||Research suggests that making annotations is an indispensable behavior that offer many benefits. Due to such benefits, annotations have been applied to support different learning systems. However, such studies largely focused on learning outcomes but rarely considered other factors affect learners within authentic learning environments, such as learners’ prior knowledge, learners’ learning scenarios. More specifically, there are few studies to examine how prior knowledge affects students to make and view annotations. In addition, the in-class scenario has been widely investigated in previous studies, but the effects of after-class scenario were rarely examined. It is, therefore, essential to understand how prior knowledge influences learners to make and to view annotations in and after class. To address these issues, the purposes of this study are to (a) develop an Annotatable Multimedia E-reader (AME) which provided individual/sharing annotation environments to help students learn English in-class and after-class and (b) conduct two empirical studies to examine how prior knowledge influenced fifth-grade students’ reactions to the use of the AME within individual/sharing annotation environments. That is to say, the research presented in this doctoral thesis not only examines the influences of prior knowledge on students’ making and viewing annotations but also further provides annotation tools to support learners to learn in- and after-class scenarios, such as Text Annotations (TA), Voice Annotations (VA), Text-To-Speech (TTS), Teacher’s Lecture (TVA).|
The findings from Study One indicated that prior knowledge significantly affected learners’ learning achievement and learning behavior within the individual annotation environment. Regarding the learning achievement, the results demonstrated that the Low Prior knowledge (LPK) students obtained higher gain scores than High Prior knowledge (HPK) students. Regarding the learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the students’ prior knowledge significantly affected their learning behavior after the class. In addition to the influences of prior knowledge, the relationship among learning achievement, learning behavior, and learning perception also revealed some findings. Regarding the relationships between learning achievement and learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the students who tended to use more annotations after-class could have relatively higher post-test scores. Regarding the relationships between learning perception and learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the HPK students who had high levels of Usefulness would use more TVA in-class; the HPK students who have high levels of intention would use fewer OVA after-class; the LPK students who have more intention to use the AME could use more TTS after-class. Regarding the relationships between learning perception and learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the LPK students who perceived a higher level of Usefulness have higher gain scores.
The findings from Study Two indicated that prior knowledge significantly affected learners’ learning behavior within the sharing annotation environment. Regarding the learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the HPK students preferred to use more TA in-class, VA after-class, and OVA after-class than the LPK students. Moreover, the results demonstrate that the HPK students preferred to view more other HPK students’ annotations than the LPK students. Regarding the relationship between learning achievement and learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the students who tended to use more annotations in-class could have relatively higher post-test scores. Moreover, the results demonstrated that viewing more HPK students’ annotations could have higher post-test scores. Regarding the relationships between learning perception and learning behavior, the results demonstrated that the HPK students who would use more TVA in- and after- class had a high level of perceptions for the Easy to Use and Usefulness. In addition, the HPK students who had a high level of intention would use more TVA in-class.
By doing so, this thesis will make contributions to the learning field in a number of ways. Firstly, this will provide a deeper understanding of the learners’ reactions to the use of the AME from the perspectives of prior knowledge, regarding learning achievement, learning behavior and learning perception. Secondly, this will take into account different learning scenarios, which can undertake the first contribution in the area of prior knowledge. In other words, this will provide a deeper understanding of the learners’ reactions to the use of the AME within individual/sharing annotation environments not only in-class but also give an understanding of after-class.
||Agrifoglio R, Black S, Metallo C, et al. (2012) Extrinsic Versus Intrinsic Motivation in Continued Twitter Usage. Journal of Computer Information Systems 53: 33-41.|
Berg BL, Lune H and Lune H. (2004) Qualitative research methods for the social sciences: Pearson Boston, MA.
Boyle JR. (2007) The process of note taking: Implications for students with mild disabilities. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas 80: 227-232.
Bransford J, Vye N, Stevens R, et al. (2005) Learning theories and education: Toward a decade of synergy.
Brod G, Werkle-Bergner M and Shing YL. (2013) The influence of prior knowledge on memory: a developmental cognitive neuroscience perspective. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 7.
Brown JS, Collins A and Duguid P. (1989) Situated learning and the culture of learning. Education Researcher 18: 32-42.
Brusilovsky P and Eklund J. (1998) A study of user model based link annotation in educational hypermedia. Journal of Universal Computer Science 4: 429-448.
Bull S and Solity J. (1987) Classroom management: Principles to practice, London: Croom Helm London.
Bulu ST and Pedersen S. (2012) Supporting problem-solving performance in a hypermedia learning environment: The role of students′ prior knowledge and metacognitive skills. Computers in Human Behavior 28: 1162-1169.
Calisir F and Gurel Z. (2003) Influence of text structure and prior knowledge of the learner on reading comprehension, browsing and perceived control. Computers in Human Behavior 19: 135-145.
Chan T-W, Roschelle J, Hsi S, et al. (2006) One-to-one technology-enhanced learning: An opportunity for global research collaboration. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning 1: 3-29.
Chang CK and Hsu CK. (2011) A mobile-assisted synchronously collaborative translation-annotation system for English as a foreign language (EFL) reading comprehension. Computer Assisted Language Learning 24: 155-180.
Chang WC and Ku YM. (2015) The Effects of Note- Taking Skills Instruction on Elementary Students′ Reading. Journal of Educational Research 108: 278-291.
Chen CM, Chen YT, Hong CM, et al. (2012) Developing a Taiwan library history digital library with reader knowledge archiving and sharing mechanisms based on the DSpace platform. Electronic Library 30: 426-442.
Chen CM and Li YL. (2010) Personalised context-aware ubiquitous learning system for supporting effective English vocabulary learning. Interactive Learning Environments 18: 341-364.
Chen IJ and Yen JC. (2013) Hypertext annotation: Effects of presentation formats and learner proficiency on reading comprehension and vocabulary learning in foreign languages. Computers & Education 63: 416-423.
Chen SY and MaCredie RD. (2004) Cognitive modeling of student learning in Web-based instructional programs. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 17: 375-402.
Chen Z-H and Chen SY. (2013) A surrogate competition approach to enhancing game-based learning. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 20: 35.
Dairianathan A and Subramaniam R. (2011) Learning about Inheritance in an Out-of-School Setting. International Journal of Science Education 33: 1079-1108.
Davis DS and Neitzel C. (2012) Collaborative sense-making in print and digital text environments. Reading and Writing 25: 831-856.
Davis FD. (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly: 319-340.
Davis M and Hult RE. (1997) Effects of writing summaries as a generative learning activity during note taking. Teaching of Psychology 24: 47-49.
Foster J and Lin A. (2003) Individual differences in learning entrepreneurship and their implications for web-based instruction in e-business and e-commerce. British Journal of Educational Technology 34: 455-465.
Garcia-Almeida DJ, Hernandez-Lopez L, Ballesteros JL, et al. (2012) Motivation and prior knowledge as determinants of knowledge assimilation: Explaining the academic results of tourism students. Journal of Hospitality Leisure Sport & Tourism Education 11: 151-160.
Ghaebi A and Fahimifar S. (2011) E-book acquisition features: attitude of Iranian information professionals. Electronic Library 29: 777-791.
Gil-Flores J. (2011) The socioeconomic status of families and students′ educational achievement. Cultura Y Educacion 23: 141-154.
Ginsburg M and Kambil A. (1999) Annotate: A web-based knowledge management support system for document collections. Systems Sciences, 1999. HICSS-32. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on. IEEE, 10 pp.
Goh DHL, Razikin K, Lee CS, et al. (2012) Evaluating the use of a mobile annotation system for geography education. Electronic Library 30: 589-607.
Hadwin AF, Kirby JR and Woodhouse RA. (1999) Individual differences in notetaking, summarization, and learning from lectures. Alberta Journal of Educational Research 45: 1-17.
Handley Z. (2009) Is text-to-speech synthesis ready for use in computer-assisted language learning? Speech Communication 51: 906-919.
Harger RO. (1996) Teaching in a computer classroom with a hyperlinked, interactive book. Ieee Transactions on Education 39: 327-335.
Harmer J. (2001) The practice of English language teaching, London: Longman.
Hay DB, Kehoe C, Miquel ME, et al. (2008) Measuring the quality of e-learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 39: 1037-1056.
Heath AP, Greenway M, Powell R, et al. (2014) Bionimbus: a cloud for managing, analyzing and sharing large genomics datasets. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 21: 969-975.
Ho Yk. (2003) Audiotaped dialogue journals: An alternative form of speaking practice. Elt Journal 57: 269-277.
Hoover-Dempsey KV, Bassler OC and Brissie JS. (1987) Parent involvement: Contributions of teacher efficacy, school socioeconomic status, and other school characteristics. American Educational Research Journal 24: 417.
Hsu CK, Hwang GJ and Chang CK. (2013) A personalized recommendation-based mobile learning approach to improving the reading performance of EFL students. Computers & Education 63: 327-336.
Huang EY, Lin SW and Huang TK. (2012a) What type of learning style leads to online participation in the mixed-mode e-learning environment? A study of software usage instruction. Computers & Education 58: 338-349.
Huang YM, Huang TC and Hsieh MY. (2008) Using annotation services in a ubiquitous Jigsaw cooperative learning environment. Educational Technology & Society 11: 3-15.
Huang YM, Liang TH, Su YN, et al. (2012b) Empowering personalized learning with an interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students. Etr&D-Educational Technology Research and Development 60: 703-722.
Huitema B. (2011) The Analysis of Covariance and Alternatives: Statistical Methods for Experiments, Quasi-Experiments, and Single-Case Studies: John Wiley & Sons.
Hung HC and Young SSC. (2015) The Effectiveness of Adopting E-Readers to Facilitate EFL Students′ Process-Based Academic Writing. Educational Technology & Society 18: 250-263.
Hwang W-Y, Liu Y-F, Chen H-R, et al. (2015) Role of Parents and Annotation Sharing in Children′s Learning Behavior and Achievement Using E-Readers. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 18: 292-307.
Hwang WY, Chen NS, Shadiev R, et al. (2011) Effects of reviewing annotations and homework solutions on math learning achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology 42: 1016-1028.
Hwang WY, Wang CY and Sharples M. (2007) A study of multimedia annotation of Web-based materials. Computers & Education 48: 680-699.
Johnson RB and Onwuegbuzie AJ. (2004) Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher 33: 14-26.
Kang YY, Wang MJJ and Lin RT. (2009) Usability evaluation of E-books. Displays 30: 49-52.
Kiewra KA. (1985) Providing the instructor′s notes: An effective addition to student notetaking. Educational Psychologist 20: 33-39.
Kiewra KA. (1989) A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review 1: 147-172.
Kiewra KA, DuBois NF, Christian D, et al. (1988) Providing study notes: Comparison of three types of notes for review. Journal of Educational Psychology 80: 595.
Kobayashi K. (2006) Combined Effects of Note‐Taking/‐Reviewing on Learning and the Enhancement through Interventions: A meta‐analytic review. Educational Psychology 26: 459-477.
Li LY, Chen GD and Yang SJ. (2013) Construction of cognitive maps to improve e-book reading and navigation. Computers & Education 60: 32-39.
Lin JW and Lai YC. (2014) Using collaborative annotating and data mining on formative assessments to enhance learning efficiency. Computer Applications in Engineering Education 22: 364-374.
Liu TC, Lin YC and Paas F. (2014) Effects of prior knowledge on learning from different compositions of representations in a mobile learning environment. Computers & Education 72: 328-338.
Lo JJ, Yeh SW and Sung CS. (2013) Learning paragraph structure with online annotations: An interactive approach to enhancing EFL reading comprehension. System 41: 413-427.
Maatta SL and Bonnici LJ. (2014) An evaluation of the functionality and accessibility of e-readers for individuals with print disabilities. Electronic Library 32: 493-507.
McDonald S and Stevenson RJ. (1998) Effects of text structure and prior knowledge of the learner on navigation in hypertext. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 40: 18-27.
Nakayama M, Mutsuura K and Yamamoto H. (2015) The prediction of learning performance using features of note taking activities. Proc. of the European Symposium on Artificial Neural Networks (ESANN).
Nielsen J. (1993) Usability engineering, Boston: Academic Press.
Nokelainen P, Miettinen M, Kurhila J, et al. (2005) A shared document‐based annotation tool to support learner‐centred collaborative learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 36: 757-770.
Ogata H and Yano Y. (2004) Context-aware support for computer-supported ubiquitous learning. Paper presented at the 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education. JhongLi, Taiwan.
Osipov IV, Prasikova AY and Volinsky AA. (2015) Participant behavior and content of the online foreign languages learning and teaching platform. Computers in Human Behavior 50: 476-488.
Ovsiannikov IA, Arbib MA and Mcneill TH. (1999) Annotation technology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 50: 329-362.
Pattuelli MC and Rabina D. (2010) Forms, effects, function: LIS students′ attitudes towards portable e-book readers. Aslib Proceedings 62: 228-244.
Pazzani MJ. (1991) Influence of prior knowledge on concept acquisition: Experimental and computational results. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 17: 416.
Piolat A, Olive T and Kellogg RT. (2005) Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology 19: 291-312.
Powell RR. (1997) Basic research methods for librarians: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Röscheisen M, Mogensen C and Winograd T. (1997) Shared Web annotations as a platform for third-party value-added, information providers: architecture, protocols, and usage examples: Stanford University, Department of Computer Science.
Reiser BJ. (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences 13: 273-304.
Rockinson-Szapkiw AJ, Courduff J, Carter K, et al. (2013) Electronic versus traditional print textbooks: A comparison study on the influence of university students′ learning. Computers & Education 63: 259-266.
Rogers R, Lombardo J, Mednieks Z, et al. (2009) Android application development: Programming with the Google SDK: O′Reilly Media, Inc.
Sandberg J, Maris M and de Geus K. (2011) Mobile English learning: An evidence-based study with fifth graders. Computers & Education 57: 1334-1347.
Schneps MH, Thomson JM, Chen C, et al. (2013) E-Readers Are More Effective than Paper for Some with Dyslexia. Plos One 8.
Shadiev R, Hwang W-Y, Yeh S-C, et al. (2014) Effects of unidirectional vs. reciprocal teaching strategies on web-based computer programming learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research 50: 67-95.
Shurtz S and von Isenburg M. (2011) Exploring e-readers to support clinical medical education: two case studies. Journal of the Medical Library Association 99: 110-117.
Siegenthaler E, Wurtz P and Groner R. (2010) Improving the Usability of E-Book Readers. Journal of Usability Studies 6: 25-38.
Song HS. (2010) The Effects of Learners′ Prior Knowledge, Self-Regulation, and Motivation on Learning Performance in Complex Multimedia Learning Environments. ProQuest LLC. New York: New York University.
Su AYS, Yang SJH, Hwang WY, et al. (2010) A Web 2.0-based collaborative annotation system for enhancing knowledge sharing in collaborative learning environments. Computers & Education 55: 752-766.
Sun Z, Zhang Z and Wang H. (2011) Consistency and error analysis of Prior-Knowledge-Based Kernel Regression. Neurocomputing 74: 3476-3485.
Suritsky SK and Hughes CA. (1991) Benefits of Notetaking - Implications for Secondary and Postsecondary Students with Learning-Disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly 14: 7-18.
Titsworth BS and Kiewra KA. (2004) Spoken organizational lecture cues and student notetaking as facilitators of student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology 29: 447-461.
Tran NA. (2011) The Relationship between Students′ Connections to Out-of-School Experiences and Factors Associated with Science Learning. International Journal of Science Education 33: 1625-1651.
Tsai TF. (2009) EFL college freshman note-taking training for reading comprehension. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning 5: 12-18.
Wang C-Y and Chen G-D. (2004) Extending e-books with annotation, online support and assessment mechanisms to increase efficiency of learning. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. ACM, 132-136.
Wetzels SAJ, Kester L, van Merrienboer JJG, et al. (2011) The influence of prior knowledge on the retrieval-directed function of note taking in prior knowledge activation. British Journal of Educational Psychology 81: 274-291.
Wilson R, Landoni M and Gibb F. (2003) The WEB Book experiments in electronic textbook design. Journal of Documentation 59: 454-477.
Wood D, Bruner JS and Ross G. (1976) The role of tutoring in problem solving*. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry 17: 89-100.
Wright S, Fugett A and Caputa F. (2013) Using E-readers and Internet Resources to Support Comprehension. Educational Technology & Society 16: 367-379.
Yeh TK, Tseng KY, Cho CW, et al. (2012) Exploring the Impact of Prior Knowledge and Appropriate Feedback on Students′ Perceived Cognitive Load and Learning Outcomes: Animation-based earthquakes instruction. International Journal of Science Education 34: 1555-1570.
Yu BW, Doraiswamy H, Chen X, et al. (2014) Genotet: An Interactive Web-based Visual Exploration Framework to Support Validation of Gene Regulatory Networks. Ieee Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 20: 1903-1912.