地理素養教學在台灣中學的教學和挑戰   －以三位中學地理科教師為例

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：38

、訪客IP：3.147.8.46

姓名

傅紹瑋(Shao-Wei Fu) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

學習與教學研究所

論文名稱

地理素養教學在台灣中學的教學和挑戰－以三位中學地理科教師為例
(Issues and Challenges of Teaching Literacy-based Geography in Senior High Schools - A Case Study of Three Taiwanese Geography Teachers)

相關論文

★ 課室小組討論活動的口語參與-以六名大學師資生為例	★ 探究師資生素養導向課程之設計能力與改變
★ 探究課室小組討論觀點——以「課程發展與設計」的師資培育課程為例	★ 探究高中生於論證遊戲中的協同論證模式與過程
★ 以設計研究法發展思考程序課程設計原則

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)

本研究探討台灣中學地理教師在面對新課綱的課程變化時，如何進行素養教學和面對甚麼挑戰，研究目的為了解地理老師在面對素養教學時面臨的困境，如何面對並找出符合素養導向地理教學的方法。
　　基於上述目的產生的研究問題有三：一、型塑地理教師教學的因素為何？二、符合地理素養教學的要素為何？三、哪些因素導致地理教師難以推動素養教學？研究者採用質性個案研究回答上述問題，並使用「立意取樣」挑選三位台灣公立中學的地理老師作為研究目標，蒐集資料含：觀課田野筆記、深度訪談、授課教案、電子簡報檔和教學講義。資料分析以開放編碼方式進行，藉此來了解資料所呈現的研究結果和主題。
　　研究結果顯示：一、型塑地理教師教學的因素包含：教師的教學信念（belief on learning）、受考試限制的課程進度和授課時間限制、學生成績與學習表現、家長對學習的觀點；二、符合地理素養教學的要素包含：（1）教師的教學信念為：讓學生將知識學以致用；（2）教師的教學以探究為目標，運用討論來增進同儕互相搭建鷹架；（3）教師與學生角色的改變：學生是地理知識的探究者而非被動吸收地理知識，教師成為學習的引導者；（4）透過教師社群支持素養教學專業能力的發展；三、導致地理教師難以推動素養教學的因素包含：（1）缺乏校內或校外的教師社群支持來發展素養教學相關課程與教學專業能力；（2）重視考試成績的學習文化；（3）繁瑣的教務、課務工作讓教師缺乏時間進行素養教學的專業發展。
　　本研究可協助現場教師、教學研究者、學校行政人員和政策制定者
了解教學現場教師們面對素養導向教學產生的問題，並提供順利執行素養導向地理教學的方法。
　　由於本研究僅選擇三位教師來深入探討素養導向地理教學，所以本研究無法含括地理教師面臨所有的問題，以及其它可順利執行素養教學的方法。

摘要(英)

This research investigated how three senior high school Geography teachers tackled the issues and challenges of teaching literacy-based Geography in Taiwan. Literacy-based Learning was a national curricuar innovation (also known as the 108 Curricula) implemented by the Ministry of Education of Taiwan in August 2019. It aimed at empowering each child for lifelong learning. With the new curricula, Geography teachers were required to teach how geographers think and do as opposed to content mastery. Although the 108 Curricula suited 21st century global challenges, it was a major hurdle for most Geography teachers.
I asked three research questions to guide my research regarding how senior high school Geography teachers cope with the demands and challenges from the 108 Curricula. First, what are the factors that shape the teaching of Geography in senior high schools? Second, how are literacy-based Geography taught by an experienced and dedicated Geography teacher and what are the key factors contributing to literacy-based Geography in her classrooms? Third, what are the factors contributing to the challenges and difficulties of teaching literacy-based Geography?
Using a qualitative case study approach, I purposefully selected two senior and one junior Geography teachers to participate in this study. Data include classroom observation, field notes, in-depth interviews, lesson plans and other teaching materials from three teachers. Data are analyzed with an open-coding approach in order to capture emerging themes related to the three research questions. I concluded the following findings.

A Geography classroom in Taiwanese public high schools was shaped by the following intertwined factors: teacher’s belief about teaching and learning, MOE’s curricular plan and school time tables, students’ exam outcomes, parents’ beliefs on learning.
In establishing a literacy-based Geography classroom, the dedicated teacher believed that the outcome of teaching was not students’ exam results, but students’ ability to solve problems using Geography knowledge. She organized student-centric discussions that led to clarification of ideas and knowledge production. She perceived students as critical knowledge consumers and producers, while teachers were learning community organizers and facilitators. She worked with other teachers as a community of teaching and learning practices.
Factors that made literacy-based Geography a challenge included the lack of professional development and administrative support within and beyond schools, a dominant learning culture that defined learning and teaching excellence based on students’ exam results, and the tedious daily routines that made teaching professional development an extra burden.
This research enabled senior school teachers, school administrators, education researchers, and policy makers to formulate an in-depth understanding of literacy-based Geography taught by dedicated, senior, and novice teachers. It is worth noting that the three participant teachers do not represent all senior high school Geography teachers in Taiwan.

關鍵字(中)

★ 108課綱
★ 地理教學
★ 素養導向
★ 素養導向學習
★ 教師信念

關鍵字(英)

★ 108 Curricula
★ Geography teaching
★ literacy-based teaching
★ literacy-based learning

論文目次

一、緒論 1
1-1 研究動機與目的 1
二、文獻探討 5
2-1 地理學科導向教學 5
2-2 地理素養導向教學 8
2-3 國外如何教導地理素養課程 14
2-4 國內如何教導地理素養 17
三、研究方法 24
3-1 研究問題 24
3-2 研究方法的介紹 25
3-3 研究資料蒐集與分析 28
3-4 研究倫理 34
3-5　前導性研究的啟發 35
第四章研究發現 44
4-1 研究發現的結果和討論 45
第五章討論 103
5-1 影響地理教師教學的要素 104
5-2 素養導向地理教學的成功要素 111
5-3 地理教師執行素養導向教學的困難 117
5-4 研究限制 120
第六章研究貢獻與限制 121
6-1 研究總結與貢獻 121
6-2 研究限制 122
6-3 研究如何改變自身的教學信念 123
參考文獻 128
附錄一、研究同意書 140

參考文獻

文崇一、楊國樞（2000）。訪問調查法。社會及行為科學研究法下冊。台北：東華。
王宜珍（1999）。應用網路資源於國中地理科教學之研究。國立臺灣師範大學地理學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
王雅觀（2005）。國中教師應用科技之教學歷程探究: 地理科教師應用教學科技之個案研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北市。
王震武（2002）。升學主義的成因及其社會心理基礎－一個歷史觀察。本土心理學研究，17，3-65。
黃譯瑩（2003）。統整課程及其系統分形模式之再認識：尋找另一條認識的出路。科學教育期刊，11，1-24。
方德隆、張宏育（2013）國中教育階段核心素養課程之建構。課程研究，8（1）， 65-99。
古鈞元（2005）。教師教學信念與資訊科技融入教學—國中地理教師個案研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文，未出版，台北市。
江文慈（2007）。超越測量-評量典範轉移的探索與啟示。Journal of Educational Practice and Research， 20（1），173-200。
江映瑩（2007）。Google Earth 應用於中學地理教育之研究。國立臺灣大學地理環境資源學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
黃朝恩（2001）。跨世紀的美國地理教育新貌。國立臺灣師範大學地理研究報告，未出版，台北。
吳明崇（2002）。教學創新的影響因素。中等教育，53(4)，32-35。
吳宗立（2009）。國小社會領域教師教學創新與影響因素之研究。社會科教育研究，14，251 - 275
何珍儀（2005）。網路輔助地理學習之研究—以 [台灣氣候] 單元為例。國立高雄師範大學地理學系教學碩士班碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
吳芝儀、李奉儒（譯）（1995）（原作者：Patton, M. Q.）質的評鑑與研究。台北：桂冠。
李孟文（2002）。教學的精緻理論及其在國中數理科教學之應用。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
周天穎（2008）。地理資訊系統理論與實務，四版，台北市，儒林。
周興隆（2010）。 Google Earth 融入地理教學對國中生學習成效影響之研究。國立臺北教育大學社會與區域發展學系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
林天佑（1996）。認識研究倫理。引自http://mail.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/26/social/26-13.htm。
林進材（2004）。教學原理。臺北：五南
林志彥（2008）。資訊科技融入坡地防災教學之研究—以台中縣外埔國中為例，國立中興大學水土保持學系碩士論文，未出版，台中。
林怡資（2014）。以ARCS動機模式與資訊科技融入國中地理科教學對國中生的學習動機與學習成就之研究。國立臺中教育大學教育學系課程與教學碩士論文，台中市，未出版。
林信全（2005）。空間能力與空間認知對三維空間搜尋系統的影響，國立交通大學理學院網路學習學程碩士論文，未出版，新竹。
林真玉（2015）。應用網路化動態評量輔助國中學生學習天氣與氣候概念之研究。國立新竹教育大學教育與學習科技學系課程與教學碩士在職論文，未出版，新竹市。
林素卿（2007）。從課程與教學改革趨勢談教師專業發展評鑑。教育資料與研究雙月刊，76，29-46。
施添福（1983）。我國中學的地理教育─反省與展望。台北市：國立台灣師範大學地理學系。
施添福（1989）。中學地理教學─理論與實際。台北市：國立台灣師範大學中等教育輔導委員會。
孫志麟（2010）。專業學習社群：促進教師專業發展的平台。學校行政雙月刊，69，138-158。
鍾榮進（2014）。學科教學知識之呈現—以一位國小社會領域教師為例。新竹教育大學教育學報，31(1)，1-46。
國教院（2015）。十二年國教總綱。台灣：教育部。
國教院（2017）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要社會領域草案。台灣：教育部。
張俊德（1984）。SAT-一種學術能力測驗. 師友月刊，203，56-57。
張郁雯、林文瑛（2003）。升學主義還是升學機會?升學壓力的社會意涵。教育心理學報，35（2），167-182。
張霄亭（1995）。教學媒體與教學新科技。台北：心理。
潘慧玲、陳佩英、張素貞、鄭淑惠、陳文彥（2014）。從學習領導論析學習共同體的概念與實踐。市北教育學刊，45，1-28。
夏林清、鄭村棋譯（1989）。行動科學：實踐中的探究。台北：張老師。
陳佩英（2018）。跨領域素養導向課程設計。台灣：教育部
陳淑敏（2004）。幼兒教師教學信念與教學行為之探究。屏東師院學報，21，1-36
陳向明（2002）。社會科學質的研究。台北：五南。
陳秋璉（2010）。動態評量輔助高中地理實察行動學習之研究。國立臺灣師範大學地理學系碩士學位論文，未出版，台北市。
陳國川（1995）。地理教材設計的理論與實踐。台北市：師大書苑。
陳淑英（1992）。〈視聽教育、教學科技與教育工學〉。中等教育，44（1），頁38。
陳淑英（1993）。《教學媒體---理論與實務》，頁28、30、81-82。台北市：文景。
黃意舒（1996）。兒童行為觀察法與應用。台北：心理。
黃瑞琴（1999）。《質的教育研究方法》，頁137、151。台北：心理出版社。
楊洲松（2016）。第十二章教育科技化的哲學思考。載於簡成熙（主編），新教育哲學（253-271 頁）。臺北：五南。
楊銀興（2000）。傳統評量與新式評量之比較及國小教師對實施新式評量相關問題覺知情形之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，台北。
鄭世彬、許民陽 (2005)。台灣近代自然書寫中環境意識的探究與未來的可能性。市師環教，34。
詹明峰（2011）。如何運用遊戲來促進學習典範轉移。前瞻科技與管理，1（1），49-59。
潘淑滿（2003）。質性研究：理論與應用。台北：心理出版社。
蔡清田、陳延興、吳明烈、盧美貴、方德隆、陳聖謨、林永豐（2011）。K-12中小學課程綱要的核心素養與各領域之連貫體系研究（國家教育研究院委託研究報告）。嘉義縣：國立中正大學課程研究所。
蔡清田、陳延興。（2013）。國民核心素養之課程轉化。課程與教學，16（3），59-78。
蔡清田（2014）。國民核心素養：十二年國教課程改革的DNA。臺北：高等教育。
賴美杏（2004）。資訊融入地理教學與傳統地理教學之比較。中山女高學報，4，95-100。
賴進貴（1999）。中小學生地圖認知之研究。地圖: 中華民國地圖學會會刊，10，49-58。
薛家圓（2001）。中等學校地理科地形單元電腦網路教學之研究。國立彰化師範大學地理學系碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
蘇芳如（2003）。國中地理科電化教學資源的設計與應用--以透明投影片 (TP) 及簡報式課程軟體 (Microsoft PowerPoint) 之設計與教學為例。臺灣師範大學地理學系在職進修碩士班學位論文，未出版，台北市。
歐陽鍾玲、何榆（2013）。思考技能的訓練與中學地理教學。地理研究，58，97-117。
PISA國家研究中心：〈臺灣參與PISA2009年精要報告〉（2011）取自　　　　http://pisa.nutn.edu.tw/download/data/ 1207_2009PISA_REPORT.pdf

二、英文部分
Adams, P. C. (1998). Teaching and learning with SimCity 2000. Journal of Geography, 97(2), 47–55.
Barr, R., Dreeben, R., & Wiratchai, N. (1983). How schools work. University of Chicago Press.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. 1989. Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher. pp.32~42.
Bartsch, R. A., & Cobern, K. M. (2003). Effectiveness of PowerPoint presentations in lectures. Computers & education, 41(1), 77-86.
Bednarz, S. W. (2004). Geographic information systems: A tool to support geography and environmental education? GeoJournal, 60, 191–199.
Bednarz, S. W., & Van der Schee, J. (2006). Europe and the United States: The implementation of geographicinformation systems in secondary education in two contexts. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(2),191–205.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1985). Cognitive coping strategies and the problem of inert knowledge. Thinking and learning skills, 2, 65-80.
Berliner, D. C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America’s public schools. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Broadfoot, P. (1996). Assessment and learning: Power or partnership? In H. Goldstein & T. Lewis (Eds.), Assessment: Problems, developments and statistical issues (pp.21-40). New York: Wiley.
Blankstein, A. M., Houston, P. D., & Cole, R. W. (Eds.) (2008). Sustaining professionallearning communities . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Bruffee, K. A. (1973). Collaborative learning: Some practical models. College English, 34 (5), 634-643.
Bauch, P. (1984). Prediction elementary classroom teaching practices from teachers’ educational beliefs. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 252954).
Castleford, J. (1998). Evaluating IT-based resources for supporting learning and teaching in geography: some case studies. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 22(3), 375-381.
Castro, A. P. (2001). Learning in a digital age: Current and future trends in educational technology. Retrieved August 25, 2009, from http://www.geocities.com/apcastro111/conteduc/edutech.htm
Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. Teachers College Press.
Cuban, L. (1993). How Teachers Taught: Constancy and Change in American Classrooms, 1890-1990. Research on Teaching Series. NY: Teachers College Press.
Carano, K. T., & Berson, M. J. (2007). Breaking stereotypes: Constructing geographic literacy and cultural awareness through technology. The Social Studies, 98(2), 65-69.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (in press). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing learning and instructions: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, N]: Erlbaum.
Demirci, A. (2009). How do teachers approach new technologies: Geography teachers’ attitudes towards Geographic Information Systems (GIS). European Journal of Educational Studies, 1(1), 43-53.
David Lambert (2010) Geography education research and why it matters, International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 19:2, 83-86, DOI: 10.1080/10382046.2010.482180
Demsey, J., Reiser, R., Branch, R. M., & Gustafson, K. L. (2008). Instructional design　review. Retrieved August 23, 2009, from　http://idetel.blogspot.com/2008/02/trends-and-issues-chapter-1.html
Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. F. (1960). Knowing and the known (No. 111). Boston: Beacon Press.
Dickey, M. D. (2007). Game design and learning: A conjectural analysis of how massively multiple online roleplaying games (MMORPGs) foster intrinsic motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 253–273.
Dooley, K. E. (1999). Towards a holistic model for the diffusion of educational technologies: An integrative review of educational innovation studies. Educational Technology & Society, 2(4),
Downey, G., & Lucena, J. U. A. N. (2003). When students resist: Ethnography of a senior design experience in engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 19(1), 168-176.
Fisher, C., & Binns, T. (Eds.). (2016). Issues in geography teaching. Routledge.
Fitzpatrick, C. (1993). Teaching geography with computers. Journal of Geography, 92(4), 156-159.
Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. London: Routledge.
Grant, R. (1997). A claim for the case method in the teaching of geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 21(2), 171-185.
Geography. (2018, May). National Geography. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/geography/
Hayakawa, S. I. & Hayakawa A. R. (1949). Language in thought and action. New York: Harcourt, Brace.http://www.ifets.info/journals/2_4/kim_dooley.html
Hipp, K., Huffman, J., Pankake, A., & Olivier, D. (2008). Sustaining professional learning communities: Case studies. Journal of Educational Change, 9 (2), 173-195.
Jan M, Chee YS and Tan EM. (2010). “Changing Science Classroom Discourse toward Doing Science: The Design of a Game-Based Learning Curriculum,” in Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Computers in Education, Putrajaya, Malaysia: APSCE, 543-547
Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. The MIT Press.
Joshua, E. S. (2005). PowerPoint’s power in the classroom: enhancing student’s self-efficacy and attitudes. Computer & Education, 45, 203–215.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, N.J: Ablex Pub. Corp.
Liben, L. S., & Downs, R. M. (1994). Fostering geographic literacy from early childhood: The contributions of interdisciplinary research. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15(4), 549-569.
Lambert, D., & Balderstone, D. (2012). Learning to teach geography in the secondary school: a companion to school experience. Routledge.
Lemberg, D., & Stoltman, J. P. (1999). Geography teaching and the new technologies: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of education, 63-76.
Maxwell J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McLuhan, M. (1994). Understanding media: The extensions of man. Boston, MA: MIT press.
Muir-Herzig, R. G. (2004). Technology and its impact in the classroom. Computers & Education, 42(2), 111-131.
McKeachie, W. J., & Svinicki, M. (Eds.) (2006). McKeachie′s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (12th ed.). Boston : Houghton Mifflin.
Nellis, M. D. (1994). Technology in geographic education: Reflections and future directions. Journal of Geography, 93(1), 36-39.
Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
NCSS (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies. Washington DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
OECD. (2016). Global Competency for an inclusive world. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/aboutpisa/Global-competency-for-an-inclusive-world.pdf
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.
Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., & Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self-efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Computers & Education, 50,1084–1091.
Patterson, T. C. (2007). Google Earth as a (Not Just) geography education tool. Journal of Geography, 106(4), 145–152.
Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligences and design for education. In G. Solomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations(pp. 47-87). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Pennell, S. (2008). Teacher librarians in professional learning communities. CSLA Journal, 32 (1), 25-26.
Ramasundaram, V., Grunwald, S., Mongeot, A., Comerford, N. B., & Bliss, C. M. (2005). Development of anenvironmental virtual field laboratory. Computers & Education, 45, 21–34.
Rosenberg, Matt. ”Why Study Geography?” ThoughtCo, Aug. 22, 2019, thoughtco.com/why-study-geography-1435605.
Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula, T. Butter., & E. Guyton(Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education(pp. 102-119). New York: Macmillan Library Reference.
Scheffler, F. L. (1999). Computer technology in schools: What teachers should know and be able to do. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 305–326.
Salter, K. (1990). Geography and Teaching: What Is the Essence of Geographic Literacy? Focus On Geography, 40(2), 26.
Shaffer, D. W., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Before every child is left behind: How epistemic games can solve the coming crisis in education (WCER Working Paper): University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4-14.
Snelson, C. (2008). YouTube and beyond: Integrating web-based video into online education. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 732-737). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Squire KD and Jan M. (2007) “Mad City Mystery: Developing Scientific Argumentation Skills with a Place-Based Augmented Reality Game on Handheld Computers,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 5-29
Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stake, R. E. (2013). Multiple case study analysis. New York: Guilford Press.
Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change (Vol. 219). Lexington, KY: CreateSpace.
Tüzün, H., Yılmaz-Soylu, M., Karakuş, T., İnal, Y., & Kızılkaya, G. (2009). The effects of computer games on primary school students’ achievement and motivation in geography learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 68-77.
Pintrich,P.R.,Smith,D.A.F.&McKeachie,W.J.(1989) A Manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).Mich:National Center forResearch to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL).School of Education,TheUniversity Michigan.research and future directions. Adult Education , 28 (4), 253-260.
Veen, W. (1993). How teachers use computers in instructional practice—four case studies in a Dutch secondary school. Computers & Education, 21(1-2), 1-8.
Veen, W. (1993). The role of beliefs in the use of information technology: implications for teacher education, or teaching the right thing at the right time. Journal of Information Technology for teacher education, 2(2), 139-153.
Virvou, M., Katsionis, G., & Manos, K. (2005). Combining software games with education: Evaluation of its educational effectiveness. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 54–65.
Whitehead, A. N. (1967). The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Free Press.
Woods, R. (1982). Theoretical population geography.
Wiggins, G.、McTighe, J. (2006). Understanding by Design(2 ed.). Upper Saddle Riber, New Jersey: Pearson / Merrill Prentice Hall.

指導教授

詹明峰

審核日期

2020-2-20

推文