
6.1: Summary …………..…………………………….69
6.2: Further research.........................70
6.3: Limitations…………………………………....72
References …………………………..........…….73
Appendix………………………………………………..88

Tables and Figure

Tables
Table1: Number of faculty at Tamkang University…………………………………………..……….35
Table 2: Responses rate…………………………………………………………………………..…...41
Table 3: Reliability analysis…………………………………………………………………………..44
Table 4: Demographic data and computer related variables to adoption of WBI…………………….45
Table 5: T-test of current adopter and current non-adopters of WBI in terms of demographics…..…47
Table 6: T-test of future adopters and future non-adopters of WBI in terms of demographics……....47
Table 7: Importance of authority in WBI by demographics and computer related variables…….…..48
Table 8: T-test of perceived importance of authority WBI in terms of demographics……………….49
Table 9: Table of correlation analysis………………………………………………………………..51
Table 10: Test results for the equality of covariance matrices……………………………………….52
Table 11: Standardized canonical discriminant function coefficient……………………………..…53
Table 12: Classification results for current and future faculty adopter of WBI…………………….55
Table 13: Classification results for perceived importance of authority in WBI…………………….56
Table 14: Hypothesis results………………………………………………………………….…….57
Figure
Figure 1: Research framework…………………………………………………………………….29


參考文獻 References
1.Abernathy, D. J. (1998), The WWW of distance learning: Who does what and where? Training and Development, 52 (9), 28-31.
2.Anne S., Laurel R & J Cook J.A. (1991), Gender and university teaching, a negotiated difference, Published by: State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. State University of New York.
3.Arcilla, R. (1992), Tragic Absolutism in Education, in Educational Theory 42, no. 4: 477-478.
4.Armstrong, R. D. (1998), Faculty strategies for learning to teach at a distance. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59 (01), 1426.
5.Bachman, J.D., Bowers, D.G. and Marcus, P.M. (1968), Bases of Supervisory Power: A comparative Study in Five Organizational Settings, in Tannenbaum, A.S. (Ed.), Control in Organizations, McGraw-Hill, New York.
6.Bandura, A. Adams, N. E. and Beyer, J. (1977), Cognitive processes mediating behavioral change, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 125-139.
7.Bandura, A. (1982), Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency, American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.
8.Bandura, A. (1986), Social Foundations of Thought and Action: a Social Cognitive Theory, Englewood CliOEs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
9.Bandura, A. (1994), Self-efficacy in Ramachaudran, V.S. (Ed) Encyclopedia of human behavior Vol 4 Academic Press, New York, 71-81.
10.Bandura, A. (1995), Exercise of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies, in Bandura A Ed Self-efficacy in changing societies, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1-45.
11.Bandura, A. (1996), Failures in self-regulation: Energy depletion or selective disengagement? Psychological Inquiry, 7, 20-24.
12.Bandura A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
13.Bannan, B., and Milheim, W.D. (1997), Existing Web-Based Instruction Courses and Their Design, In Khan, B.H., (Ed.), Web-Based Instruction, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, page 381.
14.Barker, P.G. (2002), On being an online tutor, innovations in education and teaching international, 39, 1, 3-13.
15.Bates, A.W. (1995), Technology, open learning and distance education. New York: Rutledge.
16.Beck, C. (1994), Difference, Authority and The Teacher-Student Relationship Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (available at
http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-yearbook/94_docs/BECK.HTM)
17.Begley, T.M. & Boyd, D.P. (1987), Psychological characteristics associated with performance in entrepreneurial firms and smaller businesses, Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 79-93.
18.Betts, K.S. (1998), Factors Influencing Faculty Participation in Distance Education in Postsecondary Education in the United States: An Institutional Study, Ph.D. dissertation, The George Washington University.
19.Blau, P. M. (1964), Exchange and Power in Social Life, John Wiley & Sons.
20.Blau, P. M. (1985), The measurement and prediction of career commitment, Journal of occupational psychology, 58, 277-288.
21.Boggiano, A. K., Main, D. S., & Katz, P. A. (1988), Children's preference for challenge: The role of perceived competence and control, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 134-141.
22.Boocock, S. S. (1973). The School as a Social Environment for Learning, Sociology of Education 46: 15-50.
23.Burbules, N. Burbules, and Rice, S. (1991) Dialogue across Differences: Continuing the Conversation, Harvard Educational Review 61, no. 4, 401-402.
24.Cassidy, S. & Eachus. P. (1998), Developing the computer self-efficacy (CSE) scale: investigation the relationship between CSE, gender and experience with computer, computer self efficacy web site available at www.chssc.salford.ac.uk/healthSci/selfeff/selfeff.htm.
25.Cartwright, D. (1965), Influence, leadership, control in Handbook of organizations, James G.March (ed.), 180-211. Chicago: Rand McNally.
26.Challis, A. T. (1998), Faculty attitudes toward distance education in Utah public colleges and universities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59 (07), 2379.
27.Charp, S. (1999), Distance education, T.H.E. Journal, 27 (2), 6-7.
28.Chau P. (2001), Influence of computer attitude and self-efficacy on IT usage behavior, Journal of end user computing; jan-mar 2001; 13, 1.
29.Cheng, Y. C. (1994), Teacher Leadership Style: A Classroom-level Study Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 32 No. 3, 1994, 54-71.
30.Christ, W. G. (1997), Defining media education, In W. G. Christ (ed.), Media education assessment handbook, 3-21.
31.Chute. A. G., Thompson .M .M, & Hanock, B. W. (1995), The McGraw-Hill Handbook of Distance Learning. New York –San Francisco. Copyright 1999 by the Graw-Hill Companies.
32.Clark, G. (1996), Glossary of CBT/WBT Terms, 1996. Available http://www.clark.net/pub/nractive/alt5.htm, pages 1-2.
33.Cockrell, D. (1990), Outdoor leadership certification, In J.C. Miles & S. Priest (Eds.) Adventure education 251-262.
34.Compeau, D. R. and Higgins, C. A. (1995), Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test, MIS Quarterly, 3, 189- 211.
35.Covert, M.D., & Goldstein, M. (1980), Locus of control as a predictor of users’ attitude toward computer, Psychological reports, 47, 1167-1173.
36.Cyrs, T. E. et al. (1997), Teaching and Learning at a Distance: What it takes to effectively design, deliver, and evaluate programs, New directions for teaching and learning 71 (Fall). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.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 Vol 27, 31-37.
38.Ditzenberger, R. (1976), Perceived barriers to implementing a distributive education competency-based learning system. Dissertation Abstracts International, 37 (08), 4890.
39.Duffy, T. et al (2002), Comparing distance education and conventional education: observations from a comparative study of post registration nurses, Association for learning technology journal, 10, 1, 70-82.
40.Durkheim, E. (1956), Education and Sociology, New York: Free Press
41.Eaton, J.S. (2002), Core Academic Values, Quality, and Regional Accreditation: The Challenge of Distance Learning Council For Higher Education Accreditation
42.Ellsworth, E. (1989), Why Doesn’t This Feel Empowering? Working Through the Repressive Myths of Critical Pedagogy, Harvard Educational Review 59, no. 3, 297-324.
43.Ewert, A. & Estes, C. (1988), Enhancing mixed-gender programming: Considerations for experiential educators, The Bradford Papers Annual, 3, 10-19, Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.
44.Ewert, A. (1989), Outdoor Adventure Pursuits: Foundations, Models, and Theories, Columbus, OH: Publishing Horizons, Inc.
45.Finn, J. D., & Rock, D. A. (1997), Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82 (2), 221-234.
46.Fiske, S. T. and Shelley E. T. (1991), Social Cognition, Second Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
47.Friedrich, C. J. (1958), Authority, Reason and Discretion IN Friedrich, C J. (ed) Authority, Harvard University Press, Massachusetts, 28-48.
48.Fredrickson, S. (1999), Untangling a tangled web: An overview of web-based instruction programs, T.H.E. Journal 26 (11) 67-78.
49.French, R.P. & Raven, B. (1968), The Bases of Social Power, in Cartwright, D. and Zander, A. (Eds), Group Dynamics, Harper and Row, New York, 1968, 259-69.
50.Fusilier, M. R., Ganster, D. C., & Mayes, B. T. (1987), Effects of social support, role stress, and locus of control on health. Journal of Management, 13, 517-528.
51.Gagne, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992), Principles of instructional design (4th Ed.), New York: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.
52.Gasaway, L. (1998), Distance Learning and Copyright, 1 Journal Of Library Service for Distance Education (June).
53.Gass, M. A. (1990), The longitudinal effects of an adventure orientation program on the retention of students, Journal of College Student Development, 31, 33-38.
54.Geer, R. et al (1998), The effect of an information literacy subject on teacher education students computing self-efficacy, available at www.cegsa.sa.edu.au/conference/acec98/acec98.htm.
55.Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., Back, W. (1998), Multivariate data analysis, 5ed., Prentice-Hall International, Inc.
56.Harrison, A.W. and Rainer, R.R. (1997), Testing the self-efficacy-performance linkage of social-cognitive theory, Journal of Social Psychology, 137 (1), 79-87.
57.Harrison, A.W., Rainer, R.K. (1992), The influence of individual differences on skill in end-user computing, Journal of Management Information Systems, 9 (1), 93-111.
58.Hawk, S.R. (1989), Locus of control and computer attitude: the effect of user involvement, Computer in human behavior, 5, 199-206.
59.Heider, F. (1958), The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
60.Hill, T. et al (1987), Role of efficacy expectations in predicting the decision to use advanced technologies: the case of computers journal of applied psychology, 72 (2), 307-313.
61.Hiltz, R. et al (1999), Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: a multi-measure, multi-method approach, journal of asynchronous learning networks, 4, 2. Available at www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jaln-vol4issue 2.htm.
62.Hoy, W.K. and Miskel, C.G. (1991). Educational Administration, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 82-92.
63.Hsieh, J. C. (1987), Discuss the independent of education rights and freedom of use, Theory and policy, 2, 42-48 Taiwan.
64.Humphreys, M. S. and Revelle, W. (1984), Personality, motivation, and performance: a theory of relationship between individual differences and information processing Psychological Review, 91, 153-184.
65.Igbaria, M. & Iivari, J. (1995), The Effects of Self-Efficacy on Computer Usage, Omega, International Journal of Management Sciences, 23, (6), 587 – 605.
66.Kagima, L. C. (1998), Faculty computer self-efficacy and integration of electronic communication in teaching college course. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59 (11), 4077.
67.Kalechstein, A.D. Nowicki, S. (1997), A meta-analytic examination of the relationship between control expectancies and academic achievement: an 11-year follow-up to Findley and Cooper, Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 123, 27.
68.Karsten, R. A. & Roth, R. M. (1998a), The relationship of computer experience and computer self-efficacy to performance in introductory computer literacy courses.” Journal of research on computing in education, 3I 14-24.
69.Karsten, R. & Roth, R.M. (1998b), Computer Self-Efficacy: A Practical Indicator of Student Computer Competency in Introductory IS Courses, Informing Science Volume 1 No 3.
70.Kear, M. (2000), Concept analysis of self-efficacy, Graduate Research in Nursing, available at:http://graduateresearch.com/kear.htm
71.Keegan, R. T. (1996), Creativity from Childhood to Adulthood: A Difference of Degree and Not of Kind. In Creativity from childhood through adulthood. New directions for child development, no 72, edited by M. A. Runco, 57-66, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass: Summer 1996.
72.Kelley, H. H. (1967), Attribution theory in social psychology, In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation,15, 192-240, Lincoln, University of Nebraska.
73.Kelly, L. (1995), The ASTD technical and skills training handbook, New York: McGraw- Hill, Inc.
74.Kerber, K. W. (1983), Attitudes towards specific uses of the computer: Quantitative, decision making, and record-keeping applications, Behavior and information technology, 2, 197-209.
75.Khan, B. H. (1997), Web-Based Instruction. New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications.
76.Kinney, N. (2001), A guide to design and testing in online psychology learning and teaching, 1, 1, 16-20.
77.Klint, K. (1999), New directions for inquiry into self-concept and adventure experiences, In, J.C. Miles and S. Priest (Eds.), Adventure Programming, 163-168, State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.
78.Koul, R. and Rubba, P. (1999), An analysis of the reliability and validity of personal internet teaching efficacy beliefs scale, Electronic journal of science education available at http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/koulrubba.html.
79.Krampen, G. (1985), Zur Bedeutung von Kontrollueberzeugungen in der klinischen Psychologie, Zeitschrift fuer Klinische Psychologie, 14(2).
80.Krampen, G. (1987), Differential effects of teacher comments, Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(2), 137 - 146.
81.Krampen, G. (1988), Competence and control orientations as predictors of test anxiety in students: Longitudinal results. Anxiety Research, 1, 185-197.
82.Krampen, G. (1991), Fragebogen zu Kompetenz- und Kontrollueberzeugungen (FKK), Handanweisung (1 ed.), Goettingen: Hogrefe Verlag fuer Psychologie.
83.Lachman, M.E. (1986), Locus of control in aging research: A case for multidimensional and domain-specific assessment, Journal of Psychology and Aging, 1, 34-40.
84.Langford, M. and Reeves, T.E. (1998), The relationship between computer self-efficacy and personal characteristics of the beginning information systems student Journal of Computer Information Systems, 38 (4), 41-45.
85.Lefcourt, H. M. (1982), Locus of Control (2nd Ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
86.Lev, E. L. (1997), Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy: application to oncology”, scholarly inquiry for nursing practice 11(1), 21-42
87.Lewin, K. (1952), Group decision and social change in reading in Social psychology, G E Swanson et al (eds), NY: Henry Holt and Company, Inc., 1952
88.Maehr, M.L. (1990), The Psychological Environment of the School: A Focus for School Leadership, paper presented at the American Association of Educational Research Annual Meeting, Boston, MA, April 1990.
89.Mantyla, K., & Gividen, R. J. (1997), Distance learning: A step-by-step guide for trainers, Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development.
90.Manke, M. P. (1997), Classroom power relations : understanding student-teacher interaction, Mahwah, N.J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
91.Marks, P.A. et al (1998), Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The adverse childhood experiences (ACE) study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 14(4), 245-258.
92.McManus, T.F. (1996), Special Considerations for Designing Internet Based Instruction, 1995, [On-Line]. Available http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/coe/depts/ci, pages 1 through 7.
93.McManus, T.F. (1996), Delivering Instruction on the World Wide Web, Available http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/%Emcmanus/wbi.html, 1-13.
94.Metz, M. (1978), Classrooms and corridors: The crises of authority in desegregated secondary schools. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
95.Moore, M. G. & Kearsley, G. (1996), Distance education: A systems view. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
96.Murphy, C. A. et al. (1989), Development and validation of computer self efficacy scale, Educational and Psychological measurement, 49, 893-899.
97.Nahl, D. (1996), Affective monitoring of Internet learners: perceived self-efficacy and success, in Hardis S Ed Proceedings of the 59th annual Meeting of the American Society for information Science, Baltimore, MD 21-24 October, NJ, 100-9
98.Nahl, D. (1997), Information counseling inventory of affective and cognitive reactions while learning the Internet, Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 2(2/3), 11-33.
99.Olcott, D. J. (1994), The critical role of faculty: Applied frameworks and strategies for integrating distance education into postsecondary institutions. Dissertation Abstracts International, 56 (04), 1214.
100.O’Leary, A. (1985), Self-efficacy and health” behavioral research and technology Vol 23, 437-451.
101.Pajares, F. (2002), Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy, available at www.emory.edu/education/mfp/eff.html.
102.Parent, J., Forward, J., Canter, R., & Mohling, J. (1975), Interactive effects of teaching strategy and personal Locus of Control on student performance and satisfaction, Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(6), 764 - 769.
103.Parer, M. S., Croker, S., & Shaw, B. (1988), Institutional support and rewards for academic staff involved in distance education. International Council for Distance Education. Victoria, Australia.
104.Paxton, T. (1998), Self-efficacy and outdoor adventure programs: A quantitative and qualitative analysis. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
105.Propst, D.B., Koesler, R.A. (1998), Bandura goes outdoors: role of self-efficacy in the outdoor leadership development process. Leisure Sciences, 20, 319-344.
106.Pettijohn, T, (1990), Locus of control scale, available at: http://www.dushkin.com/connectext/psy/ch11/survey11.mhtml
107.Qutami, Y. and Abu-Jager, M. (1997), Student’s self-efficacy in computer skills as a function of gender and cognitive learning style at Sultan Qaboos University. International Journal of Instructional Media, 24 (1), 63-75.
108.Relan, A. and Gillani, B.B. (1997a), Web-Based Information and the Traditional Classroom: Similarities and Differences. In Khan, B.H., (Ed.), Web-Based Instruction, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, page 43.
109.Relan, A. and Gillani, B.B. (1997b), Web-Based Information and the Traditional Classroom: Similarities and Differences, In Khan, B.H.,(Ed.), Web-Based Instruction, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 45.
110.Robertson, E. (1994), http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-yearbook/94_docs/ROBERTSO.HTM
111.Rogers, E. M. (1995), Diffusion of innovations, New York: The Free Press.
112.Rotter, J. B. (1954), Social Learning and Clinical Psychology, New York: Prentice-Hall, INC.
113.Rotter, J. B. (1966), Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement, Psychological Monographs, 80, 1–28.
114.Rotter, J. B. (1975), Some problems and misconceptions related to the construct of internal vs. external control of reinforcement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 48, 56-67.
115.Rotter, J. B. (1990), Internal verses external control of reinforcement: A case history of a variable, American Psychologist, 45, 489-493.
116.Santi, P.A. (1997), Interactive World Wide Web-Based Courseware: Similarities and Differences, In Khan, B.H., Web-Based Instruction, 1997b, Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 407.
117.Seligman, M. E. P. (1975), Helplessness. On depression, development and death. San Francisco: Freeman.
118.Shapiro, D. H., Schwartz, C. E., & Astin, J. A. (1996), Controlling ourselves, controlling our world: Psychology’s role in understanding positive and negative consequences of seeking and gaining control. American Psychologist, 51, 1213-1230.
119.Schaar, J. (1981), Legitimacy in the modem state (Transaction Books, New Brunswick, NJ).
120.Schunk, D. H. (1985), self efficacy and classroom learning, Psychology in the School, Vol.22, 208-291
121.Smith, R. A. (2002), Race, gender, and authority in the workplace: Theory and Research Rutgers University, School of Management and Labor Relations, 50 Labor Center Way, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901
122.Swidler, A. (1979), Organization without authority. Cambridge, Ma. Harvard.
123.SPSS, Inc. (2000) SPSS 10.1, Computer software. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
124.Staples, D. S., Hulland, J. S., & Higgins, C. A. (1998), A self-efficacy theory explanation for the management of remote workers in virtual organizations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication [On-line], 3 (4). Available: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue4/staples.html.
125.Stone, G. & Jackson, T. (1975), Internal-external control as a determinant of effectiveness of modeling and instructions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22, 294-298.
126.Thompson, M. M. (2000). Barriers to the implementation of distance education. Retrieved May 16, 2000, from http://www.lucent.com/cedl/barriers.html.
127.Torkzadeh, G. and Koufteros, X. (1994), Factorial validity of computer self-efficacy scale and the impact of computer training. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 813-821.
128.Torkzadeh, G. & Van Dyke T.P. (2001), Development and validation of an Internet self-efficacy scale Behavior & Information Technology, 2001, VOL. 20, No. 4, 275-280
129.Trice, A. D. (1985), An Academic Locus of Control Scale for college students. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 61, 1043-1046.
130.Trice, A. D. (1980), Students' locus of control and ratings of a structured educational environment. Psychological Reports, 46, 782.
131.Wang, A. & Newlin, M. (2002), Predictors of performance in virtual classroom: identifying and helping at risk cyber –student” The journal technology Horizon in Education, May 2002, 29 (10), 21
132.Wang, Y. & Cohen, A. (1998), University faculty use of the internet. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED423867).
133.Washull, S.B. (2001), The online delivery of psychology courses: attrition, performance and evaluation, Teaching of psychology, 28, 2, 143-147.
134.Webster, J. and Hackley, P. (1997), Teaching effectiveness in technology-mediated distance learning, Academy of Management Journal, 40 (6), 1282-1310.
135.Weinberg, L.E. (1996), Choice or chance: An attributional analysis of perceived control and learned helplessness in care giving outcomes, In G. Joseph (Ed.) Difficult Issues in Aging in Difficult Times, Guelph, ON: Department of Family Studies, University of Guelph.
136.Westbrook, K. C. (1998), Technology and the educational workplace, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
137.Willis, B. (1993), Distance education a practical guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
138.Willis, J. (1996), Faculty perspectives on instructional technology: A national survey, Retrieved April 22, 2000, from http://www.coe.uh.edu/insite/elec_pub/html1995/1818.htm
139.Yin, R.K. (1994), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, Sage Publications.
140.Yukl, G. (1989), Managerial leadership: a review of theory and research journal of management, 15 (2), 251-289.
141.Zhang, Y. and Espinoza, S. (1998), Relationship among computer self-efficacy, attitudes toward computers, and desirability of learning computing skills. Journal of research on computing in education 30 (4), 420-437
142.Zimmerman, B. (1995), Self-efficacy and educational development, In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-efficacy in changing societies (202-231). New York: Cambridge University Press.
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2005-06-28公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2005-06-28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 2281 或 來信