在行動科技輔助學習下探討學生個人特質對學習方法與學習成果的影響

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：25

、訪客IP：3.129.253.65

姓名

康明詠(Ming-yong Kang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

企業管理學系

論文名稱

在行動科技輔助學習下探討學生個人特質對學習方法與學習成果的影響

相關論文

★ 工作滿足、領導行為、工作特性與人格特質對離職傾向之探討-以超大型會計師事務所審計人員為例	★ 以組織診斷模型診斷企業組織層級架構－以某公司為例
★ 科技產業組織診斷與分析之研究-以Q公司為例	★ 製造業推行六標準差的成功關鍵因素探討
★ 高職辦理輪調式建教班對學校經營績效之評估－以北區私立高職為例	★ 本國商業銀行經營績效之探討-資料包絡分析法之應用
★ 台灣中小企業創業動機與創業績效關係之研究	★ 員工當責與真誠領導之關聯性-以心理賦權與團隊凝聚力為中介變數
★ 以個人與環境適配為關鍵中介探討特定品牌領導對員工品牌權益之影響	★ 道德感讓你買更多綠色產品？從消費者產品知覺價格及品質角度來探討—以綠色程度做調節
★ 線上品牌社群該如何提升與粉絲的價值共創？以線上品牌社群活動與線下實體活動為中介變數探討	★ 農業創新服務模式之商業模式研究-以蜂巢數據科技有限公司為例
★ 燈⽕闌珊處的求職旅程：如何透過⼯作價值觀、雇主吸引⼒、激勵因⼦為求職者點亮路徑	★ 購買意願的幕後功臣：Instagram大小網紅的自我揭露對消費者自我一致性與感知真實的影響
★ 中小企業之組織診斷與分析－以A公司為例	★ 高科技產業人力資源發展與組織績效之研究－以新竹科學園區為例

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 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

本研究旨在探討高等教育學生在行動科技輔助的學習環境中，個人特徵對個人學習方法與學習成效之影響。在個人特徵方面，以學習風格(Learning style)四構面、認知負荷(Cognitive load)兩構面與成就目標(Achievement goal)四構面進行探討。除此之外，本研究更進一步的比較行動科技輔助的環境與一般傳統教學環境之間的差異，藉以了解行動裝置在學生學習過程中的效果。
本研究之對象為國立交通大學在103年所開設的管理學課程之學生，採用實驗設計之「靜態組比較設計」將學生分為實驗組及控制組，兩組的差別在於實驗組課程中使用行動裝置上的學習平台(iNCTU)與通訊軟體Line，而控制組則沒有。研究回收135份有效樣本，並透過SPSS 21與AMOS 21進行個人資料與信效度分析，利用路徑分析（Path Analysis）探討本研究之理論架構與路徑因果關係，研究發現說明如下：
(一) 學生的學習風格對於學習方法、學習滿意度與成績皆沒有顯著影響。
(二) 在一般傳統環境中，內在認知負荷對學習方法的影響並不顯著;而在行動科技的輔助下，內在認知負荷會反向影響深層、正向影響表層學習方法。
(三) 在一般傳統環境中，內在認知負荷只會反向影響滿意度;而在行動科技的輔助下，內在認知負荷對滿意度及成績皆無顯著影響。
(四) 一般傳統環境下，外在認知負荷對深層/表層學習方法並無顯著影響;而在行動科技輔助下，外在認知負荷會正向影響深層學習方法。
(五) 一般傳統環境下，外在認知負荷對滿意度及成績並無顯著影響;而在行動科技輔助下，外在認知負荷會正向影響滿意度及成績。
(六) 不論在何種環境下，成就目標皆會影響學生的學習方法、學習滿意度及成績。
(七) 一般傳統環境下，學習方法並不影響學習滿意度及成績;而在行動科技輔助下，表層學習方法易導致較差的成績。

本研究更進一步利用多群組分析探討實驗組與控制組，在模型各路徑的差異，藉以了解在學習中引進行動裝置的效果，研究結果說明如下：
(一) 在認知負荷中，內在負荷→深層、內在負荷→表層、外在負荷→滿意度此三條路徑有顯著差異。
(二) 在成就目標中，趨向表現→表層、逃避精熟→表層、趨向精熟→表層、逃避表現→深層、逃避精熟→滿意、趨向精熟→滿意、趨向表現→成績此七條路徑有顯著差異。

摘要(英)

This research attempted to determine whether individual differences will influence learning approaches and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment (mobile learning as well as traditional learning). Individual differences will include learning style (convergent, divergent, assimilation, accommodative), cognitive load (intrinsic cognitive load, extraneous cognitive load) , and achievement goal (performance-approach, master-avoidance, master-approach, performance-avoidance).
Furthermore, the research compared the differences between blended learning and traditional learning to investigate the effects of applying mobile devices and handheld devices.
The subjects of this study were 135 students in a management class in the National Chiao Tung University. The research adopted the static group comparison of experimental design. The students were assigned to a control group, and an experimental group. Students in the experimental group had used the m-learning systems (iNCTU) and Line but students in the control group had not. The Path Analysis was conducted to analyze the data and investigate the causalities among all parameters constructed in the research. The results were summarized as follows:

I. Learning style didn’t affect learning approach, learning achievement and satisfaction.
II. In the traditional environment,Intrinsic cognitive load didn’t affect learning approach;in the blended learning environment intrinsic cognitive load had a negative effect on deep approach but a positive effect on surface approach.
III. In the traditional environment, intrinsic cognitive load had a negative effect on satisfaction; in the blended learning environment, intrinsic cognitive load wouldn’t affect learning achievement and satisfaction.
IV. In the traditional environment, extraneous cognitive load wouldn’t affect deep/surface approach;in the blended learning environment, extraneous cognitive load had a positive effect on deep approach.
V. In the traditional environment, extraneous cognitive load wouldn’t affect satisfaction and learning achievement;in the blended learning environment, extraneous cognitive load had a positive effect on satisfaction and learning achievement.
VI. Achievement goal would affect learning approach 、satisfaction and learning achievement.
VII. In the traditional environment, learning approach wouldn’t affect satisfaction and learning achievement;in the blended learning environment, surface approach had a negative effect on learning achievement.

The Multi-group analysis was conducted to explore the difference of the two groups. The results showed that the two groups were significantly difference in dimensions of the proposed research model. The results of the study were summarized as follows:

I. In terms of cognitive load, Intrinsic cognitive load→deep approach、Intrinsic cognitive load→surface approach and extraneous cognitive load->satisfaction have significantly differences in two groups.
II. In terms of achievement goal, performance-approach→surface approach、mastery- avoidance→surface approach、mastery-approach→surface approach 、performance- avoidance→deep approach、mastery-avoidance→satisfaction and Mastery-approach→satisfaction、Performance-approach→learning achievement have significantly differences in two groups

關鍵字(中)

★ 學習風格
★ 成就目標
★ 認知負荷
★ Biggs 3P 模型
★ 路徑分析
★ 多組分析
★ 多變量變異數分析
★ 行動學習

關鍵字(英)

★ Learning styl
★ Achievement goal
★ Cognitive load
★ Biggs 3P Model
★ Path analysis
★ Multi-group analysis
★ MANOVA
★ Mobile learning

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract v
圖目錄 x
表目錄 xi
一、緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與目的 1
1-2　　研究貢獻 4
1.3　　研究模型 5
二、文獻探討 7
2-1　　Biggs 3P模型 7
2-2　　教學情境因子 11
2-2-1　傳統學習、數位學習與行動學習 11
2-2-2　行動學習結合傳統學習的混合模式 12
2-3　　個人情境因子 14
2-3-1　學習風格 15
2-3-2　認知負荷 17
2-3-3　成就目標 18
2-4　　學習成效 19
2-5　　研究假設 21
2-5-1　學習風格與學習成效 21
2-5-2　認知負荷、學習方法與學習成效 21
2-5-3　成就目標、學習方法與學習成效 22
2-5-4　學習方法與學習成效 24
三、研究方法 25
3-1　　實驗樣本與實驗設計 25
3-2　　課程內容及行動裝置 26
3-2-1　準備階段 26
3-2-2　實驗階段 27
3-2-3　成果階段 28
3-3　　衡量方式 29
3-3-1　學習風格 29
3-3-2　認知負荷 31
3-3-3　成就目標 32
3-3-5　學習成效 34
3-4　　實施步驟 35
3-5　　資料分析工具與分析方法 35
3-5-1　敘述性統計分析 35
3-5-2　因素分析 36
3-5-3　信度分析 36
3-5-4　效度分析 36
3-5-5　路徑分析 37
3-5-6　多變量變異數分析 38
3-5-7　多群組分析 38
3-5-8實驗設計之內、外在效度 38
四、資料分析 40
4-1　　樣本之敘述統計 41
4-2　　變數之敘述性統計 45
4-3　　信度分析 50
4-4　　建構效度分析 51
4-4-1　收斂效度 51
4-4-2　區別效度 53
4-5　　路徑分析與多群組分析 54
4-5-1　學習風格與學習方法、學習成效 54
4-5-2　認知負荷、學習方法與學習成效 55
4-5-3　成就目標、學習方法與學習成效 58
4-5-4　學習方法、學習滿意度與學習成績 62
4-6　　假設驗證與路徑總結 63
五、結論與建議 67
5-1　　研究發現 67
5-2　　教育實務與研究意涵 75
5-2　　研究限制與建議 78
參考文獻 80
附錄一　學習風格問卷 85
附錄二　認知負荷、成就目標、學習方法、滿意度問卷 88
附錄三　管理學課程大綱 93

參考文獻

Akkoyunlu, B., & Yilmaz-Soylu, M. (2008). A Study of Student′s Perceptions in a Blended Learning Environment Based on Different Learning Styles. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 183-193.
Al‐Qahtani, A. A., & Higgins, S. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e‐learning on students′ achievement in higher education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 220-234.
Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS quarterly, 159-174.
Alavi, M., Marakas, G. M., & Yoo, Y. (2002). A comparative study of distributed learning environments on learning outcomes. Information Systems Research, 13(4), 404-415.
Ames, C. (1984). Achievement attributions and self-instructions under competitive and individualistic goal structures. Journal of educational psychology, 76(3), 478.
Anderman, E. M., & Wolters, C. A. (2006). Goals, Values, and Affect: Influences on Student Motivation.
Bannert, M. (2002). Managing cognitive load—recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learning and Instruction, 12, 139-146.
Berge, Z. L., & Collins, M. P. (1995). Computer mediated communication and the online classroom: distance learning: Hampton Press Cresskill.
Biggs, J. (1979). Individual differences in study processes and the quality of learning outcomes. Higher education, 8(4), 381-394.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: McGraw-Hill International.
Biggs, J. B. (1987). Study Process Questionnaire Manual. Student Approaches to Learning and Studying: ERIC.
Blankson, J., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2008). Nontraditional students’ perception of a blended course: Integrating synchronous online discussion and face-to-face instruction. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(3), 421-438.
Bounoua, L., Cury, F., Regner, I., Huguet, P., Barron, K. E., & Elliot, A. J. (2012). Motivated use of information about others: Linking the 2× 2 achievement goal model to social comparison propensities and processes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(4), 626-641.
Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 67(1), 26-48.
Clayton, K., Blumberg, F., & Auld, D. P. (2010). The relationship between motivation, learning strategies and choice of environment whether traditional or including an online component. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 349-364.
Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., & Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: A systematic and critical review.
Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S. R., & Rotter, N. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4), 169-190.
Dahlgren, L. O., & Marton, F. (1978). Students′ conceptions of subject matter: an aspect of learning and teaching in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 3(1), 25-35.
Demirbilek, M. (2010a). Investigating Attitudes of Adult Educators towards Educational Mobile Media and Games in Eight European Countries. Journal of Information Technology Education, 9, 235-247.
Demirbilek, M. (2010b). Investigating attitudes of adult educators towards educational mobile media and games in eight European countries. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 9(1), 235-247.
Dillon, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Review of educational research, 68(3), 322-349.
Diseth, Å., & Kobbeltvedt, T. (2010). A mediation analysis of achievement motives, goals, learning strategies, and academic achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 671-687.
Drew, P. Y., & Watkins, D. (1998). Affective variables, learning approaches and academic achievement: A causal modelling investigation with Hong Kong tertiary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 68(2), 173-188.
Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American psychologist, 41(10), 1040.
Elliot, A. J. (2005). A conceptual history of the achievement goal construct.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2× 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80(3), 501.
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of educational psychology, 91(3), 549.
Elliot, A. J., & Murayama, K. (2008). On the measurement of achievement goals: Critique, illustration, and application. Journal of educational psychology, 100(3), 613.
Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering education, 78(7), 674-681.
Fenollar, P., Román, S., & Cuestas, P. J. (2007). University students′ academic performance: An integrative conceptual framework and empirical analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), 873-891.
Finn, A., & Bucceri, M. (2004). A case study approach to blended learning. Los Angeles: Centra Software. Retrieved March, 23, 2008.
Fuegen, S. h. (2012). The impact of mobile technologies on distance education. TechTrends, 56, 49-53.
Graf, S. (2007). Technologies Linking Learning, Cognition, and Instruction. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology: A Project of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 2, 305.
Grimley, M. (2007). Learning from multimedia materials: The relative impact of individual differences. Educational Psychology, 27(4), 465-485.
Hall, C. W., Bolen, L. M., & Gupton, R. H. (1995). Predictive validity of the Study Process Questionnaire for undergraduate students. College Student Journal.
Hamilton, J., & Tee, S. (2010). Teaching and learning: A SEM blended learning systems approach. Higher Education Research and Development (HERD), 29, 1-16.
Hefling, K., & Duncan, E. S. A. (1999). Challenge to schools: Embracing digital textbooks. Seattlepi. com.
Ijab, M. T., Anwar, R., & Hamid, S. (2004). Teaching and learning of e-commerce courses via hybrid e-learning model in UNITAR. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations (JECO), 2(2), 78-94.
Keefe, J. W. (1987). Learning Style Theory and Practice: ERIC.
Keefe, J. W. (1991). Learning style: Cognitive and thinking skills: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Keller, J. (2011). The slow-motion mobile campus. The chronicle of higher education, 84-86.
Klopfer, E., Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2002). Environmental detectives: PDAs as a window into a virtual simulated world. Paper presented at the Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE International Workshop on.
Kolb, D. (1974). On management and the learning process: Prentice-Hall.
Kuehn, S. A. (1994). Computer‐mediated communication in instructional settings: A research agenda. Communication Education, 43(2), 171-183.
Leidner, D. E., & Fuller, M. (1997). Improving student learning of conceptual information: GSS supported collaborative learning vs. individual constructive learning. Decision Support Systems, 20(2), 149-163.
Leidner, D. E., & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1993). The information age confronts education: Case studies on electronic classrooms. Information Systems Research, 4(1), 24-54.
Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Tyson, D. F., & Patall, E. A. (2008). When are achievement goal orientations beneficial for academic achievement? A closer look at main effects and moderating factors. Revue internationale de psychologie sociale(1), 19-70.
Liu, T.-C., Lin, Y.-C., Tsai, M.-J., & Paas, F. (2012). Split-attention and redundancy effects on mobile learning in physical environments. Computers & Education, 58(1), 172-180.
Liu, Y.-C., Shih, Y., & Yeh, R.-W. (2008). The development of online learning style inventory: An exploratory study. TW Chan, B. Gautam, F.-C. Chen, S. Chen, C. Chou, M. Jacobson... J.-C. Yang (Eds.), ICCE, 389-390.
Maccia, E. S., & Maccia, G. S. (1973). On a Model for Educational Research: Extended Systems Theory (SIGGS).
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 38(1), 43-52.
Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students′ goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of educational psychology, 80(4), 514.
Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). e-Learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129-135.
Naismith, L., Sharples, M., Vavoula, G., & Lonsdale, P. (2004). Literature review in mobile technologies and learning.
Nicholson, J., Nicholson, D., & Valacich, J. (2008). Examining the effects of technology attributes on learning: A contingency perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 7(1), 184-204.
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 38(1), 1-4.
Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Darabi, A. A. (2005). A motivational perspective on the relation between mental effort and performance: Optimizing learner involvement in instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(3), 25-34.
Paas, F. G., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of educational psychology, 86(1), 122.
Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 78-102.
Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (1997). Role of goal orientation, ability, need for achievement, and locus of control in the self-efficacy and goal--setting process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 792.
Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS quarterly, 401-426.
Pillay, H. (1998). An investigation of the effect of individual cognitive preferences on learning through computer‐based instruction. Educational Psychology, 18(2), 171-182.
Popescu, E. (2012). Integrating Individual Differences in Adaptive Educational Systems: The Unified Learning Style Model Case1. Intelligent Learning Systems and Advancements in Computer-aided Instruction: Emerging Studies, 94.
So, H.-J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51(1), 318-336.
Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and instruction, 12(3), 185-233.
Sweller, J., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational psychology review, 10(3), 251-296.
Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of educational research, 76(1), 93-135.
Utman, C. H. (1997). Performance effects of motivational state: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1(2), 170-182.
Weggen, C. C., & Urdan, T. A. (2000). Corporate E-learning: Exploring A New Frontier. WR Hambrecht and Co. www. wrhambrecht. com/research/coverage/elearning/idir explore. html.
Wong, N.-Y., & Watkins, D. (1998). A longitudinal study of the psychosocial environmental and learning approaches in the Hong Kong classroom. The Journal of Educational Research, 91(4), 247-255.
Wu, W.-H., Jim Wu, Y.-C., Chen, C.-Y., Kao, H.-Y., Lin, C.-H., & Huang, S.-H. (2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 59(2), 817-827.
王保進. (2006). 英文視窗版 SPSS 與行為科學研究 (三版).
江琬瑜. (1999). 訓練成效評估之研究. 國立中央大學人力資源管理研究所碩士論文. Resource Development Quarterly, 4(4), 377-390.
余泰魁. (2007). 科技媒介學習環境之學習成效比較研究. 教育心理學報, 39(1), 69-90.
吳明隆. (2008). SPSS 操作與應用多變量分析實務: 臺北市: 五南.
侯玫如, 程炳林, & 于富雲. (2004). 國中生多重目標導向與其自我調整學習之關係. 教育心理學報, 35(3), 221-247.
陳順宇. (2005). 多變量分析, 華泰書局, 四版.
廖遠光. (1999). 教學科技的發展對學習環境的影響: 教學科技與媒體.

指導教授

李憶萱(Yi-hsuan Lee)

審核日期

2014-8-21

推文