臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

隨著資訊技術發展成熟，網際網路應用普及，使得迅速累積的知識，能夠借助科技之力快速地傳遞到世界各地，而正蓬勃發展的遠距教學就是利用這個優勢，解決了傳統課堂學習上時間與空間受限制的問題。但進一步卻也發現在解決學習時空問題的背後，因為學習者身處在不同的地域空間中，造成學習者因無法直接與同儕互動而失去互相切磋課業與學習的機會。因此，本研究站在群組合作學習理論的基點出發，將學習者分成數個群組，藉由觀察遠距教學環境中，群組團隊參與同步討論的情形，期望能從中了解合作學習群組在這樣的互動方式下，其表現的學習行為與獲得的學習成效，並進一步找出影響群組合作學習過程及成效差異的因素，作為提供遠距教學在合作學習及相關任務分派上的參考依據。故本研究以淡江大學遠距教學平台(IDEA)中的同步討論區為實驗環境，透過實地觀察法與問卷填答輔助，分別探討在決策與智力兩種類型任務之下，不同群組特質及群組大小對合作學習過程及學習成效的影響。結果發現在決策型任務下，群組大小不會造成群組討論過程表現的差異，群組特質則會，三種特質的組別在參與學習過程程度上，依序是純外向組、純內向組、內外向混合組，但在智力型任務下，群組大小反而成為影響群組討論過程的主要因素，小群組有高於大群組的參與學習度，而群組特質的影響力則變得不明顯；另外，在決策型任務和智力型任務之下，群組大小會顯著影響群組學習成績，而群組特質則是影響群組滿意度的主要因素，三種特質的群組在滿意度的高低上，依序是純外向組、內外向混合組、純內向組。最後，在決策型任務下，群組討論過程會顯著影響群組學習滿意度，但無顯著影響群組決策結果滿意度；而在智力型任務下，群組討論過程的影響力則反之。

As the maturity of information technology development and the proliferation of Internet applications, accumulated knowledge with the help of those technologies can be quickly distributed all over the world. Distance learning, already at its prosperous stage, utilizes these technology trends to unlash the limitation of time and space in traditional classroom. Meanwhile, it brings about the problem of deficiency in interacting and exchanging views with their peers. Thus, the objective of this research, by observing the interaction among group members, is to investigate the process and the effectiveness of cooperative learning under synchronous discussion in a distance- learning platform. It also aims at finding how variables have impacts on the effectiveness of cooperative learning. The outcome can be a reference for using Web-enabled technology to support cooperative learning and the assigned tasks under distance-learning environment in the future. This study is conducted in distance learning platform of TKU using observations and supplementary survey instrument to investigate the influence of group characteristic and size on cooperative learning given different types of tasks. The research results show that the group characteristic is significantly related to participative process of a group under a decision-making task. The highest degree of participative process is the extrovert group、then the introvert group、and finally the mixed group. But under an intellective task, group size becomes a decisive variable. The small group is more participative in the process than the larger group. Moreover, group size is significantly related to academic record of a group and group characteristics is significantly related to group satisfaction of cooperative learning under the decision-making and intellective task. The extrovert group are more satisfied that the mixed group and the introvert group. Finally, the participative process of a group is significantly related to group learning satisfaction, but not group decision satisfaction under the decision-making task. But the participative process of a group is reversed under the intellective task.

目 錄
中文摘要 Ⅰ
英文摘要 Ⅱ
本文目錄 Ⅲ
表目錄 Ⅳ
圖目錄 Ⅵ
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究問題與目的 3
第三節 研究範圍 4
第四節 預期貢獻 5
第五節 研究流程 5
第六節 論文結構 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 遠距教學 7
第二節 合作學習 14
第三節 遠距教學中的互動 23
第四節 遠距教學中影響群體行為的因素 31
第三章 研究方法 40
第一節 研究架構 40
第二節 研究假設 41
第三節 變數定義與操作 44
第四節 研究對象 47
第五節 研究方法與設計 48
第四章 資料分析結果與討論 56
第一節 信度及效度分析 56
第二節 假設檢定 58
第三節 綜合研究結果提出發現 69
第五章 結論與建議 75
第一節 研究結論 75
第二節 研究限制 79
第三節 未來研究方向 80
參考文獻 81
中文部分 81
英文部分 83
附錄一：實驗之任務內容 89
附錄一：實驗之問卷內容 94

[1]王裕德(民90)，多媒體電腦輔助教學環境中合作學習對技職院校學生程式設計學習成效影響之研究，國立彰化師範大學工業教育學研究所碩士論文。
[2]古永嘉譯，古柏(D. R. Cooper)、愛摩里(C. W. Emory)著(民84)，企業研究方法，台北：華泰書局。
[3]巫靜宜(民88)，比較網路教學與傳統教學對學習效果之研究─以Word 2000之教學為例，私立淡江大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[4]李怡慧(民89)，網路教學環境上群組合作學習分組方式之探討，國立中山大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[5]李啟龍(民89)，網路上的合作探究學習，國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
[6]李金泉(民90)，非同步式網路輔助教學之研究─以技職校院工業安全課程為例，國立彰化師範大學工業教育研究所博士論文。
[7]李美慧(民90)，科技接受模式在非同步網路學習系統使用意向之應用，國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[8]李淑芬(民90)，Ｅ時代的學習趨勢：談終身學習與遠距教學，社教雜誌，272(3)，1-4。Available:http://public.ptl.edu.tw/publish/soedu/272/content.html
[9]呂丰君(民90)，非同步網路學習下任務型態與困難度對合作學習績效與滿意度之研究，國立中正大學資訊管理學研究所碩士論文。
[10]邱建中(民86)，群體支援系統中電子交談與群體大小對偏好型決策之影響，國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[11]邱皓政(民91)，社會與行為科學的量化研究與統計分析：SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析，台北：五南圖書出版公司。
[12]林奇賢(民86)，全球資訊網輔助學習系統─網際網路與國小教育，資訊與電腦雜誌，58，14-18。
[13]林暐棠(民87)，群體支援系統之實驗室研究─任務特性、人格特質與匿名特性之影響，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[14]林達森(民90a)，合作學習與認知風格對科學學習之效應，國立高雄師範大學教育學系─教育學刊，17，255-279。
[15]林達森(民90b)，合作建構教學與認知風格對國中學生生物能量概念學習之效應，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
[16]林義男、陳淳文譯，韋柏(Weber R. P.)著(民78)，內容分析法導論(Basic Content Analysis)，台北：巨流圖書。
[17]洪榮昭、劉明洲(民86)，影響多媒體電腦輔助學習認知因素之探討，教育研究資訊，5(4)，119-125。
[18]張銘晃(民85)，電子會議使用效果之實驗室研究─群體大小、任務特性與匿名之影響，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[19]張淑媛(民90)，高職學生人格特質、情緒智力與學習成就─以高雄市立海青工商為例，私立南華大學管理研究所碩士論文。
[20]莊雅茹(民89)，不同學習者特質在多媒體環境中學習成效之比較，輔仁學誌，31，97-116。
[21]黃政傑、林佩璇(民85)，合作學習，台北：五南圖書出版有限公司。
[22]陳自強(民85)，教學新主張─遠距教學系統，教育資料文摘，37(6)，174-180。
[23]陳麗玉(民89)，場地獨立性在超媒體學習環境下之考量，視聽教育雙月刊，42(5)，13-21。
[24]陳梅英(民90)，應用網路合作式問題解決教學法於高級中學電腦學科之研究，國立台北科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文。
[25]麥孟生(民88)，人心理類型、自我效能及態度對電腦學習成效之影響，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[26]黃堅厚(民88)，人格心理學，台北：心理出版社。
[27]楊淑晴(民88)，麥布二氏心理類型量表(MBTI)之綜覽，教育研究資訊，7(2)，100-110。
[28]趙美聲、陳姚真譯，摩爾(M. G. Moore)、基爾斯利(G. Kearsley)著(民88)，遠距教育─系統觀(Distance Education- A System View)，台北：松崗。
[29]劉惠如(民88)，整合式網路教學之教學設計與評量，國立中山大學資訊管理學研究所碩士論文。
[30]潘裕豐(民88)，網路遠距學習模式對資優先獨立研究之可行性研究，資優教育季刊，70，7-15。
[31]樂為良譯，羅森柏格(M. J. Rosenberg) 著 (民91)，E-Learning：提升個人競爭力、強化企業優勢的終極學習策略(E-Learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age)，台北：麥格羅、希爾。
[32]賴葆禎(民86)，賴氏人格診斷測驗指導手冊，台北：千華出版社。
[33]謝麗菁(民83)，認知特質與訓練型態對資訊系統使用者學習績效之影響─以文書處理系統為例，私立淡江大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[34]豐佳燕(民88)，特教師資班學員認知型態對使用網路互動式遠距學習系統之影響，國立台灣師範大學特殊教育學研究所碩士論文。
[1]Alavi, M. (1994) “ Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: An Empirical Evaluation, ” MIS Quarterly, June, pp. 159-174.
[2]Bass, B.M. (1974) “ The Definition of “Group”, ” in Small Group Communication: a Reader, R.S. Cathcart & L.A. Samovar (ed.), Iowa: M.C. Brown, pp. 19-27.
[3]Benbasat, I. & Lim, L. H. (1993) “The Effects of Group, Task, Context, and Technology Variables on the Usefulness of Group Support Systems: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Studies, ” Small Group Research, 24(4), November, pp. 430-462.
[4]Bench-Capon, T.J.M. & Leng, P.H. (2000) “Computer-mediated Collaborative Learning of Legal Argumentation, ” Information & Communications Technology Law, 9(2) , pp. 129-138.
[5]Casarotti, M., Filipponi, L., Pieti, L. & Sartori, R. (2002) “Educational Interaction in Distance Learning: Analysis of a One-Way Video and Two-Way Audio System, ” PsychNology Journal, Summer, 1(1).Available: http://www.psychnology.org/journal.htm
[6]Condon, S.L. & Cech, C.G. (1996) “ Functional Comparison of Face-to-Face and Computer-Mediated Decision Making Interactions, ” in Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives, S.C. Herring (ed.), London: John Benjamins, pp. 65-80.
[7]Dennis, A.R., George, J.F., Jessup, L.M., Nuunamaker, J.F. & Vogel, D.R. (1988) “ Information Technology to Support Electronic Meetings, ” MIS Quarterly, December, pp. 591-624.
[8]Dillenbourg, P. (1999) “Introduction: What Do You Mean by “Collaborative Learning” ? ,” in Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approach, P. Dillenbourg(ed.), Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 1-19.
[9]Eldin, Y. (1996) “The Interactivity Component of Distance Learning Implemented in an Art Studio Course, ” Education, Winter, 117(2), pp. 180-184.
[10]Ellis, D.G & Fisher, B.A. (1994) Small Group Decision Making-Communication and Group Process(4th ed.), New York: McGrath-Hill, Inc.
[11]Gallupe, R. B., DeSanctis, G. & Dickson, G. W. (1988) “Computer-Based Support for Group Problem-Finding: An Experimental Investigation, ” MIS Quarterly, June, pp. 277-296.
[12]Graham, C. R. (2002) “Factors for Effective Learning Groups in Face-to-Face and Virtual Environments, ” The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(3), pp. 307-319.
[13]Green, S.G. & Taber, T.D. (1980) “The Effects of Three Social Decision Schemes on Decision Group Process, ” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, pp. 97-106.
[14]Hall, P. (1996) “Distance Education and Electronic Networking, ” Information Technology for Development, 7, pp. 75-89.
[15]Harasim, L. (1990). “ Online Education: An Environment for Collaboration and Intellectual Amplification. ” in Online Education: Perspectives on a New Environment, L. Harasim(ed.) , New York: Praeger, pp. 39-63.
[16]Hassenplug, C. A. & Harnish, D. (1998) “The Nature and Importance of Interaction in Distance Education Credit Classes at Technical Institutes, ” Community College Journal of Research & Practice, September, 22(6), pp. 591-605.
[17]Haythornthwaite, C. (2001) “Exploring Multiplexity: Social Network Structures in a Computer-Supported Distance Learning Class, ” The Information Society, 17, pp. 211-226.
[18]Hiltz, S.R. (1993) The Virtual Classroom: Learning without Limits via Computer Network, NJ: Albex Publishing Corporation.
[19]Hirumi, A. (2002) “A Framework for Analyzing, Designing, and Sequencing Planned Elearning Interactions, ” The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), pp. 141-160.
[20]Hollingshead, A.B. , McGrath, J.E. & O’Connor, K.M. (1993) “Group Task Performance and Communication Technology: A Longitudinal Study of Computer-Mediated Versus Face-to-Face Work Groups, ” Small Group Research, August, pp. 307-333.
[21]Johnson, R. T. & Johnson, D. W. (1994) “An Overview of Cooperative Learning, ” in Creativity and Collaborative Learning, J. S. Thousand, Villa, R. A. & Nevin, A. I. (ed.), Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing, pp. 31-44.
[22]Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1994) Learning Together and Alone: Cooperation, Competition, and Individualization, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
[23]Johnson, D. W. , Johnson, R. T. & Holubec, E. J. (1994) Cooperative Learning in the Classroom, pp. 1-12, Alexandria, VA: ASCD Publication.
[24]Keegan, D. (1996). Foundations of Distance Education, New Fetter Lane, London: Routledge.
[25]Kelly, H. , “Interactivity in Online Courses,” Online Magazine: Distance Learning.Available: http://www.studyoverseas.com/distance/interactivity.htm
[26]King, F., Nelson, J.G. & Restauri, S. (2002) “Reaching the Distant Learner: The Evolutionary Process, ” Education, Summer, 122(4), pp.667-370.
[27]Krippendorff, K. (1986) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, pp. 129-168, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
[28]Littleton, K. & Hakkinen, P. (1999) “Learning Together: Understanding the Process of Computer Based Collaborative Learning,” in Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approach, P. Dillenbourg(ed.), Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 20-30.
[29]McGrath, J.E. (1984) Group: Interaction and Performance, pp. 1-87, Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice Hall.
[30]Moore, M.G.(1989) “ Three types of interaction, ” The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2) , pp. 1-6.Available:http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/zef/cde/found/moore95.htm
[31]Nunamaker, J.F., Dennis, A.R., Vslscich, J.S., Vogel, D.R. & Georage, J.F. (1991) “ Electronic Meeting Systems to Support Group Work, ” Communications of the ACM, 34(7) , pp. 40-61.
[32]Pinsonneault, A. & Kdraemer, K.L. (1989) “ The Impact of Technological Support on Groups: An Assessment of the Empirical Research, ” Decision Support Systems, 5(2), pp. 197-216.
[33]Rafaeli, S. (1988) “ Interactivity: From New Media to Communication, ” in Sage Annual Review of Communication Research: Advancing Communication Service, Volume 16., R. P. Hawkins, J. Wiemann & S. Pingree (ed.), pp. 110-134. NewBury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications.
[34]Rafaeli, S. & Sudweeks, F. (1998) “ Interactivity on the Nets, ” in Network and Netplay: Virtual Groups on the Internet, F. Sudweeks, M. McLaughlin & S. Rafaeli (ed.), Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, pp. 173-189.
[35]Ravenscroft, A. & Matheson, M. P. (2002) “ Developing and Evaluating Dialogue Games for Collaborative E-Learning, ” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, pp. 93-101.
[36]Rice, A.K. (1974) “ The Individual, the Small Group, and the Large Group, ” in Small Group Communication: a Reader, R.S. Cathcart & L.A. Samovar (ed.), Iowa: M.C. Brown, pp. 12-18.
[37]Slavin, R. E. (1995) Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice, pp. 1-4, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
[38]Snodgrass, D. M. (2000) Collaborative Learning in Middle and Secondary Schools: Applications and Assessments, pp.1-6, Larchmont, NY: EyeOn Education.
[39]Stumpf, S.A. & Dunbar, R.L.M. (1991) “The Effects of Personality Type on Choices Made in Strategic Decision Situations, ” Decision Sciences, 22, pp. 1047-1072.
[40]Udvari-Solner, A. (1994) “A Decision-Making Model for Curricular Adaptations in Cooperative Groups, ” in Creativity and Collaborative Learning, J. S. Thousand, Villa, R. A. & Nevin, A. I. (ed.), Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes Publishing, pp. 59-77.
[41]Wagner, E. D. (1997) “Interactivity: From Agents to Outcomes,” New Directions for Teaching and Learning, Fall, 71, pp. 19-26.
[42]Wehrs, W. (2002) “An Assessment of the Effectiveness of Cooperative Learning in Introductory Information Systems, ” Journal of Information Systems Education, 13(1), pp. 97-49.
[43]Williams, M. L., Paprock, K. & Covington, B. (1999) Distance Learning: The Essential Guide, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
[44]Willis, B. (1993) Distance Education: A Practical Guide, Englewood Cliff, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
[45]Witkin, H.A., Goodenough, D.R., & Karp, S.A.(1967) “Stability of Cognitive Style from Childhood to Young Adulthood, ” Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 7(3) , pp. 291-300.
[46]Wood, W. (1987) “ Meta-Analytic Review of Sex Differences in Group Performance, ” Psychological Bulletin, 102(1), pp. 53-71.
[47]Yellen, R.E., Winniford, M. & Sanford, C.C. (1995) “Extraversion and Introversion in Electronic-Supported Meeting, ” Information & Management, 28, pp. 63-74.