摘 要
　　互動式電子白板是眾多ICT產品中的一種，它是教學工具，也是學習的工具，互動式電子白板內建的特殊功能和教學軟體可以活化教師教學效果，提升學生學習成效。
　　科技接受模式相關研究指出資訊科技產品的知覺有用性、知覺易用性是使用者接受此產品之關鍵因素。教育部積極推動資訊融入教學中的互動式電子白板可以視為資訊科技產品的一種，桃園縣國民小學教師所知覺到互動式電子白板的知覺易用性、知覺有用性，應為教師願意使用互動式電子白板的關鍵因素。本研究以Davis(1989)「科技接受模式」為理論基礎，實證探討影響桃園縣國民小學教師使用互動式電子白板的行為意願因素。
　　本研究利用問卷蒐集資料，進行資料分析與驗證假說，經過結構方程式模式分析，結果發現模式適配度良好。本研究將研究結果整理後提出以下幾點結論，以提供未來的研究者或相關單位作為參考：
一、桃園縣國民小學教師在使用互動式電子白板時，教師對於互動式電子白板的「知覺有用性」並不會因為學校規模、性別、年齡、職務、教育程度及服務年資而有所差異，但是會因「是否有參加過互動式電子白板研習活動」而有差異。
二、桃園縣國民小學教師在使用互動式電子白板時，教師對於互動式電子白板的「知覺易用性」並不會因為學校規模、年齡、職務、教育程度、服務年資及是否有參加過互動式電子白板研習活動而有所差異，但是會因「性別」不同而有差異。
三、桃園縣國民小學教師的背景變項，不論在環境變項與個人背景變項，在「使用態度」上，均無顯著差異。
四、桃園縣國民小學教師的背景變項，不論在環境變項與個人背景變項，在「行為意願」上，均無顯著差異。
五、桃園縣國民小學教師在使用互動式電子白板時，個人所知覺的「知覺有用性」、「知覺易用性」、「使用態度」對於使用互動式電子白板的「行為意願」有顯著預測效果。

Abstract
Interactive whiteboard is one of useful ICT tools. It not only can be used to increase the efficiency of teaching to teachers, but also make the curriculum more interesting.
TAM (technology acceptance model) theory was created by Davis in 1989, it shows that the usefulness, ease of use of information technology (IT) products are two key factors to change users’ adoption of that. As in Taoyuan County, the willingness of use to the interactive whiteboard may be influenced by the usefulness and ease of use which perceived by the teachers of elementary schools. In this study, the data were collected and analyzed by the questionnaire designed by researcher. After analyzing data with the Structural Equation Model (SEM),the results show that the research model was supported by the data and all hypotheses were accepted. The following conclusions were drawn from this study:
1.The Perceived of Usefulness (PU) of teachers in elementary schools to the interactive whiteboard was significant, positively related to conference attendance of teachers.
2.The Perceived Ease of use (PEOU) of teachers in elementary schools to the interactive whiteboard was significant, positively related to the gender of teachers.
3.The Attitude toward Use (AU) of teachers in elementary schools to the interactive whiteboard was not significant, negatively related to teachers’ background.
4.The Behavior Intention (BI) of teachers in elementary schools to the interactive whiteboard was not significant, negatively related to teachers’ background.
5.The BI of teachers in elementary schools to the interactive whiteboard was forecasted by the perception of PU, PEOU and AU of teachers.

參考文獻
壹、中文部份
王全世（1990）。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。
朱南旭（2007）。高雄市國小學童電腦網路學習的使用意願及其相關影響
因素之探討。國立台南大學教育系科技發展與傳播研究所碩士論文，
未出版，台南市。
林儀惠（2008）。互動式電子白板在國小數教學之探討-以國小數學領域五年級
面積單元為例。亞洲大學資訊工程學系碩士論文，未出版，台中縣。
周孝俊（2008）。互動式電子白板學習活動設計和實驗。國立花蓮教育大學學
習科技研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮縣。
周世雄（2009）。國中小教師應用互動式電子白板教學之創新接受度與科技
接受度之相關研究－以屏東縣e化示範點學校為例。國立屏東教育大
學教育科技研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東市。
桃園縣政府教育處（2010）。ICT教育遠景。2010年5月31日。取自http://
www.tyc.edu.tw/files/enc/ict/ep1.html
陳怡辰（2007）。以計劃行為理論和科技接受模式探討知識分享。國立成
功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，台南市。
陳振榮（2002）。資訊科技融入國小數學科教學對學童學習成就與態度影
響之研究。國立台中師範學院數學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台中
市。
陳宗永（2003）。電腦輔助教具對於國小四年級學童在「時間概念」學習
成效與學習態度之影響。國立台中師範學院數學教育學系碩士論文，
未出版，台中市。
陳世昌（2004）。有K12網路教學平台使用經驗之教師對K12網路教學平台
之接受度研究。元智大學資訊社會學研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園
縣。
陳惠邦（2006）。互動白板導入教室教學的現況與思考。張家宜（主持人），
資訊時代的創新與學校經營。全球華人資訊教育創新論壇，淡江大學
蘭陽校區。
陳惠邦（2007）。以互動白板實踐互動教學理想的可能性：教師社群與專業
發展觀點。2009年12月31日。取自http://tw.classf0001.urlifelinks.com/
css000000011129/cm7kfile-1178758083-9008-7368.doc
陳韻雯（2009）。桃園縣國民小學教師使用互動式電子白板之調查研究。國立
臺北教育大學國民教育學系教育事業創新經營碩專班碩士論文，未出版
，台北市。
許士軍（2001）。管理學。台北市：東華書局。
張春興（1993）。心理學。台北市：東華書局。
張碧桃（2005）。以科技接受模式探討國民小學採用學務系統之研究-以台
中縣為例。靜宜大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文，未出版，台中縣。
曾道明（2009）。新竹縣國民小學教職員使用校務行政系統之科技接受模式
研究。國立新竹教育大學教育學系研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
楊惠合（2004）。以科技接受模型探討數位學習滿意度之研究。大葉大學
資訊管理學系碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
網奕資訊（2006）。高效能e化教室建議方案—互動式電子白板。2010年1
月30日，取自：http://www.habook.com.tw/habook_epaper/2006/
950731_IWB/950731_IWB.htm.
鄭皓元（2006）。資訊融入國小數學科教學效益之探究-以六年級面積概念
為例。國立臺中教育大學數學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台中市。
劉昌鈞（2007）。以延伸科技接受模式探討學務系統使用行為之研究。大
葉大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
劉柏廷（2006）。科技接受模式結合計劃行為理論與科技接受模式，科技接
與使用統一理論之實證分析與比較：以台北市停車收費採用PDA為
例。國立交通大學運輸科技與管理學系碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
蕭英勵（2007a）。探討中小學將互動式電子白板導入教學之策略。全國教
師在職進修資訊網-電子報(e論壇)，2。2009年12月31日。取自
http://inservice. edu. tw/EPaper/200712/indexView.aspx?EID=48
蕭英勵（2007b）。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（2008）。互動式電子白板導入校園之省思與策略。全國教師在職
進修資訊網-電子報(e論壇)，2。2009年12月7日，取自http://inservice.
edu.tw/ EPaper/200712/indexView.aspx?EID=62
蘇伯方（2004）。即時傳訊軟體採用模式之研究。國立中山大學傳播管理
研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
貳、英文部分
Agarwal, R. and J. Prasad(1997). The Role of Innovation Characteristics and
Perceived Voluntariness in the Acceptance of Information Technplogies,Decision
Sciences,28(3),557-582.
Apperson, J. M., Laws, E. L., and Scepansky, J. A. (2004).The impact of presentation graphics on students’ experience in the classroom. Computers and Education, 47,116-123.
Apple Computers. (1995). Teaching, learning, and technology: A report on 10 years of ACOT research. Retrieved September 1, 2009 from http://www.
apple.com/education/k12/leadership/acot/library.html
Ajzen, I.(1985). From Intention to actions: A theory of planned Action control: From cognition to behavior Kuhl,Julius;Beckmann,Jürgen. Berlin and New York:Springer-Verlag ,11-39.
Austin N. (2003). Mighty white. The Guardian, 7 January 2003.
Ball B. (2003). Teaching and learning mathematics with an interactive whiteboard. Micromaths 19, 4–7.
Bagozzi, R. P., and Yi, Y.(1988). ”On the Evaluation for Structural Equation
Models,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16, 74-94.
Beauchamp, G. (2004). Teacher Use of the Interactive Whiteboard in Primary Schools: towards an effective transition framework.Technology, Pedagogy and Education,13(3), 327-348.
Blane D. (2003). Access across the board. Times Educational Supplement, 7 March 2002.

Branzburg, J. (2006). Use an interactive whiteboard: Get a handle on how this technology can spice up the classroom. Technology and Learning, 26(6), 31.
British Educational Communications and Technology Agency [BECTA] (2003) .
What the research says about interactive whiteboards.
Boyle J. (2002). Virtual magic. Times Educational Supplement, 26 April 2002.
Butler, J. B., and Mautz, D. (1996).Multimedia presentations and learning: A
laboratory experiment. Issues in Accounting Education, 11, 259-280.
Butler, L. L. (2005). Chalk, what chalk? Journal of Physical Education Recreationand Dance, 75, 12-13.
Carson L. (2003). Board work, not boring. Times Educational Supplement, 9 ,May 2003.
Chin, W.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, 19(2), 237-246.
Cogill J. (2002). The use of interactive whiteboards in the primary classroom: what is effective practice and how does this relate to effective practice in teaching with ICT? Becta Research Conference 2003: Proving Effective Practice with ICT, TUC Congress Centre, London. Retrieved from
http://www.becta.org.uk/research/research.cfm?section=1andid=2854.
Cooper, R. B. and R. W. Zmud(1990). Information Technology Implementation
Research: a Technological Diffusion Approach,Management Science ,26(2),
123-139.
Culp, K. M., Honey, M., and Mandinach, E. (2003, October) A retrospective on twenty years of education technology policy. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Technology.
Davis, F. D.(1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3),319-339.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. and Warshaw, P. R.(1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology：A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science,35(8), 982-1002.
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P. and Warshaw, P. R.(1992). Extrinsic and Intrinsic
Motivation to Use Computers in the Workplace.Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 22(14),1111-1132.
Demetriadis, S., Barbas, A., Molohides, A., Palaigeorgiou, G., Psillows, D., Vlahavas, I.,et al. (2003). “Cultures in negotiation:” Teachers’ acceptance/ resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools. Computers and Education, 41, 19-37.
Driscoll, M. P. (2002). How people learn (and what technology might have to do with it. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED470032) .
Dwyer, D. (1994). Apple classrooms of tomorrow: What we’ve learned.
Educational Leadership,7(51), 4-10.
Edwards J.-A., Hartnell M. and Martin R. (2002) Interactive whiteboards: some lessons from the classroom. Micromaths,18, 30–33.
Ekhaml L. (2002). The power of interactive whiteboards. School Library Media Activities Monthly, XVIII, 35–37.
Fichman, R. G.(1992). Informaton Technology Diffusion: A Rview of Empircal
Research,Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Information
System,Dallas.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I.(1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research.Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Frey, B. A., and Birnbaum, D. J. (2002).Learners’ perceptions on the value of PowerPoint in lectures (Report No. IR 021417). University of Pittsburgh. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED467192) .
Furr, P. F., Ragsdal, R., and Horton, S. G. (2005). Technology’s non-neutrality: Past lessons can help guide today’s classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 10, 277-287.
Gage J. (2002). So what is an electronic whiteboard? Should you want one? Micromaths ,18, 5–7.
Gentry, L. and Cantalone, R(2002). A Comparison of Three Models to Explain
Shop-Bot Use on the Web. Psychology and Marketing,19(11), 945-955.
Gefen, D., Karahanna, E., Straub, D.W.(2003). Trust and TAM in online shopping: an integrated model. MIS Quarterly,27, 51–90.
Gerard, F., Green, M., and Widener, J. (1999, February). Using SMART board in foreign language class. Paper presented at Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education Conference, Antonio, TX.
Glover D. and Miller D. (2001). Running with technology: the pedagogic impact of the large scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10, 257–276.
Glover, D. and Miller, D. (2003). Players in the Management of Change: introducing interactive whiteboards into schools. Management in Education, 17 (1), 20-23.
Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D. and Door, V. (2005). The interactive whiteboard: a literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(2), 155-170.
Goodhue, D. L. and Thompson, R. L.(1995). Task-Technology Fit and Individual
Performance.MIS Quarterly,19(2),213-236.
Goodison T. (2002a). ICT and attainment at primary level. British Journal of Educational Technology 33, 201–211.
Goodison T. (2002b). Learning with ICT at primary level. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 18, 282–29.
Hairs, Jr. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W.C.(1998). Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed. New York: Macmillan.
Hall, I., and Higgins, S. (2005). Primary school students’ perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 102-117.
Hayduk, L. A.(1987). Structural equations modeling with LISREL: Essentials
and Advances. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Henderson, H. (1999). Issues in the Information Age. San Diego, CA: Lucent Books.

Heide, A., and Henderson, D. (2001). Active learning in the digital age classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hung-Pin Shih(2004). Extended technology acceptance model of Internet utilization behavior.Information and Management,41,719–729.
Johnson C. (2002) The writing’s on the board. Educational Computing and Technology, September, 58–59.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D.(1996). LISREL: A Guide to the Program and Applications(3th ed).
Karahanna, E., D. W. Straub,and N. L. Chervany(1999). Information Technology
Adoption across Time:A Cross-Sectional Comparison of Pre-Adoption and
Post-Adoption Beliefs.MIS Quarterly,23(2),183-213.
Kennewell, S. (2001). Interactive Whiteboards – Yet another Solution Looking for a Problem to solve? Information Technology in Teacher Education, 39, 3-6.
Kennewell, S. and Morgan, A. (2003). Student teachers’ experiences and attitudes towards using interactive whiteboards in the teaching and learning of young children, in: Proceedings of Young Children and Learning Technologies Conference (Sydney, International Federation for Information Processing).
Kimberly, J. R. and Evanisko, M. J.(1981). Organizational Innovation: The
Influence of Individual,Organizational,and Contextual Factors on Hospital
Adoption of Technological and Administrative Innovations.Academy of
Management Journal,24(4),689-713.
Kirkwood, A., and Price, L. (2005). Learners and learning in the twenty-first century: What we know about students’ attitudes towards and experiences of information and communication technologies that will help us design courses? Studies in Higher Education, 30, 257-274.
Koeber, C. (2005). Introducing multimedia presentations and a course website to an introductory sociology course: How technology affects student perceptions of teaching effectiveness. Teaching Sociology, 33, 285-300.

Kwon, T.H. and R.W. Zmus.(1987). Unifying Fragmented Models in Information Systems Implementation. John-Wiley: Information Systems, Series.
Lammers, J. and Fox, E.(1991). Predicting breast self-examination using
Fishbein's theory of reasoned action, Wellness Perspectives, 8(2), 3-12.
Landis, M. (2005, March/April). Eight ways to integrate whiteboard into instruction. Media and Methods, 41, 4.
Latham P. (2002). Teaching and Learning Mathematics: the Impact of Interactive Whiteboards – Results of the North Islington Education Action Zone RM Easiteach Mathematics Project. BEAM Education, London.
L. D. Chen, M. L. Gillenson, D. L. Sherrell(2002). Enticing online consumers: an extended technology acceptance perspective.Information and Management,39,705–719.
Lee M. and Boyle M. (2003). The Educational Effects and Implications of the Interactive Whiteboard Strategy of Richardson Primary School. Richardson Primary School: ACT, Australia, Retrieved from http://www at:.richardsonps.act.edu.au/RichardsonReview_Grey.pdf.
Levy P. (2002) Interactive whiteboards in learning and teaching in two Sheffield schools: a developmental study. Retrieved from http://www.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards. htm.
Loschert, K. (2004, September). Bye, bye, blackboard. NEA E-News. Retrievedon July 31, 2006, Retrieved from http://www.teachsmart.
org/teachingSmarter/Presentation_Notes.asp.
Mackall, P. (2004). Interactive whiteboards enhance the learning experience fordeaf, hard-of-hearing students. THE Journal, 31(10), 64-66.
Mathieson, K.(1991). Predicting user intentions: comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior.Information Systems Research,2(3),173–191.
Moore, G. C. and I. Benbasat.(1991). Development of an Instrument to Measure the perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation. Information Systems Research,2(3),192-222.
Morgan, A. E. and Kennewell, S. E. (2006). Initial teacher education students’ views onplay as a medium for learning—a divergence of personal philosophy and practice.Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(3), 307-320.
Owens, R. G.(1991). Organizational Behavior in Education.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Plouffe, C. R., J. S. Hulland, and M. Vandenbosch(2001). Research
Report:Richness versus Parsimony in Modeling Technology Adoption
Decisions-Understanding Merchant Adoption of a Smart Card-Based
Payment System.Information Systems Research,12(2),208-222.
Prescott, M. B.(1995). Diffusion of Innovation Theory:Borrowings, Extensions and
Modifications from IT Researchers.Data Base,26(2-3),16-19.
Raafat Saade, Bouchaib Bahli(2005). The impact of cognitive absorption on
perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use in on-line learning: an
extension of the technology acceptance model.Information and
Management,42,317–327.
Robbins, S. P.(1992). Organizational behavior.6th ed., Englewood Cliffs,
NJ:Prentice-Hall.
Rodrigues, S. (2003). Conditions pupil disposition, autonomy, and effective use of ICT in science classrooms. The Educational Forum, 67, 266-275.
Rogers, E. M.(1983). Diffusion of Innovations,3rd ed,New York:Free Press.
Smith H. (2001). Smartboard evaluation: final report. Retrieved from http://www.kented.org.uk/ngfl/whiteboards/report. Accessed 20th June 2009.
Stallard, C. H., and Cocker, J. S. (2001). The promise of technology in schools: The next 20 years. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press.
Susskind, J. E. (2005). PowerPoint’s power in the classroom: Enhancing students’ self-efficacy and attitudes. Computers, 45, 203-215.
Sutherland, R., Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Brawn, R., Breeze, N., and Gall, M., et al. (2004). Transforming teaching and learning: Embedding ICT into everyday classroom practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 413-425.
Szabo, A., and Hastings, N. (2000). Using IT in the undergraduate classroom: Should we replace the blackboard with PowerPoint? Computers and Education, 35, 175-187.
Szajna, B.(1996). Empirical evaluation of the revised technology acceptance model. Management Science, 42(1),85-92.
Taylor, S., and Todd, P. A.(1995). Understanding Information Technology Usage: a Test of Competing Models.Information Systems Research,6 (2）,144-176.
Thomas A. (2002). The white stuff. Times Educational Supplement, 11 October 2002.
Thomas A. (2003). Little touches that spell success. Times Educational Supplement, 23 May 2003.
Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., and Howell, J. M.(1991). Personal Computing:
Toward a Conceptual Model of Utilization.MIS Quarterly,15(1),124-143.
Triandis, H. C.(1971). Attitude and Attitude Change, John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
,New York.
Triandis, H. C.(1980). Values, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Behavior.Nebraska
Symposium on Motivation.University of Nebraska Press, Lincoin, NE,
1980,195-259.
Turman, P. (2005). The influence of instructional technology on students’ affect: Do course designs and biological sex make a difference. Communication Studies, 56, 109-129.
Vail, K. (2003). School technology grows up. American School Board Journal, 190(9), 34-37.
Venkatesh, V., and F. D. Davis(1996). A model of antecedents of perceived ease of use : Development and test.Decision Science,27,451-481.
Venkatesh, V., and Speier, C. (1999). Computer Technology Training in the
Workplace: A Longitudinal Investigation of the Effect of the Mood,
Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes ,79(1),1-28.

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., and Davis, F. D.(2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view.MIS Quarterly, 27(3),425-478.
Vincent S. Lai, Honglei Li(2005). Technology acceptance model for internet banking:an invariance analysis.Information andManagement, 42 ,373–386.
Walker D. (2002a). White enlightening Times Educational Supplement, 13 September 2002.
Walker D. (2002b). Meet whiteboard Wendy ,Times Educational Supplement, 13, September 2002.
Wall, K., Higgins, S., and Smith, H. (2005). ‘The visual helps me understand the complicated things’: Pupil views of teaching and learning with interactive whiteboards. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 851-867.
Wellington, J. (1999). Integrating multimedia into science teaching: Barriers and benefits. School Science Review, 81, 49-54.
Wheeler, S. (2001). Information and communication technologies and the changing role of the teacher. Journal of Education Media, 26, 11-17.
White, N., Ringstaff, C., and Kelley, L. (2002). Getting the most from technology in schools. (Report No. IR 021860). Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 471137).
Wiske, S. (2000).A new culture of teaching for the 21st century. In D. Gordon (Ed.), The digital classroom,Cambridge, MD: The Harvard Education Letter,69-77.
Wood C. (2001). Interactive whiteboards – a luxury too far? Teaching ICT 1, 2.
Zhang, S., and Deng, H. (2004). Perception of learning effectiveness in the multimedia classroom vs. the traditional classroom: A case study. Media Review, 11, 87-107.
Zhao, Y., and Cziko, G. A. (2001). Teacher adoption of technology: A perceptual control theory perspective. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 5-30.
Zint, M.(2002). Comparing three attitude-behavior theories for predicting science
teachers’ intentions.Journal of Research in Science Teaching ,39（9）, 819-844.
Ziolkowski, R. (2004, Jan/Feb). Interactive whiteboards: Impacting teaching
and learning. Media and Methods, 40(4), 44.