博碩士論文 91127003 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:14 、訪客IP:35.173.57.84
姓名 謝幸玲(Hsing-Ling Hsieh)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 學習與教學研究所
論文名稱 網路同儕評量回饋功能及自我調制歷程之研究
(A Study of Functions of Feedback and Self-regulated Learning under Networked Peer Assessment)
相關論文
★ 自我效能與STEM樂高機器人課程對國民小學六年級學生學習成效與學習態度之影響★ 偏鄉小學學伴在英語線上課業輔導的學習滿意度、學習態度和學習成果
★ 數位遊戲設計之教學模式建構★ 樂高機器人多媒體教材設計、發展與可用性評估
★ 桃園縣青少年網路閱讀動機與網路閱讀行為之相關研究★ 專題式合作學習在教育桌上遊戲設計課程之應用-以師資培育學生為例
★ 國小學生對桌上遊戲接受度之相關分析—以大富翁遊戲為例★ 網路討論區評鑑指標發展及應用
★ 台灣青少年學習者於機器人學習活動的動機策略探究-以WRO機器人競賽為例★ 資訊科技融入教學實踐歷程之行動敘說--以國小低年級閱讀與寫作為例
★ 創意思考螺旋教學策略對國小學童學習效果之研究★ 一位數學家教老師 如何資訊融入專業知能發展
★ 成語教學導入桌遊對國中八年級學生之影響★ 遊戲化華語教學之研究—以創意思考螺旋融入教育桌遊為例
★ 機器人學習活動的協作歷程、情境知識之探究:以樂高機器人之分組學習課程為例
檔案 [Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [相關文章]   [文章引用]   [完整記錄]   [館藏目錄]   [檢視]  [下載]
  1. 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
  2. 已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的,進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。
  3. 請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定,切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送,以免觸法。

摘要(中) 網路同儕評量將教育評量網路化,兼具同儕評量及網路輔助教學的優點。本研究以自我調制學習理論觀點,探討網路同儕評量的特定環境下,學習者藉由社會互動以建構知識的過程,分析學習者的認知處理、回饋如何在學習中產生作用。希冀鼓勵教學者瞭解回饋對學習者自我調制的交互影響。最後根據研究發現提出具體建議,供日後研究與教師從事教學之參考。
研究對象是北部某大學研究生共12位,科目為「教育與心理統計學」。研究採取個案方式進行,在學科內容教授完畢後,進行網路同儕評量活動,學習者完成學期作業,共歷時10週。蒐集資料以問卷、晤談、內容分析(作業內容、學習者自評、心得內容)、回饋內容分析為主。
研究結果如下:研究目的之一在於建構網路同儕評量自我調制學習模式。隨互評次數的多次歷程,學習者認知系統的知識的信念與動機、目標設定、學習策略實施、監控、知覺外在回饋、反省與評估等不斷持續進行的階段性過程所組成。在網路同儕評量回饋內容分析上,互評的次數的增加對於評審者給同儕高層次回饋功能的次數並沒有增進,但深入分析回饋內容,就大多數單一個案,其回饋內容卻更有品質。口頭與紙本回饋類型與回饋功能有顯著關連。回饋類型對回饋功能具有14.5%的預測力。學習者接受回饋後修正作業表現程度有顯著的效果。學習者於研究者自行編制的問卷「網路同儕評量回饋認知功能效果」有良好的回應。有91.7%的學生肯定網路同儕評量活動,願意再次參與。
摘要(英) Networked Peer Assessment adopts Internet resources to assist assessment. It has advantages of peer assessment and computer-assisted instruction. This study has applied networked peer assessment to explore the processes of interactive knowledge construction of learners. We have used self- regulated learning theory to analysis the cognitive processes of learners and how feedback functions and then constructed a model of self-regulated learning under networked peer assessment. We are looking forward to instructor to understand feedback and self-regulated learning of learner are reciprocal effect. Finally, suggestions for teacher instruction and future research topics are proposed.
Twelve postgraduate students at a national university in north Taiwan served as subjects. The curriculum is Education and mental statistics. The research was a case study. After teaching content of academic subject, teacher carried out networked peer assessment and learners finished study assignments in term. It lasts 10 weeks altogether. Collect the survey materials include questionnaire method, interview, content analysis (study assignments、learners wrote what they have learned and self assessment).
The results were as follows: study one of purpose is to establish model of self-regulated learning under networked peer assessment. Because of the number of times of networked peer assessment, the cognitive system of learners will going on continuously constantly phased course make up by the belief of knowledge、goal setting、learning strategies、monitor、aware external feedback、self-examination and evaluate. The content analysis of networked peer assessment showing increase of the number of times has not been promoted the assessors provides high level functions of feedback. Researcher go deep into analysis the content of feedback, in most of a single case, the functions of content but there is quality even more. The types of feedback (the oral feedback and the written feedback) to the functions of feedback have significant association. The types of feedback has the capability of the index of predicative association is 14.5% to the functions of feedback. Learners revised the study assignments have noticeable effect after received feedbacks. The results of learner replied to the questionnaire, the effect of cognitive functions of feedback under networked peer assessment, edited by researcher, is good for learning. About 91.7% of subjects approve the networked peer assessment and would like to participate again.
關鍵字(中) ★ 自我調制學習
★ 回饋
★ 網路同儕評量
關鍵字(英) ★ Self-regulated learning
★ Feedback
★ Networked peer assessment
論文目次 內 容 目 錄
第一章 緒論 1
第一節、研究背景與動機 1
第二節、研究目的 1
第三節、研究問題 4
第四節、名詞解釋 5
第五節、論文架構與研究程序 6
第六節、研究限制 8
第七節、 預期研究貢獻…………………………………………………………..9
第二章 文獻探討 10
第一節、網路同儕評量 10
第二節、回饋 17
第三節、自我調制學習 1
第四節、探討回饋與自我調制的交互影響 23
第五節、自我調制學習之相關研究 27
第六節、國內網路同儕評量之相關研究…………………………………………32
第三章 研究方法 35
第一節、採用個案的原因 35
第二節、研究的信度與效度 36
第三節、研究架構 38
第四節、研究對象 ….39
第五節、研究工具與資料分析 40
第六節、研究步驟………………………………………………………………..58
第四章 研究結果與討論 60
第一節、建構網路同儕評量之回饋功能與自我調制學習之歷程……………60
第二節、分析網路同儕評量之回饋內容……………………………………. 107
第三節、瞭解學生在網路同儕評量教學活動之感受…………………………119
第五章 結論與建議………………………………………………………………124
第一節、結論………………………………………………………………….124
第二節、研究者的自我反省………………………………………………….129
第三節、研究限制 ……………………………………………………………130
第四節、建議………………………………………………………………….131
參考文獻 I
附 錄………………………………………………………………………………VIII
參考文獻 參考文獻
一、中文部分
余民寧(民91)。教育測驗與評量:成就測驗與教學評量。台北市:心理。
李弘善(譯)(2003)。M. V. Covington, &K. M. Teel著。活化學習動機:營造機會平等的學習環境。台北:遠流。
王文中、呂金燮、吳毓瑩、張郁雯、張淑慧編著(民88)。教育測驗與評量-教室學習觀點。台北市:五南。
石明家(民90)。SPSS 10.X 中文版統計資料分析實務應用。台北市:碁峰資訊。
吳佩羿(民91)。學習動機對網路學習行為及學習成就之影響。國立台灣科技大學
技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文。
吳明清(民80)。教育研究—基本觀念與方法分析。台北:五南。
吳芝儀、李奉儒(譯)(1995)。M. Q. Patton著。質的評鑑與研究。台北:桂冠。
吳芝儀、廖梅花(譯)(民91)。紮根理論研究方法(二版)嘉義市:濤石文化。(原著出版1998年)。
李弘善(譯) (民92)。Costa, A. & Kallick, B.著。評量和記錄心智習性(Discovering and exploring habits of mind.)。台北:遠流。
谷瑞勉(譯)(民88)。L. E. Berk, & A. Winsler 著。鷹架兒童的學習。台北市:心 理。
谷瑞勉(譯)(民90)。Dixon〔Krauss〕著。教室中的維高斯基:仲介的讀寫教學與評量。台北市:心理。
卓宜青(民90)網路化學習歷程檔案系統及同儕評量。國立交通大學資訊科學所碩士論文。
林心茹(譯) (2000)。B. J. Zimmerman, S. Bonner & R. Kovach著。自律學習。台北:遠流。
林佩璇(民89)。個案研究及詞其在教育研究上的應用。(中正大學教育研究所主編)。質的研究方法。麗文文化。
林珊如、楊國鑫、劉旨峰、袁賢銘(民90)。高工資訊科目同儕互評的實例:效度、思考歷程及學生態度。技術學刊,16 (4),613-623。
林珊如、劉旨峰、袁賢銘(民90)。大學生學習策略與學習動機預測期網路同儕
互評之學習成就。教育科技與媒體,57。
林珊如、劉旨峰、鄭明俊、袁賢銘(民89)。網路研討會教學法的學習成效及同儕
互評的信度與效度。遠距教育,第15、16期,41-55。
林英文(民91)。線上同儕評量對國中生簡報製作技能學習成效之研究。國立台灣
師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
林清山(民81)心裡與教育統計學。台北市:東華書局。
胡幼慧、姚美華(民85)。一些質性方法上的思考:信度與效度?如何抽樣?如何蒐集資料、登錄與分析?(胡幼慧主編)。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北:巨流圖書公司。
徐雍智(民90)。數學創意類比與同儕評量及其網路案例設計之研究。國立交通大學應用數學研究所碩士論文。
張國恩(民88)。資訊融入各科教學之內涵與實施。資訊與教育雙月刊,72,2-9。
教育部(民90)。中小學資訊教育總藍圖。台北市:教育部。民國92年12 月15 日, 取自:http://masterplan.educities.edu.tw/conference/total.shtml
陳正昌(民91)。行為及社會科學統計學:統計軟體應用(二版)。台北市:巨流。
陳佩秀(譯)(2003)。Costa, A. & Kallick, B.著。活化和應用心智習性(Discovering and exploring habits of mind.)。台北:遠流。(原作2000出版)。
陳玟伶(民90)。國小高年級兒童自我調整歷程之個案研究。台中師範國民教育研究所所碩士論文。
陳嘉皇等(譯)(2003)。D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman著。自我調整學習:教學理論與實務。台北市:心理。
彭月茵(民91)。目標層次、回饋訊息對數學工作表現與學習動機之效果:考量國中生的控制信念。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
湯清二(民85)。建構教學與回饋。教育實習輔導。2(1),62-65。
黃耿鐘(民90)。網路學習檔案評量系統及學習檔案成效指標之研究。臺南師範學院教師在職進修資訊碩士論文。
黃淑玲(民89)。網際網路合作學習環境中學習互動型態與認知風格對學習效果之影響--以二次函數之教學為例。國立政治大學教育學系研究所博士論文。
楊國賜、黃明月(民88)。我國成人教育指標之研究。社會教育學刊。28,87-140。
楊國鑫(民90)。推廣網路同儕互評系統於高及工業職業學校教學課程之研究。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
鄒佳蕙(民91)。網路同儕互評、楷模學習在小組合作環境下對學習績效與電腦態度影響之探討。國立中央大學資訊管理在職專班碩士論文。
劉旨峰(民88)。網路同儕互評系統的學生群組分析。國立交通大學資訊科學研究
研究所碩士論文。
劉旨峰、林珊如、袁賢銘(民90)。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。中國文化大學:2001全國計算機會議(2001 National Computer Symposium, NCS’01)。172-183。
劉旨峰(民91a)。網路同儕評量之研究。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所博士論文。
劉旨峰(民91b)。網路同儕互評的探討、實施、評估與增進實施品質的建議。發表於實踐大學:2002電子商務與數位生活研討會。
劉旨峰、楊國鑫、林珊如、袁賢銘(民92)。中學生與網路同儕互評之預測性研究。新竹師院學報。17, 51-71。
劉勝鈺(民92)。使用資訊科技學習數學:以網路同儕互評為例。國立新竹交通大學網路學習在職專班碩士論文。
潘明宏、陳志瑋(譯)(2003)。Nachmias, D. & Frankfort-Nachmias, C.。最新社會科學研究方法(Research methods in the social sciences, 5 th ed.)。台北縣:韋伯文化國際。(原作1996出版)。
蕭素玲(民91)。高中生課業求助行為之相關研究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
二、英文部分
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A., (1991). Social cognitive theory of self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287.
Bandura, A.(1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28,117-148.
Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulick, C. C., Kulik, J.A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research,61,213-238.
Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. R. & Zeider, M. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, Calif. : Academic Press, c
Bracha, K & Orit Z, N. (2000). Using Technology to Enhance Mathematical Reasoning: Effects of Feedback and Self-Regulation Learning. ICEM-CIME GENEVA CONFERENCE, 38(2/3), 77–82.
Bulter, D. L.(2002). Qualitative Approaches to Investigating Self-Regulated Learning:Contributions and Challenges. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 59-63.
Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: ATheoretical Synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245-281.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F.(1990). Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, 19-35.
Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1-49.
Cohen, J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences(2nd ed.)Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence-Erlbaum.
Collis, B. De Boer, W. ,& Slotman, K. (2001). Feedback for web-based assignments.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 306-313.
Dweck, C. S.(1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist, 41. 1040-1048.
Dempsey, J.V., & Sales G.C. (Eds.). (1993). Interactive Instruction and Feedback. Educational Technology Publications: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Dempsey, J. V., Driscoll, M. P., & Swindell, L. K. (1993). Text-based feedback. In Dempsey, J. V. & Sales, G. C. (Eds.), Interactive Instruction and feedback. (pp.21-54). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Engsytrom, D. (2001). Ten Components of a Good Technology Education Activity.
The Technology Teacher, 61(3), 8-13.
Falchikov,N.(1993). Group process analysis: self and peer assessment of working together in a group. Educational and Training Technology International. 30, 275-284.
Falchikov, N. ( 1995) Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment. Innovation
in Education and Training International, 32, 175–87.
Falchikov,N., & Magin, D. (1997). Detecting gender bias in peer making of students’ group process work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4),385-396.
Falchikov, N. ,& Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A
meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70, 287-322.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools. Merrill, New Jersey:
PrenticeHall.
Kulhavy, R. W., & Stock, W. A. (1989). Feedback in written instruction: The place of response certitude. Educational Psycholohy Review, 1, 279-308.
Lejk, M., & Wyvill, M. (2001). The Effect of the Inclusion of Self-assessment with Peer Assessment of Contributions to a Group Project: a quantitative study of secret and agreed assessments. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6),
pp.551-561.
Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. -F., & Yuan, S. -M. (2001a). The Learning Effects of Networked Peer Assessment for Various Thinking Styles Students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420-432.
Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. -F., & Yuan, S. -M. (2001b). Web-Based Peer Assessment:
Relation of Attitude and Achievement?. IEEE Transactions on Education, 44(2),
13-13.
Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z., & Yuan, S. M. (2001c). Web-based peer assessment: feedback
for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420-432.
Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M.(2001). Web-based peer review: An effective
web-learning strategy with the learner as both adapter and reviewer. IEEE
Transactions on Education, 44(3), 246-251.
Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M.(2002).Alternatives to instructor assessment:
A Case study of comparing self and peer assessment with instructor assessment
under networked innovative assessment procedures. International Journal of
Instructional Media. 29(4), 1-10.
Lowther, D. L., Jones, M. G., & Plants, R. T. (2000), Preparing tomorrow’s teacher to
use Web-based education, In Beverly Abbey, ed. Instructional and cognitive
impacts of Web-based education, IDEA group publishing, Hershey,USA,P.129-146.
Marcy, P. D. (2000). Psychology of Learning for Instruction. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon Press.
Meyer,L.(1986).Strategies for correcting students’wrong responses. Elementary school Journal,87, 227-241.
Markus, R. E. & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social psychological
perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299-337.
Mrudula, P.(2002) .The influence of peer feedback on self and peer-assessment of oral
skills. Language Testing. 19(2) ,109-131.
Nilson , B. (2003) Improving student peer feedback. College Teaching, 51(1), 34–38.
Neubert, M. J. (1998). The value of feedback and goal setting over goal setting alone potential moderator of this effect: A meta-analysis. Human Performance, 11(4), 321-335.
Paris, S. G. ,& Ayres, L. R.(1995). Becoming reflective students and teachers : With
portfolios and authentic assessment.(2rd ed.).. Washington, DC : American
Psychological association.
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). The motivated
strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: NCRIPTAL, The
University of Michigan.
Rijlaarsdam, G. (1987). Effects of peer evaluation on writing performance,
writing process, and psychological variables. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service NO. ED 284 288)
Roblyer, M.D. (2003). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching (3rd Edition). Columbus, Oh. : Merrill Prentice Hall.
Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical ext comprehension:Believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 435-443.
Schommer, M.(1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 406-411.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (1994). Self-regulation of learning and
performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sivan, A. (2000). The Implementation of Peer Assessment: an action research approach. Assessment in Education,7(2),193-213.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities.
Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
Tsai, C. –C., Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. –M. (2001). A Networked peer assessment system based on a V heuristic. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38, 3.
Zhao, Y. (1998). The effects of anonymity on computer-mediated peer review. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 4(4), 311-345.
Waldrop, P. B., Justin, J. E., & Adams, T. M.(1986). A comparison of three types of feedback in a computer-assisted instruction task. Educational Technology, 26(2),43-45.
Winne,P.H.,& Marx,R.W.(1982).Students’ and teachers’ views of thinking processes for classroom learning. Elementary School Journal, 82,493-518.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage.
Zimmerman, B.J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1988). Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning.Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 284–290.
Zimmerman, B. J.(1989a). Models of self-regulated learning and academic achievement. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk(Eds.). Theory, research, and practice(pp.1-25).NY:Spring-Verlag.
Zimmerman, B. J.(1989b).A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic
learning. Journal of educational psychology, 81(3), 329-339.
Zimmerman, B. J.(Ed). (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement〔Special issue〕. Educational Psychologist, 25(1).
Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2003). Educational psychology: A century of contributions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
指導教授 劉旨峯(Eric Zhi-Feng. Liu) 審核日期 2005-6-28
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