本研究透過質性研究的方式，探討教育現場中，高中職教師使用資訊科技融入教學之策略與經驗，及藉由科技接受模式的概念來分析影響其使用資訊科技融入教學之因素。研究方法採詮釋現象學來體現十二位受訪的高中職教師資訊科技融入教學之現象，並詮釋其現象背後的內在意義。資料收集為利用半結構式的深度訪談、教材文件蒐集、觀察及輔以資訊素養之量化問卷。透過文本分析，並與受訪教師形成互為主體的概念，以深度詮釋高中職教師資訊科技融入教學之歷程。
研究發現，整體來說高中職教師的資訊科技融入教學會依課程特性來設計，將科技知識(TK)、學科知識(CK)、教育學知識(PK)三者融合。教學設計漸從零散走向課程主題統整設計；教師的教學也從教師為主的知識傳授轉變成師生共同建構之取向。再者，認知有用性是影響教師使用的第一因素，教師認為資訊科技對教學具有教學成效提升、具象化教學、教材多元與課程活潑和建立教學資料庫的成效。第三，認知易用性方面，研究發現在軟體介面發展愈人性化的情況下，易用性對教師的影響力降低，反而教師會受軟體使用習慣和偏好的影響。第四，教師在資訊科技融入教學中若能感受到享受、愉悅，則其使用行為會愈投入；也因樂於投入，更能將創新的概念融入到教學中。第五，在學校設備和態度都是支持的情況下，教師還是主宰資訊科技融入於教學的關鍵者。第六，同事、師生間的共同討論與分享回饋對教師使用資訊科技之行為有增強作用。此外，目前尚未有教師教學資源之統一入口網站，建議相關單位可建立標準格式並整合相關資源，以提升教師運用資訊科技融入教學之意願與效果。最後將上述六點歸納統整成高中職教師資訊科技融入教學之歷程。
本研究並根據研究結論，針對教育單位、高中職教師及未來研究方向提出建議。

This paper explored the process of senior and vocational high school teachers integrating technology into instruction, based on Technology Acceptance Model. A qualitative approach using semi-structured interviewing was adopted to understand teachers’ perceptions of technology integration activities in the courses.
The main findings derived from this study suggested that, teachers emphasized the complex interplay of technology knowledge, content knowledge and pedagogy knowledge when they integrating technology into instruction. Furthermore, teachers tended to design instruction based on the principle of curriculum integration and mutual knowledge construction between teachers and students. Teachers indicated that perceived usefulness (PU) was the determine factor to influence the integrating technology into instruction of teachers. The more software was easeful, the less perceived ease of use (PEOU) influenced teachers. Furthermore, teachers involved in integrating technology into instruction, they felt enjoyment and happiness. Then, teachers were key roles of integrating technology into instruction on the conditions supported by school. Teachers’ behavior in integrating technology into instruction could be enhanced under a favorable climate of discussion and information sharing. However, such behavior would be inhibited due to lack of a unified web-based portal for combining existing educational resources.
Several suggestions were provided for improving education organizations and teachers' behavior in integrating technology into instruction.

參考文獻
中文部份：
王千倖(2006)。資訊科技融入教學成效省思。視聽教育雙月刊，48(2)，1-18。
王文科(1994)。質的教育研究法。台北：師大書苑。
王文科(2000)。質的教育研究法(第四版)。台北：師大書苑。
王全世(2000a)。資訊科技融入教學的意義與內涵。資訊與教育，80，23-31。
王全世(2000b)。對資訊科技融入各科教學之資訊情境的評估標準。資訊與教育，77，36-47。
王秋錳(2003)。台北市高級職業學校教師資訊科技融入教學創新行為與影響因素之研究。國立台北科技大學技職教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
王雅觀(2006)。國中教師應用科技之教學歷程探究：地理科教師應用教學科技之個案研究。國立台灣師範大學教育系博士論文，未出版，台北市。
王裕德、黃忠志(2001)。資訊科技融入教學之探討─以生活科技之室內設
計為例。生活科技教育，7(34)，29-34。
王筱涵(2004)。台北市國民小學實施資訊科技融入教學之研究。國立台北師範學院教育政策與管理研究所，未出版，台北市。
王誌毅(2004)。國民中學實施九年一貫：資訊科技融入教學現況與問題。師說，180，7-10。
李孟文(2002)。教學的精緻理論及其在國中數理科教學之應用。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
李雪莉(2000)。老師，不能退縮─教師運用資訊網路能力調查。天下雜誌2000年教育特刊，29，92-102。
呂聰賢(2002)。淺談資訊融入教學模式。北縣教育，41，47-49。
何榮桂(1999)。教育部「資訊教育基礎建設計畫」與北、高兩市「資訊教育白皮書」簡介。資訊與教育雜誌，70，2-8。
何榮桂(2002)。台灣資訊教育的現況與發展─兼論資訊科技融入教學。資訊與教育，87，22-48。
吳明隆、林振欽編著(2005)。資訊科技與教學應用:議題、理論與實務。台北：知城數位科技。
吳明隆(2004a)。科技接受模式─資訊科技融入教學。國教之友，56(1)，25-32。
吳明隆(2004b)。資訊科技融入學習領域的教學應用。視聽教育，45(4)，12-22。
吳曉華(2004)。桃園縣國中教師利用網路資源融入教學之研究。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
林佳蓉(2006)。以HTP模式及認知動機因素探討台灣資訊種子小學科技融入教學知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。
林秋先(2004)。資訊科技融入教學面臨的困境與契機。師說，180，4-6。
林逸群(2008)。教育傳播科技應用研究─以宜蘭縣國中小學教師採用教學部落格為例。彿光大學傳播學系研究所碩士論文，未出版，宜蘭縣。
林麗娟(2007)。資訊融入─教與學之投入。教學科技與媒體，79，17-29。
周永記(2004)。教師教學使用資訊科技意願之研究。國立高雄師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
柯淑惠(2008)。部落格使用者行為之研究：以科技接受度、知識分享和社會影響觀點。國立中山大學企業管理學系研究所碩士論文，高雄市。
徐式寬、林珮貞 (2003)，反省與回顧台灣政府近年來在電腦融入教學上的投資與努力，教學科技與媒體，66，60-71頁。
徐式寬(2008)。臺北縣市國中小教師資訊融入教學之方式與影響因素研究。教學科技與媒體，86，61-78。
徐新逸(2003)。學校推動資訊融入教學的實施策略研究，教學科技與媒體，59, 68-84.
徐新逸、吳佩謹(2002)。資訊融入教學的現代意義與具體作為。教學科技與媒體， 59，63-73。
徐新逸、王培卉(2004)。國小教師實施資訊科技融入社會學習領域之現況與需求評估。國立台北師範學院學報，17(1)，239-268。
許志瑋(2004)。以TAM為基礎探討影響教師接受資訊科技融入教學之因素。華梵大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，未出版，台北縣。
張文嘉(2003)。學校環境與教師個人背景對資訊融入教學之影響研究─以南投縣國中為例。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士論文，未出版，未出版，高雄市。
張德銳(1999)。師資培育與教育革新研究。台北：五南。
張國恩(1999)。資訊融入各科教學之內涵與實施。資訊與教育雜誌，72，2-9。
張基成、王秋錳(2007)。台北市高級職校教師資訊科技融入教學創新情況─從教學前準備、進行中、教學後評量階段剖析。教學科技與媒體，81，54-77。
張瑜芳、劉旨峰(2008)。教師部落格樣貌分析。理工研究學報，42(1)，119-137。
教育部(2001a)。中小學資訊教育總藍圖。2007年1月5日取自http://www.
edu.tw/EDU_WEB/EDU_MGT/MOECC/EDU6673001/ie/guideline/guideline(9006).pdf
教育部(2001b)。2001教育改革之檢討與改進會議─推動終身教育及資訊網
路。2009年5月14http://www.edu.tw/content.aspx?site_content_sn=1312
教育部(2008). 中小學資訊教育白皮書。台北：教育部。
邱玉菁(2004)。數位學習教與學歷程研究─以A高中實施之台北市教育局「電子書包實驗計畫」為例。世新大學資訊傳播學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
邱瓊慧(2002)。中小學資訊科技融入教學之實踐。資訊與教育雜誌，88，3-9。
邱瓊慧(2006)。資訊科技融入教學。載於國立台灣師範大學實習輔導處地方教育輔導組舉辦之「資訊科技融入高級中學各領域教學示例」研討會論文集（頁1-15），台北。
壽大偉(2001)。資訊網路教學。台北：師大書苑。
壽大偉(2002)。數位學習融入學校之變革領導。科學教育研究與發展專刊，139-154。
楊正宏(2007)。我國資訊科技教育推動現況與展望。教育資料與研究雙月刊，78，1-19。
溫嘉榮、施文玲(2002)。從網路學習理論觀點談教師在科技變革中的因應之道。資訊與教育雜誌，91，90-99。
廖秀莉(2000)。套裝軟體更新與使用者接受度─CAI應用。中原大學資訊 管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
潘慧玲(2004)。教育研究的取徑：概念與應用Approaches of educational research: concepts and applications。台北：高等教育文化出版有限公司。
賴淑慧(2009)。創新科技使用者行為之研究─以中華電視MOD為例。環境與管理研究，10(2)，1-16。
陳向明(2004)。教師如何作質的研究。台北：洪葉文化。
陳美葉(2009)。網路環境與資訊素養對無線網路教學意願之影響以高雄市國中藝文領域教育為例。國立中山大學傳播管理研究所碩士論文，未 出版，高雄市。
陳淑娟(2002)。網際網路電腦輔助教學於心血管疾病護理之成效。國立台北護理學院護理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳瑩芝(2007)。以TAM擴充模式探討台北市國民小學教師網路融入教學行為。國立台灣科技大學技職教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳錕隆(2003)。動機與滿意度對教師參與網路進修影響之研究。國立高雄師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
陳燕秋(2003)。資訊科技融入中學國文教師教學現況之研究。國立交通大學傳播所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
蔡文山(2005)。資訊科技融入教學之理念與應用。研習資訊，22(2)，48-55。
簡林伶(2008)。「老師，伸出操縱滑鼠的魔力吧！」____ 探討高中職教師網路教學自我效能在網路融入教學歷程之角色。國立台灣科技大學技職教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
謝佳容、王子華、沈怡秀(2010，4月)。以科技接受模式理論探討國民小學教師使用互動式電子白板之接受度調查研究，載於國立新竹教育大學資訊科學研究所舉辦之「2010電腦與網路科技再教育上的應用」研討會論文集，新竹。
謝哲智(2006)。國小教師資訊科技融入社會領域教學能力指標建構之研究。國立屏東教育大學教育科技研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。
黃欣儀(2001)。影響中小學教師網路進修使用程度相關因素之研究。國立中山大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
魏立欣（譯）（2004）。Roblyer, M. D.著。教育科技融入教學。台北：高等教育。
蕭英勵(2007)。資訊教育新趨勢─以互動式電子白板融入教學為例。中等教育，58(4), 118-130。
蕭英勵(2007)。是誰吃了乳酪？從教育夥伴談學校推展資訊融入教學之策略。中等教育，58(2), 80-101.
羅佳民(2006)。樂在教學—淺談教師應用科技融入教學。師說，194，44-46。

英文部分：
Adams, D. A., Nelson, R. R., & Todd, P. A. (1992). “Perceived Usefulness, Ease of Use, and Usage of Information Technology: A Replication”, MIS Quarterly, 16, 227-247.
Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality and behavior. Chicago, Ill.: Dorsey Press.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M.(1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood and Cliffs , NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Andrew, B. J., & Hubona,G. S.(2006). The mediation of external variables in the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43,706-717.
Arends, R. I. (2007). Learning to Teach(7th ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Austin, D. (2006). Integrating technology to help students graduate. Principal Leadership, 6(6), 8-9.
Baek, Y., Jung, J. , & Kim, B. (2008).What makes teachers use technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitation of technology with a Korean sample. Computers & Education, 50, 224-234.
Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2001). Factors Influencing Technology Integration: A Quantitative Nationwide Study. ERIC / IT Clearinghouse on Information & Technology [online] (Clearinghouse ED424212)
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: Longman Green.
Chau, P. Y. K, & Hu, P. J. H. (2002). Investigating healthcare professionals’ decision to accept telemedicine technology: An empirical test of competing theories. Information & Management, 39,297-311.
Chin, W., & Todd, P. (1995). On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in mis research: A note of caution. MIS Quarterly, 9(2), 237-246.
Csikszentmihalyi, M.(1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row.
Cuban, L.(2001). Oversold and Underused? Computers in the Classroom. Harvard University Press.
Davis, F. D.(1989).Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-341
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P., R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: Comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982-1003.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P., R. (1992). Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 22(14), 1111-1132.
English, S. J.(2002). Time for technology: Sucessfully in integrating technology in elementary school classrooms.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED474550) Retrieved May 25, 2010, from ERIC database.
Ferdig, R. E.(2006). Assessing technologies for teaching and learning: understanding the importance of technological pedagogical content knowledge. British Journal of Education Technology, 37(5), 749-760.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I.(1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Francis, B. A.(1993).Working at the interface of art, culture, and technology: A case study in art education. (Doctoral dissertation University of Hawaii, 1993) Dissertation Abstracts International, 54, 7:24-35.
Freiman, V., & Gandaho, I. (2005). New curriculum reform in action: New Brunswick’s pre-service teachers communication with school children on mathematical problems via Internet site CAMI. Paper presented at the Word Conferencer on Education Mulimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, Montreal, Canada.
Gao, Y.(2005). Applying the Technology Acceptance Model(TAM) to Educational Hypermedia: A Field Ssudy. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 14(3), 237-247.
Gibson, G. S., Harris, L. M., & Colaric, S. M. (2008). Technology acceptance in a academic context: Faculty acceptance of online education. Journal of education for business, 355-359.
Granger, C. A., Morbey, M. L., Lotherington, H., Owston, L. D. & Wideman, H. H. (2002). Factors contributing to teachers’ successful implementation of IT. Journal of Computer Assited Learning, 18, 480-488.
Grant, M. M. & Branch, R. M. (2005). Project-based learning in a middle school: Tracing abilities through artifacts of learning. Journal of Research on Technology Education, 38(1), 65-99.
Groves, M. M., & Zemel, P. C. (2000). Instructional technology adoption in higher education: An action research case study. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27(1), 57–65.
Hayes, D. (2007). ICT and learning: Lessons from Australian classrooms. Computers and Education, 49, 385–395.
Hoffman, D. L. & Novak, T. P.(1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-
mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(7), 50-68.
Hsu, C. L., & Lin, J. C. C.(2008).Acceptance of Blog Usage: The Roles of Technology Acceptance, Social Influence and Knowledge Sharing Moviaton. Information & Management, 45,65-74.
Huberman, M. (1988). Teacher careers and school improvement. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20(2),119-132.
Hughes, J. E.,& Ooms, A. (2004). Content-Focused Technology Inquiry Groups: Preparing Urban Teachers to Integrates Technology to Transform Student Learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(4), 397-411.
Hughes, J. E. (2005). The Role of Teacher Knowledge and Learning Experiences in Forming Technology-Integrated Pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2),277-302.
Hughes, J. E.,& Kerr, S. P.,& Ooms, A. (2005). Content-Focused Technology Inquiry Groups: Cases Of Technology Learning And Technology Integration. Journal Education Computing Research, 32(4), 367-379.
Hung, Y. -W., & Hsu, Y. –S. (2007). Examining Teachers’ CBT Use in the Classroom: A Study in Secondary schools in Taiwan. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3),233-246.
Igbaria, M., Guimaraes, T., & Davis, G. B. (1995). Testing the determinants of microcomputer usage via a structural equation model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 11(4),87-114.
Igbaria, M., Iivari, J., & Maragahh, H. (1995). Why do individuals use computer technology? A Finnish case study. Information and Management, 29, 227-238.
Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Computers as Mindtools for Schools: Engaging Critical Thinking Columbus. OH: Prentice-Hall.
Jonassen, D.H., Howland, J., Moore, J.,& Marra, R. (2003). Learning to solve problem with technology：a constructive perspective. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Jong-Ae, K. (2005). User acceptance of web-based subscription databases: Extending the technology acceptance model. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL
Koehler, M. J.,& Mishra, P., Yahya, K., Yadav, A. (2004). Successful teaching with technology: The complex interplay of content, pedagogy, and technology. Proceedings form the Annual Meeting of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Atlanta,GA. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computer Education.
Koehler, M. J.,& Mishra, P. (2005). Teachers learning technology by design. Journal of Computer in Teacher Education, 21(3), 94-102.
Koehler, M. J.,& Mishra, P. (2005). What happerns when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal Educational Computer Research, 32(2), 131-152.
Koehler, M. J.,& Mishra, P., Yahya, K., Yadav, A. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy and technology. Computer & Education, 49, 740-762.
King, W. R., & He, J.(2006). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43, 740-755.
Legris, P., Ingham, J. & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model.Information and Management, 40,191-204.
Leh, A. S. C. (2001).The Changing Role of Teacher: Case Study. (Clearinghouse_No: IR02006).Retrieved May 20, 2009, from ERIC detabase.Mahmood, M.A., & Swanberg, D. L. (2001). Factors affecting information technology usage: a meta- analysis of the empirical literature. Journal of Organizational Computing, 11, 107-130.
Mahmood, M.A., & Swanberg, D. L. (2001). Factors affecting information techno-logy usage: a meta- analysis of the empirical literature. Journal of Organizational Computing, 11, 107-130.
Maregerum-leys, J., & Marx, R. (2002). Teacher knowledge of educational technology: A case study if student/mentor teacher pair. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26(4), 427-462.
Ma, Q., & Liu, L. (2004). The technology acceptance model: A meta analysis of empirical findings. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 16(1), 59–72.
Ma, W. W., & Andersson, R. & Streith, K. (2005). Examining user acceptance of computer technology: an empirical study of student teachers. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 387-395.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach(2thed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mishra .P, & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A Framework for Teacher Knowledge. Teacher College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
Moersch, C. (1995). Levels of technology implementation(LoTi): A framework for measuring classroom technology use. Learning and Leading with Technology, 23(3), 40-42
Mohnsen, B. (1997). Stretching bodies and minds through technology. Education Leadership, 46-48.
Moon, J. W., & Kim, Y. G. (2001). Extending the TAM for a World-Wide-Web context. Information & Mamagement, 38(4), 217-230.
Mueller, J., Wood, E., & Willoughby, T. (2007). The culture of computers among teachers. In E. Wood & T. Willoughy (Eds.), Children learning in a digital world. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Roll, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration. Computers & Education, 51, 1523-1537.
National Center for Educational Statistics. (2000, April). Stats in brief: Teacher use of computers and the Internet in public schools. Washington, DC: Author.
Olson, J. (2000). Trojan horse or teacher’s pet? Computers and ther culture of the school. Crriculum Studies, 32(1), 1-8.
Ong, C. S., Lai, J. Y., & Wang Y. S.(2004). Factors affecting engineers’s acceptance of asynchronous e-learning systems in high-tech companies. Information & Management,41, 795-804.
Polin, L. (1992). Looking for love in all the wrong place? The Computer Teacher, 20(2), 6-7.
Russel, G., Finger, G, & Russel, N. (2000). Information technology skill of Australian teacher : Implications for teacher education. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(2), 149-166.
Shulman, L. S.(1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15(2), 4-14
Shulman, L. S.(1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1), 1-22
Taylor, S., & Todd, P. (1995). Assessing IT usage: The role of prior experience. MIS Quarterly, 19, 561-570.
Teo, T., Lee, C. B., & Chai, C. S. (2008). Understanding pre-service teachers’ computer attitudes: applying and extending the technology acceptance model. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24,128-143.
Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: A study of pre-service teachers. Computers & Education, 52, 302-312.
Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, W., & Tam, K. Y.(2002). Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics,
organizational context, and individual difference? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 215-242.
Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F. D.(1996). A model of the Antecedents of Perceived Ease of Use: Development and Test*. Decision Sciences, 27(3), 451-481.
Venkatesh, V. & Davis, F. D.(2000).A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research, 11(4), 342-365.
Wallace, R. M. (2004). A framework for understanding teaching with the internet. American educational research journal, 41(2), 447-488.
Williams, D., Coles, L., Richardson, A., Wilson, K., & Tuson, J. (2000) Integrating information and communications technology in professional practice : An analysis of teachers’ needs based on survey of primary and secondary teachers in Scottish schools. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(2), 167-182.