本研究旨在分析不同認知型態的特教師資班學員在網路互動式遠距學習系統上的使用態度與互動表現之差異，並進一步探討影響使用「網路互動式遠距學習系統」之相關因素。為達上述目的，研究者以八十七學年度就讀國立台灣師範大學進修推廣部暑期特教研究所四十學分班四年級的學員 (N= 34 )及國立台北師範學院學士後幼教學分班三年級選修特教組學員(N=43)為研究對象，並經實施「團體嵌圖測驗」後，分為高場地獨立與低場地獨立兩組。以研究者設計的「網路互動式遠距教學系統」、自編「教學活動前的問卷調查與測驗」、「使用態度問卷」與「互動表現分析表」為主要研究工具，所得資料以單因子變異數分析、卡方考驗、單因子多變項變異數分析及Pearson積差相關等統計方法進行資料分析。茲就研究結果說明如下：一、低場地獨立組與高場地獨立組對「網路互動式學習系統」使用態度有所差異。其差異主要表現在「對系統之評價」的態度分項上，且高場地獨立組對「網路互動式學習系統」持較正面肯定態度。二、低場地獨立組與高場地獨立組的互動表現差異如下：（一）二組在互動類型S-S（同儕間）的互動次數、字數未達到顯著差異，且不同的互動內容次數與字數亦無顯著差異。（二）二組在互動類型S-T（師生間）的互動次數達顯著差異，其差異主要表現在E (Engaging)與S (Statement) 互動內容向度上；互動字數亦達顯著差異，其差異主要表現在S (Statement) 互動內容向度上。三、影響特教師資班學員使用「網路互動式遠距學習系統」之相關因素的分析結果如下：（一）電腦網路使用經驗、電腦網路先備知識、性別、校別、認知型態等變項與使用態度、互動次數、互動字數之間無顯著相關。（二）電腦操作能力與互動字數之間有顯著相關。（三）使用態度與互動次數、互動字數之間有顯著的相關存在。在各內容向度與互動次數、字數的相關方面，「系統可使用性」與互動次數、字數之間有顯著的正相關；「對系統之評價」、「對自我學習過程的看法」與互動次數、字數之間則無顯著的相關。四、學員對「網路互動式遠距學習系統」的看法與建議（一）對於參與討論的方式感到便利，因為透過此系統可以表達自己的看法，而且提供老師與學員間的立即回饋。（二）適合身心障礙者使用，但須提供輔助器材。（三）未來特教的師資培育可部分採用此系統，以克服時間與空間上的限制。最後，本研究對上述研究結果加以討論之外，並綜合研究結論與研究限制，提出若干在建構電腦網路遠距教學及未來研究上的建議，以作為特殊教育網路遠距學習與研究之參考。

This study investigated the cognitive styles of special education teachers who participated in a technology class using an Interactive Internet Learning System (IILS), and explored their attitude toward IILS, the relationship among the factors in using IILS.The subjects were 34 members of in-service training class of special education in National Taiwan Normal University and 43 members of post-bachelor in-service study class of special education in National Taipei Teacher's College. A Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT) was used to assess of Filed-Dependent (FD) and Filed-independent (FI) cognitive style of the subjects. Besides, the major instruments for this research were “The Attitudes Questionnaire of members used IILS " "Table of Interactive Performance" which were developed by the researcher. The obtained data were analyzed by one-way ANOVA, Chi-square Test, two-way MANOVA and Pearson correlation. The results of this study were as the follows:1.There were differences between FD members and FI members within the attitude toward IILS. The main difference indicated on the subtest of evaluation for the system. The FI members scored higher than the FD members. The result indicated the FI members have positive attitude toward IILS. 2.The differences of interactive performance between the FD members and FI members were as the follows:(1)The type of interaction between members and members: there were no significant differences in the frequency and words of interaction between FD and FI members, and there were no significant differences between each item on interactive contents.(2) The type of interaction between members and teacher: there were differences in the frequency of interaction between FD members and FI members, the main difference indicated on the item of interactive contents of engaging and statement; there were differences in the words of interaction between FD members and FI members, the main difference indicated on the item of interactive contents of statement.3.The correlation of factors relevant to members used the IILS, which results as follows:(1)There were no signification correlation among the variances of computer experience, internet literacy, gender, school, cognitive style, used attitude, frequency of interaction and words of interaction.(2)There were positive correlation between operative ability of computer and interactive words.(3)There were positive correlation among used attitude, the frequency of interaction and words of interaction. Among the scales, the system of usefulness, the frequency of interaction and words of interaction. While the evaluation for the system and the views of self-learning no significant correlation with the frequency of interaction and words of interaction.4.The opinions and suggestions for IILS were summarized as follows.(1)The IILS used convenient for engaging discussion, because participants can present their own opinion through IILS that provide teacher and members with immediate feedback.(2)The system was appropriate for disabilities with assistive devices. (3) The future of teacher education class for special education can partly adopt IILS, solving the limitation of time and space.In addition, the limitation of research, suggestions for internet distance education with further research are also discussed in this study.

丁振豐（民78）：場地獨立性認知型式個別差異現象及其對教學歷程的影響之探討。台南師範學院學報，第22期，頁135-150。中央日報(民87）：遠距學位外位內修合法化。民國87年3月19日，第10版。尹玫君、劉蓁蓁（民86）：遠距教學理論與文獻之探討。初等教育學報（台南師範師院），第十期，頁21-80。王美音譯（民85）：擁抱未來－「資訊高速公路」未來新藍圖。台北市，遠流出版社。王華沛、周二銘（民86）：運用國家資訊通信基本建設增進肢體殘障同胞福利。資訊應用導航（經濟部技術處科技研究發展專案計畫成果），頁2-13。吳正己、林凱胤（民85）：電腦網路通訊與教師專業成長。視聽教育雙月刊，第6期第37卷，頁1-10。吳知賢（民78）：國小高年級兒童之人格特質、媒體偏好、科目興趣與其認知型態的關係。國立台南師範學院學報，第22期，頁29-54。吳裕益(民76)：認知能力與認知型態個別差異現象之探討。高雄師範學院，教育學刊，第7期，頁143-173。吳鐵雄（民85）：遠距教學系統於國小應用之研究：教學策略與學習行為之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。呂錘卿（民75）：談國民小學教師在職進修與現況。國教輔導，第30卷第4期，頁11-21。李淑芬（民86）：超本文網路合作學習環境中互動之研究。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。李麗君(民82）：從學習心裡探討隔空教學之成效。教學科技與媒體，第9期，頁3-7。沈添鉦（民85）：從社會認知觀點看閱讀超文體中的意義建構。嘉義師院國教所學報，第2期，頁362-355。周二銘、黃慶鑽、黃瑞瑛（民86）：遠距教學在殘障者居家職訓中之運用－以重度脊髓損傷者為例。就業與訓練，第2期第15卷，頁28-31。周倩、孫春在（民85）：遠距合作學習環境之設計與建立：CORAL經驗。教學科技與媒體，第26期，頁13-21。林奇賢（民86）: 全球資訊網輔助學習系統網際網路與國小教育。資訊與教育，第58期，頁2-9。林奇賢（民86）：全球資訊輔助學習系統網際網路與國小教育。資訊與教育，第58期，頁2-9。 林偉人（民84）：國小學生場地獨立性及至握信念對數學科電腦輔助教學學習成效之研究。國民教育研究集刊（台南師院），第1期，頁267-295。林清山（民74）：魏肯氏心裡分化理論相關問題之實證性研究。師大教育心理學報，第18期，頁39-54。林清達（民83）：國民小學教師之生涯規劃系列之一－進修篇。國教園地，第48期，頁17-24。林華（民85）：認知型態與遊歷輔助工具對超媒體學系統中使用者表現與態度之影響。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。邱俊宏（民85）：電子郵件虛擬教室建置與管理系統之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育研究所碩士論文財團法人交大思源基金會(民85）：遠距教學特展－什麼是遠距教學。〔WWW文件〕。URL http://spring.nii.nchc.gov.tw/Remote-Edu(瀏覽日期：民國87年3月21日)。馬德強（民85）：場地獨立性對全資訊網資料搜尋成效之研究。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士論文。張育誠（民85）：非同步電腦會議使用與人際發展之研究：以國立交通大學學生為例。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。張恬君（民85）：智慧型遠距合作學習環境之研究梁朝雲（民86）：以全球資訊網為基礎的遠距學習環境－簡介LEDA前導計畫的研發現況。教學科技與媒體，第34期，頁28-41。郭生玉（民82）：心理與教育測驗。台北市，精華書局。郭重吉（民76）：評介學習風格之有關研究。資優教育季刊，第23期，頁7-16。郭淑方、張基成（民87）：企業教育訓練實施遠距教學之途徑。中華民國遠距教育學會會刊，第7期，頁30-37。陳舜芬、丁志仁、洪儷瑜(民85）：師資培育於教師進修制度的檢討。教育研究所集刊，第37輯，頁40-100。陳嘉彌（民86）：網路互動式遠距教學策略之構念與可行性（上）。教學科技與媒體，第34期，頁42-46。曾淑容（民68）：我國高中學生性別、智力、創造力三者與場地獨立關係之研究。教育學院學報，第4期，頁251-280。黃仁竑﹑趙美聲（民86）：寬頻網路及時群播之實例探討：談中正大學先島系統之研發與維護。資訊與教育雙月刊，第58期，頁30-38。黃含綿（民86）：全動視訊會議系統互動模式與互動行為－以視訊會議遠距教學為例。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。楊家興（民84年）：隔空教育下的傳播科技：新舊教學媒體的省思。教學科技與媒體，第21期，頁5-12。經建新訊（民85）：美國資訊時代之教育發展新趨勢。〔WWW文件〕。URL http://cepd.spring.org.tw/News/inform/0927.htm(瀏覽日期：民國87年3月6日)。經濟部中央標準局、財團法人資訊工業策進會（民84）：NII 相關資訊及通訊國家標準研擬需求調查。齊立平（民85）：電子郵件的使用對組織傳播民主化的影響。國立交通大學傳播研究所碩士論文。潘文福（民86）：遠距在職研習系統初探。資訊與教育雜誌創刊10年特刊（台灣省政府教育廳），頁158-163。鄭建良（民86）：電腦網路在中小學遠距教育之應用探討。資訊與教育雜誌創刊10年特刊，頁111-118。魏丕信（民84）：不同介面表現形式及個人認知型態差異對使用超媒體資訊系統搜尋效果的影響。第四屆國際電腦輔助教學研討會論文集(頁21-27)。新竹：交通大學。鐘樹椽(民85）:遠距教學與教育訓練。教師之友，第3期第37卷，頁28-32。

Abouserie, R. &Moss, D. (1992). Cognitive style, gender, attitude toward computer-assisted learning and academic achievement. Educational Studies, 18(2), 151-160.Acker, S. R. &McCain, T.A. (1993). The contribution of interactivity and two-way video to successful distance learning applications: A literature review and strategies positioning. The Center for Study in Telecommunication. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio.Ahern, T. C. et al. (1992). The effects of teacher discussion in computer-mediated discussion. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(3), 291-309.Althaus, S. L. (1997). Computer-mediated communication in the university classroom: an experiment with on-line discussions. Communication Education, 46, 158-174.Ausburn, L. J. &Ausburn, F. B. (1978). Cognitive style: some information and implications for instructional design. Educational Communication and Technology: A Journal of Theory Research, and Development, 26(4), 337-354. Bates, A. W. (1995). Creating the future: developing vision in open and distance learning. In F. Lockood (Ed.), Open and distance learning today, 42-51. London: Routledge. Belton, B. (1994). A pilot study of interactions between teachers and senior students at the Brisbane school of distance education. (ERIC NO.390611)Berge, Z. L. &Collins, M. P. (1995). Computer mediated communication and the online classroom. New Jersey: Hampton.Brody, E. W. (1990). Communication tomorrow: new audiences, new technologies, new Media. New York: Praeger. Chen, L. L. (1997). Distance delivery systems in terms of pedagogical considerations: a reevaluation. Educational Technology, 37(4), 34-37.Cornish, M. &Monahan, B. (1996). A network primer for educators. Educational Technology, 34(2), 55-57.Fast, M. G. (1995). Interaction in technology－Mediated, multisite, foreign language instruction. (ERIC NO.385231)Ferris, P. (1997). What is CMC? An overview of scholarly definitions. [WWW document]. URL http://www.december.com/cmc/mag/1997/jan/ferris.html (visited 1998, Aug 17).Fowler, L. S. &Wheeler, D. D. (1995). Online form k-12 Classroom. In Z. L. Berge &M. P. Collins (Eds.), Computer Mediated Communication and online classroom. Vol. 1: Overview and perspectives. New Jersey: Hampton. Gunawardena, C. N. &Boverie, P. E. (1993). Impact of learning style on instructional design for distance education. (ERIC Document NO. ED359926)Harasim, L. (1990). Online education: an environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. In L. Harasim (Ed.), Online education: Perspectives on a new environment (pp. 39-63). New York: Praeger.Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., &Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: a field guides to teaching and learning online. MA: MIP press.Hatrman, K., Neuwirth, C. M., Kiesler, S., Sproull, L. Cochran, C., Plamquist, M. &Zubbrow, D. (1995). Patterns of social interaction and learning to write: A some effects of network technologies. In Z. L. Berge, &M. P. Collins (Eds.). Computer mediated communication. Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press Inc.Heeter, C. (1986). Implication of new interactive technologies for conceptualizing communication. In J. L. Salvaggio &J. Bryanr (eds.). Media Use of Information Age. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Hiltz, S. R. (1992). Constructing and evaluating a virtual classroom. In Martin Lea, (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp.188-208). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Hiltz, S. R. (1994). The virtual classroom: learning without limits via computer network. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Hsu, T. E. (1994). Effects of learner cognitive style and metacognitive tools information acquisition paths and learning in hyperspace environment (pp.291-306). (ERIC NO.ED373721).Ingram, A. L. (1995). Teaching with technology. Association Management, 48(6), 31-36.Joan, P. G. (1985). An investigation of relationship between field dependent-independent cognitive style, interpersonal orientation, and learning preference among head nurses and a selected group of staff nurses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Boston.Jonasen. D. H. &Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences learning and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum associates.King, J. C. (1995). Interaction in distance education setting. [WWW document]. URL http://www.ssu.missouri.edu/ssu/aged/narm/s-e-.htm (visited 1998, Aug 29).Lar, F. L., &James, D. K. (1992). The effects of search tool and cognitive style on performance in hypermedia database searches. Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the 1994 National convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology sponsored by research and theory division.Leidner, D. E., &Jarvenpass, S. L. (1995). The use information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view. MIS Quarterly, 19(3), 265-289.Lin, C. H. &Davidson, G. (1994). Effects of Linking structure and cognitive style on students' performance and attitude in computer-based hypertext environment. (ERIC NO.ED373734)Linda, P. T. & Joan, S. (1996) ：Technology and rural special education models and methods for preparing teachers. Paper presented at the meeting of rural goals 2000: building program that work, Kansas State University.Liu, M. &Reed, W. (1994). The relationship between the learning strategies and learning styles in a hypermedia environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 10(4), 419-434.Liu, M. &Reed, W. M. (1994). The relationship between the learning strategies and learning style in a hypermedia environment. (pp.1-12). (ERIC NO.ED372727)Main, R. G. &Riise, E. (1995). A study of interaction in distance learning. (ERIC Document NO. ED383282)Mason, R. (1994). Using communications media in open and flexible learning. London: kogan Page. McDonald J. &Gibson, C. C. (1998). Interpersonal dynamics and group development in computer conferencing. The American Journal of Distance Education, 12 (1), 7-25. Messick, S. (1976). Personality consistencies in cognition and creativity. In S. Messick (Ed.), Individuality in Learning (pp.4-22). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Moore, M. (1993). Three type of interaction. In H. Keith, J. Magnus, &D. Keegan(eds). Distance education: New perspectives. New York: Routledge. Oliver, R., &McLoughlin, C. (1997). Interaction patterns in teaching and learning with live interactive television. Journal of Education Media, 23(1), 7-24.Oliver, R., &McLoughlin, C. (1997). Interactions in audiographics teaching and learning environments. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11(1), 34-54.Phillips, G., Santoro, G., &Kuehn, S. (1995). The use of computer-mediated communication in training student group problem-solving and decision-makig techniques. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2(1), 38-51.Puetras, J. J. (1994). Regulatory enhancement, infrastructure modernization, and Connecticut's establishment of a statewide, interactive, distance learning interconnection. (ERIC NO.378818)Qutami ,Y. &Abujaber, 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), 63-74.Reynolds, K. E., &Barba, R. H. (1996). Science, interactivity, and mediated communication. Science Scope, 19(6). 12-15.Rice, R. E. &Williams, F. (1984). Theories of old and new: the study of new media. In R. E. Rice &Associates, The new media communication research and technology. Bevery Hills: sage. Roberston, I. T. (1982). Individual differences in formation processing strategy and style. Paper presented at the of the international conference on Man/Machine Systems (pp.85-88), London, Rogers, E. M (1986). Communication technology: the new Media in society. New York: Free Press.Santoro, G. M. (1995). What is computer-mediated communication. In Z. L. Berge &M. P. Collins (Eds.), Computer Mediated Communication and online classroom. Vol. 1: Overview and perspectives. New Jersey: Hampton.Selnow, G. W. (1988). Using interactive computer to communicate scientific information. American Behavior Scientist, 32(2), 124-135.Smith, E. E. (1987). Interactive video: An examination of use and effectiveness. Journal of Instructional Development, 10(2), 2-10.Stanton, N. A., &Baber, C. (1992). An investigation of styles and stregies in self-directed learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 1(4), 147-167.Steuer, J. (1992). Defining virtual reality: dimension-determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93. Weller, H.G. et al. (1994). The relationship of contructivism and instructional design. Educational Technology, 31(9), 38-40.Williams, E.U., Gold, V., &Russell, S. C. (1995). Distance education as future trend for pre and inservice education. Paper presented at the meeting of Reaching to the Future：Boldly Facing Challenges in Rural Communities, American Council on Rural Special Education(ACRES).Williams, F., Rice, R. E., &Rogers, E. M. (1988). Research methods and the new Media. New York: Free Press.Witkin, H. A. (1978). Cognitive style in personal and cultural adaptation (vol. XI). 1977 Heinz Werner lecture series. Worcester, MA: Clark University.Witkin, H. A., &Goodenough, D. R. (1977). Field-dependence and interpersonal behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 661-689. Witkin, H. A., &Goodenough, D. R. (1981). Cognitive style. New York: International Universities Press, Inc.Witkin, H.A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R &Cox, P.W. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive style and theireducational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47, 1-64. Witkin, H.A., Oltman, P.K., Raskin, E. &Kaerp, S.A.（1971）. A Manual for the Embedded Figures Tests. California: Consulting psychologist Press Inc.