本研究將曾運用於兒童教育的同儕教學法應用於向量繪圖軟體的使用介面研究，並同時與傳統使用性評估方法中的共同發現法及發聲思考法比較。最後目的在探討同儕教學法的實驗可行性，並提供未來使用性研究者應用於使用性研究的實施建議。
　　本研究共有三個實驗，實驗方法分別為同儕教學法、共同發現法與發聲思考法。經實驗觀察獲得使用性問題中，包含同儕教學法有71項、共同發現法有119項、發聲思考法有77項。研究分析依性質分為質性與數性兩個部份：質性研究的部份是將所獲得之使用性問題依發生因素與使用能分類並比較方法之間的差異；數性研究的部份是將使用者滿意度評價作單因子變異數分析與平均及標準差的散佈分析。
　　研究結果發現，透過同儕教學法訊息傳遞的過程可有效了解使用者容易產生的問題以及應用該法於成人實驗對象的使用性研究是可行的。比較三法得到，同儕教學法是受測者最容易配合的的方法，共同發現法可發掘較多功能的問題並了解受測者對系統的看法與喜好，發聲思考法對受測者有較大的負擔且較難配合研究者的實驗要求。最後並提出未來研究者應用同儕教學法於使用性評估之實施建議。

　　Peer tutoring used in education of children was applied to usability evaluation in this study and compared with Co-discovery method and Thinking-aloud method. The purpose is to discuss the feasibility of peer tutoring and provide suggestions to usability researchers in the future researches.
　　There were three experiment methods in this study, including the peer tutoring, the co-discovery method , and the thinking-aloud method. Through the observation during the experiments, we got 71 usability problems in the peer tutoring method,119 usability problems in the co-discovery method, and 77 usability problems in the thinking-aloud method.
　　The analysis was divided into two parts- the qualities analysis and the quantitative analysis. In qualities analysis, the differences of causes and functions were compared between methods. In qualities analysis, the investigator analyzed the satisfaction by one-way ANOVA and scatter chart of averages and standard deviations.
It is effective to observe the usability problems by the peer tutoring approach and feasible to perform with adults experimenters. The peer tutoring approach is the most easily executed. The co-discovery method is the better method to observe various functions and to understand experimenters’ opinions and favors. The experimenters had much cognitive load in the thinking-aloud method.

參考文獻

(1)中文部份

1.Ranjit Kumar 著 ，胡龍騰、黃瑋瑩、潘中道合譯，”研究方法—步驟化學習指南”，
學富文化事業，2000
2.游政達，”應用焦點團體探討使用者需求脈絡之研究”，國立台北科技大學創新設計研
究所碩士學位論文，2003
3.蘇信方，”台灣寬頻網路使用者對網播服務網站使用性之探討：以東森寬頻網為例”，
世新大學資訊管理學系碩士學位論文，2001
4.張碧琴，”駕駛者認知地圖與車內導航系統使用行為模式之探討”，淡江大學碩士學位
論文，2004
5.賈惠雯，”同儕個別教學對國小英語低成就學生字母拼讀學習成就及學習態度影響之研
究”，國立台北師範學院兒童英語教育研究所碩士學位論文，2004
6.黃善美，”同儕師徒制輔助教學策略之個案研究”，國立台東大學教育研究所碩士學位
論文，2004
7.許莉真，”同儕教導在融合教育班的個案研究---以唐氏症兒童為例”，靜宜大學青少年
兒童福利學系碩士學位論文，2002
8.馬芳婷，社教機構短期研習班教師行為與學生學習滿意度研究。國立師範大學社會教育
研究所碩士論文，1989

(2)西文部份

1.Hackman, G. S. and Biers, D. W. , Team usability testing: Are two heads
better than one? Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual
Meeting, pp.1205-1209 ,1992

2.Barbetta, P. M ., Miller, A. D ., Peters, M. T., Heron, T. E. and Cochran,
L. L.,Tugmate: A Cross-Age Tutoring Program to Teach Sight Vocabulary.
Education And Treatment Of Young Children 14/1 pp.19-37,1991

3.Benford, S., Bederson, B.B., Akesson, K., Bayon, V., Druin, A., Hansson, P.,
Hourcade, J.P., Ingram, R., Neale,H., O’Malley, C., Simsarian, K., Stanton,
D., Sundblad, Y.and Taxe´n, G..Designing storytelling technologies to
encourage collaboration between young children.ACM Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems, CHI Letters 2 (1), pp.556–563,2000

4.Bennet, J.Managing to meet usability requirements: establishing and meeting
software development goals. In: Bennet, J., Case,D., Sandelin, J., Smith, M.
(Eds.), Visual Display Terminals.Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,
pp.161–184,1984

5.Bernstein, S., Boquiren, C.,and Cho, A. Keeping cross-age tutoring alive:
Growing and sustaining a school-wide tutoring program.,1997

6.Beth Kelly.Washington Reading Corps Toolkit module 6 Peer and Cross-age
Tutoring.Washington Superintendent of Public Instruction Washington Reading
Corps,2004

7.Boren, M.T.and Ramey,J.Thinking-aloud: reconciling theory and practice. IEEE
Transactions on Professional Communication 43 (3),pp.261–278.,2000

8.Britz,M.W.,Dixon,J.and McLaughlin,T.F.,The Effects ofpeer tutoring on
Mathematics Performance: A Recent Review.,B.C.Journal Of Special Education
13/1,pp.17-33.,1989

9.Buurman, R.D.,User-centered design of smart products.Ergonomics 40
(10),pp.1159–1169,1997

10.Cassell, J.and Ryokai, K.,Making space for voice: technologies to support
children’s fantasy and storytelling.Personal Technologies (3), pp.203–
224.,2001

11.Cohen,P.A.,and Kulik,J.A.Synthesis of Research on the Effects of
Tutoring.,Educational Leadership 39/3,pp.226-227.,1981

12.Corsaro,W.A.,Interpretive reproduction in children’s peer cultures. Social
Psychology Quarterly 55,pp.160–177.,1992

13.Damon,W., and Phelps, E.Critical Distinctions Among Three Approaches. In
Peer Interaction, Problem-Solving, And Cognition: Multidisciplinary
Perspectives, edited by N. M. Webb. New York: Pergamon Press, pp.9-19, 1989

14.Druin,A.,Cooperative Inquiry：Developing New Technologies for Children with
Children ,Proceedings of CHI’99,ACM Press,Pittsburgh, PA, pp.592-599,1999

15.Giesecke, D.,Cartledge, G., and Gardner, R.Low-Achieving Students as
Successful Cross-Age Tutors.,Preventing School Failure 37/3 pp.34-43., 1993

16.Goldschmid,B.and Goldschmid,M.L,Peer teaching in higher education : a
review,Higher Education,5,pp 9-33.,1976

17.Goodblad, S.and Hirst, B.,.Peer tutoring , a Guide to Learning and
Teaching,Kogan Page,London.,1989

18.Hewett,T.T.,and Scott,S.The use of thinking-out-aloud and protocol analysis
in development of a process model of interactive database searching. Proc.
IFIP INTERACT’87 Second Intl. Conf. HCI (Stutt-grat, Germany,1-4
September),pp.51-56,1987

19.Hoysniemi, J., Hamalainen, P.and Turkki, L., Using peer tutoring in
Evaluating Usability of Physically Interactive Computer Game with
Children .Interacting with Computers Vol.15,pp.203-225,2003

20.Ilse E.H. van,Mathilde M.Bekker,Arnold P.O.S Vermeeren and Peter A.
Lloyd,Assessuing Usability Evaluation Method On Their Effectiveness To
Elicit Verbal Comments From Children Subjects.pp43-46,2003

21.Inkpen, K., Ho-Ching, W., Kuederle, O., Scott, S.and Shoemaker, G.,This is
fun! We’re all best friends and we’re all playing:supporting children’s
synchronous collaboration. Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative
Learning (CSCL) ,pp.252–259.,1999

22.John,B.E.and Marks,S.J.Tracking the effectiveness of usability evaluation
methods.,Behaviour and Information Technology. pp.188-202, 1997

23.Jordan ,P.W.An Introduction To Usability.Taylor & Francis,UK,1998a

24.Jordan, P.W. Human factors for pleasure in product use,Appl. Ergon. 29
(1),pp.25–33.,1998b

25.Kwahk, J. Y. and Sung H. Han,A methodology for evaluating the usability of
audiovisual consumer electronic products, Applied Ergonomics, Vol. 33, pp.
419-431,2002.

26.Kemp,J.A.M.and Gelderen,T.van,Co-discovery exploring：an inform method for
iteratively designing consumer product.,1996

27.Kent L.Norman.and Elizabeth D.Murphy.Usability testing of an internet form
for the 2004 overseas enumeration test : interactive testing using think-
aloud and retrospective report method.,2004

28.Kwahk, J.A methodology for evaluating the usability of audiovisual consumer
electronic products. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Pohang University of
Science and Technology,Pohang,South Korea.,1999

29.Nielsen,J,Evaluating the thinking-aloud trchnique for use by computer
scientists.HCI,Vol.3,pp.69-82,1992a.

30.Nielsen,J.The usability engineering lifecycle.IEEE Computer, 25(3), pp.12-
22,1992b

31.Nielsen,J.Usability Engineering”Academic Press,Boston.,1993

32.Nielsen, J.and Mack, R. L.Usability Inspection Methods,New York: John
Wiley.,1994

33.Nielsen, J.Estimating the number of subjects needed for a thinking-aloud
test.International Journal of Human-Computer Studies,41, pp.385-397., 1994

34.Norman,D.A., The Psychology of Everyday Things ,New York：Basic Books,1998

35.Norman, K. L.and Murphy,Usability Testing Of An Internet Form For The 2004
Overseas Enumeration Test: Iterative Testing Using Think-Aloud And
Retrospective Report Methods.Human Factors and Ergonmics Society,2004

36.Norman, Cognitive Engineering, in User-Centred System Design: New
Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, D. A. Norman and S. W. Draper,
Eds. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986.

37.Rhenius, D., and Deffner, G.Evaluation of concurrent thinking-aloud using
eye-tracking data.Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 34th Annual
Meeting.Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.pp. 1265-1269,1990

38.Rooden, M.J .“Thinking about thinking-aloud” In : M.A . HANSON *
(eds .) ; Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Ergonomics Society.
(Cirencester (UK), I -4- 1998), Taylor & Francis, London (UK), pp. 328-
332.,1998

39.Stewart, J., Bederson, B.B.and Druin, A.,” Single display groupware: a
model for co-present collaboration.”Proceedings of CHI99,pp. 286–293.,1999

40.Suri, J.F.andMarsh, M.“Scenario building as an ergonomics method in
consumer product design.” Appl. Ergon. 31,pp.151–157.,2000

41.Van Kesteren, I., Bekker, M.M., Vermeeren, A.P.O.S.,and Lloyd” Assessing
usability evaluation methods on their effectiveness to elicit verbal
information from children subjects” Conference on Interaction Design and
Children,,2003

42.Wildman, D.“Getting the most from paired-user testing.”pp.21–27.,1995

43.Wilson, C.andBlostein, J.“Pros and cons of co-participation in usability
studies.” Usability Interface 4 (4).,1998