AI助理支持教師作為閱讀個人導師

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：28

、訪客IP：18.227.134.133

姓名

涂弘旻(Hong-Min Tu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

AI助理支持教師作為閱讀個人導師
(AI Support for Teachers as Personal Reading Mentors)

相關論文

★ 探索電玩遊戲頻率對於視覺注意力表現能力的效應	★ 代理表現學習模式—以動物同伴為例
★ 常用邏輯句型重組之學習	★ 電腦支援國小數學文字題擬題活動初探
★ 解釋數學：透過科技支援創作與討論以增強小學生的數學溝通能力	★ 提問式鷹架教學結合數位閱讀寫作系統對國小低年級學生語文能力的影響
★ 數學島：興趣驅動之國小數學線上平台設計與初步評估	★ 以「猜擬題」活動增進學生數學文字題解題能力
★ 基於學生練習使用回饋之學習成效預測模型與動態題數練習機制	★ 透過主題地圖與寵物同伴促進閱讀更深更廣的書籍
★ 具推薦書籍功能之閱讀島系統架構設計	★ 透過學生影片創作進行國小數學學習:趣創者理論之應用
★ 英文單字樂園：學生自創字卡搭配複習機制強化英文字彙學習之系統設計及學習成效初探	★ 設計與實作明日寫作系統增進國小學生寫作表現
★ 設計與實踐「提升式寫作」活動以提升國小學生寫作品質與寫作興趣	★ TTPR：設計科技強化型全肢體反應為了小學生和國中生在印尼學習英語詞彙

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 (2026-8-10以後開放)

摘要(中)

明日閱讀計畫自2012年推廣至今，已經成功推動台灣中小學進行閱讀活動，研究團隊先前曾提出願望書單概念和閱讀個人教練模式，讓教師透過師生聊書活動，進一步了解學生狀況，並引導學生擴展閱讀廣度和興趣。然而，現今教師在師生聊書活動中的教學負擔過重，而師生聊書活動是教師掌握學生閱讀狀況和學習成效的重要管道，因此可能導致願望書單活動的執行成效不彰。
為了減輕教師在師生聊書活動和願望書單活動中的教學負擔，本研究為教師開發了專屬的「AI助理」，其中包含了「聊書輔助」和「書籍推薦」兩個主要功能，聊書輔助功能主要是透過AI技術，幫助教師在師生聊書活動中自動記錄、分析與學生的聊書內容，而書籍推薦功能則是能夠即時將學生的學習歷程資訊和班級圖書資訊呈現給教師參考，讓教師能夠在願望書單活動中，針對個別學生推薦適合的書籍，以及給予不同學生個別化的指導。
本研究之研究對象為國小二至六年級的教師與學生，共5位教師和75位學生。並收集師生聊書紀錄、願望書單活動的選書紀錄，以及教師訪談結果，以了解AI助理的導入，對於教學活動的影響。
透過質性和量化的分析發現，AI助理的「聊書輔助功能」能夠將教師的教學工作從原先記錄、整理和分析，這類低層次且繁瑣的工作，轉變成為個別學生提供專業的教導與指引，這類型的高層次教學工作。而AI助理提供給教師不同面向的分析與輔助功能，能夠幫助教師將引導學生參與聊書活動的教學工作，轉變成幫助學生掌握新知識、引導學生自主探索學習等類型的教學工作，也能夠間接提升低年級學生在聊書過程中所講述的內容和想法的豐富度，以及影響高年級學生在聊書過程中所使用的分享策略。而「書籍推薦功能」則是能夠為教師提供即時的學生學習歷程資料和書籍的詳細資訊，讓教師能夠更輕易地向學生推薦適合的書籍，以幫助教師成為每位學生的「閱讀個人導師」。

摘要(英)

Reading for Tomorrow, promoted since 2012, has successfully encouraged reading activities in Taiwanese schools. The research team previously proposed the concept of a "wish booklists" and a "personal reading coach" model, allowing teachers to better understand students′ reading habits through teacher-student book discussions and to guide them in broadening their reading scope and interests. However, today’s teachers are often overwhelmed by the workload involved in these discussions, which are crucial for tracking students’ reading progress and learning outcomes. As a result, the effectiveness of implementing the wish list activity might be compromised.
To reduce the workload for teachers in teacher-student book discussions and the wish booklists activities, this study has developed an exclusive "AI Assistant" for teachers. This AI Assistant includes two main functions: "Book Discussion Support" and "Book Recommendation." The Book Discussion Support function uses AI technology to help teachers automatically record and analyze the content of book discussions with students. The Book Recommendation function provides real-time information on students′ learning progress and book information for teachers′, enabling them to recommend suitable books for individual students and provide personalized guidance during wish booklists activities.
This study focused on 5 teachers and 75 students from grades 2 to 6 in elementary schools. It collected records of teacher-student book discussions, selections from wish booklists activities, and results from teacher interviews, to evaluate the impact of system integration on instructional activities.
Through qualitative and quantitative analysis, it was found that the AI Assistant′s "Book Discussion Support" function can shift teachers′ work from low-level, tedious tasks such as recording, organizing, and analyzing to high-level instructional tasks like providing professional guidance and support to individual students. The AI assistant′s various analytical and support functions help teachers shift from guiding students in book discussion activities to aiding students in grasping new knowledge and encouraging independent learning. This transformation enhances junior grades students′ content richness and ideas during discussions and influences Senior grades students′ sharing strategies. Additionally, the "Book Recommendation" function provides real-time student learning progress data and detailed book information to teachers, facilitating easier book recommendations tailored to each student′s needs, thus enabling teachers to play the role of "Personal Reading Mentors" for their students.

關鍵字(中)

★ AI輔助教學
★ 師生聊書
★ 願望書單
★ 個人閱讀導師
★ 明日閱讀2.0

關鍵字(英)

★ AI-Assisted Teaching
★ Teacher-Student Book Discussions
★ Wish Booklists
★ Personal Reading Mentors
★ Reading for Tomorrow 2.0

論文目次

摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
致謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 ix
第一章、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
1.4 論文架構 3
第二章、文獻探討 5
2.1 閱讀相關研究 5
2.1.1 閱讀的重要性 5
2.1.2 身教式持續安靜閱讀(Modeled Sustained Silent Reading) 6
2.1.3 明日閱讀2.0 7
2.1.4 閱讀後延伸活動 9
2.2 科技支持教師教學 10
2.2.1 教師在閱讀活動中所扮演的角色 10
2.2.2 閱讀個人導師 11
2.2.3 科技輔助教師教學工作 12
2.3 科技支持聊書活動 14
第三章、活動設計與系統介紹 16
3.1 系統設計背景 16
3.2 系統開發架構與流程 19
3.3 系統設計階段與目的 20
3.3.1 階段一：教學活動數位化 20
3.3.2 階段二：聊書記錄與分析自動化 21
3.3.3 階段三：學習歷程具象化 22
3.4 系統頁面與功能說明 24
3.4.1 支持「願望書單活動」數位化之頁面與功能說明 24
3.4.2 支持「聊書記錄與分析自動化」之系統頁面與功能說明 30
3.4.3 支持「學習歷程具像化」之頁面與功能說明 39
第四章、研究方法與分析 42
4.1 研究參與者與環境 42
4.2 設計研究法 44
4.3 研究流程 45
4.4 研究工具 47
4.4.1 師生聊書歷程紀錄與系統操作日誌 47
4.4.2 評分指標 47
4.4.3 半結構性訪談 54
4.5 資料收集與分析 59
4.5.1 資料收集過程 59
4.5.2 資料分析方法 61
第五章、研究結果與討論 64
5.1 AI助理之「聊書輔助功能」對於師生聊書活動的影響 64
5.1.1 AI助理之「聊書輔助功能」對於學生的影響 65
5.1.2 AI助理之「聊書輔助功能」對於教師的影響 71
5.2 AI助理之「書籍推薦功能」對於願望書單活動的影響 79
5.2.1 AI助理之「書籍推薦功能」對於閱讀目標設定與學生閱讀行為的影響 79
5.2.2 AI助理之「書籍推薦功能」對於教師掌握學習歷程與書籍資訊的影響 82
5.3「AI助理」對於輔助教師作為「閱讀個人導師」的影響 84
第六章、結論與討論 86
6.1 結論 86
6.1.1 AI助理之「聊書輔助功能」對於師生聊書活動的影響為何？ 86
6.1.2 AI助理之「書籍推薦功能」對於願望書單活動的影響為何？ 87
6.1.3「AI助理」對於輔助教師作為「閱讀個人導師」的影響為何？ 88
6.2 研究限制 89
6.3 未來展望 90
參考文獻 93
中文文獻 93
英文文獻 94
附錄一、AI助理的聊書輔助功能之提示詞(Prompt)說明 99
附錄二、學生聊書策略分析之提示詞(Prompt)說明 101

參考文獻

丁延欣（2022）。促進教師成為閱讀個人教練之初步模式設計與系統開發。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所。
中華明日閱讀協會（2023）。2023明日閱讀日參與狀況分布。晨讀運動-明日閱讀日。取自https://www.readingfortomorrow.org/LightUpMssr/2023/index.php
李筠茱（2019）。臺灣教師使用歐盟 Go-Lab 系統進行線上探究式教學之推展研究［碩士論文］。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
林宥邑（2021）。實施身教式持續安靜閱讀對國小五年級生識字能力與閱讀理解能力影響之實驗研究〔碩士論文〕。屏東科技大學技職教育研究所。
林英傑（2017）。引趣、入趣、延趣－讓孩子在閱讀中「Hide & Seek」。臺灣教育評論月刊，6(9)，303-307。
柯華葳（2017）。教出閱讀力(2017 暢銷增修版)。台灣：親子天下。
唐寓琳（2021）。身教式持續安靜閱讀對於國小五年級學童閱讀動機與閱讀習慣影響之研究〔碩士論文〕。國立政治大學圖書資訊學數位碩士在職專班。
徐詩惠（2020）。運用身教式持續安靜閱讀及其延伸方案對國中生閱讀興趣及閱讀理解影響之研究〔碩士論文〕。慈濟大學教育研究所。
徐銘駿（2020）。具推薦書籍功能之閱讀島系統架構設計。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所。
教育部國教署（2019）。108課綱適性揚才迎向未來。108課綱資訊網。取自https://shs.k12ea.gov.tw/site/12basic
教育部國教署（2023）。臺灣PISA 2022成果發表。教育部全球資訊網。取自https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9E7AC85F1954DDA8&s=1A08AD2FC666D4C6
許喬珉（2023）。明日閱讀2.0：發展成就目標系統並初步評估對學生閱讀廣度與數量之影響。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所。
陳欣琳（2020）。身教式持續安靜閱讀對於臺灣孩童之英語閱讀動機及閱讀理解之影響〔未出版之碩士論〕。國立臺中科技大學英語學系。
陳德懷（2016）。明日閱讀：明日主題學習的基礎。台灣：天下雜誌。
黃秋霞、楊志強、蔡宜雯（2022）。互動式 AR 輔助學習裝置軟體使用滿意度調查。特殊教育發展期刊，(73)，33-56。
盧雅雯、莊文啟、歐陽誾（2019）。持續安靜閱讀對國小一年級學童識字能力與閱讀興趣之影響。教育學誌，(42)，1-53。
賴瑞霖（2021）。閱讀島：應用數位閱讀歷程擴大學生閱讀舒適圈及提升閱讀動機之系統設計。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所。
Ahmad, S. F., Alam, M. M., Rahmat, M. K., Mubarik, M. S., & Hyder, S. I. (2022). Academic and administrative role of artificial intelligence in education. Sustainability, 14(3), 1101.
Ajideh, P., Zohrabi, M., & Khojand, B. (2024). Exploring the Effectiveness of Pre-and Post-Reading Activities on the Development of Reading Motivation and Self-Regulation as Essentials for Reading Comprehension. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 11(3), 25-49.
Akram, H., Yingxiu, Y., Al-Adwan, A. S., & Alkhalifah, A. (2021). Technology integration in higher education during COVID-19: An assessment of online teaching competencies through technological pedagogical content knowledge model. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 736522.
Al Darayseh, A. (2023). Acceptance of artificial intelligence in teaching science: Science teachers′ perspective. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100132.
Allington, R. L., & McGill-Franzen, A. M. (2021). Reading volume and reading achievement: A review of recent research. Reading Research Quarterly, 56, S231-S238.
Alshater, M. (2022). Exploring the role of artificial intelligence in enhancing academic performance: A case study of ChatGPT. Available at SSRN.
Aydin, G., & Ayranci, B. B. (2018). Reading Preferences of Middle School Students. World Journal of Education, 8(2), 127-139.
Baba, J., & Affendi, F. R. (2020). Reading Habit and Students′ Attitudes towards Reading: A Study of Students in the Faculty of Education UiTM Puncak Alam. Asian Journal of University Education, 16(1), 109-122.
Barber, A. T., & Klauda, S. L. (2020). How reading motivation and engagement enable reading achievement: Policy implications. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(1), 27-34.
Berry, R. A. W., & Englert, C. S. (2005). Designing conversation: Book discussions in a primary inclusion classroom. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28(1), 35-58.
Chan, T. W., Looi, C. K., Chen, W., Wong, L. H., Chang, B., Liao, C. C., ... & Ogata, H. (2018). Interest-driven creator theory: Towards a theory of learning design for Asia in the twenty-first century. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(4), 435-461.
Chen, J. J. (2016). Connecting right from the start: Fostering effective communication with dual language learners. Gryphon House, Inc..
Chen, L., Chen, P., & Lin, Z. (2020). Artificial intelligence in education: A review. Ieee Access, 8, 75264-75278.
Chien, C. W. (2021). Taiwanese elementary school english teachers’ practice of teacher leadership in professional dialogue. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1-20.
Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., & Chen, N. S. (2009). An innovative approach for promoting information exchanges and sharing in a web 2.0-based learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 311-323.
Chew, R., Bollenbacher, J., Wenger, M., Speer, J., & Kim, A. (2023). LLM-assisted content analysis: Using large language models to support deductive coding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14924.
Clark-Wilson, A., Robutti, O., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Introduction. In: The mathematics teacher in the digital era. AMC, 10, 12.
Clark-Wilson, A., Robutti, O., & Thomas, M. (2020). Teaching with digital technology. Zdm, 1-20.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the learning sciences, 13(1), 15-42.
De Naeghel, J., Valcke, M., De Meyer, I., Warlop, N., Van Braak, J., & Van Keer, H. (2014). The role of teacher behavior in adolescents’ intrinsic reading motivation. Reading and Writing, 27, 1547-1565.
Dell′Acqua, F., McFowland, E., Mollick, E. R., Lifshitz-Assaf, H., Kellogg, K., Rajendran, S., ... & Lakhani, K. R. (2023). Navigating the jagged technological frontier: Field experimental evidence of the effects of AI on knowledge worker productivity and quality. Harvard Business School Technology & Operations Mgt. Unit Working Paper, (24-013).
Farrokhi, F., Zohrabi, M., & Chehr Azad, M. H. (2018). Corrective feedback and Iranian EFL learners′ spoken complexity and accuracy. Teaching English Language, 12(2), 117-143.
Gallucci, C., Van Lare, M. D., Yoon, I. H., & Boatright, B. (2010). Instructional coaching: Building theory about the role and organizational support for professional learning. American Educational Research Journal, 47(4), 919-963.
Gao, L., Waechter, K. A., & Bai, X. (2015). Understanding consumers’ continuance intention towards mobile purchase: A theoretical framework and empirical study–A case of China. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 249-262.
Gasser, L., Dammert, Y., & Murphy, P. K. (2022). How Do Children Socially Learn from Narrative Fiction: Getting the Lesson, Simulating Social Worlds, or Dialogic Inquiry?. Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1445-1475.
Gaudreau, C., King, Y. A., Dore, R. A., Puttre, H., Nichols, D., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2020). Preschoolers benefit equally from video chat, pseudo-contingent video, and live book reading: Implications for storytime during the coronavirus pandemic and beyond. Frontiers in Psychology, 2158.
Ghory, S., & Ghafory, H. (2021). The impact of modern technology in the teaching and learning process. International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies, 4(3), 168-173.
Hassinger‐Das, B., Ridge, K., Parker, A., Golinkoff, R. M., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., & Dickinson, D. K. (2016). Building vocabulary knowledge in preschoolers through shared book reading and gameplay. Mind, Brain, and Education, 10(2), 71-80.
Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers Make a Difference, What is the research evidence?. Paper presented at the Australian Council for Educational Research Annual Conference on Building Teacher Quality. Melbourne, Australia.
Hindman, A. H., Skibbe, L. E., & Foster, T. D. (2014). Exploring the variety of parental talk during shared book reading and its contributions to preschool language and literacy: Evidence from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study-Birth Cohort. Reading and Writing, 27, 287-313.
Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Saks, K., Leijen, Ä., Bardone, E., & Wang, M. (2020). Open learner models in supporting self-regulated learning in higher education: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 154, 103878.
Justice, L. M., Mashburn, A. J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2008). Quality of language and literacy instruction in preschool classrooms serving at-risk pupils. Early childhood research quarterly, 23(1), 51-68.
Kamruzzaman, M. M., Alanazi, S., Alruwaili, M., Alshammari, N., Elaiwat, S., Abu-Zanona, M., ... & Ahmed Alanazi, B. (2023). AI-and IoT-assisted sustainable education systems during pandemics, such as COVID-19, for smart cities. Sustainability, 15(10), 8354.
Kane, B. D., & Rosenquist, B. (2019). Relationships between instructional coaches’ time use and district-and school-level policies and expectations. American Educational Research Journal, 56(5), 1718-1768.
Kieran, C., Krainer, K., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (2012). Linking research to practice: Teachers as key stakeholders in mathematics education research. In Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 361-392). New York, NY: Springer New York.
Lin, Y. S., Chen, S. Y., Su, Y. S., & Lai, C. F. (2017). Analysis of students’ learning satisfaction in a social community supported computer principles and practice course. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(3), 849-858.
Liu, C. C., Liao, M. G., Chang, C. H., & Lin, H. M. (2022). An analysis of children’ interaction with an AI chatbot and its impact on their interest in reading. Computers & Education, 189, 104576.
Liu, C. C., Chiu, C. W., Chang, C. H., & Lo, F. Y. (2024). Analysis of a chatbot as a dialogic reading facilitator: its influence on learning interest and learner interactions. Educational technology research and development, 1-29.
Marsh, J. A., McCombs, J. S., & Martorell, F. (2012). Reading coach quality: Findings from Florida middle schools. Literacy Research and Instruction, 51(1), 1-26.
McCracken, R. A. (1971). Initiating sustained silent reading. Journal of Reading, 14(8), 521-583.
McCracken, R. A., & McCracken, M. J. (1978). Modeling is the Key to Sustained Silent Reading, The Reading Teacher, 31(4), 406-408.
McCracken, R. A., & McCracken, M. J. (1987). Reading is only the tiger′s tail: A language arts program (12th ed). Portage & Main Press.
McClure, E., & Barr, R. (2017). Building family relationships from a distance: Supporting connections with babies and toddlers using video and video chat. Media exposure during infancy and early childhood: The effects of content and context on learning and development, 227-248.
Milburn, T. F., Girolametto, L., Weitzman, E., & Greenberg, J. (2014). Enhancing preschool educators’ ability to facilitate conversations during shared book reading. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 14(1), 105-140.
Mol, S. E., Bus, A. G., De Jong, M. T., & Smeets, D. J. (2008). Added value of dialogic parent–child book readings: A meta-analysis. Early Education and Development, 19(1), 7-26.
Noy, S., & Zhang, W. (2023). Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence. Available at SSRN 4375283.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation, Development [OECD]. (2010). PISA 2009 results: Learning to learn: Student engagement, strategies and practices (Volume III). Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10. 1787/9789264083943-en.
Pilgreen, J. L. (2000). The SSR handbook: How to organize and manage a sustained silent reading program. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
Raffle, H., Revelle, G., Mori, K., Ballagas, R., Buza, K., Horii, H., ... & Spasojevic, M. (2011, May). Hello, is grandma there? let′s read! StoryVisit: family video chat and connected e-books. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1195-1204).
Rao, Z., & Chen, H. (2020). Teachers’ perceptions of difficulties in team teaching between local-and native-English-speaking teachers in EFL teaching. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 41(4), 333-347.
Topping, K. J. (1996). The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A typology and review of the literature. Higher education, 32(3), 321-345.
Wahjudi, A. (2010). Interactive post-reading activities that work. Bahasa dan Seni, 38(1), 84-92.
Williams, E. (1987). Classroom reading through activating content-based schemata.
Xhemajli, A. (2016). The role of the teacher in interactive teaching. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 4(1), 31-38.
Xu, Y., Wang, D., Collins, P., Lee, H., & Warschauer, M. (2021). Same benefits, different communication patterns: Comparing Children′s reading with a conversational agent vs. a human partner. Computers & Education, 161, 104059.
Zhang, J., & Tao, D. (2020). Empowering things with intelligence: a survey of the progress, challenges, and opportunities in artificial intelligence of things. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 8(10), 7789-7817.

指導教授

陳德懷(Tak-Wai Chan)

審核日期

2024-8-13

推文