本研究的目的在於了解不同情況之下，高級中等學校學生的數學學習動機。透過搜集基隆市及附近地區高級中等學校學生問卷共6所學校915人，調查有關數學學習動機的相關問題。

本研究的主要結果如下：
1.高級中等學校的學生高度認同以下事情為「學習數學」：「做數學題目」、「聽老師在台上講課」、「動腦思考數學或邏輯推理」、「理解數學內容」、「提出問題或討論數學」、「背公式或題目題型」、「在其他科目中應用數學」、「在生活中應用數學」。

2.高級中等學校的學生高度認同以下事為在認真學習數學後值得的事：「把不懂的內容弄懂了」、「考出好成績」、「習題都會算」、「同學會來問我會做的題目」、「能把數學應用在生活上」、「上課時回答老師的問題」。

3.高級中等學校的學生在以下情況有高度的學習動機在課堂上配合數學課堂活動：「老師和我們互動很好」、「老師會在意上課內容是否讓人理解」、「數學單元有趣吸引人」、「明天要考數學」、「上課時可以和同學討論」、「平常的情況下」
4.高級中等學校的學生在任何情況下都沒有高度的學習動機在放學後認真學習數學。

5.高級中等學校的學生高度認同以下有關數學的觀點：「數學可以訓練邏輯思考」、「數學在財經領域很重要」、「數學在科學及科技領域很重要」

6.完全中學、國立高中、公立高職學生有不同的數學學習動機。

7.男、女學生有不同的數學學習動機。

8.數理班、體育班、原住民藝能有不同的數學學習動機。

In different situations, students’ motivations for learning mathematics are diefferent. By collecting 915 highschool students from 6 schools in Keelung city and its neighborhood, we got some information about what kind factors will affect students’ motivation.

The main results of this research are belows:
1.Highschool students largely agree that “study mathematics” are these things: “doing mathmatical problems”,”listening teacher’s lesson”,”thinking mathematics or using logic”,”understaning the mathmatical cotent”,”give a problem or discuss mathmatics”,”remember the mathematical formula or solution”,”using mathmatics in other subjects”,”using mathematics in everyday life”.

2.Highschool students largely agree that it is valuable to learn mathmatics hardly, because …:” I understand those can not understood”,”I get a good grade in tests”,”I can do all of the problems”,”classmates ask me the problems that I can do”,”I can use mathematics in everyday life”,”I can answer teacher’s problems in the class”.

3.Highschool students have highly motivation to learn mathematics in class in these situations:”teachers have good interaction with us”, ”teachers care whether the course is understandable ” , ”mathematical units is interesting”, “there is a math test tomorrow” ,“students can discuss with classmates in class”,”in normal situation”.

4.Highschool students have no situation to have highly motivation to learn mathematics after school.

5.Highshool students largely agree these following things about mathematics:“mathmatics can train someone’s logical thinking”,”mathematics is important in finance”,”mathematics is important in technology”

6.Students in comprehensive Junior-Senior high school, normal senior high school, and vocational high school have difference in motivation in mathematical learning.

7.Male and female students have difference in motivation in mathematical learning.

8.Studetns in mathmatical gifted class, physical gifted class, and aboriginal art class have difference in motivation in mathematical learning.

參考文獻
一、 中文部分
1. 保羅‧拉克哈特(2013)。一個數學家的嘆息。臺北：經濟新潮社。
2. 李國偉(民101年2月)。TIMSS 2011耐人尋味的問題。科學人，132期。
3. 林天佑 (2010)。APA 格式第六版。臺北：臺北市立教育大學。
4. 林清山(1992)。心理與教育統計學。臺北：東華。
5. 黃毅英, & 黃家鳴. (1997)。十地區數學教育課程標準。數學傳播，第21卷第2期。
6. 黃財尉 (2003)。共同因素分析與主成份分析之比較， 彰化師大輔導學報，(25)，63-86.
7. 教育部(2010)。數學課程綱要專刊。教育部。頁53。
8. 教育部(2014)。十二年國教實施計劃。教育部。
9. 邱皓政(2010)。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS/PASW 資料分析範例解析(第五版)。台北：五南。
10. 斯坦(2012)。幹嘛學數學。臺北：天下遠見出版股份有限公司。
11. 朱經明(2007)。教育及心理統計學。臺北：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
12. 鍾靜. (2005)。論數學課程近十年之變革。教育研究月刊，133， 124-134。
13. 陳大魁. (2002)。 談從 9 年一貫到 12 年一貫數學銜接的幾個面向.。科學教育月刊，253期。
14. 張春興(2008)。教育心理學。臺北：臺灣東華書局股份有限公司。

二、 英文部分
1. American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. General Learning Corporation. Retrieved 25 December 2013.
3. Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. Annals of child development. Vol.6. Six theories of child development (pp. 1-60). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
4. Brown, M. B., & Forsythe, A. B. (1974). Robust tests for the equality of variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69(346), 364-367.
5. Brophy, J. E. (2010). Motivating students to learn. Routledge.
6. Carver, C.,&Scheier,M.(1999). A few more themes, a lot more issues: Commentary on the commentaries. In R. Wyer, Jr.(Ed.),Perspectives on begavioral self-refulation (Advances in social cognition series, Vol.12, pp261-302).Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
7. Cattel,R.B.(1966). The scree test for the number of factors.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1,245-276
8. Coe, R. (2002). It's the effect size, stupid: what effect size is and why it is important. British Educational Research Association annual conference, Exeter, 12-14 September, 2002
9. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
10. Cohen,J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the begavioral sciences(2nd ed.). Hillsdale,NJ:Eribaum
11. Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological bulletin, 112(1), 155.
12. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
13. Deci,E.,&Ryan,R.(1985).Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human begavior. New York:Plenum
14. Deci,E,&Ryan,R.(Eds).(2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY:University of Rochester Press.
15. Dunnet,C.W.(1980). Pairwise multiple comparisons in the unequal variance case. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 75, 796-800
16. Elliot,A.,&McGregor,H.(2001).A 2x2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,80,501-509
17. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
18. Games, P. A., & Howell, J. F. (1976). Pairwise multiple comparison procedures with unequal n’s and/or variances: a Monte Carlo study. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 1(2), 113-125.
19. Kaiser,H.F.(1960).The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement,20,141-151
20. Kaiser,H.F.(1974).An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 31-36
21. Levene, H. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances1. Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling, 2, 278-292.
22. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology.
23. Maehr,M.,&Meyer,H.(1997).Understanding motivation and schooling:Where we’ve been,where we are, and where we need to go. Educational psychology Review,9,371-409.
24. Mayer R.E.(1987).Educational Psychology: A Cognitive Approach. Boston. Little,Brown and Copany
25. Maslow, A. H., Frager, R., & Cox, R. (1970). Motivation and personality (Vol. 2). J. Fadiman, & C. McReynolds (Eds.). New York: Harper & Row.
26. Matell, M. S., & Jacoby, J. (1972). Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert-scale items? Effects of testing time and scale properties. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56(6), 506.
27. Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Herengracht 487, Amsterdam, 1017 BT, The Netherlands.
28. Neill, J. (2008). Why use effect sizes instead of significance testing in program evaluation. Retrieved from http://wilderdom.com/research/effectsizes.html
29. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
30. Santos, J. R. A. (1999). Cronbach’s alpha: A tool for assessing the reliability of scales. Journal of extension, 37(2), 1-5.
31. Scheffe, H. (1999). The analysis of variance (Vol. 72). John Wiley & Sons.
32. Tamhane, A. C. (1979). A comparison of procedures for multiple comparisons of means with unequal variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association , 74(366a), 471-480.
33. Thrash,T.,&Elliot,A.(2001). Delimiting and integrating achievement motive and goal constructs. In A. Efklides, J. Kuhl, & R. Sorrentino (Eds.), Trends and prospects in motivation research(pp. 3-21). Boston: Kluwer
34. Weiner, B. (1992). Human motivation: Metaphors, theories, and research. Sage.
35. Welch, B. L. (1947). The generalization ofstudent's' problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika, 28-35.