博碩士論文 104554010 詳細資訊




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:23 、訪客IP:3.233.219.62
姓名 張詠渝(Yung-Yu Chang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 網路學習科技研究所
論文名稱 從全面性的角度探討先備知識對同儕互評中受評與 評分之影響
(A Comprehensive Investigation of the Impacts of Prior Knowledge on Assessing and Being Assessed in the Context of Peer Assessment)
相關論文
★ 探討認知風格於數位遊戲式英語學習環境對遊戲行為與學習成效之影響★ 由空間能力探討遊戲式英語學習如何影響學習者之遊戲行為和遊戲表現
★ 從認知風格的角度探討同儕互評分組對遊戲製作與評量之影響★ 從認知風格的角度探討同儕互評對遊戲式學習系統製作與評量之影響
★ 在數位遊戲式學習環境中先備能力對兩種學習內容整合方式之影響:緊密結合 vs. 鬆散結合
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) 近年來,同儕互評被廣泛應用在教學和學習中。許多研究指出同儕互評可以幫助學習者,例如:提升學生的學習動機、增加高層次思考等。但因每一個人的背景、需求及學習偏好是不同的,所以有必要對於同儕互評是否能適用於每一個學習者進行探討,故需要從個別差異的角度來研究。在個別差異方面,本研究著重於高先備知識學習者與低先備知識學習者之間的差異,因為先備知識與學習者理解和處理資訊的方式有關。而近十幾年來,研究探討先備知識在學習者學習歷程造成的影響之研究日益增長,許多學者指出先備知識在學習過程中扮演著一個關鍵的角色,然而,缺乏研究探討先備知識對同儕互評中的得分、評分、學習觀感和學習成效之影響。
為了全面性了解此影響,本研究探討了8個研究問題,即:(1)先備知識如何影響受評者在同儕互評的過程中之得分差異; (2)先備知識如何影響評分者在同儕互評的過程中之評分差異; (3)先備知識如何影響評分者在同儕互評的過程中與老師之評分差異; (4)先備知識如何影響評分者在同儕互評過程中所評之評分分數與老師評分及學生自評之評分分數之相關性; (5)先備知識如何影響學習者在同儕互評過程中體驗之學習觀感差異; (6)先備知識如何影響學習者在同儕互評過程中體驗之學習觀感與教學活動各構面之相關性; (7)先備知識如何影響學習者在同儕互評過程中達到之學習成效差異; (8)先備知識如何影響學習者在同儕互評過程中達到之學習成效與評分者所評之評分分數之相關性。
本研究之研究對象為國中九年級學生(N=38),依據學生以七年級6次段考之平均成績進行分組,分為高先備知識學生組(N=21)與低先備知識學生組(N=17),實驗為期四週,時間共540分鐘。第一及第二週為傳統教學,學生複習相關學習單元,並在傳統教學開始之前、後分別進行學習成效成前測與中測;第三週為影片拍攝,學生針對生物遺傳單元之內容進行拍攝,以同質性分組的方式進行3~5分鐘之教學影片拍攝,亦即是擁有相同先備知識的學生二人為一組;第四週為影片評分,學生與老師分別針對第三週各組拍攝之影片進行評分,並在結束評分後,讓學生進行後測測驗及填寫學習觀感問卷。
本研究的結果顯示,不同的先備知識的學習者在同儕互評中的得分、評分、學習觀感和學習成效有所不同。在得分差異方面,高先備知識學習者較容易獲得較高的得分,因為他們善於開發自己的資訊處理結構,且思考邏輯較有條理;相反的,低先備知識學習者則對於課程內容了解不佳,容易提供錯誤的學習內容,因此,獲得的得分較低。而在評分差異方面,高先備知識學習者對於影片內部特徵的評分較為詳細,因此較能符合評量核心;相反的,低先備知識學習者容易忽略影片中之錯誤內容,而造成較高的評分。
另一方面,高先備知識學習者與低先備知識學習者在同儕互評中有相似的學習觀感產生,高先備知識學習者易於追求更好的表現,而產生積極的行為表現;相反的,低先備知識學習者容易受到外在學習方式改變提高學習動機。而上述學習觀感可能是造成不同先備知識學生能夠積極投入課程之中的因素之一,此有助於學生的知識獲得,使得不論是高先備知識學習者或低先備知識學習者皆能從課程中獲得學習成效。然而,與低先備知識學習者相比,高先備知識學習者的平均成績略有提高,而這可能是因為同質性分組造成所提供的不同所致。高先備知識學習者與相同程度的人互動容易觸發近側發展區的學習;相反的,低先備知識學習者並不易於從相同程度的人獲得足夠的鷹架而產生主動學習。
從上述結果顯示,不同先備知識學習者可能因為同儕互評導入學習過程中,學習者的學習動機有所提升,換言之,同儕互評對於不同先備知識學習者的學習是有效的。本研究結果有助於深入了解如何建立一個能適應不同先備知識學習者的學習系統,此外,這些發現可以指導設計師、研究學者、教材設計者與學生如何開發符合每個人需求的學習課程,進而達到建立個人化學習系統的目標,並促進未來同儕互評的發展。
摘要(英) Peer assessment has been widely used in teaching and learning for recent years. Many studies have suggested that peer assessment can bring benefits to student learning, e.g., the increase of learning motivation and the higher-order thinking ability. However, each individual has different background, needs and learning preferences. Thus, it is doubtful whether peer assessment can be suitable to each learner. To this end, there is a need to consider individual differences. Among various individual differences, this study focuses on prior knowledge, which refer to the way of learners organizing and processing information. Some scholars have found that prior knowledge play a key role in the learning process. However, paucity of research examined the impacts of prior knowledge on assessment scores, learning perceptions and learning achievements in the context of peer assessment.
To fill this gap, this study aimed to address this issue. To achieve comprehensive understandings, this study examined eight research questions, i.e., (a) How the levels of prior knowledge affects the scores that learners obtain during the process of peer assessment; (b) How the levels of prior knowledge affects the scores that learners marks during the process of peer assessment; (c) How the levels of prior knowledge affects assessment differences between learners and teachers during the process of peer assessment; (d) How the levels of prior knowledge affects correlations between learners’ assessment and others; (e) How the levels of prior knowledge affects learners’ learning perceptions during the process of peer assessment; (f) How the levels of prior knowledge affects the correlation between learners’ learning perceptions and the dimension of teaching activities; (g) How the levels of prior knowledge affects learners’ learning achievements during the process of peer assessment; (h) How the levels of prior knowledge affects the correlation between learners’ learning achievements and the scores obtained from the assessment.
The study was conducted for the ninth grade students (N=38). According to the average scores of the 7th grade monthly test, the students were divided into high-prior knowledge students (N=21) and low-prior knowledge students (N=17). The experiment lasted for four weeks, and in total it took 540 minutes. In the first and second weeks, traditional teaching was undertaken and students reviewed relevant learning units. Before and after the traditional teaching, students had to take the pre-testing and the middle–testing, respectively. In the third week, students made a video and the students with the same knowledge were assigned as a group to make a video together. In the fourth week, the students and teacher did the assessment separately for the videos of each group made in the third week. Finally, the students were asked to take the post-tests and fill out a questionnaire.
The results of this study showed that learners with different levels of prior knowledge obtained different scores, made different assessment, and showed different learning perceptions and learning achievements during the process of peer assessment. Regarding the scores that they obtained, the high-prior knowledge learners were more likely to get higher scores because they were good at developing their own information processing structure, and the thinking logic is more organized. On the contrary, the low-prior knowledge learners have poor understandings of the course content. Accordingly, it was easy for them to provide the wrong learning content, so the scores obtained were lower. Regarding the assessment difference, the high-prior knowledge learners have more detailed assessment on the internal features of the videos so their assessment are more in line with the theme. On the contrary, the low-prior knowledge learners tended to ignore the wrong content in the videos so that they gave a higher score. On the other hand, the high-prior knowledge learners and the low-prior knowledge learners have similar learning perceptions in peer assessment. The high-prior knowledge learners are prone to pursue better performance and produce positive behavioral performance; on the contrary, the low-prior knowledge learners are susceptible to changes in external learning styles to improve learning motivation. The above-mentioned learning perception may be one of the factors that enables all students to actively participate in the curriculum. This helps students gain knowledge so that both high-prior knowledge learners and low-prior knowledge learners can make learning achievements in courses. However, the average performance of high-prior knowledge learners was slightly higher than that of low-prior learners, and this may be due to the difference in the provision of homogenous groupings. The high-prior knowledge learners interact with people with a similar level of prior knowledge could easily trigger learning in the near-development area; on the contrary, low-prior knowledge learners could not obtain sufficient scaffolding from people with a similar level of prior knowledge.
The above results showed that peer assessment could motivate both high-prior knowledge learners and low-prior knowledge learners. In other words, peer assessment is effective for learners with different levels of prior knowledge. The results of this study can provide deep understandings of how to establish peer assessment that can accommodate the needs of learners with different levels of prior knowledge. Moreover, these findings can guide designers, researchers, textbook designers and students on how to develop appropriate learning courses that meet the needs of everyone so that the goal of establishing a personalized learning system can be achieved. By doing so, the development of peer assessment can be promoted in the future.
關鍵字(中) ★ 同儕互評
★ 先備知識
★ 學習觀感
★ 學習成效
關鍵字(英) ★ peer assessment
★ prior knowledge
★ learning perception
★ learning achievement
論文目次 摘要 i
Abstract iii
致謝 vi
目錄 vii
圖目錄 ix
表目錄 x
第一章 緒論 1
1.1研究背景與動機 1
1.2研究目的 3
1.3名詞釋義 4
第二章 文獻探討 5
2.1同儕互評 5
2.1.1同儕互評的優點與缺點 5
2.1.1.1同儕互評的優點 5
2.1.1.2同儕互評的缺點 6
2.1.2同儕互評在教學現場的使用 8
2.1.3同儕互評、學生自評與老師評分之相關研究 9
2.1.4個別差異對同儕互評的影響 10
2.2先備知識 11
2.2.1先備知識的重要性 11
2.2.2不同先備知識學生的學習特質 11
第三章 研究方法 15
3.1研究設計 15
3.2研究對象 15
3.3研究工具 15
3.3.1生物學習成效卷 15
3.3.2學習觀感問卷 17
3.3.3教學影片評分表 19
3.3.4教學影片檔 19
3.4實驗流程 20
3.5資料處理與分析 23
第四章 結果與討論 25
4.1 受評者差異 25
4.1.1高先備知識受評者VS低先備知識受評者(老師評分) 25
4.1.2高先備知識受評者VS低先備知識受評者(高先備知識評分者評分) 28
4.1.3高先備知識受評者VS低先備知識受評者(低先備知識評分者評分) 30
4.2評分者差異 32
4.2.1高先備知識評分者VS低先備知識評分者(所有影片) 32
4.2.2高先備知識評分者VS低先備知識評分者VS老師(高先備知識學生之影片) 35
4.2.2.1高先備知識評分者VS低先備知識評分者 35
4.1.2.2高先備知識評分者VS老師 38
4.1.2.3低先備知識評分者VS老師 40
4.2.3高先備知識評分者VS低先備知識評分者VS老師(低先備知識學生之影片) 42
4.2.3.1高先備知識評分者VS低先備知識評分者 42
4.2.3.2高先備知識評分者VS老師 45
4.2.3.3低先備知識評分者VS老師 48
4.3評分相關性 50
4.3.1高先備知識評分者拍攝的影片之評分分數相關性 50
4.3.2低先備知識評分者拍攝的影片之評分分數相關性 51
4.4學習觀感 53
4.4.1高、低先備知識學習者之學習觀感問卷結果差異分析 54
4.4.2高、低先備知識學習者之學習觀感問卷結果相關性分析 61
4.5學習成效 63
4.5.1高、低先備知識學習者之學習成效分數之差異 63
4.5.2影片製作與學習成效之相關性 67
第五章 結論 70
5.1研究成果與結論 70
5.2發展學習者模型 73
5.3研究貢獻 77
5.4未來研究方向 78
參考文獻 79
中文部分 79
英文部分 80
附錄一 88
附錄二 90
附錄三 92
參考文獻 中文部分
于富雲、鄭守杰、杜明璋、陳德懷(2003)。網路同儕互評與評量標準來源對批判思考能力之影響。南師學報:教育類,37(2),1-21.
王道華(2017)。同儕互評導入英文論文寫作課程之學習歷程與成效分析。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系數位學習科技碩士在職專班碩士論文,1-159。
吳佳玲、張俊彥(2002)。高一學生地球科學問題解決能力與其先備知識及推理能力關係的初探研究。科學教育學刊,10(2),135-156。
李晧銘(2016)。使用線上同儕互評機制探討學生學習成就與同儕互評觀點之關係研究。淡江大學資訊與圖書館學系碩士班學位論文,1-66。
沈慶珩、黃信義(2006)。網路同儕互評在 Moodle 系統上的應用。教育資料與圖書館學,43(3),267-284。
林宛頤(2012)。以英語為外國語學生於電子歷程檔案中對同儕評量作為語言學習工具之看法。東海大學外國語文學系碩士班學位論文,1-110。
林進材(2004)。教學原理。台北市:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
范庭瑋(2016)。探討匿名/具名評分機制對同儕互評結果的影響。國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士班學位論文,1-57。
徐雍智、蔡今中、陳明璋(2002)。數學創意類比與同儕評量及其網路案例設計之初探。師大學報:科學教育類,47(1),1-13。
翁韻婷、陳明溥、羅怡帆(2012)。角色扮演遊戲融入5E學習環對國中化學式相關概念學習之影響。數位學習科技期刊,4(2),23-37。
張育誠(2016)。結合巨觀概念構圖與微觀知識表格之無所不在同儕互評學習模式對學生自然科學課程學習成效之影響 。東吳大學資訊管理學系碩士班學位論文,1-75。
張家慧、蔡銘修(2018)。淺談同儕作業互評與實施建議。臺灣教育評論月刊,7(8),212-218。
張基成、吳明芳(2011)。網路化檔案評量環境下教學者評、學生自評與同儕互評之信效度比較。教育資料與圖書館學,49(1),135-170。
陳玉婷(2008)。影響網路學習成效之相關研究--以南部某科技大學為例。中臺學報,20(2),67-87。
陳欣儀(2014)。多媒體組合方式與先備知識對小五學生「線對稱圖形」認知負荷影響之探究。國立臺北教育大學數學暨資訊教育學系研究所碩士論文,1-116。
黃霈仁(2013)。從人因的觀點評估遊戲式學習。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士班學位論文,1-70。
陳斐卿、江家瑋、張鐵懷、黃佩岑、單維彰(2015)。數學自由擬題之設計與評量-一個合作的取徑。科學教育學刊,23(2),185-211。
彭妮絲(2013)。同儕評量於華語文師資培育學習成效探究。人文研究期刊,11, 99-118。
劉芸安(2017)。運用微型教學系統支援師資生自評與同儕互評的教學演練之個案研究。國立交通大學教育研究所碩士學位論文,1-124。
劉旨峰、林珊如、袁賢銘(2001)。以大學生學習策略與學習動機預測其網路同儕互評之學習成就。2001年 NCS 全國計算機會議。
鄭如意(2017)。攝影評量規準在網路同儕互評回饋機制輔助國小學童攝影課程學習效益之研究。國立台中教育大學教師專業碩士學位學程碩士論文, 1-176。

英文部分
Albanese, M. (2000). Problem‐based learning: why curricula are likely to show little effect on knowledge and clinical skills. Medical Education, 34(9), 729-738.
Arslan‐Ari, I. (2018). Learning from instructional animations: How does prior knowledge mediate the effect of visual cues? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(2), 140-149.
Billington, H. L. (1997). Poster presentations and peer assessment: Novel forms of evaluation and assessment. Journal of Biological Education, 31(3), 218-220.
Chang, C. C., Tseng, K. H., & Lou, S. J. (2012). A comparative analysis of the consistency and difference among teacher-assessment, student self-assessment and peer-assessment in a Web-based portfolio assessment environment for high school students. Computers & Education, 58(1), 303-320.
Chen, J. M., Chen, M. C., & Sun, Y. S. (2014). A tag based learning approach to knowledge acquisition for constructing prior knowledge and enhancing student reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 70, 256-268.
Chen, S. Y., Fan, J. P., & Macredie, R. D. (2006). Navigation in hypermedia learning systems: experts vs. novices. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(2), 251-266.
Chen, S. Y., & Huang, P. R. (2013). The comparisons of the influences of prior knowledge on two game-based learning systems. Computers & Education, 68, 177-186.
Chen, S. Y., & Macredie, R. D. (2010) Web-based interaction: A review of three important human factors. International Journal of Information Management. 30(5), 379-287
Chen, M. P., Wong, Y. T., & Wang, L. C. (2014). Effects of type of exploratory strategy and prior knowledge on middle school students’ learning of chemical formulas from a 3D role-playing game. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(2), 163-185.
Chew, E., Snee, H., & Price, T. (2016). Enhancing international postgraduates’ learning experience with online peer assessment and feedback innovation. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 53(3), 247-259.
Crane, L., & Winterbottom, M. (2008). Plants and photosynthesis: peer assessment to help students learn. Journal of Biological Education, 42(4), 150-156.
De Grez, L., Valcke, M., & Roozen, I. (2012). How effective are self-and peer assessment of oral presentation skills compared with teachers’ assessments? Active Learning in Higher Education, 13(2), 129-142.
Demir, M. (2018). Using online peer assessment in an Instructional Technology and Material Design course through social media. Higher Education, 75(3), 399-414.
Dikici, A. (2009). An application of digital portfolio with the peer, self and instructor assessments in art education. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 36, 91-108.
Forzani, E. (2018). How well can students evaluate online science information? contributions of prior knowledge, gender, socioeconomic status, and offline reading ability. Reading Research Quarterly, 53(4), 385-390.
Harris, L. R., & Brown, G. T. (2013). Opportunities and obstacles to consider when using peer-and self-assessment to improve student learning: Case studies into teachers′ implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 36, 101-111.
Ho, H. N. J., Tsai, M. J., Wang, C. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2014). Prior knowledge and online inquiry-based science reading: Evidence from eye tracking. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(3), 525-554.
Hou, H. T. (2013). Analyzing the behavioral differences between students of different genders, prior knowledge and learning performance with an educational MMORPG: A longitudinal case study in an elementary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 85-89.
Hwang, G. J., Hung, C. M., & Chen, N. S. (2014). Improving learning achievements, motivations and problem-solving skills through a peer assessment-based game development approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(2), 129-145.
Joh, J., & Plakans, L. (2017). Working memory in L2 reading comprehension: The influence of prior knowledge. System, 70, 107-120.
Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2015). Supporting multimedia learning with visual signalling and animated pedagogical agent: Moderating effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(2), 97-115.
Kearney, S., Perkins, T., & Kennedy-Clark, S. (2016). Using self-and peer-assessments for summative purposes: analysing the relative validity of the AASL (Authentic Assessment for Sustainable Learning) model. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 840-853.
Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2010). Peer assessment as collaborative learning: A cognitive perspective. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 344-348.
Ku, O., Chen, S. Y., Wu, D.H., Lao, A. C.C., & Chan, T. W. (2014). The effects of game-based learning on mathematical confidence and performance: High ability vs. low ability. Educational Technology & Society, 17(3), 65-78.
Lai, C. Y. (2016). Training nursing students′ communication skills with online video peer assessment. Computers & Education, 97, 21-30.
Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2015). An interactive peer-assessment criteria development approach to improving students′ art design performance using handheld devices. Computers & Education, 85, 149-159.
Lai, C. H., Liao, Y. S., Jong, B. S., & Lee, B. F. (2011). The effect of peer assessment on group strategy. In 2011 International Conference on Future Computers in Education (ICFCE 2011) (Vol. 1, pp. 107-111).
Lee, C. I., & Chang, C. C. (2017). Assigning the appropriate works for review on networked peer assessment. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 3283-3300.
Lee, C. Y., & Chen, M. J. (2014). The impacts of virtual manipulatives and prior knowledge on geometry learning performance in junior high school. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 50(2), 179-201.
Lee, C. Y., & Chen, M. P. (2009). A computer game as a context for non-routine mathematical problem solving: The effects of type of question prompt and level of prior knowledge. Computers & Education, 52(3), 530-542.
Li, L. (2017). The role of anonymity in peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(4), 645-656.
Li, L., & Gao, F. (2016). The effect of peer assessment on project performance of students at different learning levels. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(6), 885-900.
Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Learning through science writing via online peer assessment in a college biology course. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 242-247.
Liu, C. C., Lu, K. H., Wu, L. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). The impact of peer review on creative self-efficacy and learning performance in Web 2.0 learning activities. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(2), 286-297.
Lu, J., & Law, N. (2012). Online peer assessment: Effects of cognitive and affective feedback. Instructional Science, 40(2), 257-275.
McNamara, D. S., Ozuru, Y., & Floyd, R. G. (2017). Comprehension challenges in the fourth grade: The roles of text cohesion, text genre, and readers’ prior knowledge. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 229-257.
Ng, E. M. (2016). Fostering pre-service teachers′ self-regulated learning through self-and peer assessment of wiki projects. Computers & Education, 98, 180-191.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (1996). The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-250.
Panadero, E., Romero, M., & Strijbos, J. W. (2013). The impact of a rubric and friendship on peer assessment: Effects on construct validity, performance, and perceptions of fairness and comfort. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 39(4), 195-203.
Rayner, G., & Papakonstantinou, T. (2018). Interactions among students′ prior learning, aspiration, confidence and university entrance score as determinants of academic success. Student Success, 9(2), 1-13.
Salehi, M., & Masoule, Z. S. (2017). An investigation of the reliability and validity of peer, self-, and teacher assessment. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 35(1), 1-15.
Schmidt, H. G., De Volder, M. L., De Grave, W. S., Moust, J. H., & Patel, V. L. (1989). Explanatory models in the processing of science text: The role of prior knowledge activation through small-group discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 610-619.
Shing, Y. L., & Brod, G. (2016). Effects of prior knowledge on memory: Implications for education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 10(3), 153-161.
Spyridakis, J. H., & Isakson, C. S. (1991). Hypertext: A new tool and its effect on audience comprehension. In Professional Communication Conference, 1991. IPCC′91. Proceedings. The Engineered Communication., International (Vol. 1, pp. 37-44). IEEE.
Stegmann, K., Pilz, F., Siebeck, M., & Fischer, F. (2012). Vicarious learning during simulations: is it more effective than hands‐on training? Medical Education, 46(10), 1001-1008.
Suñol, J. J., Arbat, G., Pujol, J., Feliu, L., Fraguell, R. M., & Planas-Lladó, A. (2016). Peer and self-assessment applied to oral presentations from a multidisciplinary perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(4), 622-637.
Svinicki, M. (1993). What they don’t know can hurt them: the role of prior knowledge in learning. The Professional & Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, 5(4), 1-5.
Takeda, S., & Homberg, F. (2014). The effects of gender on group work process and achievement: an analysis through self‐and peer‐assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 373-396.
Tarchi, C. (2015). Fostering reading comprehension of expository texts through the activation of readers’ prior knowledge and inference-making skills. International Journal of Educational Research, 72, 80-88.
Tenório, T., Bittencourt, I. I., Isotani, S., Pedro, A., & Ospina, P. (2016). A gamified peer assessment model for on-line learning environments in a competitive context. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 247-263.
Timoshenko, A. V. (2015). Peer assessment in small cell biology classes: a pilot case study. In Proceedings of the 2015 Western Conference on Science Education, Western University, Canada (Vol. 1).
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Tsivitanidou, O. E., Constantinou, C. P., Labudde, P., Rönnebeck, S., & Ropohl, M. (2018). Reciprocal peer assessment as a learning tool for secondary school students in modeling-based learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(1), 51-73.
Usher, M., & Barak, M. (2018). Peer assessment in a project-based engineering course: comparing between on-campus and online learning environments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(5), 745-759.
Uto, M., & Ueno, M. (2016). Item response theory for peer assessment. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(2), 157-170.
Wang, J. H., Chen, S. Y., & Chan, T. W. (2016). An investigation of a joyful peer response system: High ability vs. low ability. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 32(6), 431-444.
Wang, J. H., Chen, S. Y., Chang, B., & Chan, T. W. (2016). From integrative to game‐based integrative peer response: high ability versus low ability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(2), 170-185.
Wang, J. H., Hung, P. C., & Chen, S. Y. (2016). The Influences of Cognitive Styles on Assessment Differences in the Context of Peer Response. Workshop Proceedings of the International Workshop on Technology-Enhanced Collaborative Learning 2016 (TECL2016).
Wang, X. M., Hwang, G. J., Liang, Z. Y., & Wang, H. Y. (2017). Enhancing students’ computer programming performances, critical thinking awareness and attitudes towards programming: An online peer-assessment attempt. Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 58-68.
Yang, W. T., Lin, Y. R., She, H. C., & Huang, K. Y. (2015). The effects of prior-knowledge and online learning approaches on students’ inquiry and argumentation abilities. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1564-1589.
Yüksel, I. (2014). Impact of activity-based mathematics instruction on students with different prior knowledge and reading abilities. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(6), 1445-1468.
指導教授 楊接期 陳攸華(Jie-Chi Yang Sherry Y. Chen) 審核日期 2018-12-24
推文 facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu   
網路書籤 Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare   

若有論文相關問題,請聯絡國立中央大學圖書館推廣服務組 TEL:(03)422-7151轉57407,或E-mail聯絡  - 隱私權政策聲明