跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(54.161.24.9) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/01/17 11:49
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:王岱伊
研究生(外文):Dai-Yi Wang
論文名稱:小組合作學習策略之研究
論文名稱(外文):A Study on Strategies of Collaborative Learning
指導教授:孫春在孫春在引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chuen-Tsai Sun
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立交通大學
系所名稱:資訊科學系
學門:工程學門
學類:電資工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:83
中文關鍵詞:小組工作合作學習組隊學習策略合作策略思考風格
外文關鍵詞:team workcollaborative learningteam forminglearning strategiescollaborative strategiesthinking style
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:207
  • 點閱點閱:5335
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:1410
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:22
合作學習是近幾十年來相當受到重視的學習方法,但影響合作成效的因素相當的多,本篇論文將針對分組分法和思考風格兩個主軸探討合作學習策略。
小組合作在各領域中都相當重要,但如何在有限的資源下做最有效的分組,目前多靠經驗和感覺,本論文設計了一個可以同時考慮多維變數的分組模型,並針對不同組隊動機採用不同分組演算法,以便應用所有資源能做有效分組,且整體的效能仍能維持住一定水準。這個分組模型和演算法在群組人力規劃和配置上將可兼顧平衡與效能兩方面的考慮。
為探討思考風格與個人及小組學習成效的關係,我們將實驗過程分為兩個階段,以有效掌握住個體和群體工作模式。利用網路問卷調查,取得學生本身原有的思考風格、個人的工作方式、該生在小組中的工作方式及互動模式。如此,我們便能觀察、驗證許多假設,並歸納出有價值的合作策略和互動方式。
本次實驗中,我們歸納出學生處理學習主題(人工智慧下棋程式)的策略有六種基本型態,而小組的合作模式可分為四種。這些分析方法均具有一般性,可以推廣至其他領域。
Team-based collaborative learning has become an important learning method in the past few decades. Many factors of learning effect have been discussed. In this study, we aim at developing a novel team-forming model, and investigating the strategies of collaborative learning based on the thinking styles of team members.
In many fields, teamwork has been considered an essential part in success. But, how to partition given limited human resources? How to form teams? Most existing solutions depend on managers’ experiences and gut feeling. In this thesis, we design a team-forming model that takes multi-dimensional factors as input and adopts difference algorithms according to the user’s requirement. This model achieves a balance between team homogeneity and integral performance at the same time.
To thoroughly investigate the correlation between thinking styles and team-based learning effect, we split an experiment into an individual stage and then a teamwork stage. Using several network questionnaires, we collect students’ thinking styles, individual working styles, team working styles, and team interactions. We analyze and discuss various correlations between them in this thesis.
Based on this experiment, we induce six strategies that the students employed to cope with the leaning theme (artificial intelligence chess game), and find four kinds of collaboration style. These analytical methods provide a general framework and can be utilized in other fields.
摘 要 1
ABSTRACT 2
目 錄 3
圖目錄 5
表目錄 6
第一章 緒論 7
1.1 研究動機 7
1.1.1 合作是一種趨勢 7
1.1.2 合作在教育上的重要性 8
1.1.3 影響合作的因素眾多 10
1.2 研究目標 10
1.2.1 有效分組模型 11
1.2.2 由個人到小組的實驗流程 11
1.2.3 詳盡的工作問卷 12
1.2.4 視覺化的資料分析結果 12
1.3 研究的重要性 12
1.4 章節介紹 13
第二章 文獻探討 14
2.1 合作學習 14
2.1.1 合作學習的定義 14
2.1.2 合作學習以其他學習法的比較 15
2.2 團體效能的評估 17
2.2.1 團體效能 17
2.2.2 目前團體效能之相關研究 20
2.3 思考風格 23
2.3.1 思考風格的定義 23
2.3.2 思考教學法 24
2.4 分組方法 25
2.5 本論文定位 26
第三章 分組模型分析與設計 28
3.1 多維輸入參數 28
3.2 同質的定義 29
3.2.1 以距離為基礎來分組 30
3.2.2 以形狀為基礎來分組 32
3.2.3 距離與形狀兩種方式的比較 34
3.3 分組模型之設計 36
3.4 使用基因演算法找尋最佳組隊結果 39
3.4.1 基因演算法 39
3.4.2 將基因演算法應用於找尋最佳組隊結果 40
第四章 個人與小組程式設計實驗 44
4.1 實驗設計 44
4.1.1 實驗對象與教材內容 44
4.1.2 實驗問題 45
4.1.3 實驗流程 48
4.2 實驗分組 49
4.2.1 學生思考風格的分布 49
4.2.2 初步分群結果 52
4.2.3 組隊方法 53
4.3 學習實驗之資料分析 54
4.3.1 個人設計策略之分析 55
4.3.2 個人專題成績之分析 59
4.3.3 小組設計策略之分析 61
4.3.4 個人在小組中的角色(個人貢獻)分析 63
4.3.5 小組合作滿意度之分析 64
4.3.6 小組專題成績之分析 66
4.3.7 其他依變項間的的相關性分析 69
第五章 結論與未來展望 72
5.1 結論 72
5.2 研究限制 74
5.3 未來展望 75
參考文獻 77
Sternberg, Robert J. & Spear-Swerling, Louise著,李弘善譯(民89)。思考教學。遠流出版。
鄭心惠(民89)。合作學習環境中學生分組模式之研究。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
羅勃.史坦伯格(Sternberg, Robert J.)著,薛絢譯(民88)。活用你的思考風格(Thinking Styles)。天下遠見出版。
Baron, R. S., Kerr, N. L., & Miller, N. (1992). Group process, Group decision, Group action. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Blignaut, R. J., & Venter I. M. (1998). Teamwork: can it equip university science students with more than rigid subject knowledge? Computer and Education, 31, 265-279.
Brereton, O. P., Lees, S., Bedson, R., Boldyreff, C., Drummond, S., Layzell, P. J., Macaulay, L. A., & Young, R. (2000). Student group working across universities: a case study in software engineering. IEEE Transactions on Education, 43(4), 394-399.
Carrier, C. A., & Sales, G. C. (1987). Pair versus individual work on the acquisition of concepts in a computer-based instructional lesson. Journal of Computer-based instruction, 14, 11-17.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
Cordero, R., DiTomaso, N., & Farris, G. F. (1996). Gender and race/ethnic composition of technical work group: relationship to creative productivity and morale. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 13, 205-221.
Cosden, M. A., & English, J. P. (1987). The effects of grouping, self esteem, and locus of control on microcomputer performance and help seeking by mildly handicapped students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 443-460.
Dalton, D. W., Hannafin, M. J., & Hooper S. (1989). Effects of individual and cooperative computer-assisted instruction on student performance and attitudes. Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(2), 15-24.
Dilienbourg, P., & Schneider, D. (1995). Collaborative learning and the internet. Available: http://tecfa.uniqe.ch/tecfa.html.
Forman E.A., & Cazden C.B. (1985). Exploring vygotskian perspectives in education: the cognitive value of peer interaction. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition (pp. 323-347). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gates, A. Q., Delgado, N., & Mondragon O. (2000). A structured approach for managing a practical software engineering course. 30th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.
Hawkins, S., Sheingold, K., Gearhart, M., & Beger, C. (1982). Microcomputers in schools: Impact on the social life of elementary classrooms. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 3, 361-373.
Henderson, K. (1991). Flexible sketches and inflexible data bases: Visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16(4), 448-473.
Henry, S. M., & Stevens, K. T. (1999). Using Belbin’s leadership role to improve team effectiveness: An empirical investigation. The Journal of Systems and Software, 44, 241-250.
Hiltz, S.R. (1995a). Teaching in a virtual classroom. Paper presented in the 4th International Conference on Computer Assisted Instruction.
Hiltz, S.R. (1995b). The virtual classroom: Learning without limits via computer networks. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Hooper, S., (1992). Cooperative learning and computer-based instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 40(3), 21-38.
Hooper, S., & Hannifin, M. J. (1988). Cooperative CBI: the effects of heterogeneous versus homogeneous grouping on the learning of progressively complex concepts. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4, 413-424.
Hooper, S., & Hannifin, M. J. (1991). The effects of group composition on achievement, interaction, and learning efficiency during computer-based cooperative instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 39(3), 27-40.
Huxham, M., & Land, R. (2000). Assigning students in group work projects. Can we do better then random? Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(1), 17-22.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Stanne, M.B. (1985). Effects of cooperative, competitive and individualistic goal structures on computer-assisted instruction. Journal of educational psychology, 77(6), 668-677.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperative learning. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), The Effective teacher. New York: Random House.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (3rd Ed.). Englewood, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Klein, J. D., & Pridemore, D. R. (1992). Effects of cooperative learning and need for affiliation on performance, time on task, and satisfaction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 40(4), 39-47.
Kravitz, D. A., & Martin, B. (1986). Ringelmann rediscovered: The original article. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 936-941.
Lamouri, S., Öztürk, Y., & Abut, H. (1999). A new collaborative active learning tool for signal processing education. Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 1999. Proceedings., 1999 IEEE International Conference, 4(4), 2029-2032.
Levi, D., & Slem, C. (1995). Team work in research and development organization: the characteristics of successful teams. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 16, 29-42.
Li, W., & Aiken, M. (1998). Inductive learning from preclassified training examples: an empirical study. IEEE Transaction on System, Management, and Cybernetics-Part C: Applications and review, 28(2), 288-295.
Lou, Y., 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.
Lurey, J. S., & Raisinghani, M. S. (2001). An expirical study of best practices in virtual teams. Information and Management, 38, 523-544.
Ma, J., & Zhou, D. (2000). Fussy set approach to the assessment of student-centered learning. IEEE Transactions on Education, 43(2), 237-241
Marshall, J. E. (1995). Effects of cooperative incentives and heterogeneous arrangement on achievement and interaction of cooperative learning groups in a college life science course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 32(3), 291-299.
Mevarech, Z. R., Stern, D., & Levita, I. (1987). To cooperate or not to cooperate in CAI: that is the question. Journal of Educational Research, 80(3), 164-167.
Oetzel, J. G.. (1998). Culturally homogeneous and heterogeneous groups: explaining communication processes through individualism-collectivism and self-construal. International Journal Intercultural Rel., 22(2), 135-161.
Oetzel, J. G.. (1999). The influence of situational features on perceived conflict styles and self-construal in work groups. International Journal Intercultural Rel., 23(4), 679-695.
Olson, J. S., Card, S. K., Landauer, T. K., Olson, G. M., Malone, T., & Leggett, J. (1993). Computer-supported co-operative work: Research issues for the 90s. Behavior & Information Technology, 12(2), 115-129.
Qin, Z., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 129-143.
Ong, S. H., & Zhao, X. (2000). On post-clustering evaluation and modification. Pattern Recognition Letters, 21, 365-373.
Resnick, M. (1996). Distributed Constructionism. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Science, Northwestern University.
Ringelmann, M. (1913). Research on animate sources of power: The work of man. Annales de l’Institut National Agronomique, 2e serie-tome 7, 1-40
Rocklin, T., O’Donnell, A., Dansereau, D. F., Lambiotte, J. G., Hythecker, V., & Larson, C. (1985). Training learning strategies with computer-aided cooperative learning. Computers & Education, 9(1), 67-71.
Russell, S., & Norving, P. (1996). An introduction to artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Prentice Hall International.
Rysavy, S. D. M., & Sales, G. C. (1991). Cooperative learning in computer-based instruction. Educational Technology Research & Development, 39(2): 70-79.
Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Lingenfelter, D. (1996). Gender and group composition in small task groups using computer-mediates communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 12(2), 209-224.
Schrage, M. (1995). No more teams: Mastering the dynamics of creative collaboration. New York: Currency Doubleday.
Shaw, J. D., & Duffy, M. K. (2000). Interdependence and preference for group work: main and congruence effects on the satisfaction and performance of group members. Journal of Management, 26(2), 259-279.
Slavin, R. E. (1990). Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Student team learning: A practical guide to cooperative learning (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Thinking styles. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Sun, C. T., & Chou, C. (1996). Experiencing CORAL: Design and implementation of distant cooperative learning. IEEE Transaction on Education, 39, 357-366.
Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. Journal of Psychology, 9, 507-533.
Trowbridge, D., & Durnin,R. (1984). Results from an investigation of groups working at the computer. Washington, DC: The National Science foundation.
Watson, W. E., Johnson, L., & Kumar, K., & Critrlli, J. (1998). Process gain and process loss: comparing interpersonal processes and performance culturally diverse and non-drivers teams across time. International Journal Intercultural Rel., 22(4), 409-430.
Webb, N.M. (1984). Microcomputer learning in small groups: Cognitive requirements and group processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 1076-1088.
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80, 121-140.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Yeuh, J., & Alessi, S.M. (1988). The effects of reward structure and group ability composition on cooperative computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15, 18-22.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top