導入同儕互評於數位故事創作

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：131

、訪客IP：3.16.82.7

姓名

呂冠賢(Kuan-hsien Lu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

導入同儕互評於數位故事創作
(Applying peer assessment to digital story creation)

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)

在21世紀的全球社會中，個人的創意代表了其相當重要的核心行為能力與價值。而透過學習活動有效地的培養，對於提升學童在創意自我效能上之感受與創意成品上之表現是非常有幫助的。此外，數位說故事是近幾年來，相當受到重視的學習方式，且被認為可以完整的呈現個人的概念與創意，但如何正確導入數位說故事活動於課程中卻是令許多教學者困惑的問題，因此，本研究進一步認為，結合同儕互評的方式可能為一個有效的途徑。
本研究設計導入同儕互評的機制於數位說故事活動，探討國小六年級的學生在故事繪本作品與創意自我效能上是否會有所影響。最後，根據實驗結果分析與討論，證實了實驗組的學生在故事繪本作品上的表現確實優於控制組的學生，並且，在學生的創意自我效能上，比起控制組的學生，實驗組的學生也呈現出了較高的個人創意信念。而藉由這樣的研究結果顯示，同儕互評的介入並不會降低學生在數位說故事活動上的創意表現，反而因為有機會獲得更多的資訊與想法，進而提升其在創意成品與創意自我效能上的表現及感受。

摘要(英)

In the 21st century global society, creativity represents individual crucial core capacity and value. It is helpful for students to foster creativity by learning activities on enhancing students’ perceptions toward creative self-efficacy and performance of creative outcomes. In recent years, digital storytelling learning has been considered as an important approach to completely represent individual concept and creativity. However, it is difficult for instructors to appropriately implement digital storytelling activities in educational curriculum. The purpose of this study is therefore to design a digital storytelling activity with a peer assessment mechanism. An experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of the mechanism on sixth grade students’ story picture book works and creative self-efficacy. Results showed that students performed on story picture book in the experimental group better than those in the control group. Moreover, compared of the control group, the experimental group revealed a higher level of creative belief. As a result, the intervention of peer assessment not only provided more opportunities to obtain varied information and ideas, but also enhanced the performances and perceptions of creative outcomes and self-efficacy.

關鍵字(中)

★ 數位說故事
★ 創意自我效能
★ 同儕互評

關鍵字(英)

★ peer assessment
★ creative self-efficacy
★ digital storytelling

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iii
目錄 iv
表目錄 vii
圖目錄 ix
第一章緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的與問題 3
1-3 名詞解釋 4
1-4 論文架構 5
第二章文獻探討 6
2-1 數位說故事 6
2-2 同儕互評 8
2-3 創意自我效能 10
2-4 總結 12
第三章系統設計與實作 13
3-1 系統設計理念與原則 13
3-1-1 系統設計理念 13
3-1-2 系統設計原則 16
3-2 系統架構 17
3-3 系統資料庫設計 21
3-4 系統介面與功能 22
3-4-1 iLStory繪本製作區之建立繪本 23
3-4-2 iLStory繪本製作區之創作繪本 25
3-4-3 iLStory繪本閱讀區之瀏覽繪本 35
3-4-4 Web繪本館之瀏覽繪本 37
第四章研究方法 40
4-1 研究流程 40
4-2 實驗對象與環境 41
4-3 實驗設計與程序 43
4-4 研究工具 47
4-4-1 數位說故事作品評量表－專家評量版 48
4-4-2 數位說故事作品評量表－學生評量版 51
4-4-3 故事結構分類 51
4-4-4 創意自我效能量表 52
4-4-5 學習動機策略量表 53
4-5 資料收集與分析 54
4-5-1 繪本作品評量 55
4-5-1-1 成績評量－專家評量 55
4-5-1-2 成績評量－學生互評╱學生自評 57
4-5-1-3 故事結構評量 57
4-5-2 問卷蒐集 58
4-5-2-1 創意自我效能量表 58
4-5-2-2 學習動機策略量表 59
4-5-3 學生訪談 60
第五章實驗結果與討論 61
5-1 繪本作品分析與討論 61
5-1-1 學生作品成績差異檢定 61
5-1-2 學生作品之故事結構差異檢定 73
5-1-3 學生作品成績與自評成績相關分析 75
5-2 創意自我效能量表分析與討論 77
5-2-1 學生創意自我效能差異檢定 77
5-2-2 學生創意自我效能與作品成績相關分析 80
5-3 學習動機策略量表分析與討論 82
5-3-1 學生學習動機策略差異檢定 82
5-3-2 學生學習動機策略與創意自我效能相關分析 84
第六章結論與建議 86
6-1 結論 86
6-2 研究範圍與限制 88
6-3 未來發展與建議 88
參考文獻 90
附錄一、故事繪本介紹範例 98
附錄二、課程大綱（一） 100
附錄三、課程大綱（二） 101
附錄四、數位說故事作品評量表（專家評量版） 102
附錄五、數位說故事作品評量表（學生互評版） 104
附錄六、數位說故事作品評量表（學生自評版） 105
附錄七、創意自我效能量表（前測） 106
附錄八、創意自我效能量表（後測） 107
附錄九、學習動機策略量表 108
附錄十、學生創作作品案例 110
附錄十一、事後訪談提問單 113

參考文獻

中文部分
洪素蘋（民93）。重要他人回饋、創意自我效能、內、外在動機對創意行為的影響：社會認知理論為基礎的結構方程模式檢驗。交通大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，新竹市。
英文部分
Amabile, T. (1997). Motivating creativity in organizations: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review, 40(1), 39-58.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students. Creativity Research Journal, 18(4), 447-457. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1804_4
Benenson, G. (2001). The unrealized potential of everyday technology as a context for learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 730-745. doi: 10.1002/tea.1029
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. doi: 10.1080/0969595980050102
Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426. doi: 10.1080/0260293990240405
ChanLin, L. J., Hong, J. C., Horng, J. S., Chang, S. H., & Chu, H. C. (2006). Factors influencing technology integration in teaching: a Taiwanese perspective. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), 57-68. doi: 10.1080/14703290500467467
Choi, J. N. (2004a). Individual and contextual predictors of creative performance: The mediating role of psychological processes. Creativity Research Journal, 16(2-3), 187-199. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1602&3_4
Choi, J. N. (2004b). Person-environment fit and creative behavior: Differential impacts of supplies-values and demands-abilities versions of fit. Human Relations, 57(5), 531-552. doi: 10.1177/0018726704044308
Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438-481. doi: 10.3102/00346543058004438
Dochy, F., Segers, M., & Sluijsmans, D. (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350. doi: 10.1080/03075079912331379935
Eisenberger, R., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Incremental effects of reward on creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(4), 728-741. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.4.728
Fekonja-Peklaj, U., Marjanovic-Umek, L., & Kranjc, S. (2010). Children’’s storytelling: The effect of preschool and family environment. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18(1), 55-73. doi: 10.1080/13502930903520058
Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains. The Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112-1142.
Gershon, N., & Page, W. (2001). What storytelling can do for information visualization. Communications of the ACM, 44(8), 31-37. doi: 10.1145/381641.381653
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3-31.
Gielen, S., Dochy, F., & Onghena, P. (2011). An inventory of peer assessment diversity. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 36(2), 137-155. doi: 10.1080/02602930903221444
Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 304-315. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007
Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77-87. doi: 10.1080/0305569032000159750
Jonassen, D. H., & Hernandez-Serrano, J. (2002). Case-based reasoning and instructional design: Using stories to support problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 65-77. doi: 10.1007/bf02504994
Kaufman, J., & Schunn, C. (2011). Students’’ perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 387-406. doi: 10.1007/s11251-010-9133-6
Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 344-348. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.005
Lambert, J. (2003). Digital storytelling cookbook and travelling companion. Retrieved from http://dmp.osu.edu/dmac/supmaterials/Digital Storytelling Cookbook.pdf
Lassig, C. J. (2009). Promoting creativity in education – From policy to practice: An australian perspective. Paper presented at the Proceedings the 7th ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition : Everyday Creativity, Berkeley, California, USA.
Lee, V. R., & Thomas, J. M. (2011). Integrating physical activity data technologies into elementary school classrooms. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 865-884. doi: 10.1007/s11423-011-9210-9
Li, L., Liu, X. Y., & Zhou, Y. C. (2012). Give and take: A re-analysis of assessor and assessee’’s roles in technology-facilitated peer assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 376-384. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01180.x
Liu, C. C., Chen, H. S. L., Shih, J. L., Huang, G. T., & Liu, B. J. (2011). An enhanced concept map approach to improving children’’s storytelling ability. Computers & Education, 56(3), 873-884. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.029
Liu, N.-F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290. doi: 10.1080/13562510600680582
Lu, J. Y., & Law, N. (2012). Online peer assessment: Effects of cognitive and affective feedback. Instructional Science, 40(2), 257-275. doi: 10.1007/s11251-011-9177-2
Maddin, E. (2011). Using TPCK with digital storytelling to investigate contemporary issues in educational technology. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 7, 1-11.
Mathisen, G. E., & Bronnick, K. S. (2009). Creative self-efficacy: An intervention study. International Journal of Educational Research, 48(1), 21-29. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2009.02.009
Meadows, D. (2003). Digital storytelling: Research-based practice in new media. Visual Communication, 2(2), 189-193. doi: 10.1177/1470357203002002004
Narciss, S. (2008). Feedback strategies for interactive learning tasks. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer & D. M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 125-144). New York: Routledge.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory: 2nd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Oldham, G. R., & Cummings, A. (1996). Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39(3), 607-634. doi: 10.2307/256657
Ozok, A. A., Benson, D., Chakraborty, J., & Norcio, A. F. (2008). A comparative study between tablet and laptop PCs: User satisfaction and preferences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 24(3), 329-352. doi: 10.1080/10447310801920524
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
Rada, R., & Hu, K. (2002). Patterns in student-student commenting. Ieee Transactions on Education, 45(3), 262-267. doi: 10.1109/te.2002.1024619
Robin, B. R. (2006). The educational uses of digital storytelling. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006, Orlando, Florida, USA.
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 220-228. doi: 10.1080/00405840802153916
Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(4), 487-506. doi: 10.1007/s11423-008-9091-8
Stiggins, R. J. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment FOR learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758-765.
Stobaugh, R. R., & Tassell, J. L. (2011). Analyzing the degree of technology use occurring in pre-service teacher education. Educational Assessment Evaluation and Accountability, 23(2), 143-157. doi: 10.1007/s11092-011-9118-2
Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dunnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 291-303. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2002). Creative self-efficacy: Its potential antecedents and relationship to creative performance. Academy of Management Journal, 45(6), 1137-1148. doi: 10.2307/3069429
Tierney, P., & Farmer, S. M. (2004). The Pygmalion process and employee creativity. Journal of Management, 30(3), 413-432. doi: 10.1016/j.jm.2002.12.001
Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 591-620. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00173.x
Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276. doi: 10.2307/1170598
Topping, K. J. (2010). Methodological quandaries in studying process and outcomes in peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 339-343. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.003
Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 149-169. doi: 10.1080/713611428
Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161-1174. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.007
Tsou, W. L., Wang, W. C., & Tzeng, Y. J. (2006). Applying a multimedia storytelling website in foreign language learning. Computers & Education, 47(1), 17-28. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2004.08.013
van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & van Merrienboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.004
Via, S. (2002). Digital storytelling evaluation rubric. Retrieved from http://its.ksbe.edu/dst/PDFs/Rubrics/rubric.pdf
Yang, Y. F., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20(1), 72-83. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.01.003
Yu, F. Y., & Wu, C. P. (2011). Different identity revelation modes in an online peer-assessment learning environment: Effects on perceptions toward assessors, classroom climate and learning activities. Computers & Education, 57(3), 2167-2177. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.05.012
Zevenbergen, R. (2001). Peer assessment of student constructed posters: Assessment alternatives in preservice mathematics education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4(2), 95-113. doi: 10.1023/a:1011401532410

指導教授

劉晨鐘(Chen-chung Liu)

審核日期

2012-7-27

推文