本研究主要是針對高中數學課程中「信賴區間」的這個單元，依據99 課綱中的課程規劃，設計出一套專題式的研究教材，並以筆者所任教高中的高二及高三學生作為研究對象，進行專題性的課程授課，且對其學習成果進行評量。主要研究結果如下： 一、高三學生雖已進行過「信賴區間」及其先備知識之授課，但前測的成績並不理想。 二、高二與高三學生經由筆者授課教學後，其後測成績均較前測成績有非常明顯之進步，不過高二與高三學生的後測成績並無顯著差異。 三、高二自然組與高二社會組學生經由筆者授課教學後，其學習成效亦無顯著差異，但社會組學生學習上普遍較為認真，後測成績稍高於自然組。 四、高三自然組與高三社會組學生經由筆者授課教學後，其後測成績具顯著差異，而進步成績的學習成效亦具有顯著差異，自然組優於社會組。 五、依高中數學學習成就分成高分群、中分群與低分群三群，雖然在前測與後測成績表現上顯著不同，但進步的成績則三群並無顯著差異。 此外，筆者於本次研究中也對學生問卷調查一些筆者有興趣的相關議題，並進行問卷分析，得到以下結果： 一、對於本研究所編撰「信賴區間」之課程教材，學生普遍能夠接受且瞭解，並知曉「信賴區間」在生活上的用處，且能解讀其資訊。唯實務面上，他們對「信賴區間」之學習則持可有可無的態度。 二、本次研究的授課方式對於自然組與社會組學生的接受程度是具有差異的，其中自然組學生較能接受本次非傳統型的授課方式。 三、學生普遍認為高中數學中，「非統計類數學課程」是比較有趣的，「統計類數學課程」則在學習上具相對困難性。而在統計的課程中，「信賴區間」倒是比較感興趣的這單元。 整體而言，本次研究對學生進行信賴區間的教學結果，是具有學習成效的。 / Based on the 99 Curriculum Guidelines for the Senior High School Math, a special set of study material for Confidence Interval was composed. Eleventh and twelfth grade students from a girl’s senior high school were recruited voluntarily and lectured, and their learning performance were evaluated before and after the completion of the lecture. The primary findings are as the following: 1. Though twelfth grade students have already studied Confidence Interval before the lecture, their pre-test scores were still low. 2. On the average, both eleventh and twelfth grade students performed better after the lecture, and no significant differences were observed between them. 3. For the eleventh grade students, no significant differences were observed between social science and natural science groups. However, students in social science group appeared to work harder, and their post-test results were slightly better than those in natural science group. 4. For the twelfth grade students, significant differences were observed between social science and natural science groups. Natural science group students appeared to outperform their counterparts in social science group. 5. Among the top third, the middle third, and the bottom third of all the participating students, although their pre-test and post-test scores differed significantly, the differences between the two tests were not significant. In addition, some secondary issues were also explored, and the related findings are summarized as follows: 1. Students showed appreciation for the study material, understood the concept of Confidence Interval better after the lecture and even realize how to apply the concept to their daily life. Surprisingly, however, they didn’t think learning Confidence Interval would make any difference in their life. 2. Students in the natural science group appeared to have greater acceptance toward the unconventional teaching method than those in the social science group. 3. For the topics covered in senior high school math, students generally considered those unrelated to statistics more interesting, and thought that statistics-related topics were more difficult to learn. However, among the statistics-related topics, Confidence Interval was the most intriguing one. In conclusion, this study reveals that the experimental teaching approach concerning Confidence Interval are apparently positive and effective.