設計與評估「循環式問題創造」對於學生想法產出與寫作的影響

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：48

、訪客IP：3.14.144.108

姓名

洪佳伶(Jia-Ling Hong) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

設計與評估「循環式問題創造」對於學生想法產出與寫作的影響
(Design and Evaluate the Impact of "Circular Question Creation" on Students′ Idea Generation and Writing.)

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 (2025-9-30以後開放)

摘要(中)

研究表明，好奇心和提問在學習過程中扮演著重要的角色，提問是探索思考的關鍵方式，可以引導學生挖掘更深層的學習知識並創造想法，進一步深入地參與學習和理解，而這種參與主要是在好奇心的驅使下。
然而，學生過往在寫作前，會因想法的不足而面臨寫作困難。在傳統的寫作教學方法中，教師通常直接指定寫作題目，導致學生缺乏熱情，並限制了他們產生原創性想法的能力。這樣的情況逐漸導致學生對寫作感到排斥。
因此，本研究引入以問題為導向的活動為「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC)，以「趣創者理論」為理論背景，並採用設計研究法的研究方法。給予學生在寫作前創造及組織想法的學習環境。藉由在活動前閱讀主題材料，其結合腦力激盪的方式，提出與主題好奇問題來累積和創造想法，並為學生提供一個互動式的平台，用於產生和組織想法。本研究期望能透過此活動促使學生建構想法，且能培養學生提問的習慣，從中逐步提升提問能力。
本研究之研究參與者包含國小四、五年級共30位學生進行研究調查。將於活動過程中，蒐集問卷調查和系統後端的資料，以了解學生透過活動進行想法之間的關係和前後提問與寫作能力的影響。
透過質性和量化的研究分析發現，「循環式問題創造」活動在自然與社會的主題下，有助於學生提問能力的提升。而透過進行兩輪的想法產生，有近六成的想法被擴展，且活動不僅不會影響在課程規劃內學生原本需要學的知識範圍，能夠有效引導學生探索主題的各個方面，並激發他們的好奇心。其中發現需要發展其他方式和教學策略，包含在系統上的教學策略提供，以給予學生更多轉換想法的機會。在寫作方面，對學生在寫作上有產生正面影響。透過訪談學生表示透過活動中所記錄的想法和問題，能幫助他們在寫作過程中有明確寫作的重點和方向，整理原先問題及想法可以成為寫作作品的內容。

摘要(英)

Studies have shown that curiosity and questioning play an important role in the learning process. Questioning is a key way of exploring thinking, which can guide students to dig deeper learning knowledge and create ideas, and further participate in learning and understanding deeply, and this participation Mostly driven by curiosity.
However, students used to face difficulties in writing due to lack of ideas before writing. In traditional writing teaching methods, teachers often directly assign writing topics, causing students to lack enthusiasm and limiting their ability to generate original ideas. Such a situation gradually leads to students feeling repulsed by writing.
Therefore, this study introduces a problem-oriented activity as " Circular Question Creation", takes " Interest-Driven Creator Theory " as the theoretical background, and adopts the research method of Design-based Research. Give students a learning environment to create and organize ideas before writing. By reading the subject material before the activity, it combines brainstorming, asks curious questions about the subject to accumulate and create ideas, and provides an interactive platform for students to generate and organize ideas. This study hopes that this activity can prompt students to construct ideas, and can cultivate students′ habit of asking questions, and gradually improve their questioning ability.
The research participants of this study included a total of 30 students in the fourth and fifth grades of the elementary school for the research survey. During the activity, we will collect questionnaires and system back-end data to understand the relationship between students′ ideas through the activity and the impact of before and after questioning and writing ability.
Through qualitative and quantitative research and analysis, it is found that the " Circular Question Creation" activity helps students improve their questioning ability under the theme of nature and society. Through two rounds of idea generation, nearly 60% of the ideas were expanded, and the activities not only did not affect the scope of knowledge that students originally needed to learn in the curriculum plan, but also effectively guided students to explore various aspects of the topic and stimulated their curiosity. curiosity. Among them, it is found that other methods and teaching strategies need to be developed, and the teaching strategies included in the system are provided to give students more opportunities to change their ideas. In terms of writing, it has a positive impact on students′ writing. Through interviews, students said that the ideas and questions recorded in the activities can help them have a clear focus and direction of writing in the writing process, and sorting out the original questions and ideas can become the content of writing works.

關鍵字(中)

★ 提問
★ 前寫作
★ 腦力激盪
★ 小組協作

關鍵字(英)

★ questioning
★ pre-writing
★ brainstorming
★ group collaboration

論文目次

摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
致謝 iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 viii
表目錄 x
第一章、緒論 1
1.1研究背景 1
1.2研究動機 4
1.3研究問題與研究目的 5
1.4名詞解釋 6
1.4.1前寫作(Pre-writing) 6
1.4.2 想法產生 7
1.4.3 循環式腦力激盪(Round-robin Brainstorming) 8
1.4.4 提問 8
1.4.5 循環式問題創造(Circular Question Creation) 9
1.5論文架構 10
第二章、文獻探討 11
2.1 提問想法與寫作 11
2.1.1 提問的角色與重要性 12
2.1.2 提問與小學生的寫作困難 13
2.2 好奇心扮演的角色與重要性 14
2.2.1 好奇心與提問能力 15
2.2.2 好奇心與自主探索(self-exploration) 16
2.3 想法的產生與組織技巧 19
2.3.1 腦力激盪(Brainstorming) 21
2.4 科技輔助寫作 22
2.5興趣驅動創造者理論(Interest-Driven Creator Theory) 24
第三章、活動設計與系統環境 27
3.1理論背景 27
3.1.1興趣驅動創造者理論(Interest-Driven Creator Theory) 27
3.2活動設計 28
3.2.1設計原則 30
3.3系統設計與開發 35
3.3.1系統開發架構與流程 36
3.3.2系統介面與功能說明 37
第四章、研究方法與分析 47
4.1研究參與者與環境 47
4.2設計研究法 49
4.3研究流程 50
4.4研究工具 60
4.3.1開放性問卷設計 60
4.3.2評分指標 63
4.3.3觀課紀錄和訪談 73
4.5資料收集與分析 74
4.5.1資料收集過程 74
4.5.2資料分析方法 76
第五章、研究結果與討論 80
5.1 「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC) 活動是否有效提升學生的提問能力？ 80
5.2 透過「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC)活動過程中如何影響學生的想法產生？ 82
5.3 透過「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC)活動是否有效幫助學生後續的寫作？ 109
第六章、結論與討論 113
6.1 結論 113
6.1.1 「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC) 活動是否有效提升學生的提問能力？ 114
6.1.2 透過「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC)活動過程中如何影響學生的想法產生？ 114
6.1.3 透過「循環式問題創造」(Circular Question Creation, CQC)活動是否有效幫助學生後續的寫作？ 116
6.2 研究限制 117
6.3未來展望 118
參考文獻 121
中文文獻 121
英文文獻 121
附錄一 125
附錄二 126

參考文獻

中文文獻
國家教育研究院（2019）。十二年國民基本教育領域課程綱要（國民中小學、普通型高中）研修工作手冊。臺北：國教院。
英文文獻
Affendi, F. R., Noah, J. B., Arif, F. K. M., & Yunus, M. M. (2020). Advantages of integrating padlet as a pre-writing strategy. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(3), 4031-4033.
Arnone, M. P., Small, R. V., Chauncey, S. A., & McKenna, H. P. (2011). Curiosity, interest and engagement in technology-pervasive learning environments: a new research agenda. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(2), 181-198.
Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154-1184.
Baaijen, V. M., Galbraith, D., & de Glopper, K. (2014). Effects of writing beliefs and planning on writing performance. Learning and Instruction, 33, 81-91.
Baehr, J. (2013). Educating for intellectual virtues: From theory to practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 47(2), 248–262.
Baehr, J. (2017). The varieties of character and some implications for character education. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 46(6), 1153–1161.
Berlyne, D. E. (1954). A theory of human curiosity. British Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 180–191.
Berlyne, D. E. (1966). Curiosity and exploration. Science, 153(3731), 25-33.
Berlyne, D. E. (1978). Curiosity and learning. Motivation and emotion, 2(2), 97-175.
Berninger, V. W., & Swanson, H. L. (1994). Children’s writing; toward a process theory of the development of skilled writing. Children’s writing: Toward a process theory of development of skilled writing, 57-81.
Beiki, M., Gharagozloo, N., & Raissi, R. (2020). The effect of structured versus unstructured collaborative pre-writing task on writing skills of the Iranian EFL students. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 5, 1-29.
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.
Chan, T. W., Looi, C. K., Chang, B., Chen, W., Wong, L. H., Wong, S. L., ... & Chou, C. Y. (2019). IDC theory: creation and the creation loop. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 14(1), 1-29.
Chen, W., Chan, T. W., Wong, L. H., Looi, C. K., Liao, C. C., Cheng, H. N., ... & Pi, Z. (2020). IDC theory: habit and the habit loop. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1), 1-19.
Clark, S., Harbaugh, A. G., & Seider, S. (2019). Fostering adolescent curiosity through a question brainstorming intervention. Journal of adolescence, 75, 98-112.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the learning sciences, 13(1), 15-42.
Collins, A. A., Ciullo, S., Graham, S., Sigafoos, L. L., Guerra, S., David, M., & Judd, L. (2021). Writing expository essays from social studies texts: a self-regulated strategy development study. Reading and Writing, 34, 1623-1651.
Crimmins, G., Black, A., Jones, J. K., Loch, S., & Impiccini, J. (2018). Collaborative writing ‘betwixt and between’sits jaggedly against traditional regimes of authorship. TEXT: Journal of Writing and Writing Courses, 22(1).
Etemadzadeh, A., Seifi, S., & Far, H. R. (2013). The role of questioning technique in developing thinking skills: The ongoing effect on writing skill. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1024-1031.
Fawzi, M., & Hussein, A.A. (2013). Enhancing students’ motivation to write essays through brainstorming: A comparative study. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(9), 191-196.
Grossnickle, E. M. (2016). Disentangling curiosity: Dimensionality, definitions, and distinctions from interest in educational contexts. Educational Psychology Review, 28(1), 23-60.
Gnach, A., Wiesner, E., Bertschi-Kaufmann, A., & Perrin, D. (2007). Children’s Writing Processes When Using Computers: Insights Based on Combining Analyses of Product and Process. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(1), 13–28.
Hagtvedt, L. P., Dossinger, K., Harrison, S. H., & Huang, L. (2019). Curiosity made the cat more creative: Specific curiosity as a driver of creativity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 150, 1-13.
Hashempour, Z., Rostampour, M., & Behjat, F. (2015). The effect of brainstorming as a pre-writing strategy on EFL advanced learners’ writing ability. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(1), 86-99.
Heong, Y. M., Yunos, J. M., Othman, W., Hassan, R., Kiong, T. T., & Mohamad, M. M. (2012). The needs analysis of learning higher order thinking skills for generating ideas. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 59, 197-203.
Hidi, S. E., & Renninger, K. A. (2020). On educating, curiosity, and interest development. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 35, 99-103.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 111-127.
Hidi, S., & Boscolo, P. (Eds.). (2006). Writing and motivation (Vol. 19). Brill.
Keen, J. (2017). Teaching the writing process. Changing English, 24(4), 372-385.
Lawrence, S. A., McNeal, K., & Yildiz, M. N. (2009). Summer program helps adolescents merge technology, popular culture, reading, and writing for academic purposes. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(6), 483–494.
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 146–59.
Liao, C. C., Chang, W. C., & Chan, T. W. (2018). The effects of participation, performance, and interest in a game‐based writing environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 211-222.
Litman, J. A., & Jimerson, T. L. (2004). The measurement of curiosity as a feeling-of-deprivation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82, 147-157.
Magner, U. I. E., Schwonke, R., Aleven, V., Popescu, O., & Renkl, A. (2014). Triggering situational interest by decorative illustrations both fosters and hinders learning in computer-based learning environments. Learning and Instruction, 29, 141-152.
Mogahed, M. M. (2013). Planning out pre-writing activities. International Journal of English and Literature, 4(3), 60-68.
Osborn, A. (2012). Applied imagination-principles and procedures of creative writing. Read Books Ltd.
Peterson, E. G., & Hidi, S. (2019). Curiosity and interest: current perspectives. Educational Psychology Review, 31(4), 781-788.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the literature. Reading &Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139-158.
Quintero, L. M. (2008). Blogging: A way to foster EFL writing. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, (10), 7-49.
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. E. (2019). Interest development and learning. The Cambridge handbook of motivation and learning (pp. 265–290).
Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2014). Situational interest and learning: Thirst for knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 32, 37-50.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Susskind, E. (1969). The role of question-asking in the elementary school classroom. The Psycho-Educational Clinic-Papers and Research Studies, 130–151.
Teng, F. (2019). A comparison of text structure and self-regulated strategy instruction for elementary school students’ writing. English Teaching: Practice & Critique, 18(3), 281-297.
Troia, G. A., Shankland, R. K., & Wolbers, K. A. (2012). Motivation research in writing: Theoretical and empirical considerations. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 28(1), 5-28.
Wardani, I. (2014). Improving the ability in writing Descriptive Text through Guided-Questions technique. E-Journal of ELTS (English Language Teaching Society), 2(1).
Whaite, P., & Ferrie, F. P. (1997). Autonomous exploration: Driven by uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 19(3), 193-205.
Wijaya, K. F. (2021). Collaborative And Problem-Based Learning In Promoting Indonesian Efl Learners’Learning Autonomy. Polyglot: Jurnal Ilmiah, 17(2), 191-211.
Wong, L. H., Chan, T. W., Chen, W., Looi, C. K., Chen, Z. H., Liao, C. C., ... & Wong, S. L. (2020). IDC theory: interest and the interest loop. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 15(1), 1-16.

指導教授

陳德懷(Tak-Wai Chan)

審核日期

2023-7-26

推文