本研究旨在探討學前教師資訊科技融入教學現況及其相關影響因素。首先瞭解學前教師資訊科技融入教學之定義、內涵與現況；其次分析不同背景變項及內外在因素對學前教師資訊科技融入教學之差異情形；第三，分析影響資訊科技融入教學因素與資訊科技融入教學之相關；最後影響學前教師資訊科技融入教學因素對學前教師資訊科技融入教學各層面之預測力。 本研究透過文獻分析，以及問卷調查法來了解資訊科技融入教學的現況，及其相關影響因素。本研究之母群體為台北縣市幼稚園、托兒所教師及園所長，採分層抽樣進行取樣，老師和園長各發出480份問卷，老師的有效問卷為51%，園長的有效問卷為58.1%。使用工具為自編「學前教師資訊科技融入教學之應用量表」、「影響學前教師資訊科技融入教學因素之量表」及「園所長對資訊科技融入教學態度之量表」，問卷回收後，使用SPSS 12.0 for windows套裝軟體進行描述性統計、信度分析、效度分析 、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、Scheffé多重比較、皮爾森積差相關、逐步多元迴歸來分析資料。本研究主要結論如下： 壹、在園所電腦基本資料分面 一、台北縣市之園所資訊設備非常普及 貳、在學前教師資訊科技融入教學方面 一、大部分的老師均有進行資訊科技融入教學 二、資訊科技融入教學的模式以「教學前準備」和「教學中活動」表現 最佳 三、資訊科技融入教學的程度以「資訊科技的初步應用」表現最佳 四、「園所屬性」、「園所位置」、「教學經驗」、「教育程度」、 「電腦課程經驗」和「研習時數」對學前教師資訊科技融入教學均 有顯著影響 參、影響資訊科技融入教學因素方面 一、「教學信念」是影響學前教師資訊科技融入教學最大的因素 二、「資訊素養」是影響學前教師資訊科技融入教學的次要因素 三、學前教師的資訊素養以「基本軟體知能」最佳 四、學前教師的資訊素養以「電腦在教學上的應用」最差 五、「園所屬性」、「園所位置」、「教育程度」、「電腦課程經驗」 和「研習時數」對影響學前教師資訊科技融入教學之因素均有顯 著影響 肆、在影響園所長對資訊科技融入教學態度方面 一、園所長對資訊科技融入教學的看法均表示認同 二、園所長願意投入資訊科技融入教學之意願高 三、「園所屬性」和「園所位置」均會對園所長資訊科技融入教學產生 顯著影響 伍、學前教師資訊科技融入教學與影響資訊科技融入教學因素兩者關係方 面 一、「影響資訊科技融入教學之內外在因素」與「學前教師資訊科技融 入教學」呈現正相關 二、「影響資訊科技融入教學之因素」對「學前教師資訊科技融入教 學」具有預測力 最後研究者根據研究結果，分別對園所長、學前教師、師資培育機構、研習機構以及後續相關研究提出建議，以期對未來資訊科技融入學前教育有所助益。 關鍵詞：學前教師、園所長、資訊科技融入教學、資訊素養 / The main purpose of this study was to:(1) Understand definition, connotation and current situation of technology integration instruction. (2) Explore technology integration instruction data between different backgrounds and influence factors. (3) Analyze the relationships between influence factors and technology integration instruction. (4) Explore the predictive power of influence factors on the part of technology integration instruction. To accomplish these purposes, the methods were adopted literature review and questionnaire, which served as the basis of this study. In questionnaire aspect, was executed public and private kindergartens and nursery schools in Taipei city and county. This research was executed by questionnaire survey. “Preschool teachers technology integration instruction questionnaire",“influence factors of technology integration instruction questionnaire”and“Principals’ attitude on technology integration instruction questionnaire”were designed from literature by myself to collect data. By means of stratified random sampling.The samples include 480 principals (effective return rate is 58.1%) and 480 teachers (effective return rate is 51%).The questionnaire data analyzed statistically by description statistics,reliability analysis, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Scheffé posteriority comparison, Person-moment correlation analysis, stepwise multiple regression analysis through the use of SPSS 12.01 for windows. The major results were summarized as follows: A.In the aspect of technology equipment a.Technology equipment in Taipei city and county are very universal. B.In the aspect of technology integration instruction a.In the main of preschool teachers are implement technology integration instruction. b.It’s usually implement technology integration instruction on “prepare of teach” and “teaching”. c.The best dimension is “technology preliminary application”. d.“Taipei city and county”, “public and private”, “teachers’ years of teaching”, “educational degree of teachers",“computer’s learning experience”and “research and study hours” have significant influences on preschool teachers implement technology integration instruction. C.In the aspect of influence factors of technology integration instruction a.The best influence factors of technology integration instruction is“Teaching-belief”. b.The second influence factors of technology integration instruction is“Information Literacy”. c.The best information literacy in preschool teachers is “basic software knowledge”. d.The worst information literacy in preschool teachers is “computer use in instruction”. e.“Taipei city and county",“public and private”, “educational degree of teachers”, “computer's learning experience"and“research and study hours” have significant influences on influence factors of technology integration instruction. D.In the aspect of principals’ attitude on technology integration instruction a.All of the principals are identification with technology integration instruction. b.The best part of principals are willing invest in technology integration instruction. c.“Taipei city and county” and “public and private” have significant influences on principals’ attitude on technology integration instruction. E.In the aspect of relationships between technology integration instruction and influence factors of technology integration instruction a.There was positive correlation existed between “influence factors of technology integration instruction” and “technology integration instruction”. b.“Influence factors of technology integration instruction” did promote“technology integration instruction”. In the last part, the researcher, based on the findings, proposes some suggestions for the principals, the preschool teachers, the teacher training institutions, the research and study institutions and the future researchers, hope to benefit accelerant technology integration instruction in preschools in the future. Key words: preschool teacher, preschool principal, technology integration instruction, information literacy

本研究旨在探討幼托機構園(所)長領導取向知覺及其相關因素。本研究採問卷調查法進行資料蒐集，問卷調查對象以國內北中南東四區的公私立幼稚園、托兒所共計3242位園(所)長為母群體，採分層隨機抽樣的方式進行抽樣，共發出653份問卷，回收328份有效問卷(回收率50%)。研究工具乃參考Bolman&Deal(1991)所編製的「領導取向量表」(Leadership Orientation Scale)以及鄭燕祥(1994)的「校長領導五度向量表」，經題意修正及預試的過程後所發展成適用於國內的「幼托機構園(所)長領導取向量表」。問卷回收後以SPSS10.0套裝軟體進行資料分析。資料分析方法主要採描述性統計、信度分析、因素分析、t考驗、單因子變異數分析、薛費及LSD多重比較法作維資料處理的方法。本研究之主要發現如下： 一、幼托機構園(所)長知覺自身的領導取向包含「教育與人際領導」、「結構領導」與「政治領導」。 二、幼托機構園(所)長知覺領導取向整體表現良好，其中以「教育與人際領導」最高，其次是「結構領導」，而以「政治領導」表現最低。 三、在不同背景變項中，「年齡」、「擔任主管年資」、「園所性質」、「園所規模」對於幼托機構園(所)長領導取向有顯著差異；「性別」、「擔任教師年資」、「園所所處地區」、「園所成立時間」對於幼托機構園(所)長知覺領導取向則無顯著差異。 最後依據本研究結果分析與結論，對於幼托機構園(所)長、幼教師資培育機構、幼教行政機關與後續研究者提出具體建議以茲參考。 關鍵字：幼稚園、園所長、幼教領導、領導取向

近年來國內對學前教育研究之焦點漸跳脫課程與教學、教師與幼兒等範疇，而對學前教育組織(幼稚園、托兒所)或組織領導者(園所長)的關切亦日趨重視，亦顯現園所長對幼兒園教學品質的關係。本研究旨在探討台灣幼托園所長教學領導知覺及其相關因素。本研究採問卷調查法進行資料蒐集，問卷調查對象以台灣北、中、南、東四區共計7539公私立園所之園所長與教師為母群體，採分層隨機抽樣方式進行，對園所長與教師分別發出754份問卷，園所長部份回收400份(回收率53.05%)，教師部份回收395份(回收率52.38%)。研究工具乃依據De Bevois(1984)、Murphy(1990)、李安明(2001)、及McEwan(2003)之理論與架構為基礎，經專家審題及預試結果，修正發展成適於國內幼教領域使用之「幼托園所長教學領導問卷」。問卷回收後以SPSS 12.01套裝軟體進行資料分析。資料分析方法主要採敘述統計、信度分析、因素分析、t考驗、單因子變異數分析及薛費多重比較法，作為資料處理方法。本研究之主要發現如下： 一、 幼托園所長教學領導內涵包括五層面，包括：形成與傳遞園所教學目標、確保課程與教學品質、營造良好學習氣氛與工作環境、促進教師專業成長以及賦權教師。 二、 幼托園所長與教師對「幼托園所長教學領導」知覺程度皆非常高，且無差異。 三、 在幼托園所長部份，不同「年齡」、「服務年資」、「園所地區」、「園所性質」、「園所規模」者對「幼托園所長教學領導」知覺程度有所差異。 四、 在幼托園所教師部份，不同「園所性質」、「園所規模」之幼托園教師對「幼托園所長教學領導」知覺程度有所差異。 最後依據本研究結果分析與結論，對於幼托園所長、幼教行政機關與規劃園所長研習單位以及後續研究者提出具體建議以茲參考。 / Recently, the research focus of early childhood education has gradually put more emphasis on preschool directors in Taiwan. Much research has shown that preschool directors play a key role in preschool quality, and that their leadership also has an impact on preschools. Some scholars had emphasized that preschool directors’ leadership consist of two parts: administration leadership and instructional leadership. Somehow, there was gradually more research on administration leadership, but still very few on preschool directors’ instructional leadership. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to understand the awareness of preschool directors’ instructional leadership between preschool directors themselves and preschool teachers in Taiwan. In addition, the study was also done to identify the background factors that would influence directors’ and teachers’ awareness of directors’ instructional leadership. This study was executed using a questionnaire survey. A sample population of 754 public and private preschool directors, along with 754 teachers, participated using the survey tool, Preschool Directors’ Instructional Leadership Questionnaire, which was developed by researcher according to literature review. 400 questionnaires (effective return rate is 53.05%) were returned by directors, and 395 (effective return rate is 52.38%) by teachers. This study reports four major findings: (1) Preschool directors’ instructional leadership includes 5 dimensions:(a)To frame and communicate the school’s instructional goals; (b)To ensure learning and teaching quality; (c) To build a positive learning and working climate; (d) To promote teachers’ professional growth; (e) To delegate authority to teachers. (2) Both preschool directors and teachers had very high-degree awareness of directors’ instructional leadership. And there was no difference between the directors’ and teachers’ awareness. (3) Different age, working experience, school area, school type, and school scale have influenced preschool directors’ awareness of their instructional leadership. (4) Different school type and scale have influenced preschool teachers’ awareness of directors’ instructional leadership. Keywords: awareness of instructional leadership, preschool directors、preschool teachers、kindergarten and preschool