基於知識翻新理論之線上同步合作論證學習平台之開發與初步評估

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：35

、訪客IP：18.191.189.85

姓名

鄭宇傑(Yu-Chieh Cheng) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

基於知識翻新理論之線上同步合作論證學習平台之開發與初步評估
(Development and Preliminary Evaluation of Knowledge Building Theory-based Online Synchronous Collaborative Argumentation Learning Platform)

相關論文

★ 支援國小科展探究教與學之網路科展探究系統的開發與評估	★ 教師科展專業知識分享社群平台系統開發與評估
★ 科學小論文寫作平台的建置與評估	★ 「探究教學線上教師社群平台」之建置與評估:以知識管理理論為基礎
★ 科學閱讀平台之發展與評估	★ 以鷹架為基礎之科展探究系統平台之開發與評估
★ Improving Novice Teachers’ Instructional Practice Through Online Multilevel Reflection: The Role of Novice Teachers’ Beliefs	★ The Effect s of Video-based Reflection on Preservice Teachers′ Micro Teaching Focusing on Meaningful Learning with ICT
★ Examining Teachers’ Online Video-Based Reflective Practice for Professional Development Regarding Guided-Discovery Learning Instruction	★ 數位教育遊戲之開發與評估：以「Mr.道耳頓的奇幻歷險」為例
★ 應用自然語言處理技術開發基於知識翻新理論之線上非同步合作論證平台與平台初步評估	★ 同步討論與反思系統（SDRS）對小學生知識建構學習環境感知和學習成果的影響
★ 具有集成設計框架的同步在線論證系統用戶界面：重新設計和評估	★ 科學探究學習系統之開發與評估
★ 支援科學專題學習之線上學習平台開發與評估	★ 線上合作共同備課平台：開發與評估

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

[檢視]

[下載]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。

摘要(中)

本研究基於知識翻新理論設計「線上同步合作論證學習平台」(Synchronize Collaborative Argumentation Learning System，以下簡稱SCALS)，平台設計目的在於讓學生能夠透過此平台，完成小組論證，提出自身的想法與看法，持續改進與反思，進而提升學生的論證能力、反思思考能力、合作學習能力等。在完成平台開發後，本研究讓學生使用SCALS平台進行討論，並相互給予意見與回饋，研究者依據學生給予的意見與回饋，以評估SCALS，本研究採用調查研究法的問卷調查法，針對42名的高中學生進行問卷調查，評估學生對於SCALS的整體知覺有用性、整體知覺易用性、整體使用意願，以及鷹架功能與論證互動工具的知覺有用性。研究結果發現多數受測學生對於SCALS的整體知覺有用性、整體知覺易用性、整體使用意願以及鷹架功能與互動工具的知覺有用性皆給予正面的回饋，多數學生提及，SCALS平台提供之功能，具備有用性與易用性，亦願意使用系統進行論證活動，最後根據本研究的研究結果顯示，提出SCALS的建議與未來研究建議。

摘要(英)

The main purpose of this study is to develop the "Synchronous Collaborative Argumentation Learning System"（SCALS）based on Knowledge Building Theory to. By using the SCALS platform, the students are expected to improve argumentation skills and to have the opportunity to continuously reflect on their collaborative argumentation activity. After completing the development of the SCALS, a total of 42 Taiwanese high school students participated in the platform evaluations of SCALS. A modified questionnaire was used for the platform evaluations in terms of the students’ perceived usefulness of the SCALS, overall perceived ease of use, and willingness to use the SCALS. The research results indicated that the students expressed positive and satisfying perception regarding the usefulness and ease of use regarding the SCALS. Also, they expressed high willingness of using the SCALS for synchronous collaborative argumentation. Besides, they also indicated that the functions provided by SCALS were useful and user-friendly. Finally, from this research results of the data analysis, this study proposed suggestions and future research work for the improvement on SCALS.

關鍵字(中)

★ 論證
★ 知識翻新理論
★ 線上同步合作論證

關鍵字(英)

★ Argumentation
★ Knowledge Building Theory
★ Online Synchronous Collaborative Argumentation

論文目次

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vi
圖目錄 vii
第一章緒論 1
第一節、研究背景 1
第二節、研究動機與目的 3
第三節、研究問題 4
第四節、名詞解釋 5
第五節、研究範圍與限制 6
第二章文獻探討 7
第一節、合作論證學習 7
第二節、知識翻新 10
第三節、相關系統分析與比較 16
第三章系統設計與實作 21
第一節、系統開發方式 21
第二節、系統設計與規劃 23
第三節、系統功能架構與模組 36
第四節、系統配置 41
第五節、系統介面與角色功能畫面 42
第四章研究方法 63
第一節、研究對象 63
第二節、研究流程 64
第三節、系統評估流程 66
第四節、研究工具 67
第五節、資料收集與分析 70
第五章結果與討論 71
第一節、學生對於SCALS之整體知覺有用性與整體知覺易用性 71
第二節、學生對於SCALS之整體使用意願 73
第三節、學生對於SCALS之鷹架功能與論證互動工具知覺有用性 74
第四節、學生對於線上同步合作論證學習平台之改進意見與想法 79
第六章結論與建議 81
第一節、研究結論 81
第二節、系統改善建議 83
參考文獻 84
附錄 87
附錄一學生背景與其他回饋問卷 87
附錄二「線上同步合作論證學習平台」之科技接受度問卷 88
附錄三「線上同步合作論證學習平台」之鷹架功能與論證互動工具之知覺有用性問卷 89

參考文獻

洪煌堯、蔡佩真與林倍伊。（2014）。透過知識創新教學理念與學習平臺以培養國小學生自然課合作學習與翻新想法的習慣。科學教育學刊，22（4），413－439。
羅希哲、蔡慧音與曾國鴻。（2011）。高中女生 STEM 網路專題式合作學習之研究。高雄師大學報：自然科學與科技類（30），41－61。
Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to Learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of: The learning sciences (pp. 443-459). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer‐to‐peer dialog. Cognitive science, 33(3), 374-400.
Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2010). Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(3), 259-282.
Clark, D., Sampson, V., Stegmann, K., Marttunen, M., Kollar, I., Janssen, J., . . . Laurinen, L. (2010). Online learning environments, scientific argumentation, and 21st century skills E-Collaborative knowledge construction: Learning from computer-supported and virtual environments (pp. 1-39): IGI Global.
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2005). Analyzing the quality of argumentation supported by personally-seeded discussions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of th 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: the next 10 years!
Clark, D. B., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., Menekse, M., & Erkens, G. (2007). Technology-enhanced learning environments to support students′ argumentation Argumentation in science education (pp. 217-243): Springer.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science education, 84(3), 287-312.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin′s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science education, 88(6), 915-933.
Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: A review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional science, 38(6), 571-606.
Hong, H.-Y., Chen, F.-C., Chai, C. S., & Chan, W.-C. (2011). Teacher-education students’ views about knowledge building theory and practice. Instructional science, 39(4), 467-482.
Hong, H.-Y., & Sullivan, F. R. (2009). Towards an idea-centered, principle-based design approach to support learning as knowledge creation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 613.
Huang-Yao, H., & Shu-Ping, L. (2010). Teacher-Education Students′ Epistemological Belief Change through Collaborative Knowledge Building. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (De La Salle University Manila), 19(1).
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Designing argumentation learning environments Argumentation in science education (pp. 91-115): Springer.
Joiner, R., & Jones, S. (2003). The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking. International journal of educational research, 39(8), 861-871.
Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Design justifications and guidelines. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 439-457.
Kayler, M., & Weller, K. (2007). Pedagogy, self-assessment, and online discussion groups. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 136-147.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (2013). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts: Princeton University Press.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization science, 5(1), 14-37.
Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012). Argumentation-based computer supported collaborative learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 79-106.
Nussbaum, E. M., Kardash, C. M., & Graham, S. E. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 157.
Oliveira, A. W., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Interactive patterns and conceptual convergence during student collaborations in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 634-658.
Olson, O., Novacek, E., Whitehead, E., & Palmer, I. (1970). Investigations on selenium in wheat. Phytochemistry, 9(6), 1181-1188.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science education, 93(3), 448-484.
Sanders, J. A., Wiseman, R. L., & Gass, R. H. (1994). Does teaching argumentation facilitate critical thinking? Communication Reports, 7(1), 27-35.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal education in a knowledge society, 97, 67-98.
Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/Knowledge forum®. Education and technology: An encyclopedia, 183, 192.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the learning sciences, 1(1), 37-68.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building environments: Extending the limits of the possible in education and knowledge work. Encyclopedia of distributed learning, 269-272.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology: na.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International journal of science education, 28(2-3), 235-260.
Sun, Y., Zhang, J., & Scardamalia, M. (2010). Developing deep understanding and literacy while addressing a gender-based literacy gap. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1).
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The use of argument: Cambridge University Press.
Veerman, A. L., Andriessen, J. E., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Learning through synchronous electronic discussion. Computers & Education, 34(3-4), 269-290.
Walker, S. A. (2004). Socratic strategies and devil′s advocacy in synchronous CMC debate. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 172-182.
Walton, D. (2006). Examination dialogue: An argumentation framework for critically questioning an expert opinion. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(5), 745-777.
Wang, T., & Jong, M. S. (2016). Towards equitable quality education for all: Are MOOCs really a way out. Paper presented at the Conference proceedings of the 20th Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education.
Whitehead, A. N. (1959). The aims of education. Daedalus, 88(1), 192-205.
Yiong‐Hwee, T., & Churchill, D. (2007). Using sentence openers to support students’ argumentation in an online learning environment. Educational Media International, 44(3), 207-218.
Yuen, A. H., & Ma, W. W. (2008). Exploring teacher acceptance of e‐learning technology. Asia‐Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 229-243.
Zhang, J., Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., Teo, C. L., & Morley, E. A. (2011). Sustaining knowledge building as a principle-based innovation at an elementary school. The Journal of the learning sciences, 20(2), 262-307.

指導教授

吳穎沺(Ying-Tien WU)

審核日期

2019-7-12

推文