博碩士論文 951207005 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:12 、訪客IP:54.221.145.174
姓名 王司沁(Ssu-Chin Wang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 學習與教學研究所
論文名稱 認知風格對學習者於互動多媒體輔助統計學習之影響-以圖像型與文字型為例
(The Effects of Students’ Cognitive Styles upon Applying Computer Multimedia to Change Statistical Misconceptions)
相關論文
★ 在亞卓市教案編輯系統中設計學校本位教案發展之模組★ 以同儕互評與討論提升小六學童之寫作表現 ~以行動學習輔具教室為例
★ 以言談分析方法解析鷹架輔助之線上即時互動★ 『教學決策參照架構』對教師應用無線科技進行數學教學成效影響之實驗研究
★ 高中生「相關」迷思概念診斷工具之發展歷程研究★ 以模擬為基礎的統計學習軟體之初探性評估研究
★ 線上同儕互評對國小六年級學童寫作學習成效影響之實驗研究★ 模擬輔助理解系統對高中生統計「相關」概念學習成效之實驗研究
★ 認知風格對模擬為基礎之電腦輔助學習的影響★ Exploring Computer-based Nature Science Instruction Based on the Cognitive Load Theory: Spatial Contiguity Effect, and Effects of Prior Knowledge on Performance Assessments
★ 使用電腦字典輔助英文閱讀之認知負荷、認知歷程與非刻意字彙習得★ 行動學習環境中「表徵形式」與「線索有無」對學習者學習行為、認知負荷與學習成效之影響
★ 認知負荷理論的應用與省思:優化電腦模擬輔助學習之介面設計與認知支持的系列研究★ 虛擬教室結合頭戴式顯示器之注意力偵測設計及準確度分析與研究
★ 電腦模擬輔助學習中「人機互動」對認知負荷、學習歷程與學習成效的影響★ 影響中小學教師行動科技融入教學之因素模式探討
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) 過去針對學習者於電腦學習情境下之個別差異探討的研究,大多數為關心學習成效的改善情形,而鮮少探究學習者於使用系統時的學習歷程、思考模式與操作行為等面向上的差異。據此,本研究之目的為:(1)探討不同認知風格的學習者使用互動多媒體系統的學習歷程;並欲進一步瞭解不同的學習歷程,是否會造成學習成效的不同,因此,另一目的為(2)探討不同認知風格的學習者於使用互動多媒體系統後的學習成效。
根據上述研究目的,本研究選取大學生進行大規模(共855名)認知風格量表(Style of Processing Scale, SOP)的施測,並根據量表結果選取符合條件之圖像型與文字型各14名接受實驗處理。透過二階段迷思概念診斷測驗進行前測、後測與延後測結果和放聲思考取得學習歷程資料,在實驗結束後立即進行半結構式的訪談,以完整地蒐集學習者操作過程中已描述但較不完整的想法,最後,再根據蒐集到的資料進行分析與整理。
本研究結果發現:(1)兩組在學習歷程「閱讀與處理訊息」、「思考」與「操作與觀察圖形」的方式等三方面有差異;(2)在閱讀與處理訊息的方式方面,文字型在回饋區獲得的協助多於圖像型;(3)在思考方式上,大部分圖像型傾向將文字轉換成圖像作思考;(4)在操作與觀察圖形上,圖像型傾向自我導向式的操作,文字型則是一步一步地遵循教學引導進行操作;(5)學習成效上,兩組僅在延後測的迷思概念達顯著差異,而在前、後測的迷思概念,與三個測驗階段的概念理解兩組皆無顯著差異。
綜合歸納,不同認知風格的學習者顯現出不同的學習歷程,而在學習成效方面卻無太大的差異。結果顯示不同認知風格學習者皆有其特殊的學習方式,而且,此不同的學習方式對不同認知風格學習者而言,皆能夠有效地提升其學習成效。
摘要(英) Computer multimedia is seen as a good tool to help students, by integrating the diagram and text representations, to change their statistical misconceptions. However, students’ cognitive style may influence their statistical learning with computer multimedia. Therefore, the current study focused on students’ differences in learning processes created by different cognitive styles (verbalizer and imager), and compared the effects made on their statistical misconceptions through the aid of the computer multimedia. According to results from the large scale of Style of Processing Scale, twenty eight undergraduates with different cognitive styles (imagers and verbalizers) were selected as the participants in this study. The diagnostic test and its equivalent forms were applied in the pretest, the post-test and the delayed post-test to investigate the variation in participants’ misconceptions. The learning process data were collected by think-aloud method and a semi-structure interview was conducted after the experiment. The results displayed that students with different cognitive styles indeed have differences in their learning processes while learning with computer multimedia. Besides, both imagers and verbalizers can effectively reduce their statistical misconceptions and promote their correct concept understanding by learning with computer multimedia.
關鍵字(中) ★ 圖像型與文字型
★ 動態連結
★ 多重表徵
★ 放聲思考
★ 統計
★ 概念改變
關鍵字(英) ★ Verbaliser-Imager
★  Multiple-Representation
★ Dynamic-Linked
★ Statistics
★ Think Aloud
★ Conceptual Change
論文目次 目 錄
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第三節 研究問題 3
第四節 名詞釋義 3
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 多重表徵之學習理論 5
第二節 認知風格理論 10
第三節 概念改變理論 17
第三章 研究方法與設計 21
第一節 研究設計 21
第二節 實驗設計與步驟 23
第三節 研究工具 27
第四節 資料整理與分析 31
第四章 結果與討論 35
第一節 圖像型與文字型之學習歷程分析 35
第二節 圖像型與文字型之學習成效分析 61
第三節 學習歷程與學習成效的結果與討論 69
第五章 結論與建議 72
第一節 結論 72
第二節 研究限制 74
第三節 未來研究建議 75
參考文獻 77
參考文獻 參考文獻
劉子鍵和林怡均(2006年10月)。以二階段迷思概念診斷測驗探究高中生之「相關」迷思概念。劉佩雲(主持人),與學習有關之情感與態度。台灣心理學會第45屆年會,台北市東吳大學。
鄭惟厚(2007)。你不能不懂的統計常識。台北市:天下文化。
蕭錦玲(2005)。以模擬為基礎的統計學習軟體之初探性評估研究。中央大學學習與教學研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33, 131-152.
Ainsworth, S., & Van Labeke, N. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 241-255.
Ardac, D., & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students' understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 317-337.
Biemans, H. J. A., Deel, O. R., & Simons, P. R. J. (2001). Differences between successful and less successful students while working with the CONTACT-2 strategy. Learning and Instruction, 11(4-5), 265-282.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2003). E-learning and the science of instruction.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8(4), 293-332.
Childers, T. L., Houston, M. J., & Heckler, S. E. (1985). Measurement of individual differences in visual versus verbal information processing. The Journal of Consumer Research, 12(2), 125-134.
Cumming, G., Thomason, N., & Zangari, M. (1995). Designing software for cognitive change: StatPlay and understanding statistics. World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE) IV, Liberating the learner, 753-765.
Curry, L. (1983, April). An organization of learning styles theory and constructs. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada.
Darley, W. K. (1999). The relationship of antecedents of search and self-esteem to adolescent search effort and perceived product knowledge. Psychology and Marketing, 16(5), 409-427.
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671–688.
Effken, J. A., & Doyle, M. (2001). Interface design and cognitive style in learning an instructional computer simulation. Comput Nurs, 19(4), 164-171.
Heckler, S. E., Childers, T. L., & Houston, M. J. (1993). On the construct validity of the SOP scale. Journal of Mental Imagery, 17(3), 119-132.
Hegarty, M. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning: Getting to the difficult questions. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 343-351.
Jonassen, D. & Grabowski, B. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates,.
Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., Noh, T., & Koh, H. (2005). The influence of students’ cognitive and motivational variables in respect of cognitive conflict and conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1037-1058.
Kaput, J. J. (1987). Representation systems and mathematics. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 19–26). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Keil, F. (1999). Conceptual change In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. pp. 179-182. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Kirby, J.R., Moore. P.J., and Schofield, N.J. (1988). Verbal and visual learning styles. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13, 169-184.
Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949-968.
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (Sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65-100.
Lewalter, D. (2003). Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 177-189.
Leutner, D., & Plass, J. L. (1998). Measuring learning styles with questionnaires versus direct observation of preferential choice behavior in authentic learning situations: the visualizer/verbalizer behavior observation scale (VV-BOS). Computers in Human Behavior, 14(4), 543-557.
Liu & Kinshuk. (in preparing). Development and evaluation of the Simulation Assisted Learning Statistics (SALS) environment to detect and change students’ statistical misconceptions.
Liu, T. C., & Lin, Y. C. (2005, June). Applying the concept mapping method to explore high school students’ understanding and misconceptions about the “correlation”Paper presented at the meeting of 2005 International Conference on Learning, Teaching and Assessment, Taiwan, Taipei.
Liu, T. C., Chen, Y. C., Hsiao, C. L., & Lin, Y. C. (2006, June). Exploring the effects of simulation based learning on college students’ statistical understanding, misconception, and attitude. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual Global Conference on Computers in Education, GCCCE2006(CD), Beijing, China. (In Chinese)
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. London: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R.E., and Moreno, R. (1998). A split attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing system in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 312-320.
Morris, E. J., & Scanlon, E. (2000). Active learning of statistics: A case study. Journal of the Association of Learning Technology Journal, 8(1), 80–91.
Morris, E. (2001). The design and evaluation of link: A computer-based learning system for correlation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 39-52.
Morris, E. J., Joiner, R., & Scanlon, E. (2002). The contribution of computer-based activities to understanding statistics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(2), 116-126.
Moore, D. S. (1997). New pedagogy and new content: The case of statistics. International Statistical Review/Revue Internationale de Statistique, 65(2), 123-137.
Novak E. (1988). Deterministic and Stochastic Error Bounds in Numerical Analysis, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 1349, Springer-Verlag, New York: Berlin.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and verbal processes, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston..
Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach, USA: Oxford University Press.
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian journal of psychology, 45(3), 255-287.
Paivio, A., & Harshman, R. (1983). Factor analysis of a questionnaire on imagery and verbal habits and skills. Canadian journal of psychology, 37(4), 461-483.
Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. (2004). Dynamic visualisations and learning. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 235-240.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
Riding, R. J. (2001). The nature and effects of cognitive style. In R. J. Sternberg & L. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 47–72). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Riding, R.J., & Cheema, I. (1991). Cognitive styles - An overview and integration. Educational Psychology, 11, 193-215.
Riding, R. J., Grimley, M., Dahraei, H., & Banner, G. (2003). Cognitive style, working memory and learning behaviour and attainment in school subjects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(2), 149-169.
Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behaviour, London: David Fulton Publishers.
Riding, R. J., & Sadler-Smith, E. (1997). Cognitive style and learning strategies: Some implications for training design. International Journal of Training and Development, 1(3), 199-208.
Sadler-Smith, E., & J Smith, P. (2004). Strategies for accommodating individuals' styles and preferences in flexible learning programmes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 395-412.
Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of media, cognition and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Scaifeand, M., & Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: How do graphical representations work? Int. J. Human–Computer Studies, 45, 185-213.
Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 141-156.
Schoenfeld, A. H., Smith, J. P., & Arcavi, A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic analysis of one student’s evolving understanding of a complex subject matter domain. Advances in instructional psychology, 4, 55–175.
Schuyten, G., & Dekeyser, H. M. (2007). Preference for textual information and acting on support devices in multiple representations in a computer based learning environment for statistics. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2285-2301.
Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 227-237.
Seufert, T., & Brunken, R. (2006). Cognitive load and the format of instructional aids for coherence formation. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 321–331.
Snell, J. L. (1995). The Journal of Statistics Education Information Service and Other Internet Resources for Statistics Teachers. The American Statistician, 49(4), 372-375.
Someren, M. W. V., Barnard, Y. F., & Sandberg, J. A. C. (1994). The think aloud method: A practical guide to modelling cognitive processes. London: Academic Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2001). A capsule history of theory and research on styles. In R. J. Sternberg & Li-fang Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on Thinking, Learning, and Cognitive Styles (pp. 1-22). London, NJ: Erlbaum.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211–231). Orlando FL: Academic Press.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive science and educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.
Tabachneck-Schijf, H. J. M., Leonardo, A. M., & Simon, H. A. (1997). CaMeRa: A computational model of multiple representations. Cognitive Science, 21(3), 305-350.
van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2006). Supporting students' learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 199-212.
von Roten, F. C. (2006). Do we need a public understanding of statistics? Public Understanding of Science, 15(2), 243-249.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4(1), 45-69.
Yerushalmy, M. (1991). Student perceptions of aspects of algebraic function using multiple representation software. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7(1), 42-57.
指導教授 劉子鍵(Tzu-Chien Liu) 審核日期 2008-7-17
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