臺北市中小學校長科技領導之創新關切與科技接受度研究

Research on Concern Based Adoption Model and Technology Acceptance Model of Principals' Technology Leadership of Elementary and Secondary in Taipei

10.6173/CJSE.2013.2101.05

戴建耘(Chien-Yun Dai)；陳宛非(Wan-Fei Chen)；韓長澤(Charng-Tzer Harn)；賴慕回(Mu-Hui Lai)；高曼婷(Man-Ting Kao)

科技接受模式3 ； 科技領導 ； 關切階層 ； Technology Acceptance Model 3 ； Technology Leadership ； Concern-Based Adoption Model

科學教育學刊

21卷1期（2013 / 03 / 01）

97 - 133

繁體中文

隨著資訊科技的發展與成熟，教育單位需因應時代潮流，透過資訊科技來融入教學、建置數位化學習環境與管理平臺。學校領導者需具備新思維高度關切科技發展趨勢，運用科技管理能力，提升學校經營管理成效，因此具體展現科技領導能力，成為校長重要關鍵能力之一。本研究旨在瞭解臺北市中小學校長在參加科技領導研習營後之「關切階層」與「科技接受」之程度，以及瞭解不同背景變項在依變項間之差異。研究方法是採用問卷調查法輔以訪談，以臺北市226所公立中小學中，參與研習營且全程參與的43位校長填答，有效樣本共40位，達93.00%。研究發現，校長對科技領導之關切程度，以「結果關切」為最高；擔任校長年資「4年以下」、「5～8年」及「13年以上」者，在「電腦趣味性」之表現顯著的優於擔任校長年資「9～12年」者；在校長任職階層以「高中」的校長在「結果關切」與「主觀規範」之表現優於擔任「國小」者；學校規模「24班以下」和「49班以上」的校長，在「合作關切」、「知覺易用性」之表現顯著的優於學校規模「25～48班」者。

As information technology develops, in order to respond to the current trend, educational organizations use information technology in teaching and establish digital learning environment and management platform. School leaders require a new concept to be highly concerned about the trend regarding to technology development. They have to use their technology management ability to promote school management efficiency. Therefore, showing technology leadership ability concretely becomes one of a principal’s vital key abilities. The aims of the study lie in understanding the levels of ”Innovation Concern” and ”Technology Acceptance” after the principals in Taipei city participated in the Technology Leadership Workshop, and understanding the differences in terms of various background and dependent variables. This study primarily involved questionnaire survey complemented with interviews. Among 226 elementary, junior and senior high schools in Taipei City, there were 43 principals participating in the Technology Leadership Workshop, there are 40 effectives, reaching 93.00%. The results showed that, in terms of the principals’ Innovation Concern level toward technology leadership, the level of result concern was the highest. For principals with the career duration of less than four years, 5 to 8 years and over 13 years, their performances in computer playfulness were significantly better than principals with the service duration of 9 to 12 years. In terms of the level of school the principals served, the performances of senior high school principals in result concern and subjective norm were better than those of elementary school principals. For principals within school size of less than 24 classes and over 49 classes, their performances in collaboration concern and perceived ease of use were better than principals with school size of 25 ~ 48 classes.

1. 林信志、湯凱雯、賴信志(2010)。以科技接受模式探討大學生學習以網路教學系統製作數位教材之意圖和成效。數位學習科技期刊，2(1)，60-78。
   連結：
2. 林國亮、吳明隆(2006)。學校行政主管資訊科技應用素養與學校經營績效之關係研究─以高雄市國民小學為例。學校行政，45，1-25。
   連結：
3. 洪新原、張麗敏、劉淑娟(2010)。應用差異理論探討資訊系統使用者滿意度之研究─不同使用者觀點之比較。資訊管理學報，17(2)，57-81。
   連結：
4. 孫志麟、陳建銘(2007)。學校組織變革中的教師關注：發展階段與類型分析。師大學報，52(1)，159-180。
   連結：
5. 葉美春、阮明淑(2007)。使用者採用知識管理系統之影響因素研究─理論模型的比較取向。圖書資訊學刊，5(1/2)，69-90。
   連結：
6. 劉忠峰、翁明正、吳欽和(2010)。以科技接受模式3探討網路大學系統使用意向之研究。第十四屆電子商務研討會，新北市:
   連結：
7. 馮丁樹(1995)。實用學術論文寫作。查詢日期：2012年9月17日，檢自http://www.bime.ntu.edu.tw/~dsfon/specialtopics/writethesis2.htm。
8. International Society for Technology in Education. (2009). NET for administrators. Retrieved November 25, 2011, from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-administrators.aspx
9. Loucks-Horsley, S. (2005). The concern-based adoption model (CBAM): A model for change in individuals. Retrieved August 21, 2006, from http://www.nationalacademies.org/rise/backg4a.htm
10. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2007). Improving school leadership. Retrieved December 17, 2011, from http://www.oecd.org/edu/schoolleadership
11. Maryland Association of Secondary School Principals. (2011). The evaluation of Minnesota's school principals. Retrieved December 17, 2011, from http://www.md-massp.org/docs/Prin%20Eval%20Minnesota.pdf
12. Adams, R. D.,Martray, C.(1981).Teacher development: A study of factors related to teacher concerns for pre, beginning, and experienced teachers.annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,Los Angeles, CA:
13. Amoako-Gyampah, K.,Salam, A. F.(2004).An extension of the technology acceptance model in an ERP implementation environment.Information & Management,41(6),731-745.
14. Anderson, R. E.,Dexter, S. L.(2000).ERIC Document Reproduction ServiceERIC Document Reproduction Service,Irvine, CA:Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations.
15. Bailey, G. D.(1997).What technology leaders need to know: The essential top 10 concepts for technology integration in the 21st century?.Learning & Leading with Technology,25(1),57-62.
16. Bailey, G. D.,Lumley, D.(1994).Technology staff development programs: A leadership sourcebook for school administrators.New York:Scholastic.
17. Bailey, G. D.,Lumley, D.,Dunbar, D.(1995).Leadership & technology: What school board members need to know.Alexandria, VA:National School Board Association.
18. Bellamy, G. T.,Fulmer, C. L.,Murphy, M. J.,Muth, R.(2006).Principal accomplishments: How school leaders succeed.New York:Teachers College Press.
19. Bogdan, R. C.、Biklen, S. K.、黃光雄譯(2001)。質性教育研究─理論與方法。嘉義市:濤石。
20. Bridges, J. W.(2003).Los Angeles, CA,University of California.
21. Brooks-Young, S.(2006).Critical technology issues for school leaders.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin.
22. Chang, I.(2002).Assessing principals' leadership in implementing educational technology policies.2002 Research and Creative Activities Forum (RCAF),Columbia, MO:
23. Checkley, K.(2000).The contemporary principal: New skill for a new age.Education Update,42(3),1-6.
24. Collis, B.(1988).Computers, curriculum, and whole-class instruction.Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.
25. Cory, S.(1990).Can your district become an instructional technology leader?.School Administrator,Special Issue: Computer Technology Report,17-19.
26. Creighton, T. B.(2003).The principal as technology leader.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin.
27. Davis, F. D.(1989).Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology.MIS Quarterly,13(3),319-340.
28. Davis, F. D.,Bagozzi, R. P.,Warshaw, P. R.(1989).User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models.Management Science,35(8),982-1003.
29. Fishbein, M.,Ajzen, I.(1975).Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research.Boston, MA:Addison-Wesley.
30. Flanagan, L.,Jacobsen, M.(2003).Technology leadership for the twenty-first century principal.Journal of Educational Administration,41(2),124-142.
31. Ford, J. I.(2000).Lincoln, NE,University of Nebraska.
32. Fullan, M. G.,Stiegelbauer, S.(1991).The new meaning of educational change.New York:Teachers College Press.
33. Fuller, F. F.(1969).Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization.American Educational Research Journal,6(2),207-226.
34. Glatthorn, A. A.(2000).The principal as curriculum leader: Shaping what is taught and tested.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin.
35. Hall, G. E.,George, A. A.,Rutherford, W. L.(1977).Measuring stages of concern about the innovation: A manual for the use of the SoC Questionnaire.Austin, TX:Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
36. Hall, G. E.,Wallace, R. C.,Dossett, W. A.(1973).A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions.Austin, TX:The Research and Development Center for Teacher Education.
37. Hall, G., E.,Hord, S. M.(1987).Change in schools: Facilitating the process.Albany, NY:State University of New York Press.
38. Inkster, C. D.(1998).Minneapolis, MN,University of Minnesota.
39. Jewell, M. J.(1998).The art and craft of technology leadership.Learning and Leading with Technology,26(4),46-47.
40. Kearsley, G.(Ed.),Lynch, W.(Ed.)(1994).Educational technology: Leadership perspectives.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Educational Technology Publications.
41. Kuhl, J.(Ed.),Beckmann, J.(Ed.)(1985).Action-control: From cognition to behavior.Heidelberg, Germany:Springer.
42. Legris, P.,Ingham, J.,Collerette, P.(2003).Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model.Information & Management,40(3),191-204.
43. Marso, R. N.,Pigge, F. L.(1994).Outstanding teachers' concerns about teaching at four different stages of career development.annual conference of the Association of Teacher Educators,Atlanta, GA:
44. Pai, F. Y.,Huang, K. I.(2011).Applying the technology acceptance model to the introduction of healthcare information systems.Technological Forecasting and Social Change,78(4),650-660.
45. Pavlou, P. A.(2003).Consumer acceptance of electronic commerce: Integrating trust and risk with the technology acceptance model.International Journal of Electronic Commerce,7(3),101-134.
46. Perugini, M.,Bagozzi, R. P.(2001).The role of desires and anticipated emotions in goal-directed behaviours: Broadening and deepening the theory of planned behaviour.British Journal of Social Psychology,40(1),79-98.
47. Quinn, D. M.(1999).Columbia, MO,University of Missouri.
48. Ray, D.(1992).Educational technology leadership for the age of restructuring.The Computing Teacher,19(6),8-14.
49. Reinen, I. J.,Plomp, T.(1997).Information technology and gender equality: A contradiction in terminis?.Computers & Education,28(2),65-78.
50. Rich, J. M.(1992).Innovations in education: Reformers and their critics.Boston, MA:Allyn & Bacon.
51. Roca, J. C.,Chiu, C.M.,Martínez, F. J.(2006).Understanding e-learning continuance intention: An extension of the technology acceptance model.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,64(8),683-696.
52. Rogers, E. M.(2003).Diffusion of Innovations.New York:Free Press.
53. Ross, T. W.,Bailey, G. D.(1996).Technology-based learning: A handbook for teachers and technology leaders.Arlington Heights, IL:IRI/Skylight.
54. Schultz, L. E.(2000).Qualities of an exceptional leader.Human Systems Management,19(2),93-103.
55. Sergiovanni, T. J.(1992).Moral leadership: Getting to the heart of school improvement.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
56. Sheppard, B.(1996).Exploring the transforming nature of instructional leadership.Alberta Journal of Educational Research,42(4),325-344.
57. Siegel, J.(1995).The state of teacher training.Electronic Learning,14(8),43-53.
58. Stegall, P.(1998).The principal: Key to technology implementation.95th Annual Meeting of the National Catholic Education Association,Los Angeles, CA:
59. Thompson, M. L.(1963).Identifying anxieties experienced by student teachers.Journal of Teacher Education,14(4),435-439.
60. Travers, R. M. W.,Rabinowitz, W.,Nemovicher, E.(1952).The anxieties of a group of student teachers.Educational Administration and Supervision,38,368-375.
61. Van Der Leeuw, S. E.(Ed.),Torrence, R.(Ed.)(1989).What's new? A closer look at the process of innovation.Boston, MA:Unwin Hyman.
62. Vaughan, W.(2002).Professional development and the adoption and implementation of new innovations: Do teacher concerns matter?.International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning,6(5)
63. Venkatesh, V.(2000).Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating perceived behavioral control, computer anxiety and enjoyment into the technology acceptance model.Information Systems Research,11(4),342-365.
64. Venkatesh, V.,Bala, H.(2008).Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions.Decision Sciences,39(2),273-315.
65. Venkatesh, V.,Davis, F. D.(2000).A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies.Management Science,46(2),186-204.
66. 王振鴻(2000)。博士論文(博士論文)。臺北市，國立政治大學教育學系。
67. 吳清山(2007)。教育行政議題研究。臺北市:高等教育。
68. 吳清山、林天祐(2006)。教育名詞科技領導。教育資料與研究雙月刊，71，195-196。
69. 林志隆、王郁文(2006)。南區國小初級資訊種子教師創新接受度與資訊科技融入教學關注之相關研究。屏東教育大學學報，24，107-146。
70. 林明地(2003)。校長學：工作分析與角色研究取向。臺北市:五南。
71. 林煌凱(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學資訊教育研究所。
72. 社團法人中華民國資訊學會(2008)。教育部中小學資訊教育白皮書2008-2011。臺北市:教育部。
73. 邱郁文、方國定(2005)。整合知覺玩興構面擴充資訊科技接受模式─以入口網站為例。資訊管理展望，7(1)，37-54。
74. 邱慧玲(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺中市，國立臺中師範學院國民教育研究所。
75. 姜禮能(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。花蓮縣，國立花蓮師範學院國小科學教育研究所。
76. 施宏杰(2010)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北市，國立政治大學學校行政在職專班。
77. 紀清珍(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北市，臺北市立師範學院國民教育研究所。
78. 秦夢群、張奕華(2006)。校長科技領導層面與實施現況之研究。教育與心理研究，29(1)，1-27。
79. 耿慶瑞、黃增隆、汪志堅(2006)。互動性對科技接受模式之影響─以政府入口網站為例。商管科技季刊，7(3)，509-530。
80. 張明輝(2003)。卓越校長的關鍵能力。社教雙月刊，114，15-19。
81. 張奕華(2003)。美國中小學校長領導的新趨勢：科技領導。教育研究月刊，114，147-159。
82. 張奕華(2006)。科技領導理論基礎與培訓課程範例。教育研究月刊，150，59-74。
83. 張奕華(2010)。學校科技領導與管理：理論及實務。臺北市:高等教育。
84. 張奕華、吳怡佳(2008)。校長科技領導與教師教學效能關係之研究。教育研究與發展期刊，4(1)，171-194。
85. 張奕華、許丞芳(2009)。國民中小學校長科技領導指標建構之研究。教育行政與評鑑學刊，7，23-48。
86. 張盈霏(2005)。博士論文(博士論文)。臺北市，國立政治大學教育研究所。
87. 葉連祺(2003)。科技領導。教育研究月刊，112，151-152。
88. 臺北市政府教育局(2010)。資訊教育白皮書。
89. 劉亞平(1998)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺南市，國立臺南師範學院資訊教育研究所。
90. 蔡政道(2004)。臺灣、香港與新加坡資訊教育之比較研究。圖書館學與資訊科學，30(1)，114-131。
91. 謝文斌(2004)。論析中小學校長專業發展的新面向：科技領導。中等教育，55(5)，72-91。

1. 張瑞娥、洪榮昭(2018)。科技大學教師對職能融入教學政策之接受態度研究—以「產業職能基準系統」為中介環境。教育科學研究期刊，63(2)，251-284。