探討適地性擴增實境之線上知識分享討論行為模型於國小探究式學習課程

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：5

、訪客IP：3.145.33.153

姓名

賴佑東(Yu Tung Lai) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

資訊工程學系

論文名稱

探討適地性擴增實境之線上知識分享討論行為模型於國小探究式學習課程
(Exploring the behavioral patterns of an online knowledge-sharing discussion activity by location-based AR for an inquiry-based learning course in primary school)

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]

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)

探究式學習至今已經發展許多年，許多國家更是將探究式學習納入K-12的學習範疇中，但是這樣的一個學習方式卻沒有一個有效而且即時的紀錄方式，故本論文提出利用適地性擴增實境讓學生沉浸於探究式學習的過程，使用手持式系統即時記錄觀察物件，並提供學習者在手持裝置中能相互對談與討論，進而增進學習者在知識程度的提昇。探究式學習的過程包含五項步驟，從提出問題，嘗試回答問題，激發創造性概念，形成多人討論，最後依據論述定出最終的定論，並從定論中發現更深層的問題，產生新問題的循環。因此，為了深入了解學習者在適地性擴增實境之線上知識分享討論行為，本文將利用IAM互動分析模型探討多人知識討論行為來了解適地性擴增實境對學生在知識層次深度之差異。學習者為北部某一國小四年級學生共57人，其中實驗組28人、控制組29人分別於戶外、教室內進行學習，過程先由老師做觀察引導，接著讓學習者觀察水生植物、相互提出問題與相互回答問題，最後再由學習者做一次完整的口頭觀察問答報告。從這樣的學習活動中，結果發現適地性擴增實境結合戶外探究式學習能提高知識分享層次，達到高層次思考與認知，實驗組在分析及定論層次的比例高於控制組，且控制組離題次數遠高於實驗組，所以建議未來的探究式教學模式可以採用適地性擴增實境讓學習者有更深入的知識分享與討論。

摘要(英)

Inquiry-based learning has been developed for years. Many countries have even managed inquiry-based learning into the K-12 learning category. However, this type of learning method does not provide an efficient and effective way to record. Therefore, this paper proposes the idea of using location-based augmented reality that allows students to immerse themself in the process of inquiry learning by using handheld system to record observation of objects in real time. With the handheld devices, it provides a platform for learners to talk and discuss with each other, which further enhance the learner’s level of knowledge.
Inquiry-based learning process consists of five steps: asking questions, trying to answer questions, stimulating creative concepts, forming people discussing, and generating final conclusions based on the discussions to develop a more in depth question that starts a new problem cycle. In order to understand online knowledge sharing behavior of learners using the location-based augmented reality, we will use analytical models IAM to explore multiplayer interactive behavior of knowledge discussion, which also helps to understand the difference in location-based augmented reality on students’ depth of knowledge level.
The selected targets are 57 fourth year students in a northern elementary school. Among them, 28 are placed into the experimental group, and 29 to the control group, learning respectively in classroom and outdoor. The teacher would first do observation guidance during the process, then allow learners to observe aquatic plants, asking questions to each other and mutual answer questions, and do a complete oral observations question reports.
This result shows that location-based augmented reality combines outdoor inquiry-based learning can improve the level of knowledge sharing, achieving high-level thinking, and cognition from such learning activities. The experimental group in the analysis and conclusions levels is higher than the control group. Moreover, the control group off-topic number is much higher than the experimental group. We suggest that future inquiry teaching mode can be used location-based augmented reality so that learners have a deeper knowledge sharing and discussion.

關鍵字(中)

★ 適地性擴增實境

關鍵字(英)

★ location-based AR

論文目次

摘要 i
Abstract ii
誌謝 iv
目錄 v
圖目錄 vii
表目錄 ix
第一章緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究問題 4
第二章文獻探討 5
2-1 探究式學習(inquiry-based learning) 5
2-2 擴增實境(Augmented Reality) 9
2-3 知識建構層次編碼方案 13
第三章系統設計 17
3-1 AR catch it!登入、首頁頁面 19
3-2 適地性擴增實境區 20
3-3 分組聊天室區 24
3-4 探索歷程區 25
3-4-1 我的探索區 25
3-4-2 我的參與區 25
第四章研究方法 27
4-1 研究對象與環境 27
4-2 研究活動流程 28
4-3 分析工具 34
第五章資料分析、結果與討論 36
5-1 資料分析 36
5-2 結果與討論 41
5-2-1 量化內容分析 41
5-2-2 序列分析 47
第六章結論與未來展望 55
6-1 結論 55
6-2 未來展望 57
參考文獻 58

參考文獻

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Sciences. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
Auer, M. R. (2008). Sensory perception, rationalism and outdoor environmental education. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 17(1), 6–12.
Bakeman, R. & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing Interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics.
Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A. & Granger, E. M. (2009). No silver bullet for inquiry: Making sense of teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Science Education, 93(2), 322–360.
Bloom, M. A., Holden, M., Sawey, A. T. & Molly, H. (2010). Weinburgh.Promoting the Use of Outdoor Learning Spaces by K-12 Inservice Science Teachers Through an Outdoor Professional Development Experience. Andrews Institute of Mathematics & Science Education.
Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis – matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3–15, Routledge.
Cakir, M. (2011). L. B. Flick and N. G. Lederman (eds): Scientiﬁc Inquiry and Nature of Science: Implications for Teaching,Learning, and Teacher Education. Springer Academic Publishers.
Capps, D. K. & Crawford, B. A. (2012). Inquiry-Based Instruction and Teaching About Nature of Science: Are They Happening? The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA.
Capps, D. K., Crawford, B. A. & Constas, M. A. (2012). A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry Professional Development: Alignment with Best Practices and a Critique of the Findings. The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA.
Caudell, T. P. & Mizell, D. W. (1992). Augmented reality: an application of heads-up display technology to manual manufacturing processes. In: Proceedings of Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 659–669.
Cheng, K. H. & Tsai, C. C. (2012). Affordances of Augmented Reality in Science Learning: Suggestions for Future Research. Journal of Science Education and Technology.
Chien, C. H., Chen, C. H. & Jeng, T. S. (2010). An interactive augmented reality system for learning anatomy structure. Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists.
Cronk, J. K. & Fennessy, M. S. (2001). Wetland plants: biology and ecology. CRC Press.
Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J.W. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10–32, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Dunleavy, M., Dede, C. & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7-22.
Eick, C. J. (2012). Use of the Outdoor Classroom and Nature-Study to Support Science and Literacy Learning: A Narrative Case Study of a Third-Grade Classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 789–803.
Erdogan, I., (2005), Controlled Volcanism in the Classroom: A Simulation. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, v. 42, p. 21-24.
Erduran, S., Simon, S. & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
Falk, J. & Drayton, B. (2004). State testing and inquiry-based science: are they complementary or competing reforms? Journal of Educational Change Volume 5,Issue 4,pp 345-387.
Galileo Educational Network. (2008). What is inquiry? Retrieved September 23
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.
Hou, H. T. (2012). Analyzing the Learning Process of an Online Role-Playing Discussion Activity. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 211–222.
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 Environments, 15(3), 237-251.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E. & Sung, Y. T. (2008). Analysis of Problem-Solving-Based Online Asynchronous Discussion Pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 17-28.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E. & Sung, Y. T. (2010). Applying lag sequential analysis to detect visual behavioral patterns of online learning activities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 25-27.
Hou, H. T., Sung, Y. T. & Chang, K. E. (2009). 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.
Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., Chu, H. C., Kinshuk. & Chen, C. Y. (2012). A context-aware ubiquitous learning approach to conducting scientific inquiry activities in a science park. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5), 931-947.
Jamaludin, A. & Quek, C. L. (2006). Using asynchronous online discussions in primary school project work. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(1), 64-87.
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.
Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A. & Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 horizon report. The New Media Consortium, Austin.
Kamarainen, A. M., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., Browne, A., Mazzuca, D., Tutwiler, M. S. & Dede, C. (2013). EcoMOBILE: Integrating augmented reality and probeware with environmental education field trips. Computers & Education, 1-12.
Khe, F. H., Seng, C. T. & Wing, S. C. (2012). Fostering Student Cognition in Computer-Supported Online Collaborative Learning Environment. Educational Media and Technology Yearbook, Volume 36, 37-47.
Kim, H. (2011). Inquiry-Based Science and Technology Enrichment Program: Green Earth Enhanced with Inquiry and Technology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(6), 803-814.
Kollöffel, B., Eysink, T. H. S. & Jong, T. D., (2011). Comparing the effects of representational tools in collaborative and individual inquiry learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 223-251.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, D. M. & Fredricks, J. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 313-350.
Kye, B., & Kim, Y. (2008). Investigation of the relationships between media characteristics, presence, flow, and learning effects in augmented reality based learning augmented reality. International Journal, 2(1), 4–14.
Lacoul, P. & Freedman, B. (2006). Environmental influences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems. Environ. rev., vol. 14, no. 2, p. 89-136.
Lederman, N. G. (2004). In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of science: Past, present, and future. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 831–880). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Li, L. F., Hsu, Y. S. & Yeh, Y. F., (2012). The Role of Computer Simulation in an Inquiry-Based Learning Environment: Reconstructing Geological Events as Geologists. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 21(3), 370-383.
Li, Q., Moorman, L. & Dyjur, P. (2010). Inquiry-based learning and e-mentoring via videoconference: a study of mathematics and science learning of Canadian rural students. Educational Communications and Technology, 58: 729–753.
Lord, T. & Orkwiszewski, T. (2006). Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 342–345.
Lou, Y. P., Abrami, P. C. & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small group and individual learning with technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521.
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.
McCall, R., Wetzel, R., Lo¨schner, J. & Braun, A. K. (2011). Using presence to evaluate an augmented reality location aware game. Pers Ubiquit Comput 15(1), 25–35.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Science Foundation. (2005). Inquiry: Thoughts, views, and strategies for the k-5 classroom.Arlington. National Science Foundation.
O’Shea, P., Dede, C. & Cherian, M. (2011). The results of formatively evaluating an augmented reality curriculum based on modified design principles. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations. 3(2), 57–66.
Quek, C. L. (2010). Analysing high school students’ participation and interaction in an asynchronous online project-based learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 327-340.
Rosenbaum, E., Klopfer, E. & Perry, J. (2007). On location learning: authentic applied science with networked augmented realities. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 16(1), 31–45.
Rourke. L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(1), 5-18.
Schmidt, J. T. (2007). Preparing students for success in blended learning environments: future oriented motivation & self-regulation. Educational Research, 301–302.
Schussler, E. E. & Bautista, N. U. (2012). Learning About Nature of Science in Undergraduate Biology Laboratories. Advances in Nature of Science Research, 207-224.
Sellmann, D. & Bogner, F. X. (2012). Education in Global Climate Change at a Botanical Garden: Students’ Perceptions and Inquiry-Based Learning. Climate Change Management. Climate Change and the Sustainable Use of Water Resources, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 779-786.
Sing, C. C. & Khine, M. S. (2006). An analysis of interaction and participation patterns in online community. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 250–261.
Song, Y., Wong, L. H. & Looi, C. K. (2012). Fostering personalized learning in science inquiry supported by mobile technologies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 679-701.
Squire, K. D. & 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.
Squire, K. D. & Klopfer, E. (2007). Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. The Journal Of The Learning Sciences, 16(3), 371–413.
Sutherland IE .(1968). A head-mounted three dimensional display. Proc AFIPS Conf 33: 756–764.
Toth, E. E., Brem, S. K. & Erdos, G. (2009). “Virtual Inquiry”: Teaching Molecular Aspects of Evolutionary Biology Through Computer-Based Inquiry. Evolution Education and Outreach, 2, 679-687.
Upadhyay, B. & DeFranco, C. (2008). Elementary students’ retention of environmental science knowledge: Connected science instruction versus direct instruction. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20(2), 23–37.
van Zee, E. H. & Roberts, D. (2006). Making science teaching and learning visible through web-based ‘‘snapshots of practice’’. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17(4), 367–388.
Wilhelm, J. A. & Walters, K. L. (2006). Pre-service mathematics teachers become full participants in inquiry investigations. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology,37(7), 793–804.
Yang, S. J. H. & Chen, I. Y. L. (2008). A social network-based system for supporting interactive collaboration in knowledge sharing over peer-to-peer network. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(1). 36-50.
Yang, S. J. H., (2006). Context aware ubiquitous learning environments for peer-to-peer collaborative learning.Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 188-201.
Yang, S. J. H., Okamoto, T., & Tseng, S. S. (2008). A matter of context-aware ubiquitous learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 1-2.
Milgram, P. & Kishino, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans Inf Syst E77(12):1321–1329.

指導教授

楊鎮華(Stephen Yang)

審核日期

2013-7-12

推文