近年來資訊科技的高度發展造就數位學習產業發展與領域研究興起，在企業追求持續獲利永續經營的同時，數位學習的應用與效益是否能等同視之。本研究以數位學習成效發揮應能主導企業於此領域持續發展想法下展開，希望完整呈現企業推動數位學習過程及以探討訓練成效評估指標，提供後續建置企業與研究參考。故以一建置數位學習之光電產業企業為研究對象，透過個案研究方法與下列研究目的展開。
1.了解個案公司在導入數位學習的實際做法。
2.透過成效評估指標探討數位學習導入的實際成效。
透過詳述個案公司數位學習導入過程與做法，經分析評估、策略發展、方案選擇、建置執行、行銷宣傳、成果檢核改善階段，並藉由訓練成效評估指標來探討數位學習導入的實際成效。經研究發現個案公司推動數位學習成效中，以Kirkpatrick (1960)所提出的訓練成效四層次模式而言，Level 1~2訓練反應與學習層次屬於可接受之水準，但於Level 3訓練行為層次的無相關到Level 4訓練績效層次之負相關與顯著負向差異來看。雖個案公司數位學習導入建置過程做法完整，但由訓練成效評估指標來看，其訓練成效仍停留於訓練反應與學習層次，尚無法有效轉化為訓練行為與績效層次，故建議後續企業與研究除可學習參考個案公司之數位學習導入做法外，應多注意數位學習於訓練成效評估指標中，行為與績效層次的成效議題對數位學習建置導入之影響。
關鍵詞：數位學習

The information technology progressing recently causes the growing of e-learning development and researches. When organizations continuously seek profits to sustain, the benefit of using e-learning is a question mark. Today, the businesses having e-learning and related studies are getting more and more. The idea of making this study of was start from the advantages that a company really can get. Hopefully it is able to give a full picture of the whole process and discuss the training performance indicators to the companies which will structure e-learning in the future and for research reference as well. Therefore, I chose an optoelectronic firm using e-learning as my subject to start with my research through the way of case study and the following objectives.
1. To understand the procedure of organization to introduce e-learning system.
2. To evaluate the results of e-learning through performance indicators.
In this report, I’ll describe the steps of launching e-learning including to analyze, develop strategy, select alternatives, execute, sell the programs, evaluate and improve in the chosen organization. And I’ll discuss the effectiveness of brining in e-learning through performance indicators as well.
It is found that Level 1 and 2, training feedback and learning level, are acceptable. However, Level 3, training behavior, is unrelated, and Level 4, training achievement, presents a negative-correlation. From the outcomes, the training benefit does not cover the behavior change and training achievement, although the build-up procedure is completed.
Consequently, I recommend enterprises that are interested in building e-learning structure not only refer to the method of subject company, but also concern the affection of e-learning in the field of behavior and achievement.
Keywords：e-Learning

第一章 緒論……………………………………………………1
第一節 研究背景………………………………………………………...1
第二節 研究動機………………………………………………………...2
第三節 研究目的………………………………………………………...4
第二章 文獻探討………………………………………………5
第一節

一、中文部分
吳秉恩（1984），管理才能發展方案實施與成效關係之研究，國立政治大學企業管理研究所。
李建億、蔡芳遠（2004），應用資料探勘技術於網路專題學習活動之分析，南師學報：第38 卷第一期，國立台南師範學院，pp.1-23.
狄家葳（1999），訓練成效評估之研究―以台灣跨國企業為例，國立台灣大學商學研究所。
周佳慧（2003），訓練成效評估之探討―以V公司團隊建立課程為例，第八屆企業人力資源管理實務專題研究成果發表會，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所，11月27日至11月28日。
林聰儒（2000），e-learning 輔助知識管理之初探，國立臺北大學企業管理學系未出版之碩士論文。
陳素貞（1999），企業訓練績效評估研究―國內外標竿企業之比較，國立中央大學企業管理研究所。
楊淑芳（2004），企業導入e-Learning進行教育訓練相關學位論文之研究，國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所。
資訊工業策進會市場情報中心（1998），我國軟體產業競爭力分析，ITIS計畫。
數位學習產業推動與發展計畫（2004），企業學習網建置獎勵期末成果報告書：瀚宇彩晶企業學習網，瀚宇彩晶(股)公司，經濟部工業局。
鄒景平（1998），線上訓練企業培訓新趨勢。中衛簡訓，第135 期：23-26。
劉謦儀（2003），國內企業e-Learning實施現況之分析研究，國立師範大學工業教育學系。
鄭文婷（2004），學員控制對e-learning 訓練成效之影響-以H公司為例，第十屆企業人力資源管理實務專題研究成果發表會，國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所，12月1日至12月2日。
戴幼農（1994），「訓練成效評核」，就業與訓練，第一卷，第四期，頁55-60。
周保男、張基成、傅心怡（2002），台灣地區企業e-Learning市場之發展現況與趨勢-從企業訓練面向觀之，教學科技與媒體，第62期，頁69-84。
黃同圳（1999），製造業人才培訓與勞動生產力提升策略之研究，勞委會職業訓練局。
鄒景平（2004），主題專家也可以是好講師，管理雜誌，第357期，頁48-52。
鄒景平（2004），Rapid e-Learning讓教育訓練快而省，管理雜誌，第359期，頁86-89。
楊中旗（2002），線上學習經驗分享，管理雜誌，第322期，頁90-93。
林怡君（2003），企業員工網路素養對e-learning接受度之研究，國立台灣科技大學企業管理系。
李佳穗（2004），數位學習平台對不同年資之員工學習成果探討-以國內某公司為例，私立銘傳大學管理科學研究所碩士論文。
施賀建（2003），學習風格與方式對學習成效之影響-以互動式與否為基礎，私立中原大學資訊管理學習碩士論文。
侯明順（2002），企業推動電子化學習之研究，國立台灣科技大學管理研究所碩士論文
劉譬儀（2003），國內企業e-Learning實施現況之分析研究，國立台灣師範大學工業教育學系碩士論文。
曾小玲（2002），企業推動e-learning模式之探討，國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
姜榮哲（2001），網路化訓練環境學習成效之影響要素研究，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
李郁卿（2002），推動以均衡計分卡為基礎的績效管理制度之個案研究 - 以一外商食品公司為例，國立中山大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文。
王景瀚、陳創立、陳怡靜（2001），運用CIPP評鑑模式評鑑網路化教育訓練，能力雜誌，2001年1月號，頁122-126。
廖肇弘（2002），建置有效的線上學習系統，管理雜誌，第321期，頁112-115。
我國數位學習產業現況與未來發展報告（2003），數位學習產業推動與發展計畫，經濟部工業局。
企業導入數位學習現況分析報告（2004），數位學習產業推動與發展計畫，經濟部工業局。
美國企業數位學習市場現況報告（2003），數位學習產業推動與發展計畫，經濟部工業局。

二、英文部分
Alliger,G.M. and Janak,E.A. (1989). Kirkpatrick’s levels of training criteria: Thirty years later. Personnel Psychology, 42(2): 331-341.
Brown, K. G., and Ford, J. K. (2002). Using computer technology in training: Building an infrastructure for active learning. In K. Kraiger (Ed.), Creating, implementing, and managing effective training and development , 192-233. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Carlson, H. L., (1991). Learning style and program design in interactive multimedia. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 39: 41–48.
Christina Keller & Lars Cernerud.(2002). Students’ Perception of E-learning in University Education. Fonkoping International Business School, and Malardalen University, Sweden.
David A.Huffaker & Sandra L.Calvert(2003). The new science of learning: active learning, metacognition, and transfer of knowledge on e-learning application. J. Education Computing Research, Vol.
DeRouin, R.E., Fritzsche,B.A., and Salas, E., (2004). Optimizing e-learning: research-based guidelines for learner-controlled training. Human Resource Management, 43: 147-162.
Donald Clark.(2002). Psychological myth in e-learning. Epic Group PLC. Medical Teacher, Vol. 24, pp.598-604.
Ellermann, H. H., and Free, E. L., (1990). A subject controlled environment for paired associate learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 17: 97–102.
Freitag, E. T., and Sullivan, H. J., (1995). Matching learner preference to amount of instruction: An alternative form of learner control. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 43: 5–14.
Fry, J. P.,(1972). Interactive relationship between inquisitiveness and student control of instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63: 459-465.
George M. Alliger, Scott I. Tannenbaum, Winston Bennett, JR., and Holly Traver, Allison Shotland, (1997). A Meta-Analysis of the Relations Among Training Criteria. Personnal Psychology .341-358.
Goldstein, L. L. (1986), Training in Organization: Needs Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (2nded.) Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Gray, S. H., (1987). The effect of sequence control on computer assisted learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 14: 54–56.
Hintze, H., Mohr, H., and Wenzel, A., (1988). Students’ attitudes towards control methods in computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 4: 3-10.
Kearsley, G. (1988). Authoring considerations for hypertext. Educational Technology, 28: 21-24.
Kenneth D.Loomis, Ph D(2000), Learning Style and Asynchronous Learning: Comparing the LASSI Model to Class Performance. JALN Volume 4, Issue 1.
Kevin Young, (2002), Is e-learning delivering ROI, Industrial and Commercial Training; ABI/INFORM Global pp.54.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1960), “Techniques for Evaluation Programs”, Journal of the American Society of Training Directors, volume 14, number 1, PP.13-18.
Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1994), Evaluating Training Programs: The four Levels, San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Lai, S., (2001). Controlling the display of animation for better understanding. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33.
Marla Capozzi, (2000). eLearning that starts with the learner, not the “e” ProQuest Education Complete Page 37
Mayer, R.F. and Clark, C., (1963). Explorations in student-controlled instruction. Psychological Reports,13: 71-76.
Merrill, M. D., (1984). What is learner control? Instructional development: The state of the art, Ⅱ. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 298 905).
Milheim, W. D., (1990). The effects of pacing and sequence control in an interactive video lesson. Educational and Training Technology International, 27, 7-19.
Murphy, M. A., and Davidson, G. V., (1991). Computer-based adaptive instruction: Effects of learner control on concept learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18: 51–56.
Park, O. (1991). Hypermedia: Functional features and research issues. Educational Technology, 31: 24-31.
Richard E, Mayer (2003). Elements of a science of e-learning. J. Education Computing Research, Vo29. University of California, Santa Barbara.
Ross, S. M., and Morrison, G. R., (1989). In search of a happy medium in instructional technology research: Issues concerning external validity, media replications, and learner control. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 37: 19-33.
Ross, S. M., and Rakow, E. A., (1981). Learner control versus program control as adaptive strategies for selection of instructional support on math rules. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73: 745-753.
Sasscer, M. F., and Moore, D. M., (1984). A study of the relationship between learnes-controe patternr and course complction in computer-assisted instruction. Programmed Learning and Educationce Technology, 21: 28-33.
Schmidt, A. M. and Ford, J. K., (2003). Learning within a learner control training environment: The interactive effects of goal orientation and metacognitive instruction on learning outcomes. Personnel Psychology,56: 405-429.
Schnackenberg, H. L., and Sullivan, H. J., (2000). Learner control over full and lean computerbased instruction under differing ability levels. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 48: 19–35.
Shyu, H., and Brown, S. W., (1992). Learner control versus program control in interactive videodisc instruction: What are the effects in procedural learning?. International Journal of Instructional Media, 19: 85–96.
Tennyson, R. D., (1980). Instructional control strategies and content structure as design variables in concept acquisition using computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72: 525-532.
Tennyson, R. D., Park, O. and Christensen, D. L., (1985). Adaptive control of learning time and content sequence in concept learning using computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4): 481-491.
Wydra, F. T. (1980). Learner controlled instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Zheng Yan, Hepin Hao, L. Jon Hobbs, Ning Wen. (2003). The Psychology of e-Learning: A Field of study. State University of New York at Albany & Tufts University. J. Education Computing Research, Vo29.