國家教育研究院

　　本計畫主要目的是深入分析我國學術性百科全書類工具書之發展策略，作為我國推動學術性百科全書類工具書發展的參考。除根據相關文獻進行分析外，亦採焦點團體訪談方法，訪談7位具有編輯百科全書經驗與研究的專家學者。研究發現編輯學術性百科全書會受到Wiki的開放性編輯模式影響，另我國學術性百科全書中文資源明顯少於英文資源，且基礎專業知識的學者越來越少，是編輯學術性百科全書上遭遇的困難與挑戰。

　　編輯學術性百科全書類工具書極具知識價值，但需要長時間的投入，並耗費大量的人力以及財力。目前我國學術性百科的編輯模式仍是由專家撰稿的傳統編輯模式，編輯上應依使用者的需求有不同程度的內容，並注明引用文獻，以及運用超連結，將更符合使用者的需求。

　　在學術性百科全書的評鑑指標方面，本研究與文獻分析結果相符，依序為正確性、易讀性、客觀性、權威性、新穎性，不同的是加入易檢性。而為確保學術性百科全書的客觀性，應與實務界和學術界一起進行審查。

　　編輯學術性百科全書的工程浩大且需持續進行，故應由政府主導編輯，短期目標可從中文基礎學科開始（例如文史哲），中期目標為整合現有資源，注明百科全書內容資料是否經過審查，讓使用者自行選擇及判斷所需資訊。長期目標為持續編輯、定期維護與更新學術性百科全書的內容，若由專門的政府單位（例如國家教育研究院）進行整體規劃與執行，將更為合適。

　　本計畫研究指出百科全書的編輯模式仍維持三種主要的編輯模式，一是傳統自聘專家撰稿的編輯模式，二是直接翻譯國外權威百科全書的模式，三是採用網路大規模協作的模式。本計畫對於傳統專家編輯百科全書和群體協作的網路百科全書均有詳盡之探討，可供發展雲端工具書服務平臺之參考。編輯學術性百科全書會受到網路影響，如 Wiki的開放性編輯模式，學術性百科全書會因此而感到資源不足，也使得使用者感到中文資源明顯少於英文資源。評鑑模式與指標方面需參考國外指標、增列易檢性指標，並應該要實務界和學術界一起進行審查。本計畫建議編輯學術性百科全書比較好的方式是由政府主導，由政府出資，而由出版社和學術機構來整合，是編輯學術性百科全書比較好的方式，在實務上也比較容易推動。而國教院是適合擔任長期發展學術性百科全書的整體規劃與執行機構。

　　This project was designed to analyze the development strategy of academic encyclopedia in Taiwan. We used focus group discussions—interviewing 7 experts and scholars experienced in editing or researching encyclopedias—along with document analysis. In addition to the unavoidable influence and challenge from Wiki model of openly collaborative editing and modification, this study finds one obstacle nowadays to compiling an encyclopedia: the shortage of Chinese resources, which is far less than English resources, and the declining number of specialists with basic knowledge.

　　Compiling an academic encyclopedia although it is immeasurable for its value of knowledge, is nevertheless a long-term investments which requires an enormous amount of human and financial capital. Currently the traditional way of compiling—inviting experts and scholars to write the contents—is still preferred, but user-oriented design is highlighted that includes content division into different levels according to various needs of users, availability of works cited and references, and application of hyperlinks.

　　This research matches well with the result of document analysis in terms of evaluation indicators. They are accuracy, readability, objectivity, authority, novelty, and, what makes this study different, retrievability . To ensure the objectivity of an academic encyclopedia, the examination work should be undertaken by scholars along with specialists serving in practical fields.

　　Since compiling an academic encyclopedia requires tremendous amount of work in continuity, the government should lead the work. It can begin with basic subjects of Chinese such as language and literature, history, and philosophy, as the short-term goal; and subsequently integrate available resources and provide reliable information to users by noticing un-/examined contents. The long-term goal is to extend continuously and update regularly. It cannot be more suitable if a specific governmental institution conducts the work (such as National Academy for Educational Research).

　　The study found that encyclopedia remain three major editing modes, one is the traditional self-employed specialist writer edit mode, the second is a direct translation of foreign authoritative encyclopedia model, the third is the use of large-scale collaboration network mode. Encyclopedia could edit by online platform, such as Wiki editing mode. Some academic encyclopedia lacks of resources, and Chinese resources less than English resources. Evaluation indicators are easy to retrieve, reviewed by practitioners and scholars. The study suggested that the better way to edit academic encyclopedia is dominated and funded by the Government, but by academic institutions to integrate. For long-term development for academic encyclopedia of overall planning and implementation agency, the National Academy for Educational Research is suitable.