不同電腦模擬模式對於合作問題解決過程之影響: 非同步、同步和分工模式

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：55

、訪客IP：3.144.25.195

姓名

林尊韋(Lin Tsun Wei) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

不同電腦模擬模式對於合作問題解決過程之影響: 非同步、同步和分工模式
(The Effect of Different Computer Simulation Modes on Collaborative Problem Solving Process: Asynchronous, synchronous, and division of labor models)

相關論文

★ 以視覺為主的遊戲空間輔助全身性學習	★ 以數位教室環境增進同步遠距教學之臨場感
★ 以行動載具支援並分析合作式的探索活動	★ 以混合實境支援工作臺協同探究學習
★ 使用資料探勘輔助學習者探索大型資料庫—學習者經驗之研究	★ 以貢獻與聯結為基礎之社會知識創造模型—一個資源與概念合作聯結工具
★ 互動式計算桌面環境對於合作學習的優缺點	★ 以共享螢幕及群組軟體支援一對一環境下面對面的合作網路探索
★ 合作學習使用網際網路: 學習腳本在面對面網路合作探索的影響	★ 兒童使用超媒體的Web2.0創作故事平台之探究--衍生與重組
★ 以創用為基礎之合作說故事平台 - 衍生、重組、擁有感	★ 透過網路實施模擬實務社群並利用即興創作激發創意
★ 使用群組軟體與共同螢幕進行一對一合作網路探索活動	★ 以Cyber-Physical環境支援程式設計學習之探究
★ 跨領域合作設計活動之互動分析：群組軟體的支援與設計	★ 不同成就學生於模擬遊戲環境中程式學習效果之探究

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)

面對現今社會變化快速的時代，人們面臨到的問題越來越複雜，因此與他人合作解決問題變成21世紀的核心能力之一，在教育環境中也越來越多學習活動，透過合作問題解決達到合作學習的目的。而在科學學習中，使用電腦模擬已被證實為有效的學習方式，透過操控參數和觀察模擬變化，可以幫助學生進行知識建構。本研究應用電腦模擬進行合作問題解決的科學學習活動，探討學生在不同操作模式下，合作過程中的行為和感受，使用眼動追蹤、對話分析探討學生在問題解決中的行為模式，透過問卷調查活動時的合作品質，為了進一步了解合作過程中如何互相影響，使用多層次分析中的隨機係數模型，分析個人行為、感受與小組合作過程之間的關聯。結果顯示不同操作模式對學生在活動中的注意力無明顯差異，但在學習行為、合作感受、學習成效皆有不同，進而造成個人與小組的關聯中有明顯差異，在合作上，非同步模式較依賴對話，對話的品質影響到合作的品質；同步模式的學習成效較好，花費的時間較短，但發現在學習上會發生搭便車效應；分工模式的學習成效較差，花費的時間較長，但有較好的合作品質。最後，本研究依照結果提出未來研究的建議。

摘要(英)

Living in a fast-changing society, the problems we face is becoming more and more complex, so collaborate with peer to solve problems has become one of the core skill of the 21st century. In the field of science education, more and more instruction activities adopting collaborative problem solving (CPS) conduct collaborative learning. In scientific learning, computer simulation has been proven to be an effective way of learning which can help students to build knowledge when they adjusting simulation variable and observing changes. This study uses computer simulation in science learning activity of CPS, to analyze students behavior and feelings during collaborative in different operating modes. The study using eye tracking and dialogue analysis to analyze students′ behavior patterns in problem solving, and using questionnaires to investigate the collaborative quality. In order to understand how the collaboration affects each other, using the random coefficient model in multi-level analysis to find the association between the individual behavior, feelings and group collaborative processes. The results showed that there were no significant differences in students′ attention in the activities, but there were differences in learning behavior, collaborative feeling and learning achievements, resulting in significant differences in the association between individuals and groups. In terms of collaborative, asynchronous models rely more on dialogue, and the quality of dialogue affects the quality of the collaborative; The learning achievements of the synchronous mode is better and the time is shorter, but it is found that the free-riding effect will occur in the learning activity; The learning achievements of the division of labor model are poor and take longer, but have a better quality of the collaborative. Finally, the study makes recommendations for future studies based on the results.

關鍵字(中)

★ 合作問題解決
★ 科學學習
★ 電腦模擬
★ 眼動分析

關鍵字(英)

★ collaborative problem solving
★ science learning
★ computer simulation
★ eye-tracking

論文目次

摘要 I
Abstract II
致謝 III
目錄 IV
圖目錄 VII
表目錄 VIII
第一章緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的與問題 2
1.3 名詞解釋 3
1.3.1 合作問題解決（Collaborative problem solving） 3
1.3.2 電腦模擬（Computer Simulation） 3
1.3.3 眼動追蹤（Eye-tracking） 3
1.4 研究範圍與限制 4
1.5 論文架構 4
第二章文獻探討 5
2.1 合作問題解決 5
2.2 電腦模擬 5
2.3 眼動追蹤 6
第三章系統介紹 8
3.1 系統架構與設計理念 8
3.2 系統設計 9
3.2.1 模擬說明 9
3.2.2 科學學習活動系統說明 11
3.3 模擬操作方式差異 17
第四章研究方法 19
4.1 研究設計 19
4.2 研究對象 20
4.3 實驗設計 21
4.3.1 實驗說明 22
4.3.2 填寫實驗同意書 22
4.3.3 前測試題測驗 22
4.3.4 實驗指導語 22
4.3.5 觀看系統教學影片 22
4.3.6 詳述教學影片重點 22
4.3.7 進行眼動校正 22
4.3.8 科學學習活動 23
4.3.9 後測試題測驗 23
4.3.10 合作品質問卷 23
4.3.11 訪談 23
4.4 研究工具 24
4.4.1 CoSci平台 24
4.4.2 眼動追蹤儀 24
4.4.3 眼動蒐集軟體 26
4.4.4 合作品質問卷 32
4.4.5 前後測紙筆測驗 33
4.4.6 MATLAB 34
4.5 資料蒐集與分析 35
4.5.1 個人眼動指標 35
4.5.2 合作感知 36
4.5.3 學習成效 36
4.5.4 共同注意力指標 36
4.5.5 互動對話 38
4.5.6 小組與個人關聯 39
4.5.7 共同注意力指標與互動對話之關聯 39
第五章研究結果與討論 40
5.1 個人眼動指標分析結果 40
5.2 合作感知分析結果 43
5.3 學習成效分析結果 45
5.3.1 學習成效成對樣本T檢定 46
5.3.2 學習成效重複測量變異數分析 47
5.4 共同注意力指標分析結果 53
5.5 互動對話分析結果 55
5.5.1 互動對話（次數）分析結果 56
5.5.2 互動對話（比例）分析結果 58
5.6 小組與個人關聯分析結果 59
5.6.1 共同注意力指標與合作感知之關聯 59
5.6.2 共同注意力指標與進步成效之關聯 61
5.6.3 互動對話與個人眼動指標之關聯 63
5.6.4 互動對話與合作感知之關聯 72
5.6.5 互動對話與進步成效之關聯 77
5.7 共同注意力指標與互動對話之關聯分析 78
第六章結論與建議 80
6.1 結論 80
6.2 未來發展與建議 83
參考文獻 84
附錄A 科學學習活動教材 88
附錄B 受測者實驗參與同意書 89
附錄C 合作品質問卷 90
附錄D 學習成效前後測測驗卷 91
附錄E 小組與個人關聯分析結果 92

參考文獻

王楠鈞（2020）。注意力指引工具於合作電腦模擬問題解決之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中央大學網路學習歌技研究所學位論文，桃園市。
邱秉誠（2016）。個人電腦模擬及合作電腦模擬對於合作科學問題解決之影響。國立中央大學網路學習歌技研究所學位論文，桃園市。
彭郁翔（2018）。不同電腦模擬模式對於合作科學問題解決之影響：以眼動進行分析。國立中央大學網路學習歌技研究所學位論文，桃園市。
黃茂在, & 陳文典. (2004). [問題解決] 的能力. 科學教育月刊.
黃福坤（2006）。透過物理模擬動畫進行物理教學與學習-介紹簡易模擬動畫設計環境Easy Java Simulation。物理雙月刊，28，3，536-543。
謝翌甄（2019）。合作式電腦模擬於科學問題解決之影響：以眼動進行分析(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中央大學網路學習歌技研究所學位論文，桃園市。
Alkan, S., & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Studying computer game learning experience through eye tracking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 538-542.
Amy, W. (2003). Supporting electronic discourse: Principles of design from a social constructivist perspective. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14(2), 167-184.
Baudisch, P., DeCarlo, D., Duchowski, A. T., & Geisler, W. S. (2003). Focusing on the essential: considering attention in display design. Communications of the ACM, 46(3), 60-66.
Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Chiu, B. C., Liu, C. C., Chiang, S. H. F., Wen, C. T., ... & Wu, S. W. (2017). An analysis of student collaborative problem solving activities mediated by collaborative simulations. Computers & Education, 114, 222-235.
Chang, C. J., Liu, C. C., Wu, Y. T., Chang, M. H., Chiang, S. F., Chiu, B. C., ... & Wu, S. W. (2016, January). Students′ perceptions on problem solving with collaborative computer simulation. In 24th International Conference on Computers in Education, ICCE 2016 (pp. 166-168). Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education.
Chen, S., CHANG, W. H., LAI, C. H., & TSAI, C. Y. (2014). A comparison of students’ approaches to inquiry, conceptual learning, and attitudes in simulation‐based and microcomputer‐based laboratories. Science Education, 98(5), 905-935.
Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.
de la Torre, L., Heradio, R., Dormido, S., & Jara, C. (2013). Real-time collaboration for web-based labs.
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning?.
Dodge, R., & Cline, T. S. (1901). The angle velocity of eye movements. Psychological Review, 8(2), 145.
Drèze, X., & Hussherr, F. X. (2003). Internet advertising: Is anybody watching?. Journal of interactive marketing, 17(4), 8-23.
Duchowski, A. T. (2007). Eye tracking methodology. Theory and practice, 328(614), 2-3.
Esquembre, F. (2004). Easy Java Simulations: A software tool to create scientific simulations in Java. Computer physics communications, 156(2), 199-204.
Griffin, P., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2014). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach. Springer.
Griffin, P., Care, E., & McGaw, B. (2012). The changing role of education and schools. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 1-15). Springer, Dordrecht.
Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Teamwork quality and the success of innovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence. Organization science, 12(4), 435-449.
Huey, E. B. (1908). The psychology and pedagogy of reading. The Macmillan Company.
Hwang, F. K., & Esquembre, F. (2003). Easy java simulations: An interactive science learning tool. Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 5(2).
Hyönä, J., Lorch Jr, R. F., & Kaakinen, J. K. (2002). Individual differences in reading to summarize expository text: Evidence from eye fixation patterns. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 44.
Jermann, P., Nüssli, M. A., & Li, W. (2010). Using dual eye-tracking to unveil coordination and expertise in collaborative Tetris. Proceedings of HCI 2010 24, 36-44.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1976). The role of eye-fixation research in cognitive psychology. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 8(2), 139-143.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological review, 87(4), 329.
Kim, M., & Tan, H. T. (2013). A collaborative problem-solving process through environmental field studies. International journal of science education, 35(3), 357-387.
Kukkonen, J. E., Kärkkäinen, S., Dillon, P., & Keinonen, T. (2014). The effects of scaffolded simulation-based inquiry learning on fifth-graders′ representations of the greenhouse effect. International Journal of Science Education, 36(3), 406-424.
Liu, C. Y., Wu, C. J., Wong, W. K., Lien, Y. W., & Chao, T. K. (2017). Scientific modeling with mobile devices in high school physics labs. Computers & Education, 105, 44-56.
Martinez-Moyano, I. (2006). Exploring the dynamics of collaboration in interorganizational settings. Creating a culture of collaboration: The International Association of Facilitators handbook, 4, 69.
Marwan, N., & Kurths, J. (2002). Nonlinear analysis of bivariate data with cross recurrence plots. Physics Letters A, 302(5-6), 299-307.
Nelson, L. M. (1999). Collaborative problem solving. Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, 2, 241-267.
OECD. （ 2013） . PISA 2015 Collaborative Problem Solving Framework: OECD
Publishing.
Olsen, J. K., & Finkelstein, S. (2017). Through the (thin-slice) looking glass: An initial look at rapport and co-construction within peer collaboration. Philadelphia, PA: International Society of the Learning Sciences..
Pietinen, S., Bednarik, R., Glotova, T., Tenhunen, V., & Tukiainen, M. (2008, March). A method to study visual attention aspects of collaboration: eye-tracking pair programmers simultaneously. In Proceedings of the 2008 symposium on Eye tracking research & applications (pp. 39-42).
Richardson, D. C., & Dale, R. (2005). Looking to understand: The coupling between speakers′ and listeners′ eye movements and its relationship to discourse comprehension. Cognitive science, 29(6), 1045-1060.
Rieber, L. P., Tzeng, S. C., & Tribble, K. (2004). Discovery learning, representation, and explanation within a computer-based simulation: Finding the right mix. Learning and instruction, 14(3), 307-323.
Rutten, N., Van Joolingen, W. R., & Van Der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136-153.
Salomon, G., & Globerson, T. (1989). When teams do not function the way they ought to. International journal of Educational research, 13(1), 89-99.
Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1987). Human factors in engineering and design.
Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1337-1370.
Toet, A. (2006). Gaze directed displays as an enabling technology for attention aware systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(4), 615-647.
Tsai, M. J., Hou, H. T., Lai, M. L., Liu, W. Y., & Yang, F. Y. (2012). Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis. Computers & Education, 58(1), 375-385.
Tsai, M. J., Hou, H. T., Lai, M. L., Liu, W. Y., & Yang, F. Y. (2012). Visual attention for solving multiple-choice science problem: An eye-tracking analysis. Computers & Education, 58(1), 375-385.
Tsai, M. J., Huang, L. J., Hou, H. T., Hsu, C. Y., & Chiou, G. L. (2016). Visual behavior, flow and achievement in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 98, 115-129.
van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Savelsbergh, E. R., & Manlove, S. (2005). Co-Lab: research and development of an online learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Computers in human behavior, 21(4), 671-688.
Villamor, M., & Rodrigo, M. M. (2017). Impact of Both Prior Knowledge and Acquaintanceship on Collaboration and Performance: A Pair Program Tracing and Debugging Eye-Tracking Experiment. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference in Computers in Education (pp. 182-187).
Winsberg, E. (2013). Computer simulations in science.
Zhang, Y., Pfeuffer, K., Chong, M. K., Alexander, J., Bulling, A., & Gellersen, H. (2017). Look together: using gaze for assisting co-located collaborative search. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 21(1), 173-186.

指導教授

劉晨鐘

審核日期

2020-8-3

推文