線上討論的知識建構模式特徵 -以 批 踢 踢 實 業 坊 的 微 積 分 討 論 為 例

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：64

、訪客IP：3.144.100.38

姓名

許弼凱(Bi-Kai Hsu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

數學系

論文名稱

線上討論的知識建構模式特徵 -以批踢踢實業坊的微積分討論為例
(The patterns feature of knowledge construction in online discussion: A case study)

相關論文

★ 中小學數學教師創意教學競賽金牌得獎作品可行性分析之個案研究	★ 線上問卷調查開發應用與Matlab對於微積分學習成效之探討
★ 探討學生在不同學習環境下、線上學習系統之線上學習行為與學業成績之間的關係－以微積分課程為例	★ 中小學數學創意教學競賽實施之研究
★ 評分者對數學科創意教學觀點之比較以中小學數學教師創意教學競賽為例	★ 小波轉換於圖形比對的一種方法
★ 算術計算中誤解的文字或符號所造成的錯誤及影響	★ 相同教學單元之創意作品所著重創意觀點與創意呈現之比較－以『中小學數學教師創意教學競賽』作品為例
★ 利用凌波轉換保護影像竄改及偵測還原	★ 遊戲方式表現創意的教學策略之探討－以『中小學數學教師創意教學競賽』作品為例
★ 國小四、五年級分數運算錯誤類型分析之研究	★ 因、倍數創意教學作品分析與比較－以「中小學數學教師創意教學競賽」作品為例
★ On the Positive Solution for Grad-Shafranov Equation	★ 從微積分課後輔導，分析學生的數學學習問題:以一個助教的實例作探討
★ 評估學生自願使用e-portfolio對於提高課程表現的成效－以國立中央大學為例	★ 以課程論壇做為知識分享工具之研究 –以中央大學計算機概論課程為例

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]

本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。
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。
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)

自從網際網路的普及之後,線上的專業討論活動也隨之蓬勃發展。我們透過滯後序列分析(lag-sequential analysis) 與 IAM(Interaction Analysis Model) 的五個分類方法,結合了定量分析(quantitative content analysis)與序列分析(sequential analysis)。希望可以了解在無明顯指導者存在的線上討論平台中,使用者與使用者之間,所產生知識建構層次的深度與線上互動交流模式。我們取得一個時間區段內(2010/09/01~2011/01/31)、523 個不同 ID 使用者的資料,對他們的行為做了互動模式編碼與知識建構層次編碼。結果我們發現,雖然電子佈告欄是一個純文本的系統,與多媒體學習系統在介面上有很大的差異。但是對結果來說,此系統的知識建構層次與 problem-solved based online form(Hou et al., 2008)的性質相近。比起其他存在教師參與的網路多媒體論壇,相對的會有較高層次的知識建構與成效。在互動模式分析中,發現了一個可能是回答者願意回答的動機-鼓勵。也發現到此分析方法的缺點與提供之後的研究可以如何修改模型,以進行更深的討論。

摘要(英)

The online professional discussion has grown rapidly with the popularization of the Internet. And we wish to know the depth of knowledge construction level and the online interaction model between users without supervisor. We use five different methods include lag-sequential analysis, five sorting model of IAM (interaction analysis model), quantitative content analysis and sequen- tial analysis. We have got data from 523 different user in a time period (2010/09/01 2011/01/31), and we encode their interaction model and knowl- edge construction level. Finally we found that although BBS is a pure texture system- its user interface is much different from electric learning system, its system knowledge construction level is similar to problem-solving based online form (Hou et al., 2008), which will have higher knowledge construction level rather than other online mass media forum having teacher taking parts in. In interaction analysis, we found a possible motivation which makes people willing to answer- applaud. We also found the disadvantage of this analysis method and prove some suggestion to improve the model to have deeper research for others.

關鍵字(中)

★ 序列分析
★ 知識建構模型
★ 非同步線上討論

關鍵字(英)

★ IAM
★ lag-sequential analysis
★ CMC
★ nonsynchronous discuss

論文目次

目次
Abstract i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝辭 iii
目次 iv
圖次 vi
表次 vii
1 緒論(Introduction) 1
1.1 研究目的與動機........................... 2
2 文獻探討(Literature review ) 4
3 使用系統(System) 6
3.1 電子佈告欄的功能性 ........................ 6
3.2 電子佈告欄系統(BulletinBoardSystem) . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3 為何選擇電子佈告欄 ........................ 7
3.4 批踢踢實業坊............................ 7
3.5 數學版................................ 8
3.6 文章代碼(AID) ........................... 10
4 研究方法 10
4.1 滯後序列分析(lagsequentialanalysis) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 GSEQ................................ 11
4.3 z-score................................ 12
4.4 參與者與研究對象 ......................... 12
4.5 編碼方案(codingscheme).................... 12
4.6 資料收集與分析........................... 15
5 研究結果 17
5.1 線上互動模式............................ 17
5.2 知識建構層次............................ 20
6 討論 25
6.1 線上互動行為模式 ......................... 25
6.2 知識建構層次............................ 26
7 結論、建議與未來展望 29
References 34

參考文獻

References
Bakeman, R. and Gottman, J. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge Univ Pr.
Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., and Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for ex- amining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of educational computing research, 17(4):397–431.
Gunter, P., Jack, S., Shores, R., Carrell, D., and FLOWERS, J. (1993). Lag se- quential analysis as a tool for functional analysis of student disruptive behav- ior in classrooms. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 1(3):138.
Harasim, L. (1990). Online education: Perspectives on a new environment. Greenwood Publishing Group Inc. Westport, CT, USA.
Harasim, L. (1993). Collaborating in cyberspace: Using computer confer- ences as a group learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 3(2):119–130.
Hew, K. and Cheung, W. (2003). Models to evaluate online learning commu- nities of asynchronous discussion forums. Australian journal of educational technology, 19(2):241–259.
Hiltz, S. (1990). Evaluating the virtual classroom. Online education: Perspec- tives on a new environment, pages 133–183.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2007). An analysis of peer assessment online discussions within a course that uses project-based learning. Interactive learning environments, 15(3):237–251.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2008). Analysis of problem-solving based online asynchronous discussion pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1):17–28.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2009). Using blogs as a professional develop- ment tool for teachers: analysis of interaction behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4):325–340.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2010). Applying lag sequential analysis to detect visual behavioural patterns of online learning activities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2):E25–E27.
Jeong, A. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1):25–43.
Muilenburg, L. and Berge, Z. A framework for designing questions for online learning. Berge Collins Associates Available online: http://www. emodera- tors. com/moderators/muilenburg. html [19 July 2003].
Pena-Shaff, J., Martin, W., and Gay, G. (2001). An Epistemological Framework for Analyzing Student Interactions in Computer-Medicated Communication Environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(1).
Pena-Shaff, J. and Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers & Education, 42(3):243–265.
Puustinen, M., Bernicot, J., and Bert-Erboul, A. (2010). Written computer- mediated requests for help by French-speaking students: An analysis of their forms and functions. Learning and Instruction.
Wilkes, C. and Burnham, B. (1991). Adult Learner Motivations and Electronic Distance Education. American Journal of Distance Education, 5(1):43–50.
Willson, V. (1988). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential anal- ysis.
Zhu, E. (1996). Meaning Negotiation, Knowledge Construction, and Mentoring in a Distance Learning Course.
孫治本 (2002). 網路學習中的互動式學習-以BBS社群氛圍提昇學習參與度之研究. In ELTA2002「網路學習理論與實務」學術研討會(國立交通大學主辦;2002.10.31.).
謝佩宜 and 周倩 (2006). 網路數學討論區使用者之批判思考表現, 參與歷程觀感, 動機與程度之相關研究. 科學教育學刊, 14(1):83–100.
馬秀蘭 (2004). 數學乘除問題情境發展之研究–以 BBS 為管道. 科學教育學刊, 12(1):53–81.
魏立欣 and Roblyer, M. (2004). 教育科技融入教學. 台北: 高等教育.

指導教授

蕭嘉璋(Chia-Chang Hsiao)

審核日期

2012-7-16

推文