註釋、對話代理和協作概念圖支持大學生議論文寫作和後設認知的培養

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：16

、訪客IP：3.133.109.30

姓名

武朗狄(Randi Proska Sandra) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

註釋、對話代理和協作概念圖支持大學生議論文寫作和後設認知的培養
(Fostering Argumentative Writing and Metacognition Awareness of Undergraduate Students with Support of Annotation, Conversational Agents and Collaborative Concept Map)

相關論文

★ 同步表演機器人之建構與成效評估	★ 探討國小學童使用電子書多媒體註記系統結合註記分享機制對其學習行為與時間之影響
★ 先備知識對註記式多媒體電子書的影響研究：從個別環境到分享環境	★ Facilitating EFL speaking and writing with peer-tutoring and storytelling strategies in authentic learning context
★ An investigation into CKEL-supported EFL learning with TPR to reveal the importance of pronunciation and interactive sentence making	★ Investigation of Facilitating Physics Learning using Ubiquitous-Physics APP with Learning Map and Discussion Board in Authentic Contexts
★ 智慧互動SmartVpen在真實情境對於英文學習之影響	★ 利用合作虛擬化的網絡設計輔助計算機網路學習
★ 探討擴展合作式多媒體認知理論和其對EFL聽力與口語能力之影響 - 結合動覺辨識和學習者設計內容之猜謎遊戲	★ 在真實情境中利用智慧機制提升國小學生之外語口說及對話能力之評估
★ 探討在真實情境下教師回饋對學習認知與學習持續性之影響	★ Developing and Validating the Questionnaire and Its Model for Sustainable and Scalable Authentic Contextual Learning Supported by Mobile Apps
★ 探討個人化、情境化及社會化的智慧機制輔助真實情境國小幾何學習與其對學習成效之影響	★ Investigation of smart mechanisms for authentic contextual learning with sensor and recognition technologies
★ 探討智慧回饋如何影響學習時眼動和觸控操作的表現-以 Covid-19 快篩模擬為例	★ 在真實情境下結合圖像與位置辨識促進英文寫作

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)

議論文寫作是學生在學術與科學寫作中的基礎，與批判性思維和解決問題習習相關。然而，以往的研究調查發現，無論在宏觀層面上及微觀層面上，學生在議論文的寫作方面皆存在許多困難，例如：不合邏輯的思維模式、不夠明確的想法、缺乏論據結構，對問題、證據和數據的解釋不夠清晰等；及學生在寫作過程中的參與認知技能和自我調節等問題。因此，本研究旨在透過電腦支持的議論文寫作工具，包括註釋、聊天機器人（對話代理）和協作概念圖，整合三種工具至線上學習管理系統，來培養學生的議論文寫作和後設認知。由於本研究是在COVID-19疫情嚴重期間進行的，因此，這些工具將支持有意義的學習活動及論文寫作的調查。本研究於印尼一所大學進行為期八週的實驗，共六十名參與者，實驗組及對照組分別為三十人，針對參與者的議論文寫作的質量進行了評估，結果顯示，這三種工具有效地培養了學生議論文寫作的五個要素，包括：主張、理由、保證、支持及反駁。此外本研究深入分析發現，註釋的數量對於預測學生的議論文寫作發展具有顯著性，而協作概念圖則顯著預測學生的後設認知。此外，學生對三種工具的看法可以有效得幫助議論文寫作和後設認知，最後，我們對教育和技術等相關領域提出未來研究方向的建議。

摘要(英)

Argumentative writing is fundamental for undergraduate students′ academic life and scientific writing related to critical thinking and problem-solving. However, previous studies investigated that students have various difficulties in argumentative writing both at the macro level, such as illogical and unclear ideas, less-structured arguments, and unbalance interpretation of issues, data, and evidence; and micro-level related to students′ involvement cognition skills and self-regulatory procedures during the writing process. Therefore, this study aims to foster argumentative writing and metacognition awareness of undergraduate students by integrating computer-supported argumentative writing tools, including annotation, conversational agents (CAs), and collaborative concept maps, into an online learning management system. Since the study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, these tools can support meaningful learning activities and investigation in argumentative writing. An experiment was conducted for eight weeks at an Indonesian university for 60 participants, including 30 for the experimental group and 30 for the control group, and their argumentative writing qualities were also evaluated. The result showed that these three tools effectively foster students′ five elements of argumentative writing, including claims, grounds, warrants, and backings, rebuttal. Furthermore, the deep analysis found that the number of annotations can significantly predict the students’ argumentative writing development, and a collaborative concept map can significantly predict students’ metacognition awareness. Moreover, students′ perceptions of the three proposed tools can effectively help argumentative writing and metacognition awareness. Finally, we proposed some recommendations for future research both in educational and technical aspects.

關鍵字(中)

★ 議論文寫作
★ 後設認知
★ 註釋
★ 聊天機器人（對話代理）
★ 協作概念圖

關鍵字(英)

★ argumentative writing
★ metacognition awareness
★ annotation
★ conversational agents
★ collaborative concept map

論文目次

中文摘要 ........................................................................................................................ i
Abstract ............................................................................................................................. ii
Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... iii
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................ iv
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................. vii
Chapter 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Research Questions ................................................................................................ 3
Chapter 2 Literature Review............................................................................................. 4
2.1 Argumentative Writing ......................................................................................... 4
2.2 Metacognition Awareness in Argumentative Writing ...................................... 6
2.3 Computer-Supported Argumentative Writing ................................................... 8
Chapter 3 System Design and Implementation .............................................................. 14
3.1 System Architecture ............................................................................................ 14
3.2 Learning Activities Implementation on Moodle LMS.................................... 15
3.3 Annotation-Supported Argumentative Writing ............................................... 18
3.4 CAs-Supported Argumentative Writing ........................................................... 20
3.5 Collaborative concept map-Supported Argumentative Writing .................... 21
Chapter 4 Methodology .................................................................................................. 24
4.1 Research Structure and Research Variables ..................................................... 24
4.2 Experimental Flow and Procedures ................................................................... 30
4.3 Participants ........................................................................................................... 32
4.4 Research Tools ..................................................................................................... 33
4.5 Data Collection and Processing ......................................................................... 35
Chapter 5 Result and Discussion .................................................................................... 36
5.1 Analysis of Learning Achievement, Assingment Performance and Metacognition Awareness ................................................................................... 36
5.2 Relationship between Learning Achievement and learning behaviours ...... 43
5.3 Analysis of Relationship between Metacognition Awareness with Learning Behaviours of Supporting Tools and Learning Achievement ........................ 52
v
5.4 Prediction of the dependent variables to learning achievement and metacognition awareness ................................................................................... 60
5.5 Students’ Perceptions toward the use of Annotation, CAs and Collaborative concept mapping Tools for Argumentative Writing ....................................... 62
5.6 Findings and Discussions ................................................................................... 69
Chapter 6 Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 74
6.1 Limitations ............................................................................................................ 75
6.2 Future Recommendations ................................................................................... 76
Bibliographies ................................................................................................................. 77
Appendices ..................................................................................................................... 88

參考文獻

Abdollahzadeh, E., Amini Farsani, M., & Beikmohammadi, M. (2017). Argumentative Writing Behavior of Graduate EFL Learners. Argumentation, 31(4), 641–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-016-9415-5
Aldahmash, A. H., & Omar, S. H. (2021). Analysis of activities included in Saudi Arabian chemistry textbooks for the inclusion of argumentation-driven inquiry skills. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 68, 100968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100968
Allagui, B. (2019). Investigating the Quality of Argument Structure in First-Year University Writing. In English Language Teaching Research in the Middle East and North Africa (pp. 173–196). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98533-6_9
Alt, D., & Naamati-Schneider, L. (2021). Health management students’ self-regulation and digital concept mapping in online learning environments. BMC Medical Education, 21(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02542-w
Andrews, R. (2009). The importance of argument in education. Institute of Education, University of London.
Araujo, R. C. (2020). Online collaborative mind mapping in a mathematics teacher education program: A study on student interaction and knowledge construction. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52, 943–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01125-w
Aşıksoy, G. (2019). Computer-Based Concept Mapping as a Method for Enhancing the Effectiveness of Concept Learning in Technology-Enhanced Learning. Sustainability, 11(4), 1005. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041005
Aziz, F. I. B. A., & Said, S. B. M. (2020). Developing a persuasive writing model for secondary school. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 19(2), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-019-09253-6
Azmuddin, R. A., Nor, N. F. M., & Hamat, A. (2017). Metacognitive Online Reading and Navigational Strategies by Science and Technology University Students. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 17(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2017-1703-02
Balta, E. E. (2018). The Relationships Among Writing Skills, Writing Anxiety and Metacognitive Awareness. Journal of Education and Learning, 7(3), 233. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v7n3p233
Beare, S., & Bourdages, J. S. (2007). Chapter 10: Skilled Writers’ Generating Strategies in L1 and L2: An Exploratory Study. Writing and Cognition, 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1163/9781849508223_011
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (Eds.). (1987). The Psychology of Written Composition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203812310
Biro, S. L. (2021). Reading in a Time of Crisis: Using Perusall to Facilitate Close Reading and Active Discussion in the Remote Philosophy Classroom. Teaching Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.5840/teachphil202132137
Boykin, A., Evmenova, A. S., Regan, K., & Mastropieri, M. (2019). The impact of a computer-based graphic organizer with embedded self-regulated learning strategies on the argumentative writing of students in inclusive cross-curricula settings. Computers & Education, 137, 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.008
Breivik, J. (2020). Argumentative patterns in students’ online discussions in an introductory philosophy course. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 15(01), 8–23. https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2020-01-02
Bulgren, J. A., & Ellis, J. D. (2012). Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention in Science Classes: Teaching and Learning with Toulmin. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research (pp. 135–154). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2470-9_8
Burchardt, A., Erk, K., Frank, A., Kowalski, A., & Pado, S. (2006, May). SALTO - A Versatile Multi-Level Annotation Tool. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’06). LREC 2006, Genoa, Italy. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2006/pdf/341_pdf.pdf
Cecchinato, G., & Foschi, L. C. (2020). Perusall: University learning-teaching innovation employing social annotation and machine learning. Qwerty - Open and Interdisciplinary Journal of Technology, Culture and Education, 15(2), 45–67.
Charles, M. (1990). Responding to problems in written English using a student self-monitoring technique. ELT Journal, 44(4), 286–293. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/44.4.286
Chiang, K.-H., Fan, C.-Y., Liu, H.-H., & Chen, G.-D. (2016). Effects of a computer-assisted argument map learning strategy on sixth-grade students’ argumentative essay reading comprehension. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 75(16), 9973–9990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2904-y
Cho, K.-L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505022
Clarke, A. J. (2021). Perusall: Social learning platform for reading and annotating (perusall LLC, perusall.com). Journal of Political Science Education, 17(1), 149–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2019.1649151
Coffin, C., & O’Halloran, K. (2008). Researching argumentation in educational contexts: New directions, new methods. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 31(3), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437270802416582
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Ferretti, R. P., Andrews-Weckerly, S., & Lewis, W. E. (2007). Improving the Argumentative Writing of Students with Learning Disabilities: Descriptive and Normative Considerations. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 23(3), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560701277740
Ferretti, R. P., Lewis, W. E., & Andrews-Weckerly, S. (2009). Do goals affect the structure of students’ argumentative writing strategies? Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 577–589. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014702
Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. https://doi.org/10.2307/356600
Gabriel, V. de O., Panisson, A. R., Bordini, R. H., Adamatti, D. F., & Billa, C. Z. (2020). Reasoning in BDI agents using Toulmin’s argumentation model. Theoretical Computer Science, 805, 76–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2019.10.026
Gleason, M. M. (1999). The Role of Evidence in Argumentative Writing. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 15(1), 81–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/105735699278305
Hacker, D. J., Keener, M. C., & Kircher, J. C. (2009). Writing is Applied Metacognition. In Handbook of Metacognition in Education. Routledge.
Harris, J. (1990). Text annotation and underlining as metacognitive strategies to improve comprehension and retention of expository text. https://repository.arizona.edu/handle/10150/185254
Harris, K. R., Graham, S., Brindle, M., & Sandme, K. (2009). Metacognition and Children’s Writing. In Handbook of Metacognition in Education. Routledge.
Hirose, K. (2003). Comparing L1 and L2 organizational patterns in the argumentative writing of Japanese EFL students. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(2), 181–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00015-8
Hwang, W.-Y., Shadiev, R., & Huang, S.-M. (2010). Effect of Multimedia Annotation System on Improving English Writing and Speaking Performance. In X. Zhang, S. Zhong, Z. Pan, K. Wong, & R. Yun (Eds.), Entertainment for Education. Digital Techniques and Systems (pp. 1–12). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14533-9_1
Johnson, T. E., Archibald, T. N., & Tenenbaum, G. (2010). Individual and team annotation effects on students’ reading comprehension, critical thinking, and meta-cognitive skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1496–1507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.014
Kawase, R., Herder, E., & Nejdl, W. (2009). A Comparison of Paper-Based and Online Annotations in the Workplace. In U. Cress, V. Dimitrova, & M. Specht (Eds.), Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines (pp. 240–253). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04636-0_23
Knudson, R. E. (1992). Analysis of Argumentative Writing at Two Grade Levels. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(3), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1992.9944434
Knudson, R. E. (1994). An analysis of persuasive discourse: Learning how to take a stand. Discourse Processes, 18(2), 211–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539409544892
Knudson, R. E. (1998). College Students’ Writing: An Assessment of Competence. The Journal of Educational Research, 92(1), 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220679809597571
Kulatunga, U., Moog, R. S., & Lewis, J. E. (2014). Use of Toulmin’s Argumentation Scheme for Student Discourse to Gain Insight About Guided Inquiry Activities in College Chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(5), 78–86.
Kyllonen, P. C., Roberts, R. D., & Stankov, L. (Eds.). (2008). Extending intelligence: Enhancement and new constructs. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lachner, A., Burkhart, C., & Nückles, M. (2017). Formative computer-based feedback in the university classroom: Specific concept maps scaffold students’ writing. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 459–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.008
Lee, S. C., & Yeong, F. M. (2018). Fostering student engagement using online, collaborative reading assignments mediated by Perusall. The Asia Pacific Scholar, 3(3), 46–48. https://doi.org/10.29060/TAPS.2018-3-3/PV2000
Lin, V., Liu, G.-Z., & Chen, N.-S. (2020). The effects of an augmented-reality ubiquitous writing application: A comparative pilot project for enhancing EFL writing instruction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 0(0), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1770291
Liu, F., & Stapleton, P. (2014). Counterargumentation and the cultivation of critical thinking in argumentative writing: Investigating washback from a high-stakes test. System, 45, 117–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.05.005
Liu, F., & Stapleton, P. (2020). Counterargumentation at the primary level: An intervention study investigating the argumentative writing of second language learners. System, 89, 102198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102198
Liu, K. (2006). Annotation As an Index to Critical Writing. Urban Education, 41(2), 192–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085905282261
Liu, L. (2005). Rhetorical education through writing instruction across cultures: A comparative analysis of select online instructional materials on argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.11.001
Liu, S., Kang, L., Liu, Z., Fang, J., Yang, Z., Sun, J., Wang, M., & Hu, M. (2021). Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping: The impact of students’ perceptions of collaboration on their knowledge understanding and behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 0(0), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1927115
Lu, J., & Deng, L. (2013). Examining students’ use of online annotation tools in support of argumentative reading. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.159
Lubis, A. H. (2020). The argumentation structure of research article ‘findings and discussion’ sections written by Non-native English speaker novice writers: A case of Indonesian undergraduate students. Asian Englishes, 22(2), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/13488678.2019.1669300
Luna, M., Villalón, R., Mateos, M., & Martín, E. (2020). Improving university argumentative writing through an online training. Journal of Writing Research, 12(vol. 12 issue 1), 233–262. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2020.12.01.08
Mabunda, K., & Ade-Ibijola, A. (2019). PathBot: An Intelligent Chatbot for Guiding Visitors and Locating Venues. 2019 6th International Conference on Soft Computing Machine Intelligence (ISCMI), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISCMI47871.2019.9004411
Miller, K., Lukoff, B., King, G., & Mazur, E. (2018). Use of a Social Annotation Platform for Pre-Class Reading Assignments in a Flipped Introductory Physics Class. Frontiers in Education, 3. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00008
Mochizuki, T., Nishimori, T., Tsubakimoto, M., Oura, H., Sato, T., Johansson, H., Nakahara, J., & Yamauchi, Y. (2019). Development of software to support argumentative reading and writing by means of creating a graphic organizer from an electronic text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(5), 1197–1230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09676-1
Nagata, R., Hashiguchi, T., & Sadoun, D. (2020). Is the Simplest Chatbot Effective in English Writing Learning Assistance? In L.-M. Nguyen, X.-H. Phan, K. Hasida, & S. Tojo (Eds.), Computational Linguistics (pp. 245–256). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6168-9_21
Naghmeh-Abbaspour, B., Rastgoo, V., Fathi, N., & Yek, Z. (2019). The Use of Mindomo Software to Improve the Logical Development of EFL Learners’ Writing. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 8(12), 238–252.
Nelson, N. (2007). The Reading-Writing Nexus in Discourse Research. In Handbook of Research on Writing (First Edition, pp. 534–553). Routledge.
Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012). Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 79–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.006
Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2013). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction through a transactive discussion script in CSCL. Computers & Education, 61, 59–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.013
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Kupper, L., & Russo, R. P. (1985). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students. Language Learning, 35(1), 21–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1985.tb01013.x
Oostendorp, H. van, & Mul, S. de (Eds.). (1996). Cognitive Aspects of Electronic Text Processing (Vol. 58). Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Orehovački, T., Babić, S., & Jadrić, M. (2014). Exploring the Validity of an Instrument to Measure the Perceived Quality in Use of Web 2.0 Applications with Educational Potential. In P. Zaphiris & A. Ioannou (Eds.), Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Designing and Developing Novel Learning Experiences (pp. 192–203). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07482-5_19
Palermo, C., & Thomson, M. M. (2018). Teacher implementation of Self-Regulated Strategy Development with an automated writing evaluation system: Effects on the argumentative writing performance of middle school students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54, 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.07.002
Panahandeh, E., & Asl, S. E. (2014). The Effect of Planning and Monitoring as Metacognitive Strategies on Iranian EFL Learners’ Argumentative Writing Accuracy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1409–1416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.559
Peloghitis, J. (2017). Difficulties and Strategies in Argumentative Writing: A Qualitative Analysis. JALT2016 - Transformation in Language Education: Postconference Publication, 399–406.
Pereira, J., & Barcina, M. A. (2019). A chatbot assistant for writing good quality technical reports. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1145/3362789.3362798
Preiss, D. D., Castillo, J. C., Flotts, P., & San Martín, E. (2013). Assessment of argumentative writing and critical thinking in higher education: Educational correlates and gender differences. Learning and Individual Differences, 28, 193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2013.06.004
Pribadi, B. A. (2018). Use of the Concept Mapping Strategy to Improve Academic Writing. In K. A. Persichitte, A. Suparman, & M. Spector (Eds.), Educational Technology to Improve Quality and Access on a Global Scale: Papers from the Educational Technology World Conference (ETWC 2016) (pp. 273–285). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66227-5_21
Qin, J., & Karabacak, E. (2010). The analysis of Toulmin elements in Chinese EFL university argumentative writing. System, 38(3), 444–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.06.012
Ranalli, J., Link, S., & Chukharev-Hudilainen, E. (2017). Automated writing evaluation for formative assessment of second language writing: Investigating the accuracy and usefulness of feedback as part of argument-based validation. Educational Psychology, 37(1), 8–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2015.1136407
Reyes, R., Garza, D., Garrido, L., De la Cueva, V., & Ramirez, J. (2019). Methodology for the Implementation of Virtual Assistants for Education Using Google Dialogflow. In L. Martínez-Villaseñor, I. Batyrshin, & A. Marín-Hernández (Eds.), Advances in Soft Computing (pp. 440–451). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33749-0_35
Rusfandi. (2015). Argument-Counterargument Structure in Indonesian EFL Learners’ English Argumentative Essays: A Dialogic Concept of Writing. RELC Journal, 46(2), 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688215587607
Sabharwal, N., & Agrawal, A. (2020). Introduction to Google Dialogflow. In N. Sabharwal & A. Agrawal (Eds.), Cognitive Virtual Assistants Using Google Dialogflow: Develop Complex Cognitive Bots Using the Google Dialogflow Platform (pp. 13–54). Apress. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-5741-8_2
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994a). Assessing Metacognitive Awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460–475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994b). Metacognitive Awareness Inventory Scoring Guide. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
Siadaty, M., Gašević, D., & Hatala, M. (2016). Measuring the impact of technological scaffolding interventions on micro-level processes of self-regulated workplace learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 469–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.025
Sibarani, B., & Pandia, B. (2020). Variations in Reasoning in Javanese and Bataknese Students’ Argumentative Writing: A Study on the Relation between Ethnicity and Reasoning. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 385–394.
Şimşek, E. (2021). Philosophical roots of argumentative writing in higher education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 0(0), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1865922
Sitko, B. M. (1998). Knowing How to Write: Metacognition and Writing Instruction. In Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice (pp. 93–115). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Smet, M. J. R. de, Broekkamp, H., Brand‐Gruwel, S., & Kirschner, P. A. (2011). Effects of electronic outlining on students’ argumentative writing performance. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(6), 557–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00418.x
Southworth, J. (2021). How argumentative writing stifles open-mindedness. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 20(2), 207–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022220903426
Stapleton, P., & Wu, Y. (Amy). (2015). Assessing the quality of arguments in students’ persuasive writing: A case study analyzing the relationship between surface structure and substance. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 17, 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2014.11.006
Sturm, J. M., & Rankin-Erickson, J. L. (2002). Effects of Hand‐Drawn and Computer‐Generated Concept Mapping on the Expository Writing of Middle School Students with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 124–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00039
Suleman, R. M., Mizoguchi, R., & Ikeda, M. (2016). A New Perspective of Negotiation-Based Dialog to Enhance Metacognitive Skills in the Context of Open Learner Models. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(4), 1069–1115. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0118-8
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument, Updated Edition (2nd Edition). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005
van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., Krabbe, E. C. W., Snoeck Henkemans, A. F., Verheij, B., & Wagemans, J. H. M. (2014). Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9473-5
Varnum, K. J. (Ed.). (2019). New Top Technologies Every Librarian Needs to Know: A LITA Guide. American Library Association.
Walker, A. S. (2019). Perusall: Harnessing AI Robo-Tools and Writing Analytics to Improve Student Learning and Increase Instructor Efficiency. The Journal of Writing Analytics, 3, 37. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.37514/JWA-J.2019.3.1.11
Wei, J., Chen, J. C., & Adawu, A. (2014). Teaching ESL Beginners Metacognitive Writing Strategies through Multimedia Software. CATESOL Journal, 26(1), 60–75.
Wei, X., Zhang, L. J., & Zhang, W. (2020). Associations of L1-to-L2 rhetorical transfer with L2 writers’ perception of L2 writing difficulty and L2 writing proficiency. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 47, 100907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100907
Yaman, F. (2018). Effects of the Science Writing Heuristic Approach on the Quality of Prospective Science Teachers’ Argumentative Writing and Their Understanding of Scientific Argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(3), 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9788-9
Zarrabi, F., & Bozorgian, H. (2020). EFL Students’ Cognitive Performance during Argumentative Essay Writing: A log-file data analysis. Computers and Composition, 55, 102546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2020.102546

指導教授

黃武元(Hwang, Wu-Yuan)

審核日期

2021-8-19

推文