探討線上學習筆記與自我評量與其對學習的影響

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：49

、訪客IP：3.144.116.159

姓名

張嘉凌(Chia-Ling Chang) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

網路學習科技研究所

論文名稱

探討線上學習筆記與自我評量與其對學習的影響
(Learning Journal and Self-Assessment Mechanism and its Impact of Learning)

相關論文

★ 同步表演機器人之建構與成效評估	★ 探討國小學童使用電子書多媒體註記系統結合註記分享機制對其學習行為與時間之影響
★ 先備知識對註記式多媒體電子書的影響研究：從個別環境到分享環境	★ Facilitating EFL speaking and writing with peer-tutoring and storytelling strategies in authentic learning context
★ An investigation into CKEL-supported EFL learning with TPR to reveal the importance of pronunciation and interactive sentence making	★ Investigation of Facilitating Physics Learning using Ubiquitous-Physics APP with Learning Map and Discussion Board in Authentic Contexts
★ 智慧互動SmartVpen在真實情境對於英文學習之影響	★ 利用合作虛擬化的網絡設計輔助計算機網路學習
★ 探討擴展合作式多媒體認知理論和其對EFL聽力與口語能力之影響 - 結合動覺辨識和學習者設計內容之猜謎遊戲	★ 在真實情境中利用智慧機制提升國小學生之外語口說及對話能力之評估
★ 探討在真實情境下教師回饋對學習認知與學習持續性之影響	★ 註釋、對話代理和協作概念圖支持大學生議論文寫作和後設認知的培養
★ Developing and Validating the Questionnaire and Its Model for Sustainable and Scalable Authentic Contextual Learning Supported by Mobile Apps	★ 探討個人化、情境化及社會化的智慧機制輔助真實情境國小幾何學習與其對學習成效之影響
★ Investigation of smart mechanisms for authentic contextual learning with sensor and recognition technologies	★ 探討智慧回饋如何影響學習時眼動和觸控操作的表現-以 Covid-19 快篩模擬為例

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)

目前多數的學習筆記 (learning journal) 為傳統紙本的形式，在數位教材興盛的時代，本研究欲幫助學生擴展註記，以清楚而有條理的方式呈現學生的註記，發展更加有意義的線上學習筆記。另外，本研究加入自我評量的機制，按照修正版的Bloom’s taxonomy給予學生在自我評量上的認知分類提示，希冀學生藉此對於課堂所學的知識加以組織和省思；由於本系統實驗於程式設計課程，故提供給學生的提示皆符合程式設計課程的內容。同時間也提供學生分享彼此學習筆記和自我評量的功能。本研究欲探討學生使用學習筆記、自我評量與分享功能對於學習成效的影響為何，也想了解學生後設認知中，認知調整 (regulation of cognition) 的資訊管理策略、理解監控與除錯策略和本系統實際行為的關係。
本研究發現，線上學習筆記和自我評量對於學習成效有顯著的影響力，經常使用學習筆記與自我評量能幫助學生提升認知層次，學生有機會經常對於學習內容做整理與結構化，漸而提升自我的學習成效。而本研究所提供的機制 (線上學習筆記、自我評量和分享) 能幫助學生部分後設認知的策略。因此本研究建議，應提供學生的省思機制，且按照認知分類能讓學生的目標更清楚；加入使學生經常回顧學習筆記或自我評量的學習活動，經常回顧可幫助理解監控與除錯策略；在學習筆記中供給學生提示與輔助，同時讓學生對於學習筆記的認知滿意度提高，且學習筆記的認知層次越高，其學習成效就越好；藉由分享可幫助學生的除錯策略，幫助填補所學的不足，建議應在活動機制上增加分享的可能性。

摘要(英)

Journal writing is a reflection method. As most learning journals created by students are traditional based and less convenient for those who study web based learning materials, we designed and developed a mechanism to create online learning journals. In our study, the group of colleges’ students that were enrolled to Programming Design course used online learning journals to reflect and organize what they have learned. Our mechanism provides self-assessment pages which contain prompts according to a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy. Another feature of self-assessment pages is structural and organizational scaffolding to make entries linked with each other and build meaningful online learning journals. Our mechanism allowed students to share their learning journal and self-assessment with others, thereby promoting peer learning. Besides, we would like to measure students’ regulation of cognition through reorganization of metacognition awareness inventory to find the relationship between the mechanism we provided and the part of metacognition (regulation of cognition) student showed. In this study we provide results of our investigation on how our proposed mechanism influenced on students learning performance and regulation of cognition, and detailed analysis of advantages and disadvantages of the mechanism with further research implications in the future are given.

關鍵字(中)

★ 認知層次
★ 自我評量
★ 分享
★ 修正版Bloom’s taxonomy
★ 認知調整
★ 學習筆記

關鍵字(英)

★ cognition level
★ learning journal
★ sharing
★ regulation of cognition
★ a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy
★ self-assessment

論文目次

中文摘要 ii
Abstract iii
目錄 iv
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 viii
第1章緒論 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 1
1.2 研究目的 3
1.3 研究限制 4
第2章文獻探討 5
2.1 註記對於學習的影響 5
2.2 網頁註記系統 6
2.3 學習筆記 (Learning Journal) 11
2.4 Bloom認知分類修正版 (A Revision of Bloom’s taxonomy) (RBT) 13
2.4.1 “RBT”與程式設計 18
2.5 後設認知與其量表 19
2.5.1 後設認知的定義 19
2.5.2 後設認知量表 (MAI) 20
2.5.3 後設認知量表 (MAI) 與系統目標 22
第3章研究方法 23
3.1 研究架構 23
3.2 研究變項 25
3.3 研究假設 27
3.4 實驗對象與時間 28
3.5 研究工具 29
一、 VPen系統 29
二、問卷 33
三、 SPSS統計軟體 37
四、訪談法 38
3.6 實驗實施及步驟 39
3.7 資料蒐集與處理 41
第4章結果分析與討論 44
4.1 問卷各變項之統計結果 44
4.2 問卷之後設認知策略對於自我評量、學習筆記與分享功能之探討 49
4.2.1 問卷之自我評量後設認知策略對於自我評量中認知層次與數量之分析 49
4.2.1.1 簡單迴歸分析 49
4.2.1.2 多元迴歸分析 50
4.2.2 問卷之學習筆記後設認知策略對於學習筆記中認知層次與數量之分析 52
4.2.2.1 簡單迴歸分析 52
4.2.2.2 多元迴歸分析 53
4.2.3 問卷之分享後設認知策略對於分享中參考數量與被參考數量之簡單迴歸分析 53
4.3 自我評量、學習筆記與分享對於學習成效之關係 55
4.3.1 相關性分析 55
4.3.2 簡單迴歸分析 55
4.3.3多元迴歸分析 57
4.4系統面之間的相關性分析 59
4.5 深度訪談 60
4.5.1自我評量的理解監控對於自我評量的影響 60
4.5.2學習筆記的理解監控與除錯策略對於學習筆記的影響 60
4.5.3 分享的除錯策略與實際使用分享之行為分析 61
4.5.4 自我評量與學習筆記對於認知層次的影響 63
第5章結論與建議 64
5.1 研究結果 64
5.2 研究結論 66
5.3 未來展望與建議 69
參考文獻 71
附錄I MAI 75
附錄II 問卷內容 78
附錄III 訪談內容 81

參考文獻

[1] 陳筱菁 (2004)。以布魯姆認知分類修正版為基礎之計算機概論試題分析。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
[2] 葉連祺、林淑萍(2003)。布魯姆認知領域教育目標分類修訂版之探討。教育研究月刊，105，94-106。
[3] Alavi, M. (1994). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: an empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18 (2), 159-74.
[4] Anderson, W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and Assessment: A revision of Blooms’ Educational Objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
[5] Annotea. http://www.w3.org/2001/Annotea.
[6] Berthold, K., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17, 564-577.
[7] Bloom, B. S., et al. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: handbook I: Cognitive domain. Longmans, Green and Company.
[8] Brown, A.L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glasser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol.1, pp.77-165). Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
[9] Croxton, C. A., & Robert C. B. (2001) "Journal Writing: Does it Promote Long Term Retention of Course Concepts?" National Teaching and Learning Forum. Onyx Press in conjunction with James Rhem and Associates, Inc.: 1996. 2 Feb. 2001.
[10] Dan R. Olsen Jr., Taufer, T., & Fails J. A. (2002). ScreenCrayons: Annotating Anything. Proceedings of the 17th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology. 165-174.
[11] Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
[12] Flavell, J. C. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[13] Ganske, L. (1981). Note-taking: A significant and integral part of learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 29, 155-175.
[14] Gay, G. (1999). Learning Disabilities Resource Community. Retrieved July 1, 2003, from http://www.idrc.ca.
[15] Glover, I., Hardaker, G., & Xu, Z. (2004). Collaborative annotation system environment (CASE) for online learning. Campus-Wide Information Systems. 21(2), 72-80.
[16] Grant, A., Berlin, A., & Freeman, G.K. (2003). Short Communication: The impact of a student learning journal: a two-stage evaluation using the Nominal Group Technique. Medical Teacher, 25 (6), 659-661.
[17] Hwang, W. Y., Hsu J. L., Tretiakov A., Chou, H. W.,& Lee, C.Y. (2009). Intra-action, Interaction and Outeraction in blended learning environments. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (2), 222-239.
[18] Hwang, W. Y., Wang, C. Y., & Sharples, M. (2007). A study of multimedia annotation of Web-based materials. Computers & Education. 48 (4), 680-699.
[19] Hwang, W. Y., Wang, C. Y., Hwang, G. J., Huang, Y. M., & Huang, S. (2008). A web-based programming learning environment to support cognitive development. Interacting with Computers, 20 (6), 524-534.
[20] Hyers, A. D. (2001) Predictable achievement patterns for student journals in introductory earth science courses, Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 25 (1), 53-66.
[21] Kiewra, K. A. (1989). A Review of Note-Taking: The Encoding-Storage Paradigm and Beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1 (2), 147-172.
[22] Lister, R. (2001). Objectives and Objective Assessment in CSl. Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education, 292-296.
[23] Lister, R., & Leaney, J. (2003). Introductory programming, criterion-referencing, and bloom. Proceedings of SIGCSE 20703 (Jan. 2003), ACM Press, 143-147.
[24] Marshall, C. C. (1997). Annotation: From paper books to the digital library. In Proceedings of the second ACM conference on digital libraries, July 23-26.
[25] McCrindle, A., & Christensen, C. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performances. Learning and Instruction, 5, 167-185.
[26] Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1985). Applied Liner Statistical Model, 2d ed. Homewood, IL : Irwin.
[27] Park, C. (2003). Engaging Students in the Learning Process: the learning journal. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27 (2), 183-199
[28] Sánchez-Alonso, A., & Vovides, Y. (2007). Integration of metacognitive skills in the design of learning objects. Computers in Human Behavior. 23 (6), 2585-2595.
[29] Schilit, B. N., Price, M. N., Golovchinsky, G., Tanaka, K., & Marshall, C. C. (1999). The reading appliance revolution. Computer, 32(1), 65-73.
[30] Schraw, G. (1994). The effect of knowledge on local and global monitoring. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 143-154.
[31] Schraw, G. & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 460-475.
[32] Thorpe, K. (2004). Reﬂective learning journals: from concept to practice. Reﬂective Practice, 5 (3), 327-343.
[33] Wagner, Z.M. (1999) Using student journals for course evaluation. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24 (3), 261-272.
[34] Wong, B. Y. L., Kuperis, S., Jamieson, D., Keller, L., & Cull-Hewitt, R. (2002). Effects of guided journal writing on students’ story understanding. Journal of Educational Research, 95, 179-191.
[35] Wortzel, R. (1979) New Life Style Determinants of Woman’s Food Shopping Behavior. Journal of Marketing, 43, 28-29.
[36] Yee, Ka-Ping. (2002). CritLink: Advanced Hyperlinks Enable Public Annotation on the Web. Demo to the CSCW 2002 conference, New Orleans.
[37] Young, A., & Fry, J.D. (2008). Metacognitive awareness and academic achievement in college students. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 8 (2), 1-10.

指導教授

黃武元(Wu-Yuin Hwang)

審核日期

2009-7-3

推文