Jonassen（1991）呼籲「情境至上」後，教學設計界體認了在情境式學習的形式下，被學習知識可利用情境故事的方式加以轉化，也意識到情境這個元素對於有意義學習的重要。然而，將情境元素順勢利導地納入數位教材中，需要多年的教學設計經驗方能竟功，因而推廣不易。本研究聚焦在情境創設的處理手法設計環節上，試圖打造一個創設學習情境的便利工具。
本研究先以文獻探討方式提出情境故事導向數位教材處理手法之設計模式，並以快速雛型法（Rapid Prototyping）來發展電子績效支援系統（EPSS，Electornic Performance Support System）作為教學設計輔助工具。為確認本研究所提模式對於數位教材設計實務的協助，再請國內知名數位學習業者的資深教學設計人員進行EPSS系統試用，系統試用結果確認了本研究所發展的「情境故事導向數位教材處理手法設計模式EPSS」可有效協助數位教材設計人員構思情境故事導向數位教材的處理手法。
歸納文獻探討、快速雛型法、訪談及試用調查的結果，本研究提出以下結論：
1.情境故事導向數位教材以情境認知理論為基礎，可提供學習者有動機、會投入、能記憶、可遷移的學習情境，適於問題解決類的教學。
2.設計處理手法乃數位教材設計階段的首要工作，會決定教材知識設計與感知設計的骨幹，處理手法是數位教材能否成為情境式教學的關鍵點。
3.情境故事導向數位教材處理手法之設計模式利用角色、問題、任務、場景與資源五個元素，以及「1、決定學習者角色」，「2、決定問題與任務」與「3、決定場景與資源」三個步驟來創設學習情境，並獲致「提供擁有感」與「營造寫實氛圍」的效益。
4.「情境故事導向數位教材處理手法設計模式EPSS」能提供教學設計人員於構思處理手法的有效膺架。
5.未來「情境故事導向數位教材處理手法設計模式EPSS」的升級，可朝服務設計階段的全部工作來規劃，以提高系統的支援作用。

While Jonassen (1991) proclaimed that ‘Context is everything,’ instructional design professionals are more aware of the value of context elements to meaningful learning. For better learning retention as well as learning transfer, active knowledge should be embedded in contextualized scenarios of e-learning content. However, it takes many years to develop instructional design expertise in any of a wide variety of scenario-based e-learning content. The main purpose of this research is to shed light on how to design the crucial ‘treatment design’ of any scenario-based e-learning courseware with the scaffold of an Electornic Performance Support System (EPSS).
First, a literature review was conducted to generate a framework of scenario-based treatment design. Second, for supporting the framework, an EPSS by rapid prototyping approach was developed. Then senior instructional designers with famous e-Learning content providers in Taiwan evaluated this EPSS. Feedbacks from those participants showed that the scenario-based treatment design EPSS is useful to design treatment of scenario-based e-Learning courseware and easy to understand this technique.
Important conclusions drawn from the results of literature review, rapid prototyping, interview, and questionnaire survey are listed as following:
1.Scenario-based e-Learning courseware which is based on situated cognition theory could build up a motivated, engaging, memorable, and transferable learning context. It is best for problem-solving teaching.
2.The treatment design is the first job of e-Learning design phase and the main infrastructure of learning scenarios. The knowledge and perceptual design are decided by the treatment. It is also the key to make courseware become contextualized instruction.
3.There are five elements and three steps in the framework of scenario-based treatment design. The five elements include role, problem, task, resources and setting. The three steps are designed to (1) define learner’s role, (2) define problems and tasks as well as (3) define resources and settings. Instructional designers could use those steps to build up learning contexts and make courseware to gain the ownership and realism.
4.The scenario-based treatment design EPSS could scaffold instructional designers to generate better courseware treatments more quickly.
5.Future studies could focus on updating functions of this EPSS in supporting whole jobs of e-Learning design phase.

一、英文參考文獻
Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. Artificial Intelligence Communications, 7(1), 39-59
Abrahamson, C. E. (1998). Storytelling as a pedagogical tool in higher education. Education, 118(3), 440-451.
ACT (2002). ACT Model. Retrieved May 16, 2005, from http://tip.psychology.org/anderson.html
Ainsworth, S. (2003). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33(2-3), 131-152.
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1991). Computer-Based Instruction: Methods and Development (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3rd Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Allen, W. M. (2003). Michael Allen’s Guide to e-learning. NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Anderson, J. R. (1976). Language, Memory and Thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Applebaum, J. (2004). Learning with stories. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. Retrieved May 12, 2006, from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/storytelling/start.htm
Armstrong, A. (2002). Applying instructional design principles and adult learning theory in the development of training for business and industry. In P. L. Rogers (Ed.), Designing instruction for technology-enhanced learning (pp. 184-208). London, England: Idea Group.
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposal system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence, & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 89-195). New York: Academic Press.
Banerjy, A., & Scales, G. R. (2005). Interactive multimedia for learning performance. In S. Mishra & R. C. Sharma (Eds.), Interactive multimedia in education and training (pp. 47-59). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Barbazette, J.(2004). Instant case studies: How to design, adapt, and use case studies in training. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bardram, J. E. (2000). Scenario-based design of cooperative systems. Group Decision and Negotiation, 9(3), 237-250.
Batcher-Powell, L. M. (2005). Teaching, learning and multimedia. In S. Mishra & R. C. Sharma (Eds.), Interactive multimedia in education and training (pp. 60-72). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Berg, A. G. (2003). The knowledge medium: designing effective computer-based learning environment. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
Bergman, R. E., & Thomas, V. M. (1990). Managing interactive video/multimedia projects. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Biswas, G., Goldman, S., & Bransford, J. (1997). Anchored Interactive Learning Environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (1997) 8, 142-178.
Bowles, M. S. (2004). Relearning to E-Learn: Strategies for electronic learning and knowledge. Carlton, Victoria: Melbourne University Publishing.
Braden, R. A. (1996). The case for linear instructional design and development: A commentary on models, challenges, and myths. Educational Technology, 36(2), 5-23.
Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R .D., Hasselbring T.S., Kinzer, C. K., & Williams, S. M. (1990) . Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In M. Spector, M. C. Polson, & D. J. Muraida (Eds.), Automating instructional design: concepts and issues (pp. 115- 141). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1981). Handbook of procedures for the design of instruction (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publishing.
Browan, A. (1992, April). The cognitive basis of school restructuring. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition. and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-41.
Carroll, J.M. (1999). Five reasons for scenario-based design. Proceedings of the 32 nd Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. (Maui HI, 1999), IEEE Computer Society Press.
Carroll, J.M. (2000). Making use: Scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cennamo, K., & Kalk, D. (2005). Real World Instructional Design. Belmont, CA: Thomson-Wadsworth.
Chen, J. W., & Sheu, C. (1989). Software engineering: A new component for instructional software development. Educational Technology, 29(9), 9-15.
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3(3), 149-170.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2002). e-Learning and the science of instruction : Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Cleave, J. B. (1997). A storyline-based approach to developing management role-playing simulations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV) ( 1993). Designing learning environments that support thinking: The Jasper series as a case study. In T. M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning. NATO-ASI Series. London: Springer-Verlag.
Collins, A. S., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator Writer, 15(3), 6-11, 38-46.
Collins, A. S., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. F. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and Instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp.453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Criswell, E. L. (1989). The design of computer-based instruction. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Cunningham, J. B. (1984). Assumptions underlying the use of different types of simulations. Simulation & Games, 15, 213-234.
Daum, J. H. (2001). How scenario planning can significantly reduce strategic risks and boost value in the innovation chain. Retrieved April 29, 2006, from http://www.juergendaum.com/news/09_08_2001.htm
Dick, W. (1992). An Instructional Designer’s View of Constructivism. In M. Tomas Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A Conversation (pp.91-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The Systematic Design of Instruction (6th Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Dickelman, G. J. (2001). The case for creative abrasion: Experts speck out on knowledge management. Performance Improvement, 40(7), 9-15.
Dickelman, G., & Banerji, A. (1999). Performance support for the next millennium: A model for rapidly changing technologies in a global economy. HCI 1999 Conference: Munich, Germany.
Doolittle, P. E., McNeill, A. L., Terry, K. P., & Scheer, S. B. (2005). Multimedia, cognitive load and pedagogy. In S. Mishra & R. C. Sharma (Eds.), Interactive multimedia in education and training (pp. 184-212). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Doyle, W. (1990). Case Methods in Teacher Education. Teacher Education Quarterly, Winter, 7-15.
Driscoll, M. P. (2002). Psychological foundations of instructional design. In R. A. Reiser, & J. V. Dempsey, (Eds.). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 57-69). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Driscoll, M., & Carliner, S. (2005). Advanced web-based training strategies: Unlocking instructionally sound online learning. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer-John Wiley & Sons.
Duffy, T., & Cunningham, D. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170-198). New York: Macmillan.
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism? Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-72.
Floodman, T. (2004). Anchored learning. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. Retrieved April 29, 2006, from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/anchoredlearning/start.htm
Fripp, J (1993). Learning through simulations: A guide to the design and use of simulations in business and education. London: McGraw-Hill.
Gagné , R. M. (1993). Computer-based instructional guidance. In M. Spector, M. C. Polson, & D. J. Muraida (Eds.), Automating instructional design: Concepts and Issues (pp. 133-146). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Gagné R. M., & Briggs L. J. (1974). Principles of instructional design. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gagné, R. M. (1965). The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gagné, R. M. (1977). The conditions of learning ( 3rd Ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gagné, R. M., & Driscoll, M. P. (1989). Essentials of Learning for Instruction (2nd Ed.). Englewood. Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Gagné, R. M., & Rojas, A. (1984). Planning and authoring computer-assisted instruction lessons. In D. F. Walker & R. D. Hess (Eds.), Instructional software: Principles and perspectives for design and use (pp.57-67). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing
Gagné, R. M., Wager, W. W., & Rojas, A. (1981). Planning and authoring computer-assisted instruction lessons. Educational Technology, 21 (9), 17–26.
Gagné, R.M., & Glaser, R. (1987). Foundations in learning research. In R.M Gagné (Ed.), Instructional technology foundations (pp. 49-83). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gagné, RM (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gathany, N., & Stehr-Green, J. (2003). Scenario-based e-Learning model: A CDC case study. Retrieved Jan 10, 2005, from http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/apr2003/gathany.htm
Georgia Tech Research Institute. (2000). P-3 Maintainers Electronic Performance Support System (COSSI Announcement NO. 99-92036). Atlanta, GA: Ron Wagner
Gery, G. J. (1991). Electronic performance support systems: How and why to remake the workplace through the strategic application of technology. Boston, MA: Weingarten Publications.
Gibbons, A. S., & Fairweather, P. G. (1999). Computer-based instruction: Design and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Gillani, B B. (2003). Learning theories and the design of e-Learning environments. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America.
Gjedde, L. (2005). Designing for learning in narrative multimedia environments. In S. Mishra & R. C. Sharma (Eds.), Interactive multimedia in education and training (pp. 101-111). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Gredler, M. (1994). Designing and evaluating games and simulations: A process approach. Houston, Texas: Gulf Publishing.
Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). What is instructional design? In R. A. Reiser, & J. V. Dempsey, (Eds.). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 16-25). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Hannafin, M. J. (1989). Instructional strategies and emerging instructional technologies: Psychological perspectives. Canadian journal of Educational Communication, 18, 167-179.
Hannafin, M. J., & Peck, K. L. (1988). The design, development, and evaluation of instructional software. New York: Macmillan Publishing.
Harley, S. (1996). Situated learning and classroom instruction. In H. McLellan (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 113-122). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
Harper, B., Hedberg, J. Corderoy, B., & Wright, R. (2000). Employing cognitive tools within interactive multimedia applications. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.). Computers as cognitive tools (vol. 2): No more walls (pp. 165-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hertel, J. P., & Mills, B. J. (2002).Using simulations to promote learning in higher education: An introduction. Virginia: Stylus Publishing.
Horton, D. L., & Mills, C. B. (1984). Human Learning and Memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 35, 361-394
Hua, T. G. (2004). Exploring simulation in teaching and learning-Part 1: Games, simulation and simulation game. Retrieved July 02, 2005, from http://learningportal.tp.edu.sg/staffole/resources/PDF/simulation_Part1.pdf
ICUS (2006). elearning office safari. Retrieved May 10, 2006, from http://www.icus.net/home/LCA/index.htm
Ip, A., & Morrison, I. (2001). Learning objects in different pedagogical paradigms. Retrieved May 21, 2005, from http://users.tpg.com.au/adslfrcf/lo/LO(ASCILITE2001).pdf
Ivers, K. S., & Barron, A. E. (1998). Multimedia projects in education: Designing, producing, and assessing. Englewood, Colo: Libraries Unlimited
Iverson, K., & Colky, D. (2004). Scenario-based E-learning Design. Performance Improvement, 43(1), 16-22.
Johnson, E. B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: What it is and why it’s here to say. Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Jonassen, D. H. (1988). Preface. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (p.xi-xxi). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jonassen, D. H. (1995). Supporting communities of learners with technology: A vision for integrating technology with learning in schools. Educational Technology, 35(4), 60-63.
Jonassen, D. H. (2004). Learning to solve problem: An instructional design guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Jonassen, D. H.(1991). Thinking technology: Context is everything. Educational Technology, 31(6), 35-37.
Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002), Case-based reasoning and instructional design: Stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 65-77.
Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M., & Hannum, W. H. (1999). Task analysis methods for instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jonassen, D.H. (2006). Modeling with technology: Mindtools for conceptual change (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
Jones, K. (1988). Interactive learning events: A guide for facilitators. London: Kogan Page.
Keegan, M. (1995). Scenario educational software: Design and development of discovery learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Keirns, J. L. (1999). Designs for self-instruction: Principles, processes, and issues in developing self-directed learning. Mass: Allyn and Bacon.
Kindley, R. W. (2002). Scenario-based E-Learning: A step beyond traditional E-Learning. Retrieved November 21, 2005, from http://www.learningcircuits.org/2002/may2002/kindley.html
Kintsch, E. (1993). Principles of instruction from research on human cognition. In M. Spector, M. C. Polson, & D. J. Muraida (Eds.), Automating instructional design: concepts and issues (pp. 23-42). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Kolodner, J. L., Owensby, J. N., & Guzdial, M. (2004). Case-based learning aids. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communication and technology (2nd ed.) (pp. 829-861). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Koppett, K., & Richter, M. (2001). How to use storytelling to increase learning. Retrieved May 11, 2006, from http://www.thestorynet.com/articles_essays/storyuse.htm

LandMARC (2001). Retrieved May 10, 2006, from http://www.pcd-innovations.com/infosite/pcd2001/georgia_tech/pcd_competition_submission_form.htm
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lederman, L. C. (1984). Debriefing: A critical reexamination of the postexperience analytic process with implications for its effective use. Simulation & Games, 15, 415-431.
Lee W. W., & Owens, D. L. (2004). Multimedia-based instructional design: Computer-based training, web-based training, distance broadcast training, performance-based solutions. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Leffingwell, D. (1997). Calculating the Return on Investment from More Effective Requirements Management. American Programmer, 10(4), 13-16.
Lynn, L. E. Jr. (1999). Teaching and learning with cases: A guidebook. New York: Chatham House Publishers.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2002). Understanding conceptual change: A. commentary. In M. Limón & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 101-111). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48).Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
McLellan, H. (1996). Situated learning in the context of paradigms of knowledge and instruction. In H. McLellan (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 279-283). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
McLellan, H.（1996）. Situated learning：Multiple perspectives. In H. McLellan (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 5-17). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
Merrill, M. D. (1992). Constructivism and instructional design. Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A Conversation (pp. 99-114). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Merrill, M. D. (1994). Instructional design theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Merrill, M. D. (2001). First Principles of Instruction. Retrieved Fab 18, 2005, from http://www.id2.usu.edu
Merrill, M. D., & the ID2 Research Group (1996). Instructional transaction theory: Instructional design based on knowledge objects. Educational Technology, 36(3), 30-37.
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., & Kemp, J. E. (2004). Designing effective instruction (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Naidu, S. (2002). Designing and Evaluating Instruction for e-Learning. In P. L. Rogers (Ed.) Designing Instruction for Technology-Enhanced Learning (pp. 134-159). London, England: Idea Group Publishing.
NETg (2006). Sample business skills training: Project Management Scope. Retrieved April 12, 2006, from http://www.knowledgenet.com/courselibrary/demoourproducts.jsp#businessskills
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental Representations. New York: Oxford University Press.
Perkins, D. N. (1992). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? In M. Tomas Duffy & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A Conversation (pp.45-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Piskurich, G. M. (2000). Rapid instructional design– Learning ID fast and right. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer Publishers.
Polson, M. C. (1993). Cognitive theory as a basis for instructional design. In M. Spector, M. C. Polson, & D. J. Muraida (Eds.), Automating instructional design: concepts and issues (pp. 5-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Quinn, C. (2005). Engaging learning: Designing e-Learning simulation games. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design: What is it and why is it. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1996). A new paradigm of ISD? Educational Technology, 36(3), 13-20.
Reigeluth, C. M., & Merrill, M. D. (1979). Classes of instructional variables. Educational Technology, 19(3), 5-24.
Reiser, R. A., & Dick, W. (1996). Instructional Planning: A guide for teachers (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Richey, R. C. (2000). The future role of Robert M. Gagné in instructional design. In R. C. Richey (Ed.), The legacy of Robert M. Gagné (pp. 255-281). Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology.
Richey, R. C., & Morrison, G. R. (2002). Instructional Design In Business and Industry. In R. A. Reiser, & J. V. Dempsey, (Eds.). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 197-210). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Rieber, L. P. (2002). Supporting discovery-based learning within simulation. Retrieved August 12, 2005, from http://www.iwm-kmrc.de/workshops/visualization/rieber.pdf
Riesbeck, C. K., & Schank, R. C. (1989). Inside case-based reasoning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Riesbeck, C. K. (1996). Case-based teaching and constructivism: Carpenters and tools. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 49-61). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Roblyer, M. D. (1988). Fundamental problems and principles of designing effective courseware. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp. 7-33). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Romiszowski, A. J. (1984). Producing instructional systems: Lesson planning for individualized and group learning activities. London: Kogan Page.
Romiszowski, A. J. (1986). Developing auto-instructional materials. London: Kogan Page.
Rosson, M. B., & Carroll, J. M. (2002). Usability Engineering: Scenario-based development of human-computer interaction. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1975). Notes on a schema for stories. In D.G. Brown and A. Collins (Eds.), Representation and understanding : studies in cognitive science. (pp. 211-236). NEW YORK: Academic Press.
Sales, G. C. (2002). A Quick Guide to e-Learning: A How to Guide for Organizations Implementing e-Learning. Andover, MN: Expert Publishing.
Schank, R. C. ( 2002）Info-topia: Computers keep getting smarter. Can we? The American Spectator, 35(4), 28-30.
Schank, R. C. (1997). Virtual learning: A revolutionary approach to building a highly skilled workforce. New York: McGraw Hill.
Schank, R. C. (2002). Designing world-class e-Learning : How IBM, GE, Harvard Business School, and Columbia University are succeeding at e-Learning. NEW YORK: McGraw-Hill.
Schank, R. C., & Cleary, C. (1995). Engines for Education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1999). Learning by doing. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp.161-181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Schank, R. C., Fano, A, Bell, B, & Jona, M., (1993/1994). The design of goal-based scenarios. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(4), 305-345
Seels, B., & Glasgow, Z. (1990). Exercises in instructional design. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing Company.
Seels, B., & Glasgow, Z. (1998). Making instructional design decisions (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in Teacher Education (pp.1-30). NY: Teacher College Press.
Simonson, M. & Maushak, N. (1996). Situated learning, instructional technology, and attitude change. In H. McLellan (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 225-242). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J. (2005). Instructional Design (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Solomon, D. L. (2002). Rediscovering post-modern perspectives in IT: Deconstructing Voithofer and Foley. Educational Technology Research & Development, 50(1), 15-20.
Sternberg, R. J. & Spear-Swerling, L. (1996). Teaching for thinking. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. (2000). Teaching for successful intelligence: To increase student learning and achievement. Arlington Heights, Illinois: SkyLight Professional Development.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
Tessmer, M. & Richey, R. C. (1997). The role of context in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(2), 85-115.
Tessmer, M. (1990). Environment analysis: A neglected stage of instructional design. ETR&D, 38(1), 55-64.
Tessmer, M., Jonassen, D., & Caverly, D. C. (1989). A Nonprogrammer’s guide to designing instruction for microcomputers. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited.
Tindall-Ford, S.,Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3(4), 257-287.
Tripp, S., & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid prototyping: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology Research & Development, 38(1), 31-44.
Trop, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed.). Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD.
Uden, L. (2004). Editorial. International Journal of Learning Technology, 1(1), 1-15.
Uden, L., & Beaumon, C. (2006). Technology and Problem-Based Learning. PA: Idea Group.
Van Patten, J. (1989). What is instructional design? In K. A. Johnson & L. K. Foa (Eds.), Instructional design: New alternatives for effective education and training (pp. 16-31). New York: Macmillan.
Venezky, R. & Osin, L. (1991). The intelligent design of computer-assisted instruction. New York: Longman.
Wager, W. D., & Gagné, R. M. (1988). Designing computer-aided instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware (pp. 35-60). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wasserman, S. (1994). Introduction to case method teaching: A Guide to Galaxy. NY: Teachers college.
Weidenhaupt, K. (1998). Scenario in system development: Current practice. IEEE Software, 15(2), 34-35.
West, C. K., Farmer, J. A., & Wolff, P. M. (1991).Instructional design: Implications from cognitive science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Willis, J. (1995). A recursive, reflective instructional design model based on constructivist-interpretivist theory. Educational Technology, 35 (6), 5-23.
Wills, J., Hovey, L., & Hovey, K. G. (1987). Computer simulations: A sources book to learning in an electronic environment. New York: Garland Publishing.
Winn , W. (1996). Instructional design and situated learning：Paradox or partnership. In H. McLellan (Ed.), Situated learning perspectives (pp. 57-66). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
Woods, D. R. (2000). Helping yours students gain the most from PBL. In Temasek Centre for Problem-Based Learning (Ed.), Problem-based learning: Educational innovation across disciplines (pp.12-36). Singapore: Temasek Centre for Problem-Based Learning.

二、中文參考文獻
方吉正（民92a）。訊息處理理論與教學應用。見張新仁編：學習與教學新趨勢，頁287-306。臺北市：心理。
方吉正（民92b）。情境認知學習理論與教學應用。見張新仁編：學習與教學新趨勢，頁345-402。臺北市：心理。
方德隆等譯（民90）。統整課程的設計：證實能增進學生學習的方法。高雄市：麗文。
王美音譯（民87）。知識創新之泉：智價企業的經營，李奧納德．巴登著。臺北市：遠流。
王麗雲（民88）。個案教學法之理論與實務。課程與教學季刊，2（3），117-134。
任東屏（民93）。R.J. Sternberg的智能理論解析及其在教學上的涵義。臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
余民寧（民86）。有意義的學習：概念構圖之研究。臺北市：商鼎文化。
余民寧（民91）。線上認知診斷評量模式之研究：以國小數學科低成就學生為對象。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告，NSC-90-2614-S-004-011，NSC-91-2521-S-004-011。
余德彰、林文綺、王介丘（民90）。劇本引導：資訊時代產品與服務設計新法。臺北市：田園城市。
吳珮謹（民91）。基礎漫畫數位教材之設計與發展研究。淡江大學教育科技系碩士論文。
李文瑞譯（民93）。教材設計：原理與實務。臺北市：雙葉書廊。
李長燦（民92）。後Piaget認知發展理論與教學應用。見張新仁編：學習與教學新趨勢，頁159-187。臺北市：心理。
李茂興譯（民87）。教學心理學。臺北市：弘智文化。
林金榜譯（民92）。策略巡禮，亨利‧明茲伯格、布魯斯‧亞斯蘭與約瑟夫‧藍佩爾著。臺北市：商周。
洪榮昭、劉明洲（民86）：電腦輔助教學之設計原理與應用。臺北市：師大書苑。
洪銀杏（民90）。教師即研究者之行動研究：故事教學在低年級教室之實施。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
計惠卿（民84）。電腦輔助學習的允諾與問題。教學科技與媒體，21，38-46。
計惠卿（民92）。數位學習之人機互動構面研析。隔空教育論叢，15，109-126。
徐新逸（民88）。情境學習對教學革新之回應。研習資訊，15(1)，16-24。
高台茜（民91）。未來教室學習─以無線網路應用為基礎的認知學徒制學習環境。　　 台大教與學期刊電子報，9，http://edtech.ntu.edu.tw/epaper/911210/prof/prof_1.asp
高源令（民92）。訊息處理模式與教學。見黃國彥總校閱：教育心理學，頁191-260。臺北市：心理。
高薰芳、黃欣凱（民94）。我國1998-2002年教育科技研究所碩士論文研究趨勢與議題之內容分析。教育科技與媒體，71，4-21。
張民杰（民90）。個案教學法：理論與實務。臺北市：五南。
張新仁（民92）。Ausubel有意義的學習理論與教學應用。見張新仁編：學習與教學新趨勢，頁217-248。臺北市：心理。
張霄亭等譯（民91）。教學媒體與學習科技。臺北市：雙葉書廊。
張麗華（民91）。管理個案教學導論。臺北市：華泰。
梁桂嘉（民93）。劇本式導引設計探討與發展之研究。國立臺灣師範大學設計研究所碩士論文。
郭進隆譯（民83）。第五項修練：學習型組織的藝術與實務，彼得．聖結著。臺北市：天下文化。
陳學志主譯（民93）。認知心理學，Mark H. Ashcraft著。臺北市：學富文化。
陸劍豪譯（民88）。預演未來，海登著。臺北市：商業周刊。
黃政傑（民86）。教學原理。臺北市：師大書苑。
黃敬仁（民91）。系統分析。臺北市：碁峰資訊。
楊家興（民84）。情境教學理論與超媒體學習環境。教育科技與媒體，30，40-48。
楊雅婷（民95）。巨匠電腦數位教材通過「數位教材品質認證AAA級」。http://www.elearn.org.tw/
趙中建譯（民81）。教學模式。臺北市：五南。
趙居蓮譯（民86）。學習與教學。臺北市：心理。
劉子鍵譯（民88）。透視學習，菲立浦、索提絲著。臺北市：桂冠。
劉佩雲、簡馨瑩譯（民92）。問題解決的教與學，瓊斯、拉斯姆生、莫菲特著。臺北市：高等教育。
劉錫麒等譯（民88）。教學原理。臺北市：學富文化。
樂為良譯（民91）。E-Learning：提升個人競爭力、強化企業優勢的終極學習策略。臺北市：麥格羅希爾。
蔡錫濤、楊美雪（民84）。情境式學習教學設計。教育科技與媒體，30，48-53。
鄭昭明（民82）。認知心理學：理論與實踐。臺北市：桂冠。
鄭麗玉（民82）。認知心理學。臺北市：五南。
閻紀宇譯（民93）。未來在發酵，彼得‧舒瓦茲著。臺北市：時報出版。
簡紅珠（民87）。教學發展趨勢。見黃光雄編：教材教法的問題與趨勢，頁1-20。臺北市：師大書苑。
羅雅萱、袁世珮譯（民91）。打造TOP 1線上學習方案 : 取法e-Learning成功典範。臺北市：麥格羅希爾。
蘇照彬（民83）。Scenario在人機互動中之理論與應用：以互動電視節目表的發展與評估為例。交通大學傳播科技研究所碩士論文。