本研究旨在建立機器人教師資格檢定機制之內容架構、檢定之出題程序與標準、考試之程序與標準作業流程，以提供未來檢定研究與實施之參考。
本研究的主要研究方法為焦點團體座談法、文獻探討和訪談法。研究對象包含5位樂高學者專家、7位機器人教學實務之教師。從焦點團體座談的過程中，調查機器人教師應具備相關能力及檢定架構，以制訂檢定機制，從文獻探討歸納出檢定之出題程序與標準、考試之程序與標準作業流程，並透過實施檢定驗證機制之可行性。實施檢定由9位考生進行筆試、實作、試教、口試，試後對考生進行訪談，了解考生對檢定機制內容與執行的相關意見。
研究結果發現，(1)機器人教師應具備教育學素養、機器人專業知識、教學方法、教室及器材管理等四種能力，並採兩階段檢定，初試為筆試與實作，複試為試教與口試。(2)筆試分為「教育專業素養」與「機器人專業能力」兩大領域；實作採三題機器人任務解題實作測驗施測。教學演示評測部份，採考生抽籤或由主考官指定機器人課程中某一單元進行試教，並依試教評分表評量；而工作熱忱態度、教學理念等態度則透過口試來評量。(3)本研究所發展的機器人教師資格檢定機制在實施檢定之可行性高，可供未來研究之參考。

This research aimed to establish the mechanism structure of the robotic teacher certification system to determine the procedure and standard of test question design, the procedure of the assessment, and the standard operation process to provide references for future research on assessment and implementation.

The research adopted focus group interviews, literature review, and interviews as primary research methods. The research targets included 5 Lego experts and 7 robotic teachers. The required skills of robotic teachers and the assessment structure were studied during the focus group interview and an assessment mechanism was outlined that consisted of a summary of procedure and standard of question design, the exam procedure and standard operation process using literature review, thereby determining the feasibility of the mechanism by implementing the assessment method. The assessment required 9 candidates to take a written test, a practical test, and an oral test, followed by an interview that probed the candidates’ opinions about the content and implementation of the assessment mechanism.

The research revealed that (1) robotic teachers should demonstrate a good attitude toward teaching and possess robotic expertise, effective teaching methods, as well as classroom and equipment management skills. The assessment included two stages wherein the first part was comprised of a written and a practical test; and the second part was comprised of a teaching trial and an oral test. (2) The written test was separated into two fields, namely, “education profession” and “robotic expertise,” whereas the practical part was comprised of three test questions that required candidates to perform certain tasks using robots. For the teaching trial, a certain topic in the robotic curriculum was either drawn by the candidate from the question bank or specified by the examiner. The performance was then rated according to the teaching trial evaluation chart. On the other hand, the work ethics and passion, and teaching philosophy of the candidates were assessed in the oral test. (3) The assessment mechanism developed based on this research result was highly feasible and could serve as a reference for future research.

一、中文部份
王世英(2003)。我國高級職業學校教師知識管理能力評鑑之研究。國立彰化師範大學工業教育學系博士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
王裕德、陳元泰、曾鈴惠(2012)。機器人問題導向程式設計課程對女高中學生學習程式設計影響之研究。科學教育月刊，354，11-29。
石兆芬(2007)。作為教室教學伙伴之可程式化機器人。國立中央大學資訊工程學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園。
台灣玉山機器人協會(2013)。WRO2013國際奧林匹克機器人大賽台灣選拔賽－全國賽規則VER.0903。2014年1月20日，取自http://www.era.org.tw/exportDoc.php?name=10744.pdf
行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。台北：作者。
吳天方、廖德昭(2003)。國立高中職校教師成績考核現況與展望。學校行政雙月刊，24，87-93。
吳武典、楊思偉、周愚文、吳清山、高熏芳、符碧真、陳木金、方永泉、陳盛賢(2005)。師資培育政策建議書。教育部委託專案報告。台北市：中華民國師範教育學會。
吳庚軒(2010)。玩具融入機電整合教學之研究—以機器人設計為例。國立臺北教育大學數位科技設計學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
吳清山、林天祐(2005)，教育新詞書(New Dictionary of Education)，高等教育文化事業有限公司。
吳清山、張素偵(2002)。教師評鑑：理念、挑戰與策略。載於中華民國師範教育學會主編，師資培育的政策與檢討，177-192。臺北市：學富。
貝登堡(2013)。WRO國際奧林匹克機器人大賽。2014年1月20日，取自http://www.erobot.com.tw/robot_detail.html?n=2
何福田、羅瑞玉(1992)。教育改革與教師專業化。載於中華民國師範教育學會主編，教育專業，1-30。台北市：師大書苑。
李蕙慈(2011)。國小三年級實施情境式作文教學之行動研究。國立屏東教育大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
李鎮亦(2012)。以錨式教學理論應用於樂高機器人主動探索與解決問題能力課程設計之探討。國立屏東教育大學資訊科學系碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
邱于閔(2012)。國民小學職前教師教學能力檢定評分量表建構之研究－以國立新竹教育大學教育學系為例。國立新竹教育大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
林育沖、黃能堂(2007)。透過樂高機器人教學提昇國小學生科技創造力之研究。科技教育課程改革與發展學術研討會論文集，2006，318-324。
林秀玉(2002)。職業學校學校本位教學視導指標之研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北市。
紀又綾(2010)。設計在混合實境學習環境中的代理人及夥伴機器人。國立中央大學資訊工程學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園。
胡幼慧(1996)。質性研究：理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
施能木(2007)。應用樂高教學方案在國小生活科技課程對學童創造力影響之研究。臺灣師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
郭展馨(2009)。樂高機器人多媒體教材設計、發展與可用性評估。國立中央大學學習與教學學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園。
高雄市政府教育局(2013a)。102年「台博賽車機器人」教師培訓課程。2014年1月20日，取自http://school.kh.edu.tw/upload/151/101_8416/%E3%80%8C%E5%8F%B0%E5%8D%9A%E8%B3%BD%E8%BB%8A%E6%A9%9F%E5%99%A8%E4%BA%BA%E3%80%8D%E6%95%99%E5%B8%AB%E5%9F%B9%E8%A8%93%E8%AA%B2%E7%A8%8B.pdf
高雄市政府教育局(2013b)。樂高機器人教師培訓課程。2014年1月20日，取自http://ppt.cc/1k14
徐麗真(2011)。應用可支援互動式劇本機器人做為輔助教具對國小學童英語學習動機與學習成效影響之成就。亞洲大學資訊工程學系碩士論文，未出版，台中。
張玉山(2014)。機器人教師資格檢定機制之研究。行政院國家科學委員會產學合作研究成果報告(MOST 103-2622-S-003-002-CC3)，未出版。
國立臺中女子高級中學(2011)。台中女中創意機器人程式設計工作坊研習活動。2014年1月20日，取自http://tw.school.uschoolnet.com/?id=es00001595&mode=ajax&sid=download&key=125704043896327&file_key=131640144885785&module_id=news
國立臺北教育大學(2007)。LEGO機器人師資培訓班。2014年1月20日，取自http://rdec.ntue.edu.tw/xms/content/show.php?id=497
國立臺灣科學教育館(2013)。國立臺灣科學教育館作業基金業務計畫及預算說明中華民國102 年度。台北：國立台灣科學教育館。
國立臺灣師範大學教育研究中心(2005)。高級職業學校課程暫行綱要之校本課程發展一般科目群校訂參考書目計畫書。台北：作者。
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。台北：五南。
教育部(2013)。機器人大展雄風「第 17屆TDK 盃全國大專院校創思設計與製作競賽」熱閙開跑。2014年1月20日，取自http://www.edu.tw/pages/detail.aspx?Node=1088&Page=21405&Index=3&wid=560D2ADE-378E-4CB6-8CB4-C2CE2B227759
教育部(2013)。十二年國民基本教育實施計畫。2014年1月20日，取自http://12basic.edu.tw/File/LevelFile_38/%E5%8D%81%E4%BA%8C%E5%B9%B4%E5%9C%8B%E6%B0%91%E5%9F%BA%E6%9C%AC%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E5%AF%A6%E6%96%BD%E8%A8%88%E7%95%AB.doc
張宗憲(1999)。職業學校學校本位教學視導內涵建構與實徵調查之研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳振民(2013)。多功能英語教學機器人之研發與應用。國立虎尾科技大學電子工程系碩士論文，未出版，雲林縣。
張國保(2013)。中小學教師進修研究所的需求性與價值。臺灣教育評論月刊，2(3)，44-46。
張淑娟(2009)。不同教師資格檢定制度對初任教師專業能力影響之研究-以台北縣公立高職教師為例。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
張清濱(2009)。教學原理與實務。台北：五南。
許雅慧(2005)。應用LEGO Mindstorms視覺化環境輔助程式設計觀念學習。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
陳德欣(2001)。高級職業學校專業科目教師專業成長及其相關因素之研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北市。
溫少逸(2005)。高級職業學校教師評鑑制度之研究—以台北市私立高職為例。淡江大學教育政策與領導學系碩士論文，未出版，新北市。
彭文萱、林容妃、陳景期(2012)。國小優質科學教師教學專業發展指標及權重分配系統之建置：科學教師社群之觀點。教育實踐與研究，25(2)，131-162。
彭玉珍(2001)。高職餐飲管理科教師專業與教師效能之研究∼以台灣北區為例。中國文化大學生活應用科學學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
曾吉弘、蘇珊筠、蔡宛庭、康仕仲(2012)。特殊生融合玩中學機器人科普課程。Journal of Information Technology and Applications, 4(2), 94-99。
曾義智(2006)。應用機器人於程式設計教學—實體機器人與模擬軟體使用成效比較。臺灣師範大學資訊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
游鎮嘉(2006)。應用史賓機器人於英語教室作為教師之教學伙伴。國立中央大學資訊工程學系碩士論文，未出版，桃園。
資策會(2011)。教育機器人不只在未來。2014年1月20日，取自http://newsletter.teldap.tw/news/InsightReportContent.php?nid=4273&lid=489
劉文輝(2002)。高職教師對教師評鑑態度調查之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
劉兆達(2002)。高中校長對體育教師專業表現之評鑑。國立臺灣師範大學體育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
趙貞怡(2013)。原住民學童在電腦樂高機器人課程中的創造力與團隊合作能力。教育實踐與研究，26(1)，33-62。
劉寶貴(2003)。我國高職教師評鑑實施之研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北市。
蔡政宏(2011)。實現自閉症孩童之互動式機器人教學系統。國立交通大學電控工程學系碩士論文，未出版，新竹。
潘慧玲、王麗雲、簡茂發、孫志麟、張素貞、張錫勳、陳順和、陳淑敏、蔡濱如(2004)。國民中小學教師專業能力指標之發展。教育研究資訊，12(4)，129-168。
蔡錦豐(2009)。LEGO MINDSTORMS提升國小學童問題解決能力與科學態度之研究。臺東大學教育學系教學科技碩士班學位論文，未出版，台東。
謝亞錚(2009)。機器人輔助程式設計學習之學習成效與學生心智模型探討。臺灣師範大學資訊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北。
簡清華、陳雅萍、葉國平(2009)。智慧型機器人系統融入國小學生數學解題教學之研究。智慧型機器人系統融入國小學生數學解題教學之研究成果報告(NSC 97-2511-S-153-002)，未出版。

 
二、英文部分
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978-988.
Bertacchini, F., Bilotta, E., Pantano, P., Tavernise, A. (2012). Motivating the learning of science topics in secondary school: A constructivist edutainment setting for studying Chaos. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1377-1386.
Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. NY: Routledge.
Carbonaro, M., Cutumisu, M., Duff, H., Gillis, S., Onuczko, C., Siegel, J. et al. (2008). Interactive story authoring: A viable form of creative expression for the classroom. Computers & Education, 51(2), 687-707.
Chang, C. W., Lee, J. H., Wang, C. Y., & Chen, G. D. (2010). Improving the authentic learning experience by integrating robots into the mixed-reality environment. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1572-1578.
Chou, C. H. (2010). Investigating the effects of incorporating collaborative action research into an in-service teacher training program. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2728-2734.
Chuang, C. P., Huang, Y. J., Lin, G. H., & Huang, Y. C. (2010). POPBL-based education and trainning system on robotics training effectiveness. In System Science and Engineering (ICSSE), 2010 International Conference on (pp. 111-114). IEEE.
Dagdilelis, V., Sartatzemi, M., & Kagani, K. (2005, July). Teaching (with) Robots in Secondary Schools: some new and not-so-new Pedagogical problems. Paper presented at Advanced Learning Technologies, 2005. ICALT 2005. Fifth IEEE International Conference on (pp. 757-761). IEEE.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Richardson, N. (2009). Research review/teacher learning: What matters. Educational leadership, 66(5), 46-53.
Darling-Hammond, L., Holtzman, D. J., Gatlin, S. J., & Vasquez-Heilig, J. V. (2005). Does teacher preparation matter? Evidence about teacher certification, Teach for America and teacher effectiveness. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 13(42), 1-34.
Tigelaar, D.E., Dolmans, D.H., Wolfhagen, I.H., & Vleuten, C.P. (2004). The development and validation of a framework for teaching competencies in higher education. Higher education, 2(48), 253-268.
Hanushek, E.A., & Rivkin, S.G. (2006). Teacher Quality. In E. A. Hanushek and F. Welch, ed., Handbook of the Economics of Education. Amsterdam: Elsevier North-Holland, 2-28.
Jayne, H. (2010). Wyoming teacher perceptions of teacher quality: Effects of National Board Certification and teacher education level. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wyoming, Wyoming.
Hendriks, M., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., Sleegers, P., & Steen, R. (2010). Teachers’ professional development - europe in international comparison: An analysis of teachers' professional development
based on the OECD's teaching and learning international survey (TALIS). Luxembourg, European:European Commission.
Karahoca, D., Karahoca, A., & Uzunboylub, H. (2011). Robotics teaching in primary school education by project based learning for supporting science and technology courses. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 1425-1431.
Khattak, Z. I., Abbasi, G., & Ahmad, A. (2011). Impact analysis of the in-service teacher training programmes of the Testing and Evaluation sub-committee of the ELTR Project in Pakistan. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1479-1483.
Fernandez, K.C.(2015). Teacher certification and its relationship to student achievement in guam public high schools. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University . Retrieved Jan 18, 2016, from http://0-search.proquest.com.opac.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/pqdt/docview/1686128335/6081695C84874850PQ/15?accountid=14228
Kim, H., Choi, H., Han, J., & So, H. J. (2012). Enhancing teachers' ICT capacity for the 21st century learning environment: Three cases of teacher education in Korea. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(6), 965-982.
Klassner, F. (2002, February). A case study of LEGO Mindstorms'™ suitability for artificial intelligence and robotics courses at the college level. Paper presented at ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, ACM.
Kovacs, M., & Văcăreţu, A. S. (2010, June). Authentic assessment in the in-service teacher training system Guidebook for training providers. Paper presented at Romanian Reading and Writing for Critical Thinking Association, Romanian.
Kretlow, A. G., Wood, C. L., & Cooke, N. L. (2011). Using in-service and coaching to increase kindergarten teachers’ accurate delivery of group instructional units. The Journal of Special Education, 44(4), 234-246.
Lavonen, Jari M., Meisalo, Veijo P., Lattu, M., & Sutinen, E. (2003). Concretising the programming task: a case study in a secondary school. Computers & Education, 40(2), 115-135.
Leak, J. A., & Farkas, G. (2011). Effects of Teacher Credentials, Coursework, and Certification on Student Achievement in. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26, 237-257.
Libman, Z. (2012). Licensing procedures, teacher effectiveness and reasonable expectations. International Review of Education, 58(2), 151-171.
Lindh, J., & Holgersson, T. (2007). Does lego training stimulate pupils’ ability to solve logical problems? Computers & Education, 49(4), 1097-1111.
Liu, A., Newsom, J., Schunn, C., & Shoop, R. (2013). Students learn programming faster through robotic simulation. Tech Directions, 72(8), 16-19.
McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice. NY: Routledge.
Mills, G. E. (2003). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Mills, G. E. (2013). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher, loose-leaf version (5th Edition). USA: Pearson.
Mitnik, R., Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., & Soto, A. (2009). Collaborative robotic instruction: A graph teaching experience. Computers & Education, 53(2),330-342.
Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus group as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Nasrollahi, M. A., Krish, P., & Noor, N. M. (2012). Action research in language learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 1874-1879.
NBCTs (National Board Certified Teachers). (2014a). Built From Teacher Expertise. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://www.nbpts.org/built-teacher-expertise
NBCTs (National Board Certified Teachers). (2014b). The Beginnings of a Movement. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://www.nbpts.org/beginnings-movement
NBCTs (National Board Certified Teachers). (2014c). National Board Standards. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://www.nbpts.org/national-board-standards
NBCTs (National Board Certified Teachers). (2014d). The Five Core Propositions. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://www.nbpts.org/five-core-propositions
NSF(National Science Foundation).(2013). Tangible programming in early childhood: Revising developmental assumptions through new technologies. Retrieved January 20, 2014, from http://ase.tufts.edu/DevTech/tangiblek/
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development) (2005). Teachers matter. Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers. Synthesis Report, Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Directorate for Education, Education and Training Policy Division.
Woolf, B., Lane, H.C., Chaudhri, V., & Kolodner, J. (2013). AI Grand Challenges for Education. AI Magazine, 34(4), 66-84.
Ross, A., & Hutchings, M. (2003). Attracting, developing and retaining effective teachers in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. OECD Country Background Report Accessed, 13, 4-7.
Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Buchanan, J., & Russell, T. (2012). Teacher Professional Standards: Induction, Professional Learning and Certification. In Beginning Teaching (pp. 117-132). Netherlands: Springer.
Stringer, E. T. (2007). Action research: A handbook for practitioners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stringer, E. T., Christensen, L. M. F., & Baldwin, S. C. (2009). Integrating teaching, learning, and action research: enhancing instruction in the K-12 classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Symeou, L., Roussounidou, E., & Michaelides, M. (2012). I feel much more confident now to talk with parents: An evaluation of in-service training on teacher–parent communication. School Community Journal, 22(1), 65-87.
TEA. (2016). Approved educator standards. Retrieved Jan 18, 2016, from http://tea.texas.gov/Texas_Educators/Preparation_and_Continuing_Education/Approved_Educator_Standards/
Tanaka, F., Cicourel, A., & Movellan, J. R. (2007). Socialization between toddlers and robots at an early childhood education center. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(46), 17954-17958.
Tomek, I. (1982). Josef, the robot. Computers & Education, 6(3), 287-293.
Tournaki, N., Lyublinkskaya, I., & Carolan, B. (2009). Pathway to teacher certification does it really matter when it comes to efficacy and effectiveness? Action in Teacher Education, 30(4), 96-109.
Tucker, M. (2011). Teacher quality what’s wrong with U.S. strategy? Educational Leadership, 69(4), 42-46.
Wang, A.H., Coleman, A.B., Coley, R.J., Phelps, R.P., et al. (2003). Preparing teachers around the world. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved February 6, 2014, from http://www.ets.org/research/picprepteach.pdf
Youngs, P., Odden, A., & Porter, A. C. (2003). State policy related to teacher licensure. Educational Policy, 17(2), 217–236.