本研究的目的在發展一套問題導向的教材發展系統和分析教師發展之問題式教材。在系統方面，探討系統的適用性和可用性以及對於以問題為主的方式來呈現教材的看法。在問題式教材方面，探討六位教師發展的問題數量和各問題題幹使用率。另外，也針對不同性質的教材單元，分析其問題題幹使用率。
本研究結果如下：
一、系統方面：教師們認為系統功能能符合需求，介面設計仍有改善的空間，大致上滿意系統的整體設計。系統所提供問題類型、問題難度和問題題幹是適用的。
對於問題題幹，建議新增操作型的題幹和刪除使用率低於1%的題幹。對於以問題為主的方式來呈現教材持正面肯定，認為其能促使教師朝向高層次的方向命題，也能促進學生高階思考。認知及情意性的電腦課程適合發展成問題式教材，技能性電腦課程則不適合。
二、問題式教材方面：六位教師共拆解了173題，平均一位28.8題。問題題幹使用率最高的是「什麼是...？」，次高的是不採用King學者所提供的十九個問題題幹改採自行命題的方式編寫問題，足以顯示此十九個問題題幹需要新增題幹以供電腦教師在編寫問題式教材使用。使用率最低的問題題幹「．．．如何造成．．．？」其使用率為0%，顯示此題幹不符電腦教師在編寫問題式教材使用，故建議刪除此問題題幹。偏重認知記憶的單元（題幹使用率為89.5%）比偏重操作導向的單元（題幹使用率為82.3%）易於使用本研究的問題題幹命題。

The goal of this study is to develop a question-oriented system for the development of online instructional materials and a question-based instruction material for the analysis of teacher development. With regards to the system used, the study provides a discussion on the applicability and feasibility of systems and presents the author’s views on the materials through question stems and question-based formats. On the topic of question-based instruction material, the study has focused on the number of questions developed by six teachers and the frequency of each question stems used. In addition, the study will also give an analysis of the usage frequency of question stems based on different types of materials.
The findings of the study are as follow:
1. Regarding the system: the teachers were of the opinion that though the functions of the system were adequate to meet the demands, the interface design still has room for further improvement. Generally speaking, the teachers were satisfied with the overall design of the system. The question types, their difficulties and stems were considered appropriate for its targets. As for question stems, it was suggested that new question stems of the operating stems be added to the system and stems that had below 1% of usage frequency be deleted from the system. The teachers also expressed positive recognition for the materials to be presented in a question-based format and believed that it would promote teachers to elevate their question making abilities to a higher level, which in turn will help their students to develop high level thinking abilities. Cognitive and affective computer courses are more suitable to be developed as question-based instruction material; those that place more emphasis on skill developments are not.
2. Regarding question-based instruction material: a total number of 173 questions were taken apart by six teachers together; an average of 28.8 question per person. Question stem of “what is the meaning of…?” came out to be the most frequently used among them. However, the next 19 question stems in the ranking were not the ones provided by King; they were self-made questions by the teachers who participated in the study. This is sufficient to show that we should add more questions stems to the system for computer teachers to write question-based instruction material. “How does …effect…?” became the question stem with the lowest usage at 0%. In other words, it is not suitable for the creation of question-based instruction materials and should be removed from the system. The study also found that materials that placed more emphasis on recognition and memorization (question stem usage frequency of 89.5%) appeared to be applied in the question making from the question stems provided in this research than the materials that focused on operating orientation (question stem usage frequency of 82.3%).

杜宜展(民85)。國小學生發問行為及其相關因素之研究。台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系碩士。
張玉成(民88)。教師發問技巧。台北：心理出版社。
蔡佩貞(民92)：改進圖形與提問對六年級學生學習人體血液循環之影響。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
Barden, M.B. (1995). Effective questioning and the ever-elusive higher-order questions. The American Biology Teacher, 57, 423–426.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: Longman & Green.
Dillon, J. T. (1988). The remedial status of student questioning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20 (3), 197–210.
Dillon, J. T. (1988). Questioning and Teaching: A Manual of Practice. London:. Croom Helm.
Dori,Y.J. and Herscoritz,O.(1999).Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,36(4),411-430.
Edwards, S., & Bowman, M.A.(1996). Prompting student learning through questioning：A study of classroom question. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching,7(2),3-24.
Gall, M. (1970). The use of questions in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 40, 707-720.
Graesser, A. J. and Person, N.K.(1994).Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31,104-137.
Hunkins, F. (1995). Teaching thinking through effective questioning (2nd ed.). Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon.
King, A.(1989). Effects of self-questioning training on college student’s comprehension of lectures. Contemporary Education on psychology, 14,366-381.
King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27, 111-126.
King, A., & Rosenshine, B.(1992). Effects of guided cooperative questioning on children’s knowledge construction. Journal of Experimental Education,61(2),127-148.
Morgan, N., and Saxton, J. (1991). Teaching, Questioning, and Learning. New York: Routledge.
Pizzini, E.L. & Shepardson, D.P.(1992). Student questioning interactions in the presence of the teacher during problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 91(8), 348-352.
Rosenshine,B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S.(1996). Teaching students to generate questions：A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66,181-221.
Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1992). Text-based and knowledge-based questioning by children. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 177–199.
Shodell, M. 1995. The question-driven classroom. The American Biology Teacher, 57:278-281.
Watts, M., Gould, G. & Alsop, S(1997). Questions of understanding： Categorising pupils’ questions in science. School Science Review, 79,57-63.
Watts, M., Gould, G., Alsop, S., and Walsh, A.(1997). Prompting teachers’ constructive reflection：pupils’questions as critical incidents. International Journal of Science Education, 19,1025-1037.
Wragg,E., and Brown, G.(2001). Questioning in the Primary School. UK:Routledge