跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(52.203.18.65) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/01/19 16:08
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

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:李勝龍
研究生(外文):Sheng-Lung Li
論文名稱:資訊呈現媒體對高職學生學習程式語言之影響
論文名稱(外文):The Impacts of the Media Presentation of Information on the Vocational High School Students’ Learning of Programming
指導教授:范懿文 
指導教授(外文):Yiwen Fan
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立中央大學
系所名稱:資訊管理學系碩士在職專班
學門:電算機學門
學類:電算機一般學類
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:資訊呈現媒體認知負荷學習成效監督模式學習態度
外文關鍵詞:Learning AttitudeSupervise ModeMedia Presentation of InformationCognitive LoadLearnig Performance
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:14
  • 點閱點閱:774
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:5
運用科技以造福人類,程式語言的學習是基礎且必備的能力。學習程式語言可以強化邏輯推理能力,這對高職學生來說,是很好的訓練。本研究由認知學習理論的角度出發,透過不同的引導方式,以在高職實際的教學實驗來探討不同的資訊呈現媒體對於高職學生學習程式語言的影響,包括學習成效及認知負荷。另外,本研究也想了解學習者在未被告知及在被告知教師監控其操作螢幕的不同情境下,其學習態度有何差異。研究結果發現,教材內容以紙本媒體呈現,配合部分時間上機,其學習成效較佳;全部在電腦教室授課,教材以電子媒體形式呈現的學習成效較差。而學習者被告知教師將監看其電腦操作螢幕後,學習態度轉佳。本研究在監督學習者的操作螢幕時,發現教室裡便利的網路是學習者分心的重要因素。因此,需要學習者用心推理的程式語言教學,最好先在一般教室講解。教材內容的設計及媒體的運用,應重視如何提昇學生的認知能力,電子媒體教材的不當運用,有時反而增加學習者的認知負荷。在教學過程中,尤其是在電腦教室裡,隨時注意學習者的動態,適時導正其學習態度,方能提高學習成效。
The studying of programming is the foundation of applying information technology to benefit people. As it can reinforce the ability of logic inference, the training of programming is favorable for the vocational high school students. Stemming from the cognitive theory, this research aims to study the impacts of the media presentation of information, including paper media and electronic media, on those students. The impacts contain the learning performance and the cognitive load. Besides, based on the modes of informed and uninformed, the students’ attitude toward studying will also be examined here. The findings of this research point out that it is preferred to choose paper media at ordinary classroom rather than adopt electronic media at computer lab. It is also obvious that the students’ attitude toward learning will be much better if the instructor informs them that they are being supervised.
目錄I
圖目錄III
表目錄IV
第一章緒論1
第一節 研究背景與動機1
第二節 研究目的2
第三節 研究範圍3
第四節 預期貢獻3
第五節 研究程序4
第六節 論文結構5
第二章文獻探討6
第一節 學習理論的探討6
第二節 影響學習成效的因素11
第三節 認知負荷理論16
第三章研究設計25
第一節 研究方法之選擇25
第二節 研究架構25
第三節 變項的定義與操作化27
第四節 研究假說29
第五節 實驗設計32
第四章資料分析36
第一節 樣本基本資料分析36
第二節 統計方法38
第三節 資訊呈現媒體對學習成效影響之檢定40
第四節 資訊呈現媒體對認知負荷影響之檢定41
第五節 不同監督模式對學習態度影響之檢定43
第六節 研究發現47
第五章結論與建議48
第一節 研究結論48
第二節 對實務的建議50
第三節 研究貢獻52
第四節 研究限制54
第五節 後續研究建議55
參考文獻58
附錄一 實驗教材(部分內容)A1-1
一、紙本教材A1-1
二、電子媒體教材A1-7
附錄二 試題及問卷A2-1
一、學習成效測驗試題(第二次)A2-1
二、認知負荷測量問卷A2-3
[1] 王克先(1997),「學習心理學」,桂冠圖書公司。[2] 王國榮(1999),「Visual Basic 6.0實戰講座」,旗標出版社。[3] 王裕芳(1998),「電腦態度與學習績效的影響因素探討-中學生網頁製作教學的實地實驗研究」,國立中央大學資訊管理研究所未出版碩士論文,8頁、9頁、15頁、17頁。[4] 朱敬先(1986),「學習心理學」,千華圖書公司。[5] 宋曜廷(2000),「先前知識、文章結構與多媒體呈現對文章學習的影響」,國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系未出版博士論文。[6] 吳清基(1996),「精緻教育的理念」,師大書苑,244頁。[7] 洪錦魁(1999),「精通Visual Basic 6.0」,文魁資訊公司。[8] 徐易稜(2001),「多媒體呈現方式對學習者認知負荷與學習成效之影響研究」,國立中央大學資訊管理研究所未出版碩士論文。[9] 財團法人中華民國電腦技能基金會(2000),「Visual Basic實力養成暨評量」,松崗電腦圖書公司。[10] 翁嘉鴻(2001),「以認知負荷觀點探討聽覺媒體物件之媒體呈現方式對學習成效之影響」,國立中央大學資訊管理研究所未出版碩士論文,5頁、17∼23頁、37頁。[11] 麥孟生(2000),「個人心理類型、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未出版碩士論文,5頁、6頁、9頁。[12] 黃克文(1996),「認知負荷與個人特質及學習成就之關聯」,國立臺南師範學院國民教育研究所未出版碩士論文。[13] 陳彙芳(1999),「多媒體電腦輔助學習之實驗室研究-探討認知負荷對學習成效之影響」,國立中央大學資訊管理研究所未出版碩士論文。[14] 張紹勳等(2001)「SPSS For Windows 統計分析-初等統計與高等統計」上冊,松崗電腦圖書資料公司,第十章∼第十一章。[15] 張紹勳等(2001)「SPSS For Windows 統計分析-初等統計與高等統計」下冊,松崗電腦圖書資料公司,第十二章。[16] 鄭立鴻,李威宏(2001),「計算機概論」,下冊,啟芳出版社,第四章。[17] 蔡淑娥(1982),「高中生的電腦態度、電腦成就及其相關因素之研究」,國立政治大學教育研究所未出版碩士論文。[18] 謝麗菁(1994),「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未出版碩士論文。[19] Bostrom, R. P. (1990, March), “The Importance of Learning Style in End-User Training,” MIS Quarterly, pp. 101-109.[20] Bostrom, R. P. (1993, March), “Learning Style and End-User Training,” MIS Quarterly, pp. 118-120.[21] Bostrom, R. P., L. Olfman, and M. K. Sein (1988), “End-user computing: A research framework for investigating the training/learning process,” Human Factors in Management Information Systems, pp. 221-250.[22] Bozionelos N. (1997), “Psychology of Computer Use: XLIV. Computer Anxiety and Learning Style,” Perceptual and Motor Skills, 84, 753-754.[23] Butcher, D. F. & W. A. Muth (1985), “Predicting performance in an introductory computer science course,” Communications of The ACM, 28(3), pp. 263-268.[24] Cerpa, N., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1996), “Some Conditions Under Which Integrated Computer-Based Training Software Can Facilitate Learning,” Journal of Educational Research, 15(4), 345-367.[25] Davis, D. L. & Davis, D. F. (1990), “the Effect of Training Techniques and Personal Characteristics on Training End Users of Information System,” Journal of Management Information System, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 93-110.[26] Davis, F. D. (1989), ”Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology,” MIS Quarterly, 13(3)m pp. 319-340.[27] Davis, F. D., R. P. Bagozzi, and P. R. Warshaw (1990), “User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models,” Management Science, 35(8), pp. 982-1003.[28] Fann, G. L., D. H. Lynch, & C. Murranka (1989), “Integrating technology: Attitudes as a determinant of the use of microcomputers,” Journal of Education Technology Systems, 17(4), pp. 307-317.[29] Gal-Ezer, J. and D. Harel (1998), “What (else) should CS educators knows?” Communications of The ACM, 11(9), pp.77-84[30] Gist M. E., Schwoerer C. & Rosen B. (1989), “Effects of Alternative Training Methods on Self-Efficacy and Performance in Computer Software Training,” Journal of Applied Psychology,” pp. 884-891.[31] Goodwin, L. & J. M. Wilkes (1986), “The psychological and background characteristics influencing students’ success in computer programming,” AEDS Journal, 19(1), pp. 1-9.[32] Gopher, D. & Braune, R. (1984), “On the Psychophysics of Workload: Why bother with subjective measures?” Human Factor, 26, pp. 519-532.[33] Harrison A. W. & Rainer R. K. (1992, summer), “The Influence of Individual Differences on Skill in End-User Computing,” Journal of Management Information System, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 93-111.[34] Hendy, C. H., Hamilton, K. M. & Landry, L. N. (1993), “Measuring subjective workload: When is one scale better than many?” Human Factor, 35, pp. 579-601.[35] Kagan, D. M. (1998), “Learning how to program or use computers: a review of six applied studies,” Educational Technology, 28(3), pp. 49-51.[36] Knuth, D. E. (1974), “Computer science and its relation to mathematics,” American Mathematical Monthly, 81, pp. 323-343.[37] Kolb, David A. (1984), “Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development,” Prentice-Hall.[38] Kolb, Irwin M. Rubin, James M. McIntyre (1974), “Organizational psychology: a book of readings,” Prentice-Hall.[39] Kolb, Irwin M. Rubin, James M. McIntyre (1979), “Organizational psychology: an experiential approach,” Prentice-Hall.[40] Marcus, N. & Sweller, J., (1996), “Understanding Instructions,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), pp. 49-63.[41] Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., & Vagge, S. (1999), “Maximizing Constructivist Learning From Multimedia Communications by Minizing Cognitive Load,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), pp. 638-643.[42] Mitchell N. & Cecil R., (2001), “Considerations of Learning and Learning Research: Revisiting the ‘Media Effects’ Debate,” Jl. Of Interactive Learning Research, 12(1), p. 85.[43] Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R. & Sweller, J., (1995), “Reducing Cognitive Load by Mixing Auditory and Visual Presentation Modes,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), pp. 319-334.[44] Oman, P. W. (1986), “Identifying student characteristics influencing success in introductory computer science courses,” AEDS Journal, 19(2-3), pp. 226-233.[45] Pass, F. G. W. C., (1992), “Training Strategies for Attaining Transfer of Problem-Solving Skill in Statistics: A Cognitive-Load Approach,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp. 429-434.[46] Pass, F. G. W. C. & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., (1994), “Variability of Worked Examples and Transfer of Geometrical Problem-Solving Skills: A Cognitive-Load Approach,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), pp. 122-133.[47] Sein M. K. & Robey D. (1991), “Learning Style and The Efficacy of Computer Training Methods,” Perceptual and Motor Skills.[48] Sweller, J., (1988), “Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning,” Cognitive Science, 12, pp. 257-285[49] Sweller, J., (1989), “Cognitive Technology: Some Procedures for Facilitating Learning and Problem Solving in Mathematics and Science,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, pp. 457-466.[50] Sweller, J., (1990), “On the Limited Evidence for the Strategies,” Journal for Research in Mathematic Education, 21(5), 411-415.[51] Sweller, J. & Chandler, P., (1994), “Why Some Material is Difficult to Learn,” Cognition and Instruction, 12, pp. 185-233.[52] Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998), “Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design,” Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), pp. 251-285.[53] Van Gervan, P. W. H., Pass, F. G., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Schmidt, H. G. (2000), “Cognitive Load Theory and The Acquisition of Complex Cognitive Sills in the Elderly: Towards an Integrative Framework,” Educational Gerontology, 26(6), pp. 503-521.[54] Wierwille, W. W. & Eggmeier, F. L. (1993), “Recommendations for Mental Workload Measurement in a Test and Evaluation Environment,” Human Factor, 35, pp. 263-281.[55] Yeung, A. S. (1999), “Cognitive Load and Learner Expertise: Split Attention and Redundancy Effects in Reading Comprehension Tasks With Vocabulary Definitions,” The Journal of Experiment Education, 67(3), 197-217.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top