臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究使用Greenfoot程式設計發展工具，設計兩種不同策略之遊戲導向程式設計學習教材，讓學生在發展遊戲中學習基本的程式設計語法與概念，檢證高中二年級學生在程式設計學習成效、學習態度、及使用Greenfoot開發環境的自我效能。本研究採準實驗設計，使用由下而上式學習策略教材組為39位學生，使用由上而下式學習策略教材組為44位學生。以後測分數檢證兩組學生的學習成就差異；以問卷的數據結果歸納學生對程式設計學習態度、教材態度與個人學習態度；以Greenfoot開發環境自我效能量表檢證兩組學生的軟體自我效能差異。
研究結果發現，使用由上而下式學習策略教材的學生在程式設計學習成就上明顯高於使用由下而上式學習策略教材的學生。使用由上而下式學習策略教材的學生在教材態度上明顯高於使用由下而上式學習策略教材的學生。兩組學生在程式設計學習態度、教材態度與個人學習態度都持正向看法。

This study developed two kinds of game-oriented teaching material with Greenfoot for programming concepts learning, and examined the effects of two kinds of game-oriented teaching material on high school sophomores’ performance in programming learning, students’ attitudes toward programming learning, and students’ self-efficacy. Quasi-experimental design was implemented. A class with 39 students was assigned as the group using bottom-up learning strategy, and the other class with 44 students was assigned as the group using top-down learning strategy. Data sources included a posttest of students’ programming concepts, a student attitude survey and a Greenfoot self-efficacy scale.
The results indicated that students’ performance using top-down learning strategy were better than student performance using bottom-up learning strategy. In terms of the attitude toward teaching material, students using top-down learning strategy were better than students using bottom-up learning strategy. Both groups of student attitude survey indicated that the majority of student had positive attitudes toward using the game-oriented teaching material to learn programming concepts.

附表目錄 vi
附圖目錄 vii
第一章 緒論 1
第一節　研究背景 1
第二節 研究目的與待答問題 4
第三節 研究限制 5
第四節 名詞解釋 6
第二章　文獻探討 7
第一節 程式設計教學 7
第二節 視覺化工具 12
第三節 數位遊戲式學習 19
第三章 研究方法 23
第一節 研究對象 23
第二節 研究設計 24
第三節 研究工具 31
第四節 實驗流程 34
第五節 研究程序 35
第六節 資料處理與分析 37
第四章 結果與討論 39
第一節 程式設計學習成效 39
第二節 程式設計學習態度 42
第三節 使用Greenfoot之自我效能 55
第四節 課堂記錄 59
第五節 討論 61
第五章 結論與建議 65
第一節 結論 65
第二節 建議 67
參考文獻 68
附錄一 電腦素養調查 74
附錄二 Greenfoot 程式設計成就測驗 75
附錄三 課後態度問卷 78
附錄四 Greenfoot自我效能量表 80
附錄五 課堂觀察紀錄表 81
附錄六 由下而上式學習策略組課堂講義 82
附錄七 由上而下式學習策略組課堂講義 99

吳正己、何榮桂 (民87)：高級中學新訂電腦課程的內涵與特色。科學教育月刊，208，26-32。

邱貴發（民85）。八五級暑研所資訊教學專題彙集。國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所。

陳宏煒(民92)：高中電腦課程實施現況調查。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。

陳麗如（民90）。NETS.S對中小學學生資訊基本能力發展的啟示。資訊與教育雜誌，85期，29-44。

黃世隆（民93）。應用電腦樂高輔助高中生程式設計學習之行動研究。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。

羅漢村（民92）。自我監控活動對高中生If敘述程式設計學習成效之影響。國立臺灣師範大學，臺北市。

Askar, P., Davenport, D. (2009). An investgation of factors related to self-efficacy for Java programming among engineering students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(3), 26-32.

Au, W. K., Horton, J., &; Ryba, K. (1987). Logo, Teacher intervention and the development of thinking skills. The Computing Teacher, 15(3), 12-16.

Au, W. K., &; Leung, J. P. (1991). Problem solving, instructional methods and LOGO programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(4), 455-467.

Bandura, A. (1986), Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Bayliss, J., &; Strout, S. (2006) Games as a "flavor" of CS1. SIGCSE 2006. ACM Press, New York, NY, 500-504.

Becker, K. (2001). Teaching with games: The minesweeper and asteroids experience. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 17(2), 23–33.
Becker, K., &; Parker, J.R. (2005). All I ever needed to know about programming, I learned from re-writing classic Arcade games. Paper presented at Future Play, The international conference on the future of game design and technology, October 13–15, East Lansing, MI. Retrieved from http://dspacel.acs.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/1880/46707/1/All_I_2005.pdf

Brown, M. H. Algorithm Animation. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussets, (1988).

Brusilovsky, P., Calabrese, E., Hvorecky, J., Kouchnirenko, A., and Miller, P. (1997) Mini-languages: A Way to Learn Programming Principles. Education and Information Technologies 2(1), pp. 65-83.

Chaffin, A., Doran, K., Hicks, D., &; Barnes, T. (2009). Experimental evaluation of teaching recursion in a video game. In Sandbox ’09: Proceedings of the 2009 ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Video Games (pp. 79–86). ACM: New York.

Cliburn, D. (2006). The effectiveness of games as assignments in an introductory programming course. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference(pp. 6–10). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.

Cliburn, D.C., &; Miller, S.M. (2008). Games, stories, or something more traditional: The types of assignments college students prefer. In Proceedings of the 39th annual SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 138–142). New York: ACM Press.

Cooper, S., Dann, W., &; Pausch, R. (2000) Alice: A 3-D tool for introductory programming concepts. In Proceedings of the 5th Annual CCSC Northeastern Conference 2000, Ramapo, NJ, April, 28-29, 2000.

Crosby, M. Stelovsky, J. (1989). Subject Differences in the Reading of Computer Algorithms. Designing and Using Human-Computer Interfaces and Knowledge-Based Systems, Elsevier.

Deek, F. P., Kimmel, H., &; McHugh, J. A. (1998). Pedagogical changes in the delivery of the first course in computer science: Problem solving then programming. Journal of Engineering Education, 87(3), 313-320.

Gal-Ezer, J. &; Harel, D. (1998). What (Else) should CS educators know? Communications of the ACM, 41(9), 77-84.

Gee, J. P. (2003). What Video Games Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hartmann, W., Nievergelt, J., &; Reichert ,R. (2001). Kara, finite state machines, and the case for programming as part of general education. In Proceedings of Symposia on Human Centric Computing 2001.

Jenkins, T. (2001). The motivation of students of programming. ACM SIGCSE 6th. Annual, 53-56.

Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you: How today’s popular culture is actually making us smarter. London: Allen Lane.

Kasurinen, J.,Purmonen,M., &; Nikula U. (2008). A study of visualization in introductory programming. Retrived April 20, 2011, from http://www.ppig.org/papers/

Kelleher, C. &; Pausch, R. (2005). Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys, Volume 37(2), pages 83 – 137.

Kölling, M. (2010). The Greenfoot programming environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 10(4), Article 14, 1-21.

Kölling, M. (2010). Introduction to Programming with Greenfoot. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.

Kölling, M., Quig, B., Patterson, A. &; Rosenberg, J. (2003)The BlueJ system and its pedagogy. In Journal of Computer Science Education, Special issue on Learning and Teaching Object Technology, 13 (4).

Lawler, R. W. (1982). Designing computer-based microworlds, Byte, 7(8), 138-160.

Laird, J.E. (2001). Using a computer game to develop advanced AI. Computer, 34(7), 70–75.

Mayer, R. E., Dyck, J. L., &; Vilberg, W. (1986). Learning to program and learning to think: What’s the connection? Communications of the ACM, 29(7), 605-610.

McDermott, R., Eccleston, G., &; Brindley, G. (2008). More than a good story—Can you really teach programming through storytelling? Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences (ITALICS), 7(1), 34-43.

McKetihen, K., Reitman, J.S., Rueter H.H. and Hirtle S.C. 1981. Knowledge Organization and Skill Differences in Computer Programs. Cognitive Psychology 13, pages 307-325.

Miller, G. A. 1956. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 2, 81-97.

Naps, T. L., Rößling, G. R, Almstrum, V., Dann, W., Fleischer, R., Hundhausen,C., Korhonen, A., Malmi, L., McNally, M., Rodger, S. &; Vel´azquez-Iturbide J.A. (2002). Exploring the Role of Visualization and Engagement in Computer Science Education. In Working Group Reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 131–152, New York, NY, USA.

Nevalainen, S. Sajaniemi, J. (2006) An Experiment on Short-term Effects of Animated versus Static Visualization of Operation on Program Perception. Proc. 2006 International Workshop on Computing Education Research, pages 7-16, Canterbury, UK.

Pajares, F. (1996) Self-Efficacy Beliefs in Academic Settings, Review of Educational Research, Winter 1996, Vol.66, No.4, pp. 543-578.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. New York, New York: Basic Books.

Pattis, R., Roberts, J., &; Stehlik, M. (1994). Karel the robot: a gentle introduction to the art of programming, 2nd Edition.

Prensky M (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Ramalingam, V. and Wiedenbeck, S. (1998) Development and Validation of Scores on a Computer Programming Self-efficacy Scale and Group Analysis of Novice Programmer Self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol.19 (4), pp367-381.

Ramalingam, V., La Belle, D. and Wiedenbeck, S (2004). Self-efficacy and mental models in learning to program. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Volume 36- Issue 3, 171-175.

Robertson, J., &; Howells, C. (2008). Computer game design: Opportunities for successful learning. Computers &; Education 50, 559-578.
Soloway, E. (1993). Should we teach students to program? Communications of the ACM, 36(10) 21-24.

Stephenson, C. (2000). A Report on High School Computer Science Education in Five U.S. States. [On-line]. Available: http://www.holtsoft.com/chris/HSSurveyArt.pdf

Squire, K. (2003). Video games in education. International Journal of Intelligent Simulations and Gaming, vol. 2, 49-62.

Valente, J. A. (1995). Logo as a window into the mind. Logo Update, 4(1).

Verno, A., Carter, D., Cutler, R., Hutton, M., &; Pitt, L. (2005), A Model Curriculum for K-12 Computer Science Level 2 Objectives and Outlines (Draft 02/2005) , SIGCSE' 05, February 23–27, 2005, St. Louis, Missouri, USA..
Wallace, S.A., &; Nierman, A. (2006). Addressing the need for a Java based game curriculum. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 22(2), 20–26.

Wallace, S. A., McCartney, R., &; Russell, I. (2010). Games and machine learning: A powerful combination in an artificial intelligence course. Computer Science Education 20(1), 17–36.

West, M., &; Ross, S. (2002). Retaining females in computer science: A new look at a persistent problem. JCSC, 17(5), 1-7.

Youngblood, M. (2007). Using XNA-GSE game segments to engage students in advanced computer science education. In Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Game Development in Computer Science Education (pp. 70–74).