博碩士論文 93542018 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:18.216.129.37
姓名 黃正旭(Cheng-hsu Huang)  查詢紙本館藏   畢業系所 資訊工程學系
論文名稱 學習歷程檔管理與分析之實徵研究
(A Case Study of analysis and management in e-portfolio)
相關論文
★ 應用智慧分類法提升文章發佈效率於一企業之知識分享平台★ 家庭智能管控之研究與實作
★ 開放式監控影像管理系統之搜尋機制設計及驗證★ 資料探勘應用於呆滯料預警機制之建立
★ 探討問題解決模式下的學習行為分析★ 資訊系統與電子簽核流程之總管理資訊系統
★ 製造執行系統應用於半導體機台停機通知分析處理★ Apple Pay支付於iOS平台上之研究與實作
★ 應用集群分析探究學習模式對學習成效之影響★ 應用序列探勘分析影片瀏覽模式對學習成效的影響
★ 一個以服務品質為基礎的網際服務選擇最佳化方法★ 維基百科知識推薦系統對於使用e-Portfolio的學習者滿意度調查
★ 學生的學習動機、網路自我效能與系統滿意度之探討-以e-Portfolio為例★ 藉由在第二人生內使用自動對話代理人來改善英文學習成效
★ 合作式資訊搜尋對於學生個人網路搜尋能力與策略之影響★ 數位註記對學習者在線上學習環境中反思等級之影響
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) 情境學習理論裡,教育學者認為科學的學習內容要能與學習者的生活產生關聯,讓學習者在真實的學習情境中,透過與他人協同合作之學習或與環境之互動下作觀察與分析之思考活動,並在教師的指導下建構知識。再者,從建構主義之觀點來看,其主要精神所強調的乃是知識的形成是認知主體主動之建構,而非被動之接受,此外也同時強調知識是個人與他人經由不斷對話與社會協商的共識演化而成;然而就現階段的數位化學習之研究上,大部份都鎖定在e-learning的網路平台上去進行相關的研究,但對於探討個人化之學習歷程之實徵研究卻相當希少,因此對於e-learning平台上之學習歷程之相關研究而言,仍無法滿足教育學者所提出的情境理論與建構主義之實現。因此,本研究藉由知識工程與軟體工程相關技術之應用來實現一個人化的學習歷程管理與分析機制,提供學習者將所觀察到的人事物予以記錄到個人的學習歷程檔案平台上,並使學習者能從所補捉到的情境中去進行反思,進而體認出知識的內涵與意義,以促使學習者達成自我內化的經驗為主要的目的。
基於e-Portfolio所強調的自我反思與主動投入之精神,使得e-Portfolio對於學習者之學習行為、學習動機、滿意度、與學習成效都有研究之價值面,因此對於學習者都有相當重要性與影響性,尤其是在教育的實踐上更為重要,因此本研究將朝向學習行為、學習動機、滿意度與學習成效,四大研究構面來進行e-Portfolio的整體研究。在技術方面,本研究試圖應用知識工程技術於e-portfolio中,建構一個提供學習者自我管理與監督機制,記錄學習者的各項學習活動與學習成果。在滿意度研究方面,融入了學習夥伴推薦機制與知識推薦機制於e-Portfolio之中,並結合科技接受模式與資訊系統成功模式來衡量e-Portfolio系統的滿意度;在學習行為研究方面,透過此一機制去瞭解自己的知識建構過程與在e-Portfolio之學習行為模式;在學習動機研究方面,導入自我調整學習理論中的後設認知策略與目標導向理論,用以輔導學習者建立後設認知的能力,並藉此來觀察學習者使用e-portfolio的動機模式;在學習成效研究方面,將自我反思與自我學習自我評量納入到e-Portfolio的評量標準,以期了解學習者在e-Portfolio的學習成效之表現。
摘要(英) In situated learning theory, education scholars believe that science learning content should be able to have a connection with learners’ lives so that learners can conduct thinking activities such as observation and analysis through collaborative learning or environment interaction and construct knowledge under instructors’ guidance in a virtual learning situation. In addition, from the perspective of constructivism, the main essence is that the knowledge formation needs to be actively constructed by cognitive subjects but not passively accepted. Moreover, knowledge is evolved from constantly conversation and common sense of social coordination between individuals and others. However, most of the present studies of digital learning focus on conducting related research on e-learning internet platforms, but relatively few empirical studies on exploring personalized portfolios. As a result, the related studies on portfolios in e-learning platforms are still unable to accomplish the situated theory and constructivism brought out by education scholars. Therefore, in our study, we try to accomplish a personalized portfolio management and analysis mechanism by the application of related technologies of knowledge engineering and software engineering so that learners can use this e-Portfolio platform to record people, events, and things they observe, to conduct reflection from those situations, and further to experience the intrinsic nature and meaning of knowledge. The main purpose is to promote learners to achieve the internalization of personal experience.
The spirits of self-reflection and active involvement that e-Portfolio emphasizes make it worth of being studied on different aspects such as learners’ learning behavior, learning motivation, satisfaction and learning outcomes, and therefore is quite important and influential to learners, especially on the practice of education. As a result, we aim to conduct a holistic research on e-Portfolio by four research constructs, learning behavior, learning motivation, satisfaction and learning outcome. In the aspect of technology, our study tries to apply knowledge engineering to e-Portfolio in order to build a mechanism that allows learners to conduct self-management and self-supervision, and record their learning activities and outcomes. In the aspect of satisfaction, we incorporate learning-partner-recommendation mechanism and knowledge-recommendation mechanism in e-Portfolio. In addition, we combine the technology acceptance model and the information system success model to measure users’ satisfaction level toward the e-Portfolio system. In the aspect of learning behavior, learners can understand their own knowledge construction process and their learning behavior models in e-Portfolio. In the aspect of learning motivation, we introduce metacognitive strategies and the goal-orientation theory of the self-regulated learning theory in order to guide students to build up their metacognitive abilities and observe learners’ motivation models in using e-Portfolio. In the aspect of learning outcome, we add self-reflection, self-learning and self-assessment into e-Portfolio’s scoring rubric in order to understand learners’ learning outcomes in e-Portfolio.
關鍵字(中) ★ 學習歷程檔
★ 學習動機
★ 學習成效
★ 滿意度
★ 學習行為
關鍵字(英) ★ e-Portfolio
★ learning motivation
★ learning outcom
論文目次 目 錄
中文摘要.................................................. I
英文摘要................................................. II
誌謝..................................................... IV
目錄...................................................... V
圖目錄................................................. VIII
表目錄.................................................... X
第一章 緒論.............................................. 1
第一節 研究背景.................................................. 1
第二節 研究動機.................................................. 2
第三節 研究架構.................................................. 5
第四節 研究目的.................................................. 8
第五節 研究範圍.................................................. 9
第六節 研究流程與步驟............................................ 9
第二章 文獻探討......................................... 13
第一節 e-portfolio相關研究.......................................13
一、e-portfolio之實徵研究.....................................13
二、建構主義與e-portfolio之融合在數位學習領域.................14
三、情境學習理論與無所不在學習場域結合在數位學習領域...........15
四、無所不在的學習與e-Portfolio結合應用在數位學習領域.........16
五、融合情境主義與建構主義於e-Portfolio中支援無所不在的學習場域
…………………………………………………………………………… 17
六、e-portfolio在個人知識發展的建構與知識管理之關係...........18
七、e-portfolio與學習課程結合之關係............................21
第二節 學習動機之相關文獻探討.................................... 22
一、個人目標導向理論與e-Portfolo之關係........................23
二、後設認知策略與e-Portfolio之關係...........................25
三、後設認知策略與樂趣之關係...................................26
四、個人目標導向、後設認知策略與樂趣之關係......................27
第三節 滿意度之相關文獻探討...................................... 30
一、以e-portfolio來探討使用者滿意度相關研究.................. 30
二、資訊成功模式與滿意度之關係................................ 31
三、科技接受模式與滿意度之關係.................................33
四、滿意度與科技接受模式及資訊成功模式之關係……………………… 33
第四節 學習成效相關研究.......................................... 34
一、 e-portfolios 融入教學後之學習成效相關研究.................34
二、 針對e-portfolio學習成效評量指標的建立....................35
第五節 滿意度與學習動機及學習成效之相關關係研究……………………… 38
第三章 e-Portfolio系統平台實作..........................40
第一節 建立個人化的e-Portfolio管理機制...........................40
第二節 建立個人化的知識推薦機制於e-Portfolio..................... 43
第三節 建立個人化的學習伙伴推薦機制於e-Portfolio................. 46
第四節 知識推薦機與學習伙伴推薦機制實現知識螺旋.................. 49
第四章 研究方法............................................. 51
第一節 學習者行為分析之研究方法......................................52
一、研究架構 .....................................................52
二、研究對象......................................................54
三、研究工具......................................................54
第二節 學習動機分析之研究方法........................................54
一、研究對象......................................................54
二、研究工具......................................................55
三、資料分析工具..................................................57
第三節 基於學習夥伴推薦服務之e-Portfolio滿意度分析之研究方法........57
一、研究架構......................................................57
二、研究問題………………………………………………………………………58
三、研究對象......................................................60
四、研究工具......................................................61
第四節 基於知識推薦服務之e-Portfolio滿意度分析之研究方法………………63
一、研究架構......................................................64
二、研究問題………………………………………………………………………64
三、研究對象......................................................64
四、研究工具......................................................64
第五節 學習成效分析之研究方法........................................66
一、研究問題......................................................66
二、研究對象......................................................66
三、研究工具......................................................66
第五章 研究結果............................................. 69
第一節 學習者行為分析實驗結果........................................69
第二節 學習動機分析實驗結果..........................................73
第三節 基於學習夥伴推薦服務之e-Portfolio滿意度分析實驗結果……………81
第四節 基於知識推薦服務之e-Portfolio滿意度分析之實驗結果………………84
第五節 學習成效評量分析實驗結果......................................87
第六章 討論與建議........................................... 93
第一節 學習者行為分析討論............................................ 93
第二節 學習動機分析討論.............................................. 95
第三節 基於學習夥伴推薦服務之e-Portfolio滿意度分析討論………………… 96
第四節 基於知識推薦服務之e-Portfolio滿意度分析之討論…………………… 99
第五節 學習成效評量分析討論 ........................................ 101
第六節 整合討論與結論............................................... 102
一、學習行為分析與學習成效分析整合討論...........................103
二、學習行為分析與學習動機分析整合討論...........................103
三、學習動機分析與學習成效分析整合討論...........................104
四、滿意度分析與學習成效分析整合討論............................ 105
五、滿意度分析與學習行為分析整合討論............................ 105
六、滿意度分析與學習動機分析整合討論............................ 106
七、結論........................................................ 107
參考文獻................................................... 110
附錄........................................................123
附錄一、學習夥伴推薦之e-Portfolio問卷............................123
附錄二、原始問卷題目..............................................125
附錄三、知識推薦之e-Portfolio問卷................................127
附錄四、學習動機問卷..............................................129
附錄五、學習成效評量問卷..........................................131
參考文獻 余泰魁 (2007)。科技媒介學習環境之學習成效比較研究。教育心理學報,39(1),69 -90。
林奇賢、黃耿鐘、Chou, C. C. (2007)。數位學習歷程檔案系統在網路學習環境中的角色與意義。理工研究學報,41(2),43-64。
林淑美(2005)。Blog在課後輔導之應用。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文,桃園縣。
侯玫如(2002)。多重目標導向對國中生之、動機、情感與學習行為之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文,台南。
呂敏慧(2007)。運用同儕協助學習策略於國小三年級學童閱讀理解能力之研究-以兒裡班級讀者會為例。台北市立教育大學課程與教學研究所碩士論文
岳修平、王郁青(2000)。電子化學習歷程檔案實施之態度研究。教育心理學報,
31(2),65-83。
晁瑞明、包冬意、黃馨誼、孫皖傑、陳潔瑩(2006)。Blog輔助情境學習下學習滿意度及知識分享意願之研究─以科技接受模型及自我效能探討之,第二屆台灣數位學習發展研討會,42-51,台南市。
許正妹、張奕華(2005)。教學平台發展與設計之研究:以Blackboard 和中山網路大學為例。教育研究與發展期刊,1(1),177-206。
楊惠合(2004)。以科技接受模型探討數位學習滿意度之研究,大葉大學資訊管理學研究所碩士論文。
陳品華(1997)。從認知觀點談情境學習與教學。教育資料與研究,115,53-59。
陳正昌、程炳林、陳新豐、劉子鍵(2009)。多變量分析方法:統計軟體應用(五版)。台北:五南。
崔夢萍(2005)。運用同儕協助學習策略於國小融合教育國語文學習之研究。《特殊教育研究學刊》,30 期,27-52 頁。
游光昭、洪國勳 (2003)。網路化學習歷程檔案與科技的學習。生活科技教育月刊, 36(5),55-64。
游振鵬 (2004) 。教育理論與教育實踐的關係及其合理性發展。國民教育研究學報,12,1-18
張基成、彭星瑞(2008)。網路化檔案評量於國中電腦課程之使用及成效。師大學報:科學教育類,53(2),31-57。
謝雅慧 (2007),高中生在同步討論區下網路合作學習的表現情形。發表於台灣教育傳播暨科技學會2007年學術研討會
Abrami, P., & Barrett, H. (2005). Directions for research and development on electronic portfolios. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 31(3). Retrieved January 29, 1–15
Adamic, L.A. & Adar, E. (2005). How to search a social network. Social Networks, 27(3), 187-203.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211.
Akcil, U. , & Arap, I. (2009). The opinions of education faculty students on learning processes involving e-portfolios. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 395-400.
Alavi, M. & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Review:Knowledge Management And Knowledge Management System: Conceptual Foundations And Research Issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.
Ali-Hasan, N. & Adamic, L. (2007). Expressing social relationships on the blog through links and comments. In Proc. of International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Mar.
Allee, V. (2000). Knowledge Networks and Communities of Practice. OD practitioner, 32(4).
Ashelman, P., & Lenhoff, R. (1994). The early childhood education portfolio. In M.E. Knight, & D. Gallaro (Eds.), Portfolio assessment: Applications of portfolio analysis, 65-76. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Artino, A. R. (2009). Think, feel, act: motivational and emotional influences on military students’ online academic success. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 146-166.
Ayala, J. L. (2006). Electronic portfolios for whom? Educause Quarterly, 29, 12-13.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J.M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2nd edition.
Banbury, C. & Sarason, Y. (2004). Active Learning Facilitated by Using a Game-Show Format or Who Doesn’t Want to be a Millionaire? Journal of Management Education, 28(4), 509–518.
Barak, M. & Doppelt, Y. (2000). Using portfolio to enhance creative thinking. The
Journal of Technology Studies, 26(2), 16-25.
Barrett, Helen (2000, April). Create Your Own Electronic Portfolio. Learning & Leading with Technology . 27(7), pp. 14-21
Barrett, H. C. (2001). Electronic portfolios. In A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson (Eds.), Educational technology: An encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clic.
Barker, K. C. (2006). Environmental scan: Overview of the ePortfolio in general and in the workplace specifically.Retrieved on October 20, 2006 from http;//www.FuturEd.com.
Benek-Rivera, J. & Matthews, V. E. (2004). Active Learning with Jeopardy: Students Ask the Questions. Journal of Management Education, 28(1), 104–118.
Berdie, R. F. (1965). Perceptions of the University of Minnesota. Mimeo : A Progress Report.
Blackburn, J. L. & Hakel, M. D. (2006). Enhancing self-regulation and goal orientation with eportfolios. In A. Jafari; C. Kaufman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on ePortfolios ( chap. 9, pp. 83-89). Hershey PA: Idea Group Reference.
Bock, G. W., Zmud, R. W. & Kim, Y. G. (2005). Behavioral Intention Formation in Knowledge Sharing: Examining the Roles of Extrinsic Motivators, Social-Psychological Forces, and Organizational Climate. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 87-111.
Boekaerts, M. & Corno, L. (2005). Self-Regulation in the Classroom: A Perspective on Assessment and Intervention. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(2), 199–231.
Bourner, T. & Flowers, S. (1997). Teaching and learning methods in higher education: A glimpse of the future. Reflections on Higher Education, 9,77-102.
Bhattacharya, M. (2001). Electronic portfolios, student reflective practices, and the evaluation of effective learning. AARE Conference. Victoria, Australia .
Carney, J. (2005). What kind of electronic portfolio research do we need? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education.
Campbell, C. (2009). Middle years students’ use of self-regulating strategies in an online journaling environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (3), 98–106.
Chen, G. & Kotz, D. (2000). A survey of context-aware mobile computing research. Technical Report TR2000-381, Dept. of Computer Science, Dartmouth College.
Chou, C., Chan, T., & Lin, C. (2003). Redefining the learning companion: the past, present, and future of educational agents. Computers & Education, 40(3), 255-269.
Chang, C.-H. (2001). Educational psychology. Taipei: Tung-Hwa Publishing.
Chang, C.C. (2008). Use and performances of web-based portfolio assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(4), 358-370.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S. & Newman, S. E. (1989). Congnitive Apprenticeship:Teaching the Craft of Reading,Writing,and Mathematics. In L. Resnick(Ed.),Cognition and Instruction: Issues and Agendas.Hillsdale, NJ:Erlb -aum.453-494.
Cole, M. S., Field, H. S. & Harris, S. G. (2004). Student learning motivation and psychological hardness: Interactive effects on students’ reactions to a management class. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (1), 64-85.
Cole, M.S., Field, H.S. & Harris, S.G. (2004). Student learning motivation and psychological hardness: Interactive effects on students‟ reactions to a management class. Academy of Management Learning & Education,3(1), 64-85
Cooper, T. (1999). Whose academy is it? New Statesman, 128, 44-60.
Fitch, D., Reed, B.G., Peet, M., Tolman, R. (2008). The Use of ePortfolios in Evaluating the Curriculum and Student Learning. Journal of Social Work Education, 44(3), 37-54.
Danielson, C. & Abrutyn, L. (1997). An introduction to using portfoliosin the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
DeLone, W.H. and McLean, E.R. (1992). Information Systems Success: The Quest for the Dependent Variable. Information Systems Research ,3(1), pp. 60-95.
DeLone, W. H. & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success:A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information System, 19(4), 9-30.
Dey, A. K. & Abowd, G. D. (2000). Towards a Better Understanding of Context and Context-Awareness. In CHI 2000 Workshop on the What, Who, Where, When, and How of Context-Awareness
Dhanarajan, G. (2001). Distance education: promise, performance and potential. Open Learning, 16, 62–68.
Doig, B., Illsley, B., McLuckie, J. & Parsons, R. (2006). Using ePortfolios to enhance reflective learning and development. In A. Jafari & C. Kaufman (2006). Handbook of research on ePortfolios(chap. 16, pp. 158-167). London: Idea Group Reference.
Downes, S. “Educational Blogging,” Educause Review, Sep/Oct 2004, pp.14-26.
Ehrlich, K., Lin, C.-Y. & Griffiths-Fisher, V. (2007). Searching for experts in the enterprise: combining text and social network analysis. In GROUP‘07, 117–126. ACM Press.
Elliot, A. J., & McGregor, H. A. (2001). A 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(3), 501-519.
Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.) (2005). Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice . New York: Teachers College Press
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and metacognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., Thompson, E. S., Yen, L., Otaiba, S. A., Yang, N., Mcmaster, K. N., Prentice, K., Kazdan, S. & Saenz, L. (2001). Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies in Reading: Extensions for Kindergarten, First Grade, and High School. Remedial and Special Education, 22 (1), 15-21
Gaillet, L. I. (1992). A foreshadowing of modern theories and practices of collaborative learning: The work of the Scottish rhetorician George Jardine. Presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, Cincinnati, OH.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 200-208.
Gardner, H. (2006a). Multiple Intelligences: New Horizons. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (2006b). Development and education of the mind, The selected works of Howard Gardner. London: Routledge.
Gary. G.(2006). Can We Talk? Electronic portfolio as collaborative learning spaces. Northwestern University. Handbook of research on ePortfolios, 558-566. Hershey: Idea Group Reference
Goodhue, D. L., and Thompson, R. L. (1995). Task-technology fit and individual performance, MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 213-236.
Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C. & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431.
Guo, L., Jiang, S., Xiao, L. & Zhang, X. (2005). Fast and low-cost search schemes by exploiting localities in p2p networks. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 65(6):729–742.
Hendriks, P. (1999). Why Share Knowledge? The Influence of ICT on Motivation for Knowledge Sharing. Knowledge and Process Management, 6(2), 91-100.
Hicks W. D. and Klimoski. R.J. (1984). Entry into Training Programs and Its Effects on Training Outcomes: A Field Experiment. The Academy of Management Journal, 30(3) Sep., 542-552
Howard, G. S. & Maxwell, S. E., (1982). Do Contaminate Student Evaluates of Insruction? Research in High Education,16(2), 175-188.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E. & Sung, Y. T. (2007). An analysis of peer assessment online discussions within a course that uses project-based learning. Interactive learning environment, 15(3), 237-251.
Hou, H. T., Sung, Y. T. & Chang, K. E. (2008). Exploring the behavioral patterns of an online knowledge sharing discussion activity among teachers with problem-solving strategy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 101-108.
Hunt, H. K. (1977). CS/D-Overview and Future Research Directions. In H. K. Hunt (Ed.), Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute, 459-460.
Iivari, J. & Koskela, K., (1987). The PIOCO Model for Information Systems Design, Mis Quarterly, Sep., 11(3), pp. 401-419
Ives, B., Olson, M. H. & Baroudi, J. J. (1983). The Measurement of User Information Satisfaction. Communications of the ACM, 26(10), 785-793.
Jafari, A. (2004), The “Sticky” ePortfolio System:Tackling Challenges and Identifying Attributes. EDUCAUSE Review, 39(4), 38 - 49. February 10th, 2007
Jeong, A. C. (2003). The Sequential Analysis of Group Interaction and Critical Thinking in Online Threaded Discussions. American journal of distance education, 17(1), 25-43.
Jonassen, D., Peck, K. L., Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with Technology.NL: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, R. T., Johnson, D. W. & Stanne, M. B. (1985) Effects of Cooperative, competitive, and individual goal structures on computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 668-677
Johnson, R. T., Johnson, D. W. & Stanne, M. B. (1986). Comparison of computer-assisted cooperative, competitive, and individual learning. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 382-392
Jung, J. J. (2009). Social grid platform for collaborative online learning on blogosphere: A case study of eLearning@BlogGrid. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(2), 2177-2186.
Junjun,Li. (2009). Theoretical Model of Consumer Acceptance: In the View of Website Quality. In E-Business and Information System Security, 2009. EBISS '09. International Conference on, 1-4.
Junichiro Mori, Nathalie Basselin, Alexander Kröner & Anthony Jameson. (2008). Find me if you can: designing interfaces for people search. Intelligent User Interfaces: 377-380.
Kaplan, A., Lichtinger, E., & Gorodetsky, M. (2009). Achievement goal orientations and self-regulation in writing: An integrative perspective. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 (1), 51–69.
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B. C. Y. & Wei, K.-K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly, 29(1), 113–143.
Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. E. Reigeluth.(Ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current Status, 383-434. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kim, T. G., Lee, J. H., & Law, R. (2008). An empirical examination of the acceptance behaviour of hotel front office systems: An extended technology acceptance model. Tourism Management, 29(3), 500-513.
Kim, H. N. (2008). The phenomenon of blogs and theoretical model of blog use in educational contexts. Computers and Education, 51(3), 1342-1352.
Kramer, B. J. & Schmidt, H. W. (2001). Components and tools for online education. European Journal of Education, 36, 195–222.
Kulkarni, U. R., Ravindran, S., & Freeze, R. (2007). A Knowledge Management Success Model: Theoretical Development and Empirical Validation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23(3), 309-347.
Kulkarni, R. G., Stough, R. R. & Haynes, K. E. (2000). Towards Modeling of Communities of Practice(CoPs):A Hebbian Learning Approach to Organizational Learning. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 64(1), 71-83
Laine, L. (2003). Is e-learning effective for IT training? T +D, 57(6), 55-60
Lam,Y. & Wong, A. (1974). Attendance Regularity of Adult Learners : An Examination of Content and Structural Factors. Adult Education , 24, 130-142.
Lamont, M. (2007). What are the features of e-portfolio implementation that can enhance learning and promote self-regulation? e-portfolio 2007 conference,32-42. European Institute for e-learning, France.
Li, X., Guo, L. & Zhao, Y. E. (2008). Tag-based Social Interest Discovery. in Proc. of the 17th Intl. World Wide Web Conference.
Lockee, B., Moore, M. & Burton, J. (2002). Measuring success: Evaluation strategies for distance education. Educause Quarterly.
Malhotra, Y., and Galletta, D. F. (1999) Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to Account for Social Influence: Theoretical Bases and Empirical Validation. In Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Science, 32, 5–5, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.
Mak, A. S. & Georges, A. (2009).Benefits of self-paced learning modules for teaching quantitative methods in environmental science, International Journal of Science Education,19 (7), 835-848.
Marra, R. M., Moore, J. L. & Klimczak, A. K. (2004). Content analysis of online discussion forums: a comparative analysis of protocols. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 52(2), 23-40.
Matuga, J. M. (2009). Self-regulation, goal orientation, and academic achievement of secondary students in online university courses. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (3), 4–11.
Meeus,W. & Van Looy, L. (2002). Portfolio in de lerarenopleiding, Persoon en Gemeenschap, 54(4), 201-216.
MeLellan, H. (1996). Situated Learning Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Michael, B. & Khaled, H. (2007). Consumer satisfaction with online health information retrieval: A model and empirical study, e-Service Journal, 5(2), 53-83.
Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E., et al. (2000). Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
McKinney, V., Kanghyun, Y., & Fatemeh, Z. (2002). The Measurement of web-customer satisfaction: An expectation and disconfirmation approach, Information Systems Review, 13(3), pp.296-315.
Minnaert, A., & Janssen, P.J. (1999). The additive effect of regulatory activities on top of intelligence in relation to academic performance in higher education. Learning and Instruction, 9, 77–91.
Money, W., & Turner, A. (2004). Application of the Technology Acceptance Model to a Knowledge Management System. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 8, 80237b.
Moritz, J. & Christie, A. (2005). It’s Elementary! Using Electronic Portfolios with Young Students. In C. Crawford, D. Willis, R. Carlsen, I. Gibson, K. McFerrin & J. Price Sixteenth International Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education Conference Proceedings: 1905-1909, Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Newman, R. S. (2002). How self-regulated learning cope with academic difficulty: The role of adaptive help seeking. Theory into Practice, 41 (2), 132-138.
Nickols, F. (2003). Communities of Practice:An Overview. The Distance Consulting Company.
Nicol, D. (2007). Laying foundation for lifelong learning: case study of e-assessment in large first-year classes, British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(4), 668-678.
Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Parker, C. & Mathews, B. P. (2001). Customer satisfaction: contrasting academic and consumers’ interpretations. Marketing intelligence and Planning, 19(1), 38-44.
Pearson, S. W. & Bailey, J. E. (1977). Measurement of Computer User Satisfaction. Ph.D. dissertation, Arizona State University, Tempe.
Pekrun, R. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 315–341.
Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: A program of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Psychologist, 7, 91–106.
Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R. & Ives, B. (2001). Web-based virtual learning environments: A research framework and a preliminary assessment of effectiveness in basic IT skills training. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401-426
Pintrich, P. R., & Groot, E. V. D. (1990). Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation, 13-39. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 385-407.
Pirila, K. & Yli-Luoma, P. (2007). Learning Outcomes, Interaction and Motivation in E-learning. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education. 6460-6467.
Pitt, L. F., Watson, R. T. and Kavan, C. B.(1995). Service quality: A Measure of Information System Effectiveness, MIS Quarterly, 19(2), 173-187.
Polanyi, M. (1967). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge and Keoan Paul.
Preece, J., Nonnecke, B. & Andrews, D. (2004). The top five reasons for lurking: improving community experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 201-223.
Quang Minh Vu, Tomonari Masada, Atsuhiro Takasu, & Jun Adachi. (2007). Disambiguation of People in Web Search Using a Knowledge Base. In Proceedings of International Conference on Research, Innovation & Vision for the Future Information & Communication Technologies (IEEE RIVF’07), 185-191.
Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P. & Finkelstein, S. (1996). Managing professional intellect:making the most of best. Harvard Business Review, 74, 71-80.
Rebecca L.Fiedler & Dorothy Pick, Adopting an Electronic Portfolio System: Key Considerations for Decision Makers, Outbro de 2004
Redman, T. C. (1995). Improve Data Quality for Competitive Advantage, Sloan Management Review, 36(2), 99-107.
Rivard, S. (1987). Successful implementation of end-user computing. Interfaces, 17(3), 25-33.
Rossi, P. G., Magnoler, P., Giannandrea, L. (2008). From an e-portfolio model to e-portfolio practices: some guidelines. Campus Wide Information Systems. 25(4), 219-232
Ryan, S. (2001). Is online learning right for you? American Agent & Broker, 73(6), 54-58.
Schmidt, A. & Beigl, M. (1998). There is more to context than location: Environment sensing technologies for adaptive mobile user interfaces. In Workshop on Interactive Applications of Mobile Computing IMC’98.
Schmidt, A. & Van Laerhoven, K. (2001). How to build smart appliances. IEEE Personal Communications. 66-71.
Schwartz, M. F. & Wood, D. C. M. (1993). Discovering Shared Interests Among People Using Graph Analysis of Global Electronic Mail Traffic. Communications of the ACM, 36(8), 78–89.
Schepers, J., & Wetzels, M. (2007). A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model: Investigating subjective norm and moderation effects. Information & Management, 44(1), 90-103.
Senge, P. (1997). Sharing Knowledge, Executive Excellence, 14(11), 17-18.
Seddon, P. B. (1997). A Respecification and Extension of the DeLone and McLean Model of IS Success. Information Systems Research, 8(3), 240.
Seddon, P. B. & Kiew, M. Y. (1996). A partial test and development of the DeLone and McLean’s model of IS success. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 4(1), 90-109.
Serwatka, J. (2003). Assessment in online CIS courses. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43, 16–20.
Seyfarth, J. T. (1991). Personal management for effective schools. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Shen, D., Laffey, J., Lin, Y., & Huang, X. (2006). Social Influence for Perceived Usefulness and Ease-of-Use of Course Delivery Systems. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 5(3).
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching, Foundation of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Sripanidkulchai, K., Maggs, B. & Zhang, H. (2003). Efficient content location using interest-based locality in peer-to-peer systems. In Proc. of INFOCOMM, Mar.
Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and Situated Action : The Problem of Human machine Communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tao, Y.-H., Cheng, C.-J., & Sun, S.-Y. (2009). What influences college students to continue using business simulation games? The Taiwan experience. Computers & Education, 53(3), 929-939.
Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, W., & Tam, K. (2002). Understanding user acceptance of digital libraries: what are the roles of interface characteristics, organizational context, and individual differences? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57(3), 215-242.
Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer Assessment. Theory Into Practice, 48, 20-27.
Van Looy, L. Goegebeur, W. & Vrijsen, M. (2000). Zelfsrandig, reflecterende leraren. Van opleiding naar beroep.Brussels, Belgium:Vubpress.
Van Petegem, P. & Vanhoof, J. (2002). Evaluatie op de testbank. Handboek voor het ontwikkelen van alternatieve evaluatievormen. Mechelen, Belgium, Wolters-Plantyn.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information systems research, 11(4), 342–365.
Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation,and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model. Information Systems Research. 11(4).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wang, W., & Wang, C. (2009). An empirical study of instructor adoption of web-based learning systems. Computers & Education, 53(3), 761-774.
Wixom, B. H., & Todd, P. A. (2005). A theoretical integration of user satisfaction and technology acceptance, Information Systems Research, 16(1), 85-102.
Wang, Y. S., Wang, H. Y., Shee, D. Y. (2007). Measuring e-learning systems success in an organizational context: Scale development and validation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1792-1808.
Wei, L., & Zhang, M. (2008). The impact of Internet knowledge on college students' intention to continue to use the Internet. Information Research, 13(3), 348.
Wood, T. (1995). From alternative epistemologies to practice in education: Rethinking what it means to teach and learn. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in education , 331-340. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wolters, C. A. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structure and goal orientations to predict students’ motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236-250.
Wosnitza, M., & Volet, S.E. (2005). Origin, direction and impact of emotions in social online learning. Learning and Instruction, 15(5 ), 446-463.
Wu, J.-H. and Wang, Y.-M. (2006) Measuring KMS success: A respecification of the DeLone and McLean's model,Information & Management, 43(6) : 728-739.
Yang, S. J. H., Lan, B. C. W., Wu, B. J. D. & Chang, A. C. N. (2005). Context Aware Service Oriented Architecture for Web Based Learning, Journal of Advanced Technology for Learning, 2(4), 216-222.
Yi, Mun Y., & Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems: Self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59, 431–449.
Yu, T. K., Lu, L. C., Liu, T. F. (2009). Exploring factors that influence knowledge sharing behavior via weBlogs. Computers in Human Behavior.
Zack, M. H. (1999). Managing Codified Knowledge. Sloan Management Review, 40(4), 45-58. Available at: http://web.cba.neu.edu/~mzack/articles/kmarch/kmarch.htm
Zeichner, K. & Wray, S. (2001). The teaching portfolio in US teacher education programs: what we know and what we need to know. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(5), 613-621.
Zellers, M. & Mudrey, R. (2007). Electronic Portfolios and Metacognition: A phenomenological examination of the implementation of e-Portfolios from the Instructors’ perspective. International Journal of Instructional Media, 34(4), 419-430.
Zhang, S.X., L. Olfman and P. Ractham (2007). Designing ePortfolio 2.0: Integrating and Coordinating Web 2.0 Ser vices with ePortfolio Systems for enhancing Users’ Learning. Journal of Information Systems Education, 2(18), 203-214.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329–339.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2 nd ed.), 1-37. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
指導教授 楊鎮華(Stephen J.H. Ynag) 審核日期 2010-5-27
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