本研究之目的在於提出一可用於在網路資訊科技環境下輔助一般教師進行教學設計的網路上建構式之教學設計輔助模式，並以此模式發展出一網路上之教學設計輔助環境(Web-based Instructional Design Environment, WIDE) ，最後，以實徵研究探討教師實際使用此環境進行教學設計之成效。
經由對六位台北縣市國中歷史科教師進行之研究，由操作觀察分析﹑文件內容分析與訪談結果分析之結果可以發現，藉由WIDE環境可以達到以下之目標:
1. 促進教師對教學與學科知識之認知重整，並使教學設計內容更具系統性及連貫性。
2. 教學設計者將能提供學習者整合性且多元之學習資訊。
3. 可減輕教師教學設計時尋找相關教學資源之負擔。
4. 教學設計將能與更多元之教學策略結合。
5. 可幫助教師運用網路資訊科技於教學實務上。

The purposes of this study were to propose a web-based instructional design model, which aims to assist the teacher to do their instructional design task under the web-based technology environment. A web-based instructional design environment (WIDE) was then implemented according to the model. To assess the effectiveness of the WIDE system, an empirical study on instructional design was conducted, teachers used the system, and we analyzed the teachers’ attitudes and the system’s usability.
Six junior high school history teachers in Taipei were invited to participate the experiment. Through the observations of their using of the system, and the documents they constructed and the interview records, we found that the environment could arrive the objectives as the following:
1. The environment can promote teachers to reconstruct or reorganize their cognition about teaching and subject domain knowledge, and make their instructional design content more systematic and coherent.
2. Instruction designers could provide learners with more integrated and wider learning information.
3. The environment can decrease teachers’load when they were searching for related learning information under the web-based environment.
4. The teacher could integrate more teaching strategies into their instructional design.
5. The environment was helpful for teachers using technology and web-based environment in their instruction practice.

王千倖(1998):Web-based 網路教學管理系統，資訊與教育，67期，3-11頁。
朱湘吉(1994):教學科技的發展~理論與方法。台北:五南。
吳正己、陳美靜(1997)。職前教師電腦基本能力的培育，台灣教育，572期。20-27頁。
楊美雪(1999)。情意領域的教學設計。教學科技與媒體，35期，2-7頁。
Andrews, D. H., & Goodson, L. A. (1980). A comparative analysis of models of instructional design, Journal of Instructional Development, 3, 2-16.
Banathy, B. H. (1992). A systems view of education: Concepts and principles for effective practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
Banathy, B. H. (1987). Instructional systems design. In R. M. Gagne (Ed.), Instructional technology: Foundations( pp. 85-112 ). Hillsdale, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Branson, R. Rayner, G. T., Cox, J. L., Furman, J. P., King, F. J., & Hannum, W. H. (1976). Interservice procedures for instructional systems development. (Vols. 1-5 ) .Ft. Monroe, VA:US Army Traning and Doctrime Command. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 122 018 through 122 022).
Chaney-Cullen, T. & Duffy, M (1999), Strategic teaching framework: multimedia to Support Teacher Change, Journal of the Learning Science, 8(1), 1-40.
Deborah S. (1988), Twelve middle-school Teachers’ Planning, The Elementary School Journal, 89(1), pp69-87
English, S. & Yazdani, M. (1999). Computer-supported cooperative learning in a virtual university, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,15, 2-13.
Fisher, M.M.(1997). The Voice of Experience: Inservice Teacher Technology
Competency Recommendations for Preservice Teacher Preparation Programs. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2/3),139-147.
Gagne, R. M., & Briggs, L. J. (1979). Principles of instructional design. ( 2nd ed. ).New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Gagne, R. M., & Merrill, M. D. (1990). Integrative goals for instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 38 (1), 23-30
Jonassen, D. (1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning. Educational Technology, 31 ( 9 ) ,28-33
Julia, P. & Ross, R. (1999). Formative evaluation of a web-based course in meteorology, Computer & Education, 32, 181-193.
Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design and instruction. In C. M. Reiguluth (Ed. ). Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status (pp. 383-434). Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Main, R. G. (1993). Integrating motivation into the instructional design process. Educational Technology, 33(12), 37-41.
Mannaz, M. (1999). An expert teacher’s thinking and teaching and instructional design mddels and principles: An Ethnographic study. Educational Technology Research and Development , 46(2),37-64.
Martin, B. L. & Briggs, L. J. (1986). The affective and Cognitive domains: Integration for instruction and research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications
Newman, D., Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1989). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in schools. Cambridge, MA: Cambrideg University Press.
Pajares, M. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
Pamela L. (1992), Why Models Matter: An Alternate View on Professional Growth in Teaching, Review of Educational Research, 62(2),pp.171-179
Park, O. (1991). Hypermedia: Functional features and powerful ideas. NewYork: Basic Books.
Robert A., & Edna H. (1991), An Examination of the systematic planning techniques of two experienced Teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, l39(3),pp71-82.
Ryder, J. M. & Redding, R. E. (1993). Integrating cognitive task analysis into instructional systems development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(2), 75-96.
Ruth V. S., Stuart S., Makiko M., Claire U., & Michael E. (1998), Information seeking for instructional planning: An exploratory study, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(2), 204-219.
Scheffler, F. L. & Logan, J. P. (1999). Computer technology in schools: What teachers should know and be able to do. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 305-326
Steven R., Stephen B. (1998). Authoring Tools for Component-based Learning Environments, Journal of Learning Sciences, 7(1), 107-132.
Sunil, H. & Donna, S. (1999). Implementation of interactive web module in a teacher education course. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 15 (3), 8-16.