「論點─理由─證據」模式之議論文閱讀素養學習系統

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：22

、訪客IP：3.135.247.94

姓名

陳永哲(Yung-Che Chen) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊工程學系

論文名稱

「論點─理由─證據」模式之議論文閱讀素養學習系統
(A Tutoring System with “Claim-Reason-Evidence” Teaching Model to Foster Argumentation Reading Competence)

相關論文

★ 學習馬賽克-以教科書內容置入平板之合作式情境學習遊樂場	★ 為使用知識而設計的電子書- 以參考手冊為模式的電子書設計
★ 為使用知識而設計的電子書- 將紙本書籍以及電子書提供社群共建的機制	★ 高互動低資源損耗之課堂學習系統設計與實際教學環境導入接受度探討
★ 依學生偏好及學習狀態建構之學習輔助者與知識協尋系統	★ 網路資訊與學習系統之中文全文探勘工具
★ 支援使用者觀點之線上分析系統	★ 由網站行為歷程以貝式學習建立學習者模式之引導系統
★ 網路合作學習系統與小組互動觀察工具	★ 依作品集評量方式並支援學習狀況分析與監控之網路學習系統
★ 網路學習歷程之知識探索：學習效能評鑑之工具	★ 網路學習系統之手機端學習輔助系統
★ 以網站行為的歷程建立具時間性學習者模式	★ 行動學習資訊系統-學生端網路學習伺服器與個人數位助理端之學習系統
★ 應用貝式學習及決策樹之群組溝通網路監控系統	★ 以網路群組作品及活動依角色分析之群組合作監控系統

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)

議論文是一種能夠訓練學生邏輯思考的文體，然而在台灣國中的國文課程中，議論文所佔的比例少之又少。學生缺乏議論文的學習機會，更是缺乏論證與高層次思考的能力，又因課程緊湊，讓教師沒有額外的時間進行議論文教學。隨著教學環境的改變，課程的準備也成為教學的困難點之一。本研究期望能夠解決這些問題，因此參考眾多議論文教學之研究，以「論點─理由─證據」之模式進行議論文教學，幫助學生在閱讀議論文時先掌握架構，並且以資訊技術建構一套議論文閱讀素養學習系統來支援此教學模式，透過系統不僅讓學生能夠在課餘時間進行學習活動，更增加學生學習議論文與培養論證與思考等素養之機會，此外，教師亦能在系統當中進行教材編輯的動作，讓製作教材與課程準備的負擔降低。
以完整的系統開發來看，本研究仍屬前導階段，以「論點─理由─證據」教學模式以及對應之系統框架進行訪談與使用者意見調查，期望能夠獲得更廣泛之意見做為日後改進方向。本研究共訪談了六位任教於國中之國文科教師，同時也以問卷的方式蒐集了八十九位國中七年級之學生之意見。從訪談教師與學生問卷中反映的意見來看，本研究所使用之「論點─理由─證據」教學模式是適用於議論文教學的，系統的搭配對於學生來說也是有幫助且實用的，在教材編製工具上也能夠降低教師製作教材的負擔。從研究結果所獲得的意見來看，對於本研究的評價皆屬正向，但是實際的效益還需日後進行大規模實驗才能驗證。

摘要(英)

Argumentation is seem to foster the logical thinking. However, junior high school students in Taiwan get few chances to learn argumentation due to the lack of argumentation learning in Chinese courses, so do they lack the competency of argument and logical thinking. Also, teachers have no extra time to teach argumentation because they pay more attention on following the progress of the curriculum. On the other hand, the change of teaching environments makes the lesson preparation harder. In this study, we are trying to deal with these problems. Based on the previous researches, we proposed a “Claim-Reason-Evidence” teaching model to help students first seize the structure once they read an argumentation essay. We also constructed a tutoring system with ICT to tie in this model to make chances for students to learn argumentation and learn in extracurricular time. Furthermore, teachers could easily do the preparation of the lesson through this system.
From the view of the system development process, this is only a pilot study and thus we hope to obtain more and more suggestions to make this study better in the future. We based on the “Claim-Reason-Evidence” teaching model and the framework of the tutoring system to do the interviews and obtain the user experience. We interviewed six Chinese teachers teaching in junior high schools in Taiwan. At the same time, we investigated eighty-two 7th grade students about their opinions via questionnaires. Based on the teachers and the students’ comments, the “Claim-Reason-Evidence” teaching model is adequate to argumentation teaching and the tutoring system is also beneficial and useful to the students. Also, the tool we made for the lesson preparation is helpful. From the result of the interviews and questionnaires, all the opinions and comments were positive. However, the practical result should be verified through large-scale experiments.

關鍵字(中)

★ 議論文
★ 閱讀素養
★ 學習系統
★ 議論文教學

關鍵字(英)

論文目次

中文摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iv
目錄 vi
圖目錄 viii
表目錄 ix
一、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究問題 2
1-2-1 學生在議論文方面的訓練不足 2
1-2-2 教師沒有額外時間做議論文教學 2
1-2-3 教師準備課程不容易 3
1-3 研究目標 3
1-4 論文架構 4
二、文獻探討 5
2-1 議論文 5
2-2 議論文的共同要素 5
2-3 議論文閱讀訓練 7
2-4 議論文寫作訓練 9
2-5 圖形組織與議論圖 11
2-6 案例式推理 12
三、系統設計與實作 15
3-1 學生端系統描述 17
3-1-1 登入及選單 17
3-1-2 教學示範 18
3-1-3 閱讀引導 19
3-1-4 應用 24
3-1-5 我的歷程 25
3-2 教師端系統描述 26
3-2-1 文章上傳 26
3-2-2 文章編輯 28
3-2-3 學生歷程 33
3-3 系統架構 34
四、研究方法與結果 36
4-1 研究方法與問題 36
4-2 研究流程 37
4-3 結果 40
4-3-1 議論文教學背景 41
4-3-2 「論點─理由─證據」教學模式 43
4-3-3 「論點─理由─證據」閱讀支援系統 45
4-3-4 系統教材編製介面與功能 49
五、討論 52
5-1 議論文教學背景 52
5-2 「論點─理由─證據」教學模式 53
5-3 「論點─理由─證據」模式閱讀支援系統 54
5-4 系統教材編製介面與功能 56
六、結論與未來發展 58
參考文獻 61
附錄一：教師訪談問卷與內容 64
附錄二：學生問卷 66
附錄三：學生閱讀文章〈一〉 69
附錄四：學生閱讀文章〈二〉 70

參考文獻

Aamodt Agnar, and Enric Plaza. (1994). Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI communications, 7(1), pp. 39-59.
Barron, R. F. (1969). The use of vocabulary as an advance organizer. In H. L. Herber, & R. T. Vacca, Research in reading in the content areas: First year report Syracuse. NY: Syracuse University Reading and Language Arts Center.
Birgitta Kopp, & Heinz Mandl. (2011). Fostering argument justification using collaboration scripts and content schemes. Learning and Instruction, 21(5), pp. 636-649.
Chambliss, M. J. (1995). Text cues and strategies successful readers use to construct the gist of lengthy written arguments. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), pp. 778-807.
Chambliss, M. J., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Fourth and fifth graders representing the argument structure in written texts. Discourse Processes, 34(1), pp. 91-115.
Daniel H. Robinson, & Kenneth A. Kiewra. (1995). Visual argument Graphic organizers are superior to outlines in improving learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), pp. 455-467.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319-340.
E. Michael Nussbaum, & Gregory Schraw. (2007). Promoting argument-counterargument integration in students’ writing. Journal of Experimental Education, 76(1), pp. 59-92.
Goldman, S. R., Graesser, A. C., & van den Broek, P. (1999). Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (1988). Impact of diagrams on recalling sequential elements in expository texts. Reading Psychology, 9, pp. 121-139.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (1989). Effects of a tree diagram on students’ comprehension of main ideas in an expository text with multiple themes. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, pp. 236-247.
L. Hirsch, M. Saeedi, J. Cornillon & L. Litosseliti. (2004). A structured dialogue tool for argumentative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, pp. 72-80.
Lisette Munneke, Marije van Amelsvoort, & Jerry Andriessen. (2003). The role of diagrams in collaborative argumentation-based learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, pp. 113-131.
Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of organizational signals on free recall of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), pp. 38-48.
M. Anne Britt and Aaron A. Larson. (2003). Constructing representations of arguments. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(4), pp. 794-810.
Mark K. Felton, & Suzanne Herko. (2004). From dialogue to two-sided argument Scaffoding adolescents’ persuasive writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47, pp. 672-683.
Meredith Larson, M.Anne Britt and Aaron A. Larson. (2004). Disfluencies in comprehending argumentative texts. Reading Psychology, 25(3), pp. 205-224.
Perry D. Klein and Mary A. Rose. (2010). Teaching Argument and Explanation to Prepare Junior Students for Writing to Learn. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(4), pp. 433-461.
Suthers, D. (2003). Representational guidance for collaborative inquiry. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers, Arguing to Learn. Confronting Cognitions in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environments. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
T. Salminen, M. Marttunen & L. Laurinen. (2010). Visualizing knowledge from chat debates in argument diagrams. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), pp. 379-391.
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (updated ed.). England: Cambridge University Press.
Twardy, C. R. (2004). Argument maps improve critical thinking. Teaching Philosophy, 27, pp. 95-116.
Van Amelsvoort M., Andriessen J. & Kanselaar G. (2008). How students structure and relate argumentative knowledge when learning together with diagrams. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, pp. 1293-1313.
Van Drie J., van Boxtel C., Jaspers J. & Kanselaar G. (2005). Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, pp. 575-602.
Wendy Morgan, & Glenn Beaumont. (2003). A dialogic approach to argumentation using a chat room to develop early adolescent students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47, pp. 146-157.
Zumbach, J. (2009). The role of graphical and text based argumentation tools in hypermedia learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), pp. 811-817.
王鼎鈞. (2007). 作文七巧. 台北市: 大地出版社.
王鼎鈞. (2007). 講理. 台北市: 爾雅出版社.
何三本. (2006). 九年一貫語文教育理論與實務. 台北市: 五南出版社.
宋璦玲. (2012). 在Group Scribbles平台上以VSPOW模式進行國小高年級議論文協作寫作研究. 碩士論文, 新竹教育大學.
李博文. (2002). 國小高年級學生議論文寫作教學. 碩士論文, 國立屏東師範學院.
洪順隆. (2009). 歷代文選. 台北市: 五南出版社.
陳麗雲. (2009年4月). 國立台北教育大學進修學院進修推廣中心語文創作電子報. 擷取自 http://dice.ntue.edu.tw/epaper/2009may/2009maywri.htm
臺灣PISA國家研究中心/主編. (2011). 臺灣PISA 2009結果報告. 台北市: 心理出版社.
劉忠惠. (1996). 寫作指導. 高雄市: 麗文出版社.

指導教授

陳國棟(Gwo-Dong Chen)

審核日期

2013-8-20

推文