博碩士論文 108524602 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：18 、訪客IP：18.191.212.72
姓名 達馬萬(Darmawansah)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 網路學習科技研究所
論文名稱 印尼語小型私人線上課程(SPOC)中兩個遊戲化評量的比較實證研究
(A Comparison Empirical Study Between Two Gamified-Assessment in Small Private Online Course (SPOC) for Learning Bahasa Indonesia)
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) 線上學習和在教育環境中使用科技正得到整個教育體制的充分關注。如今，網路學習的普及為教師和學生帶來了巨大的機會，讓他們能在快速的網路學習中探索不同的學習方式。然而，目前存在著一些問題，如線上學習評量。
本研究主要目的在實證分析在小型私網平台上兩種遊戲評量對高等教育學生在是否有顯著影響。實踐分析包括學生的內在動機和自我效能。此外，學生的教育專業背景和每週的學習時間也被用作獨立變量。
這項研究最初是透過SPOC為台灣的高等教育學生提供學習印尼語的機會。這項研究開始於設計和開發兩種遊戲評量和啟發式評估的 Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing (BIPA) 教師，為世界各地的外國人提供印尼語。該階段接著進入在SPOC中啟動的系統。
研究的設計分為定量和定性(混合方法)進行。在SPOC的遊戲性評量成為研究學生內在動機和自我效能感的中心，以確定GA的使用是否顯著。此研究是在台灣一所私立大學的兩個不同班級進行的。一個是針對漢語作為第二語言的教學 Teaching Chinese as Second Language (TCSL) 學生的班級，另一個是針對非TCSL學生的班級。一開始透過預試來檢測學生的印尼語水平。其結果採用Mann-Whitney U 檢驗來尋找變量之間的相關性。
另一方面，使用Spearman來尋找依變量和自變量之間的相關性係數。研究結果被用來將學生分成兩組，進行兩輪。第一輪中，有33名學生參與了遊戲評量 (GA) 並填寫了調查，而在第二輪中參與者的數量為24名。透過使用事後分析Kruskal Wallis H-test來定量分析兩輪的數據，以調查做每個遊戲評量 (GA) 的學生的任何顯著性比較。此外，定性分析是透過向十個願意參與的學生提出五個開放式問題來進行的。學生的答案被嚴格編碼，並以五種描述性分析和圖表的形式呈現。
結果表明;(1)學生的印尼語熟練程度不影響其內在動機，自我效能僅部分受到印尼語熟練程度的影響。 (2) 學生對GA 2的內在動機與自我效能有較強的關聯性。但與GA1的相關性較弱。 (3) 在GA1和GA 2上都顯著發現了學生的感知能力，但是僅在GA 1有緊張感。 (4) GA 2僅對學生的自我效能有影響，GA 1對學生的自我效能無顯著影響。另外，GA 2在社會資源的獲取、學業成績和自主學習等方面呈現顯著差異。
根據我們的開放式調查得出的另一個發現被分析為五個支持主題。 (5) 這項研究在GA 1和GA 2的對比中對這些主題進行了批判性的討論; 學習時間與學生成績，學生對焦慮狀態的看法，印度尼西亞文化素養的相似程度以及學生在SPOC的遊戲化評估中的前後行為之間的關係並不密切。
透過查看SPOC的遊戲評量，這項研究為印尼語教師和講師提供了一個新的視角，讓他們在面對迫使所有學習都在網上進行的危急情況時，利用這種特殊的評量來吸引學生的注意力。本文討論了研究結果的含義和進一步研究的建議。
摘要(英) Online learning and the use of technology in the educational environment is getting full attention throughout educational institutions. The availability of using online learning nowadays has brought a vast opportunity for teachers, alongside with students, to explore various learning styles in facing rapid online learning. However, several issues have been existed, such as the learning assessment through online.
The purpose of this study was to empirically analyze the comparison between two gamified-assessments, whether significantly affect higher education students in their Small Private Online Course (SPOC) platform. The practical analysis includes students′ intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy. Additionally, students′ educational major background and their learning hours per week were also employed to be independent variables.
The study was initially launched to learn the Indonesian language for higher education students in Taiwan through SPOC. The study was commenced by designing and developing two gamified-assessments and heuristically evaluated by BIPA (Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing) or Indonesian language teachers, Indonesian language for foreign speakers, around the world. The phase then proceeded into the system launched in SPOC.
The design of the study was conducted into quantitative and qualitative (mixed-method). Gamified-assessment in SPOC becomes a center of study where students’ intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy were investigated to determine whether the use of GA is significant or not. The study was conducted in two different classes in a private university in Taiwan. One class for Teaching Chinese as Second Language (TCSL) students, and another class for non-TCSL students. In the beginning, students’ Indonesian language proficiency were detected by conducting pretest. Its result was used to find the differences among variables by employing Mann-Whitney U-test.
On the other hand, a Spearman’s correlation was executed to seek coefficients between dependent and independent variables. The students were then grouped into two groups for two cycles. In the cycle I, there were 33 students participated in doing the gamified-assessment (GA) and filled the survey, while the number of participants in cycle II was 24 students. The data from two-cycle were quantitatively analyzed by using a post-hoc analysis Kruskal Wallis H-test in order to investigate any significance comparison for students who are doing each GA. Moreover, the qualitative analysis was conducted in by asking five open-ended questions to the ten students who were willing to participate. Students’ answers were rigorously coded and presented in five supporting descriptive analysis and figures.
iii
The result indicates; (1) students’ Indonesian language proficiency does not affect their intrinsic motivation, while self-efficacy is only partially affected by students’ Indonesian language proficiency. (2) There is a strong correlation among students’ intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy toward GA 2. However, the weak correlation was found toward GA 1. (3) Students’ perceived competence was significantly found on both GA1 and GA 2. However, the tension was only on GA 1. (4) Self-efficacy was only affected by students in GA 2 only, while GA 1 shows the non-significant result. The additional finding indicates that GA 2 provided high significant difference among students in enlisting their social resources, their academic achievement and their self-regulated learning.
Another findings based-on the open-ended survey were analyzed into five supporting-themes. (5) The study managed those themes to critically discuss in the unflattering comparison between GA 1 and GA 2; the not relatable of learning epoch for students’ achievement, students’ perception on the state of anxiety, the likeness of Indonesian’s cultural literacy, and how students’ prior and anterior actions within the gamified-assessment in SPOC.
By viewing the gamified-assessment in SPOC, the study offers a new lens for Indonesian language teachers and instructors to use this particular assessment to get students’ attention while facing the critical condition which forces all learning to be online. The implication of the findings and recommendations for further research are discussed herein.
關鍵字(中) ★ 遊戲評量
★ 印尼語
★ 內在動機
★ 自我效能
★ SPOC		 關鍵字(英) ★ gamified-assessment
★ Indonesian language
★ intrinsic motivation
★ self-efficacy
★ SPOC
論文目次 TABLE OF CONTENT
中文摘要 …………………………………………………………………………i
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT ................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENT .................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................ ix
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................... x
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 1
1-1 Background & Identification of Problems ................................................. 1
1-2 Objectives of the Study ............................................................................... 3
1-3 Focus and Research Questions ................................................................... 3
1-4 Definitions ................................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................... 5
2-1 The Genesis of Gamification in Online Learning Assessment................... 5
2-1-1 Gamified and gamification ........................................................................ 6
2-1-2 The nature and challenges of gamified-assessment in online learning..... 7
2-2 An Explosive Development of SPOC .......................................................... 9
2-2-1 A demarcation line between SPOC and other related terms ................... 9
2-2-2 Previous works in SPOC ......................................................................... 11
2-3 Students’ Emotional Behavior in Online Learning ................................. 14
2-3-1 Intrinsic motivation as the latent variable .............................................. 14
2-3-2 Students’ self-efficacy and their collaborative behaviour ...................... 16
2-4 The Current Issue of Indonesian Language Learning ............................. 19
2-4-1 The emergence of BIPA in Taiwanese case ................................................ 20
CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODS .............................................. 22
vii
3-1 System Development ................................................................................. 22
3-1-1 Gamification concept .................................................................................. 22
3-1-2 Analysis and design .................................................................................... 24
3-1-3 Heuristic evaluation.................................................................................... 28
3-1-4 Post-production .......................................................................................... 29
3-2 Research Design and Condition................................................................ 30
3-2-1 Research participants .............................................................................. 31
3-2-2 Research instruments .............................................................................. 32
3-2-3 Research procedure ................................................................................. 33
3-2-4 Data collection technique and analysis ................................................... 36
3-2-4-1 Mann-Whitney U test ....................................................................... 36
3-2-4-2 Spearman rank-order correlation.................................................... 36
3-2-4-3 Kruskal-Wallis H test ....................................................................... 37
3-2-4-4 Virtual ethnography (Thematic analysis) ........................................ 37
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ....................................... 38
4-1 The Influences of Students’ Indonesian Language Proficiency on Their Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Efficacy ..................................................... 38
4-1-1 The influences of students’ Indonesian language proficiency on intrinsic motivation ................................................................................................ 38
4-2-1 The influences of students’ language proficiency on self-efficacy .......... 39
4-2 The Indication of Students’ Major Background (MB), Online Learning Period (OLP) and Their Correlation Coefficients ................................... 40
4-3 The Comparison Degree between TCSL and Non-TCSL Students in Both Gamified-Assessment ................................................................................ 42
4-3-1 Motivating learners intrinsically from the perspective of both GA given ......................................................................................................... 42
4-3-2 The state of enjoyment using gamified-assessment ................................ 42
4-3-3 Students get motivated intrinsically by perceiving their competence .... 43
4-3-4 Students’ tension ..................................................................................... 45
viii
4-3-5 Students’ perceiving value ...................................................................... 46
4-3-6 Overall conclusion in intrinsic motivation .............................................. 47
4-4 How gamified-assessment affected students’ self-efficacy ....................... 48
4-4-1 Students’ self-efficacy in dealing with gamified-assessment .................. 49
4-4-2 Students’ draw to enlist social resource .................................................. 49
4-4-3 The extent to which students have accomplished in GAs ....................... 50
4-4-4 Self-regulated learning among students.................................................. 52
4-4-5 Overall conclusion in self-efficacy ........................................................... 53
4-5 An Extended-Perception of SPOC’s students in Gamified-Assessment: A Virtual Thematic Analysis ........................................................................ 54
4-5-1 The unflattering comparison between travelling-like and drag-and-drop assessment ................................................................................................ 55
4-5-2 Assessment epoch is not relatable, but promising iteration ................... 57
4-5-3 Tension as part of learning ...................................................................... 58
4-5-4 Fostering cultural literacy for the sake of grasp understanding ............ 60
4-5-5 A driven sense of learning actions ........................................................... 61
4-5-6 How intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy occur in GA 1 and GA 2 ..... 62
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS .......................... 64 5-1 Conclusions................................................................................................ 64 5-2 Limitation and Suggestions....................................................................... 67
REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 68
Appendix 1. 7-point Likert-scale of Intrinsic Motivation questionnaire (Ryan, 1995) modified by Liu and Tsai (2008) ..................................................... 86 Appendix 2. 5-point Likert-scale of Self-Efficacy questionnaire (Bandura, 1977) adopted from Mills, Pajares, and Herron (2006) ........................... 87
Appendix 3. Open-ended questions ................................................................. 88
參考文獻 Acquah, E. O., & Katz, H. T. (2020). Digital game-based L2 learning outcomes for primary through high-school students: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 143, 103667. Armstrong, M. B., Ferrell, J. Z., Collmus, A. B., & Landers, R. N. (2016). Correcting misconceptions about gamification of assessment: More than SJTs and badges. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 9(3), 671-677. Arumdyahsari, S., Hs, W., & Susanto, G. (2016). Pengembangan bahan ajar Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing (BIPA) tingkat madya. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 1(5), 828-834. Awidi, I. T., & Paynter, M. (2019). The impact of a flipped classroom approach on student learning experience. Computers & Education, 128, 269-283. Bakla, A. (2018). Learner-generated materials in a flipped pronunciation class: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study. Computers & Education, 125, 14-38. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148. Barak, M., Watted, A., & Haick, H. (2016). Motivation to learn in massive open online courses: Examining aspects of language and social engagement. Computers & Education, 94, 49-60. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education. Bianco, M. B., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2007). Exploring qualitative methodologies in online learning environments. Online Learning Communities, 299-318. Boelens, R., Voet, M., & De Wever, B. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to student diversity in higher education: Instructors’ views and use of differentiated instruction in blended learning. Computers & Education, 120, 197-212. Bos, N., Groeneveld, C., Van Bruggen, J., & Brand‐Gruwel, S. (2016). The use of recorded lectures in education and the impact on lecture attendance and exam performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(5), 906-917. Brown, M. G. (2016). Blended instructional practice: A review of the empirical literature on instructors′ adoption and use of online tools in face-to-face teaching. The Internet and Higher Education, 31, 1-10. Campbell, L. O., Heller, S., & Pulse, L. (2020). Student-created video: an active learning approach in online environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-10, https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1711777 Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 980. Cheng, H. N., Liu, Z., Sun, J., Liu, S., & Yang, Z. (2017). Unfolding online learning behavioral patterns and their temporal changes of college students in SPOCs. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 176-188. Cheng, K. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2020). Students’ motivational beliefs and strategies, perceived immersion and attitudes towards science learning with immersive virtual reality: A partial least squares analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology. Clark, C., Strudler, N., & Grove, K. (2015). Comparing asynchronous and synchronous video vs. text based discussions in an online teacher education course. Online Learning, 19(3), 48-69. Costa, D. S., Mullan, B. A., Kothe, E. J., & Butow, P. (2010). A web-based formative assessment tool for Masters students: A pilot study. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1248-1253. Coughlan, S. (2013). Harvard plans to boldly go with′Spocs′. BBC News, 24. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Rathunde, K. (1993). The measurement of flow in everyday life: Toward a theory of emergent motivation. In J. E. Jacobs (Ed.), Current theory and research in motivation, Vol. 40. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1992: Developmental perspectives on motivation (p. 57–97). University of Nebraska Press.
CYCU. (n.d.). College of Humanities and Education - Applied Linguistic and Language Studies Web. Retrieved May 28, 2020, from https://www.cycu.edu.tw/eng/A_L_L_S.html Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Teacher education and the American future. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 35-47.
Darmawansah. (2020). Gamified-Assessment for Learning Indonesian as a Foreign Language : Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 22(1), 13–24. De-Marcos, L., Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., & Pagés, C. (2014). An empirical study comparing gamification and social networking on e-learning. Computers & Education, 75, 82-91. Kloos, C. D., Muñoz-Merino, P. J., Muñoz-Organero, M., Alario-Hoyos, C., Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Ruipérez, J. A., & Sanz, J. L. (2014, April). Experiences of running MOOCs and SPOCs at UC3M. In 2014 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 884-891). IEEE. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, September). From game design elements to gamefulness: defining" gamification". In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (pp. 9-15). Ding, Y., & Zhao, T. (2019). Emotions, engagement, and self‐perceived achievement in a small private online course. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 1-9. Downes, S. (2012). Connectivism and connective knowledge: Essays on meaning and learning networks. National Research Council Canada. Retrieved Aug, 1, 2013. Filius, R. M., de Kleijn, R. A., Uijl, S. G., Prins, F. J., van Rijen, H. V., & Grobbee, D. E. (2018). Strengthening dialogic peer feedback aiming for deep learning in SPOCs. Computers & Education, 125, 86-100. Fırat, M., Kılınç, H., & Yüzer, T. V. (2018). Level of intrinsic motivation of distance education students in e‐learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(1), 63-70. Fox, A. (2013). From moocs to spocs. Communications of the ACM, 56(12), 38-40. Fox, A., Patterson, D. A., Ilson, R., Joseph, S., Walcott-Justice, K., & Williams, R. (2014). Software engineering curriculum technology transfer: lessons learned from MOOCs and SPOCs. UC Berkeley EECS Technical Report. Freitas, A., & Paredes, J. (2018). Understanding the faculty perspectives influencing their innovative practices in MOOCs/SPOCs: a case study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 5. Frøkjær, E., & Hornbæk, K. (2008). Metaphors of human thinking for usability inspection and design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 14(4), 1-33. Gañán, D., Caballé, S., Clarisó, R., Conesa, J., & Bañeres, D. (2017). ICT-FLAG: a web-based e-assessment platform featuring learning analytics and gamification. International Journal of Web Information Systems. Gardner, J. (Ed.). (2012). Assessment and learning. Sage. Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 20-20. Georgiou, K., Gouras, A., & Nikolaou, I. (2019). Gamification in employee selection: The development of a gamified assessment. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 27(2), 91-103. Giang, C., Piatti, A., & Mondada, F. (2019). Heuristics for the development and evaluation of educational robotics systems. IEEE Transactions on Education, 62(4), 278-287. Glasgow, R., Nelson, C., Kearney, K., Reid, R., Ritzwoller, D., Strecher, V., ... & Wildenhaus, K. (2007). Reach, engagement, and retention in an Internet-based weight loss program in a multi-site randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 9(2), e11. Gordon, J. (2018). Reading from nowhere: assessed literary response, Practical Criticism and situated cultural literacy. English in Education, 52(1), 20-35. Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2007). A theoretical review of Winne and Hadwin’s model of self-regulated learning: New perspectives and directions. Review of Educational Research, 77(3), 334-372. Guo, P. (2017). MOOC and SPOC, which one is better?. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 5961-5967.
Hamari, J. (2015). Gamification - motivations & effects. In Doctoral Dissertations 11/2015. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hayes, S. (2015). MOOCs and Quality : A Review of the Recent Literature. QAA MOOCs Network. Heckel, C., & Ringeisen, T. (2019). Pride and anxiety in online learning environments: Achievement emotions as mediators between learners′ characteristics and learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(5), 667-677. Hoogland, K., & Tout, D. (2018). Computer-based assessment of mathematics into the twenty-first century: pressures and tensions. ZDM, 50(4), 675-686. Horwitz, E. K. (2010). Foreign and second language anxiety. Language Teaching, 43(2), 154. Hulleman, C. S., Kosovich, J. J., Barron, K. E., & Daniel, D. B. (2017). Making connections: Replicating and extending the utility value intervention in the classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(3), 387.
Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96. Hung, H. T. (2017). Design‐based research: redesign of an English language course using a flipped classroom approach. Tesol Quarterly, 51(1), 180-192. Inderasari, E., & Agustina, T. (2017). Pembelajaran bahasa Indonesia pada mahasiswa asing dalam Program BIPA IAIN Surakarta. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 6(2), 6-15. John, S. P. (2015). The integration of information technology in higher education: A study of faculty′s attitude towards IT adoption in the teaching process. Contaduría y Administración, 60, 230-252. Jong, J. P. (2016). The effect of a blended collaborative learning environment in a small private online course (SPOC): A comparison with a lecture course. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(2), 194. Jordan, K. (2014). Initial trends in enrolment and completion of massive open online courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(1), 133-160. Jurgelaitis, M., Čeponienė, L., Čeponis, J., & Drungilas, V. (2019). Implementing gamification in a university‐level UML modeling course: A case study. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 27(2), 332-343. Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons.
Kasmia, Santoso, A., & Nurchasanah. (2019). Writing Problem in the Second Language : Journal of Taiwan Beginner Bipa Student. Journal of Intensive Studies on Language, Literature, Art, and Culture, 3(2), 182–189. Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 427-443. Kocadere, S. A., & Çağlar, Ş. (2015). The design and implementation of a gamified assessment. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 11(3). Kuo, M. S., & Chuang, T. Y. (2016). How gamification motivates visits and engagement for online academic dissemination–An empirical study. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 16-27. Kusmiatun, A., Suyitno, I., Widodo, H. S., & Basuki, I. A. (2017). Identifying features of Indonesian for speakers of other languages (BIPA) learning for academic purposes. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 3(4), 197. Kyewski, E., & Krämer, N. C. (2018). To gamify or not to gamify? An experimental field study of the influence of badges on motivation, activity, and performance in an online learning course. Computers & Education, 118, 25-37. Lai, C., Wen, Y., Gao, T., & Lin, C. H. (2020). Mechanisms of the Learning Impact of Teacher-Organized Online Schoolwork Sharing Among Primary School Students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 0735633119896874. Lai, H. M., Hsiao, Y. L., & Hsieh, P. J. (2018). The role of motivation, ability, and opportunity in university teachers’ continuance use intention for flipped teaching. Computers & Education, 124, 37-50. Law, E. L. C., & Hvannberg, E. T. (2004, October). Analysis of strategies for improving and estimating the effectiveness of heuristic evaluation. In Proceedings of the Third Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 241-250). Lee, D., Watson, S. L., & Watson, W. R. (2020). The Relationships Between Self-Efficacy, Task Value, and Self-Regulated Learning Strategies in Massive Open Online Courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 23-39. Lee, H., Chang, H., & Bryan, L. (2020). Doctoral Students’ Learning Success in Online-Based Leadership Programs: Intersection With Technological and Relational Factors. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(1), 61-81.
Liao, G. (2017). Teachers of Vietnamese and Indonesian languages to be in greater demand in Taiwan | Taiwan News. Retrieved January 6, 2020, from https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3174536 Lin, J. W., & Lai, Y. C. (2013). Harnessing collaborative annotations on online formative assessments. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 263-274. Lin, Y. S., Chen, S. Y., Su, Y. S., & Lai, C. F. (2017). Analysis of students’ learning satisfaction in a social community supported computer principles and practice course. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(3), 849-858. Liu, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers & Education, 50(3), 627-639. Liu, O. L., Bridgeman, B., & Adler, R. M. (2012). Measuring learning outcomes in higher education: Motivation matters. Educational Researcher, 41(9), 352-362. Lohr, L., & Kowch, E. (2004). Designing effective instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 85-90.
Makransky, G., Mayer, R., Nøremølle, A., Cordoba, A. L., Wandall, J., & Bonde, M. (2020). Investigating the feasibility of using assessment and explanatory feedback in desktop virtual reality simulations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 293-317. Makransky, G., Bonde, M. T., Wulff, J. S., Wandall, J., Hood, M., Creed, P. A., ... & Nørremølle, A. (2016). Simulation based virtual learning environment in medical genetics counseling: an example of bridging the gap between theory and practice in medical education. BMC medical education, 16(1), 1-9. Marczewski, A. (2013). Game mechanics in gamification. Web log post. Gamasutra. Np, 6. Martens, R., Gulikers, J., & Bastiaens, T. (2004). The impact of intrinsic motivation on e‐learning in authentic computer tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(5), 368-376. Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2006). A reevaluation of the role of anxiety: Self‐efficacy, anxiety, and their relation to reading and listening proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 39(2), 276-295. Miltiadou, M., & Savenye, W. C. (2003). Applying social cognitive constructs of motivation to enhance student success in online distance education. AACE Journal, 11(1), 78-95. Mislevy, R. J. (2014). Postmodern Test Theory. Teachers College Record, 116(11), n11. Moorhouse, B. L. (2020). Adaptations to a face-to-face initial teacher education course ‘forced’online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Education for Teaching, 1-3. Moreno-Marcos, P. M., De Laet, T., Muñoz-Merino, P. J., Van Soom, C., Broos, T., Verbert, K., & Delgado Kloos, C. (2019). Generalizing predictive models of admission test success based on online interactions. Sustainability, 11(18), 4940. Muliastuti, L. (2018). Penyebaran Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia Melalui Pengajaran BIPA dan Ekspedisi Budaya. Konferensi Bahasa Indonesia 2018. Rohmadi, M. (2019). Text Book As a Java Culture Recognıtıon Medıa in Indonesıan Learnıng For Foreıgn Speaker (BIPA) in Sebelas Maret University. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 4(3), 427-434. Nejkovic, V., & Tosic, M. (2018). Exploring factors for effective use of online information in SPOC within the engineering education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26(5), 1457-1469. Nikolaou, I., Georgiou, K., & Kotsasarlidou, V. (2019). Exploring the relationship of a gamified assessment with performance. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 22. Nolan, J., & McBride, M. (2014). Beyond gamification: reconceptualizing game-based learning in early childhood environments. Information, Communication & Society, 17(5), 594-608. Ortiz‐Rojas, M., Chiluiza, K., & Valcke, M. (2019). Gamification through leaderboards: An empirical study in engineering education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 27(4), 777-788. Park, S., & Yun, H. (2018). The influence of motivational regulation strategies on online students’ behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. American Journal of Distance Education, 32(1), 43-56.
Peachey, N. (2017). Synchronous Online Teaching. In and K. M. B. M. Carrier, R. M. Damerow (Ed.), Digital Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 143–155). New York, NY Piech, C., Huang, J., Chen, Z., Do, C., Ng, A., & Koller, D. (2013). Tuned models of peer assessment in MOOCs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1307.2579.
Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1) Qin, M. X., & Tan, X. (2020). Examining a SPOC experiment in a foundational course: design, creation and implementation. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-18. Ramadhani, R. P., Hs, W., & Harsiati, T. (2016). Pengembangan bahan ajar keterampilan berbicara bahasa Indonesia bagi penutur asing tingkat pemula. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori, Penelitian, dan Pengembangan, 1(3), 326-337. Riemer, V., & Schrader, C. (2015). Learning with quizzes, simulations, and adventures: Students′ attitudes, perceptions and intentions to learn with different types of serious games. Computers & Education, 88, 160-168. Ramliyana, R. (2016). Membangkitkan motivasi belajar bahasa Indonesia bagi penutur asing (BIPA) melalui media komik. Dialektika: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 3(1), 1-19. Riemer, V., & Schrader, C. (2015). Learning with quizzes, simulations, and adventures: Students′ attitudes, perceptions and intentions to learn with different types of serious games. Computers & Education, 88, 160-168. Ryan, R. M. (1995). Psychological needs and the facilitation of integrative processes. Journal of Personality, 63(3), 397-427. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of
76
intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68. Saddhono, K., & Erwinsyah, H. (2018). Folklore As Local Wisdom for Teaching Materialsin Bipa Program (Indonesian for Foreign Speakers). KnE Social Sciences, 444-454. Rivas, E. S., Palmero, J. R., & Rodríguez, J. S. (2019). Gamification of Assessments in the Natural Sciences Subject in Primary Education. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 19(1). Sanchez, D. R., Langer, M., & Kaur, R. (2020). Gamification in the classroom: Examining the impact of gamified quizzes on student learning. Computers & Education, 144, 103666. Schunk, D. H. (1984). Self‐efficacy perspective on achievement behavior. Educational Psychologist, 19(1), 48-58. Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In Self-efficacy, Adaptation, and Adjustment (pp. 281-303). Springer, Boston, MA. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. Routledge.Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2012). Shute, V. J., & Spector, J. M. (2008). SCORM 2.0 white paper: Stealth assessment in virtual worlds. Unpublished manuscript. Siegel, S. (1956). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. McGraw-Hill Simpson, O. (2013). Student retention in distance education: are we failing our students?. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 28(2), 105-119. Chappuis, J., & Stiggins, R. J. (2017). An introduction to student-involved assessment for learning. New York, NY: Pearson. Sun, P. C., Tsai, R. J., Finger, G., Chen, Y. Y., & Yeh, D. (2008). What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1183-1202. Suyitno, I., Susanto, G., Kamal, M., & Fawzi, A. (2017). Cognitive Learning Strategy of BIPA Students in Learning the Indonesian Language. IAFOR Journal of Language Learning, 3(2), 175-190. Teng, L. S., & Zhang, L. J. (2018). Effects of motivational regulation strategies on writing performance: A mediation model of self-regulated learning of writing in English as a second/foreign language. Metacognition and Learning, 13(2), 213-240.
Tenorio, 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. Touloupis, T., & Athanasiades, C. (2020). A comparison between primary school principals’ and teachers’ perceptions of students’ online risk behaviours: the role of perceived self-efficacy. Cambridge Journal of Education, 1-18. Tsai, F. H., Tsai, C. C., & Lin, K. Y. (2015). The evaluation of different gaming modes and feedback types on game-based formative assessment in an online learning environment. Computers & Education, 81, 259-269. Tseng, H., Kuo, Y. C., & Walsh Jr, E. J. (2020). Exploring first-time online undergraduate and graduate students’ growth mindsets and flexible thinking and their relations to online learning engagement. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09774-5 Vaidhyanathan, S. (2012). What’s the matter with MOOCs. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 6. Wan, H., Liu, K., Yu, Q., & Gao, X. (2019). Pedagogical Intervention Practices: Improving Learning Engagement Based on Early Prediction. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 12(2), 278-289. Wang, M., Guo, W., Le, H., & Qiao, B. (2019). Reply to which post? An analysis of peer reviews in a high school SPOC. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-12. Wang, Y., Wang, L., Liang, H., Zollman, D., Zhao, L., & Huang, Y. (2020). Research on the small private online course (SPOC) teaching model incorporating the just-in-time teaching (JiTT) method based on mobile Internet for learning college physics. European Journal of Physics, 41(3), 035701. Wanner, T., & Palmer, E. (2018). Formative self-and peer assessment for improved student learning: the crucial factors of design, teacher participation and feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(7), 1032-1047. Warner, D. O., Nolan, M., Garcia-Marcinkiewicz, A., Schultz, C., Warner, M. A., Schroeder, D. R., & Cook, D. A. (2020). Adaptive instruction and learner interactivity in online learning: a randomized trial. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 25(1), 95-109. Westera, W. (2017). How people learn while playing serious games: A computational modelling approach. Journal of Computational Science, 18, 32-45. Wise, A. F., & Cui, Y. (2018). Learning communities in the crowd: Characteristics of content related interactions and social relationships in MOOC discussion forums. Computers & Education, 122, 221-242.
Yang, J. C., & Quadir, B. (2018). Effects of prior knowledge on learning performance and anxiety in an English learning online role-playing game. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 174-185. Zainuddin, Z., Shujahat, M., Haruna, H., & Chu, S. K. W. (2020). The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Computers & Education, 145, 103729. Zainuddin, Z. (2018). Students′ learning performance and perceived motivation in gamified flipped-class instruction. Computers & Education, 126, 75-88. Zeng, X., Yu, C., Liu, Y., Hu, X., Hao, Q., Jiang, Y., ... & Teng, B. (2018). The construction and online/offline blended learning of small private online courses of Principles of Chemical Engineering. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 26(5), 1519-1526. Zhang, X. M., Yu, J. Y., Yang, Y., Feng, C. P., Lyu, J., & Xu, S. L. (2019). A flipped classroom method based on a small private online course in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 43(3), 345-349. Zhu, Y., Zhang, W., He, Y., Wen, J., & Li, M. (2018). Design and implementation of curriculum knowledge ontology-driven SPOC flipped classroom teaching model. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 18(5).
指導教授 楊接期 Puji Riyanto(Yang, Jie-Chi Puji Riyanto) 審核日期 2020-8-12
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