線上議題探究系統之探究能力分析

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：65

、訪客IP：18.225.195.163

姓名

盧昱豪(Yu-Hao Lu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

線上議題探究系統之探究能力分析
(The Analysis of Inquiry Ability with Online Issue-based Inquiry System)

相關論文

★ 遊戲式學習增進印尼國小兒童運算思維之成效研究	★ 科技輔助版圖遊戲增進印尼兒童英語詞彙學習之成效研究
★ 運用均一教育平台於國中資源班學生數學學習之研究	★ <亞米大陷阱>數位學習營養教育遊戲對臺灣飲食營養價值學習成效之探討
★ 台灣地形遊戲教育中的沙盒擴增實境系統設計與評估	★ 線上議題遊戲系統之遊戲行為與互動歷程探討
★ 複合式領地桌遊之學習者人格特質與歷史思維分析	★ 探討成人玩家於議題式遊戲之行為與人格特質的關係
★ 大航海高峰會遊戲中的玩家衝突策略與人格分析	★ 探討成人玩家於大航海高峰會遊戲中情緒與人格的關係
★ 線上社群溝通課程對學員互動關係與團隊發展歷程研究	★ 機械戰馬：連桿仿生機器人之開發及教學設計與運算思維表現評估
★ 情境議題式策略遊戲平台的開發與評估	★ 科技融入幼兒生命教育繪本之學習、興趣、歷程與成效
★ 線上歷史探究系統對中學生歷史思維與探究學習成效分析	★ 文化美感教育桌遊＜金色絲路＞對小學生美感鑑賞素養與文化認知之學習分析影響

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]

至系統瀏覽論文 (2025-7-1以後開放)

摘要(中)

本研究利用線上網站的平台，讓學生進行社會性科學探究學習，是為學生理解社會科學議題所提供的一個自主學習環境。以科學素養促進主動學習策略的探究性學習模式，及開發良好的學習資源已成為教育的趨勢。本研究設計開發一套「基於社會性科學議題之石虎遊戲系統」，可以讓學生自由的在系統中提出問題，蒐集資料，解釋分析資料，並做討論跟歸納結果在系統的學習單內。
本研究透過課堂兩節課的引導式探究學習過程，質性研究為主、量化問卷為輔的方式。質性資料以學生進行石虎探究遊戲後，利用文字分析的方式，來探討學習者所探究的內容。量化數據的部分則是以系統的知識專業度、遊戲內容豐富性、系統功能性以及學習者對於整體實驗的滿意度，研究者從這些結果分析學生的回饋意見，進而去改善整體實驗，並在之後的實驗給予學習者更棒的遊戲體驗。
研究結果發現，各國家的小組皆發展出了獨有的探究內容，並更進一步地去完善內容的豐富度，除了研究者設計的內容外，學生自行增加了學習的內容，使整體學生增加學習內容的認知。在系統的表現上，學生對於系統的功能、整體系統感受及實驗設計的內容豐富性皆給予相當高的回饋。

摘要(英)

This research uses the platform of the online website to allow students to conduct social science inquiry learning, which is an autonomous learning environment for students to understand social science issues. The inquiry learning mode that promotes active learning strategies with scientific literacy and the development of good learning resources have become the trend of education. This research designs and develops a set of 「Social Science Issue-based Shihu Game System」, which allows students to freely ask questions in the system, collect data, interpret and analyze data, and discuss and summarize the results in the system′s study sheet.
In this study, through the guided inquiry learning process of two classes in the classroom, qualitative research is the main method and quantitative questionnaire is supplemented. Qualitative data use the method of word analysis to explore the content of the students′ exploration after students play the Shihu exploration game. The part of quantitative data is based on the knowledge and expertise of the system, the richness of the game content, the system functionality, and the learner′s satisfaction with the overall experiment. The researcher analyzes the students′ feedback from these results, and then improves the overall experiment. Subsequent experiments give learners a better gaming experience.
The results of the study found that the groups in each country have developed unique content of inquiry and further improved the richness of the content. In addition to the content designed by the researchers, the students themselves increased the learning content, which enabled the overall students to increase their learning. content awareness. In the performance of the system, students gave very high feedback on the function of the system, the overall system experience and the richness of the experimental design.

關鍵字(中)

★ 探究式學習
★ 社會議題
★ 議題式教育
★ 永續發展目標

關鍵字(英)

★ Inquiry-based learning
★ Social issues
★ Issue-based learning
★ Sustainable Development Goals

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 x
一、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的 2
1-3 研究問題 2
二、文獻探討 4
2-1 探究式學習 4
2-2 議題式教育 8
2-3 數位遊戲式學習 11
三、研究設計 12
3-1 研究設計與流程 12
3-2 課程規劃與遊戲內容 13
3-2-1 環境開發/動物保育學習單 14
3-2-2 水資源數據 16
3-2-3 土地資訊 18
3-2-4 動物保育 23
3-2-5 植被 26
3-3 開發工具 27
3-4 系統開發介面 29
3-4-1 首頁及登入註冊介面設計 29
3-4-2 登入後首頁及國家資訊 30
3-5 系統紀錄 32
3-6 系統功能說明 34
3-6-1 使用案例圖 34
3-7 遊戲歷程 36
3-7-1 遊戲開始前置作業 36
3-7-2 探究過程 38
3-7-3 議題討論與總結 40
四、實驗設計 41
4-1 實驗對象 41
4-2 實驗架構 41
4-3 實驗工具 43
4-3-1 學習單 43
4-3-2 資料處理 44
4-3-3 反思與回饋問卷 44
五、研究結果 45
5-1 探究內容分析 45
5-2 數據探究差異 61
5-3 探究能力分析 69
5-3-1 綜合能力 69
5-3-2 個別能力運用難易度探討 70
5-4 系統建議與回饋 71
5-4-1 探究活動滿意度分析 71
5-4-2 探究狀態與感受 73
5-4-3 系統功能以及介面的建議 73
六、結論與未來建議 74
6-1 結論 74
6-2 未來建議 76
參考文獻 77
中文部分 77
英文部分 77
附件一線上議題探究系統 81
附件二探究學習單 85

參考文獻

中文部分
張子超。（2017）。議題教育的意義與課程融入-以環境教育為例。教育脈動，（11），23-30。
高翠霞，高慧芬，&楊嵐智。（2018）。十二年國教議題課程的挑戰-以環境教育為例。臺灣教育評論月刊， 7(10)， 68-75。
英文部分
Anderson, R. D. (2013). Inquiry as an organizing theme for science curricula. In Handbook of research on science education (pp. 821-844). Routledge.
Annetta, L. A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. Y., & Cheng, M. T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, 53(1), 74-85.
Boulter, C. J., & Buckley, B. C. (2000). Constructing a typology of models for science education. In Developing models in science education (pp. 41-57). Springer, Dordrecht.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Buck, L. B., Bretz, S. L., & Towns, M. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory. Journal of college science teaching, 38(1), 52-58.
Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science scope, 23(6), 42-44.
Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J., & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving science inquiry with elementary students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: the Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 337-357.
Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Relationship between teacher beliefs and science education reform. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7(4), 247-266.
Duit, R., Roth, W. M., Komorek, M., & Wilbers, J. (2001). Fostering conceptual change by analogies—between Scylla and Charybdis. Learning and Instruction, 11(4-5), 283-303.
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 82(3), 300-329.
Gholam, A. P. (2019). Inquiry-based learning: Student teachers’ challenges and perceptions. Journal of Inquiry and Action in Education, 10(2), 6.
Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer‐supported biology class. Journal of research in science teaching, 40(10), 1072-1088.
Hakkarainen, K. A. I. (2003). Emergence of progressive-inquiry culture in computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning Environments Research, 6(2), 199-220.
Haury, D. L. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. Striving for excellence: The national education goals, 2, 71-77.
Kafai, Y. (2001). The educational potential of electronic games: From games-to-teach to games-to-learn. Playing By The Rules, Cultural Policy Center, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, 2001.
Krajcik, J., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., & Fishman, B. (2000). Inquiry Based Science Supported by Technology: Achievement among Urban Middle School Students.
Laurie, R., Nonoyama-Tarumi, Y., Mckeown, R., & Hopkins, C. (2016). Contributions of education for sustainable development (ESD)to quality education: A synthesis of research. Journal of Education for Sustainable development, 10(2), 226-242.
Pauw, J. B. D., Gericke, N., Olsson, D., & Berglund, T. (2015). The effectiveness of education for sustainable development. Sustainability, 7(11), 15693-15717.
Pedaste, M., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). Developing an effective support system for inquiry learning in a web‐based environment. Journal of computer assisted learning, 22(1), 47-62.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., ... & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47-61.
Pedersen, C. S. (2018). The UN sustainable development goals (SDGs) are a great gift to business!. Procedia Cirp, 69, 21-24.
Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 21-21.
Robottom, I. (2012). Socio-scientific issues in education: Innovative practices and contending epistemologies. Research in science education, 42(1), 95-107.
Seatter, C. S., & Ceulemans, K. (2017). Teaching Sustainability in Higher Education: Pedagogical Styles That Make a Difference. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 47(2), 47-70.
Shih, J. L., Chuang, C. W., & Hwang, G. J. (2010). An inquiry-based mobile learning approach to enhancing social science learning effectiveness. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 50-62.
Sipos, Y., Battisti, B., & Grimm, K. (2008). Achieving transformative sustainability learning: engaging head, hands and heart. International journal of sustainability in higher education.
Song, Y., & Kong, S. C. (2014). Going beyond textbooks: A study on seamless science inquiry in an upper primary class. Educational Media International, 51(3), 226-236.
Trevors, J. T., & Saier, M. H. (2010). Education for humanity. Water, air, and soil pollution, 206(1), 1-2.
Van Poeck, K., Læssøe, J., & Block, T. (2017). An exploration of sustainability change agents
as facilitators of nonformal learning: Mapping a moving and intertwined
landscape. Ecology and Society, 22(2).
Voulvoulis, N., & Burgman, M. A. (2019). The contrasting roles of science and technology in environmental challenges. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 49(12), 1079-1106.
Yang, L. C., & Kao, T. S. (2019). Review and foresight for the curriculum integration of environmental education. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 15(2), 1-25.

指導教授

施如齡(Ju-Ling Shih)

審核日期

2022-7-18

推文