過去研究顯示，以英文為第二語言的研究生，無論在以英語為第二語言或是以英語為外語的環境下，都會在進行研究和論文寫作時遇到困難(Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2005; Buckingham, 2005; Dong, 1998; Lee, 2008; O’Connor, Greene & Anderson, 2006; Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2006; Reeves, Herrington, & Oliver, 2005)，然而，相關研究卻缺乏探究在以英語為外語的環境下，同時身為研究生和在職教師的這群學生們所遭遇的困難，及其如何利用可取得的資源去解決論文寫作上的難題。本研究旨在藉由質性個案研究方式，以社會文化學習的角度，特別是van Lier (2004)的擴充式建構理論(expanded ZPD)，取得更多關於身為學校老師的在職研究生在論文寫作過程中遇到的困難以及解決對策的詳細資訊，以期對論文寫作教學以及論文指導上有所貢獻。本研究共邀請到三組指導教授與研究生，每組包含一位教授與他們的兩位研究生。資料來源包含與所有研究參與者的訪談內容、論文寫作相關書籍，以及學生的論文草稿，最後經由對比原始資料得出研究結果。 研究結果顯示學生在寫論文前遇到的困難是研究設計與處理資料，而在寫論文各章節時，他們會同時遇到文字上以及文體格式方面的困難。根據各章節的文體要求，學生們認為文獻回顧、研究發現，以及討論研究結果是最困難的章節，而結論是困難度最小的章節。而這些困難可歸因於學生為非母語寫作者，以及他們對於學術規範的不熟悉。此外，本研究也發現，在職班學生可取得的資源包括同儕、專家、學術出版品，以及自身。 基於上述發現，本研究提出研究所課程的教師應提供學生更多閱讀學術論文的機會，以及在課程中融入讓學生可應用課堂所學的任務。指導教授也能事先提醒學生論文中較為困難的部份，以及告訴學生有哪些可取得資源是有助於論文寫作的。未來，需要更多人誌學以及日記研究法的方式研究，以期能更深入了解在職研究生在論文寫作上的需求。 / Though a number of studies have revealed that both the L2 graduate students in English as a Second Language (ESL) and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts may encounter difficulties in conducting research and writing theses (Bitchener& Basturkmen, 2005; Buckingham, 2005; Dong, 1998; Lee, 2008; O’Connor, Greene& Anderson, 2006; Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2006; Reeves, Herrington& Oliver, 2005), research about how the graduate students who are also in-service teachers in EFL settings cope with the difficulties in thesis writing by making use of the sources available still lacks. Thus, this study aimed to have an in-depth understanding of the difficulties this group of students faced in the process of thesis writing and the ways they adopted to deal with the problems via a qualitative case study and with the social cultural perspective of learning, especially the framework of expanded ZPD (van Leir, 2004) .Three advisor-advisee pairs were invited to participate in the present study, and each pair was comprised of one advisor and two advisees. Data for analysis were collected from multiple sources, including semi-structured interviews with the participants, the textbook of the thesis writing course, and the drafts of theses. Data were analyzed by constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The results showed that the students faced difficulties about research design and compiling the data even before writing theses. When writing each section of a thesis, they had troubles both at the linguistic level and the rhetorical level. According to the rhetorical regulations of each section, Literature Review, Results, and Discussion were viewed as the three most difficult sections and Conclusion the least difficult section for the students. Hence, the unfamiliarity of academic conventions and the lower English writing abilities contributed to the difficulties the students faced during thesis writing. Moreover, the findings disclosed that the sources available for the students as in-service teachers included human resources such as peers and experts, material resources such as academic publications, and inner knowledge from self. Based upon above findings, it is suggested that the courses of graduate schools should provide students more opportunities to read academic texts extensively and practice what they learn in class. Also, the advisors should remind students of the problematic area of a specific section and tell students the resources available in the academic context. In the future, more ethnographic and diary studies are needed to explore what challenges the students who are also in-service teachers encounter in the thesis writing processes and how they solve these problems because this group of students may have different needs in thesis writing