(3.235.108.188) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/27 23:57
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:高德發
研究生(外文):Te-fa Kao
論文名稱:整合類比策略於數位學習內容之設計與成效:以物件導向程式設計之「類別」概念教學為例
論文名稱(外文):The Design and Effectiveness of Integrating Analogy Strategy into Digital Learning Content : An Example of Teaching Class Concept in Object-Oriented Programming
指導教授:邱瓊慧邱瓊慧引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺南大學
系所名稱:資訊教育研究所教學碩士班
學門:教育學門
學類:教育科技學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2005
畢業學年度:93
語文別:中文
論文頁數:75
中文關鍵詞:數位學習內容類比策略
外文關鍵詞:analogy strategydigital learning content
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:186
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
本研究探討整合類比策略於數位學習內容之設計與成效。數位學習內容設計採用「認知訓練模式」作為基礎結構,整合類比策略的操作方法,以熟悉的、具體的類比物概念對應到所要學習的抽象概念,協助學習者組織新的知識結構,並使用 SCORM 2004 制定的標準和排序規則描繪此設計結構,以決定 LMS 如何派送學習活動及學習資源給學習者。本研究採等組後測設計,評估應用此數位學習內容設計於學習概念性知識之成效,共計 43 位綜合高中資訊科學參與學習活動,隨機分派為類比學習組和一般學習組,實驗結果顯示二組之間未達顯著差異。由問卷調查結果發現,考量學習者的認知負載,當傳達較多的資訊量給學生時,宜注意可能造成的影響。
The purpose of this study was to investigate the design and effectiveness of integrating analogy strategy into digital learning content. The design of digital learning content was based on Cognitive Training Model and incorporated the analogy strategy. The analogy strategy could be able to assist students in constructing new knowledge by mapping the concrete concept to the abstract concept. The delivery Sequencing for the digital learning content was described according to the specification of SCORM 2004 Sequencing and Navigation. The sequencing rules were further stored and interpreted by the LMS adopted in the study. This study adopted posttest-only equivalent-group design to evaluate the effect of digital learning content. Forty-three senior high school students attended the learning activity. It showed that there was no significant difference between two groups. A couple of possible reasons were discussed in this thesis.
中文摘要 Ⅰ
英文摘要 Ⅱ
致謝 Ⅲ
目次 Ⅳ
表次 Ⅵ
圖次 Ⅶ
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 研究問題 2
第二章 文獻探討 3
第一節 認知取向的知識分類 3
第二節 概念教學 4
第三節 類比教學策略 7
第四節 學習科技標準的應用 11
第五節 結語 17
第三章 數位學習內容之設計 19
第一節 整合類比策略於數位學習內容之基礎架構 19
第二節 數位化教學策略 25
第三節 數位學習內容之實作 29
第四章 數位學習內容之評估 35
第一節 評估設計 35
第二節 實驗對象 35
第三節 實驗流程 36
第四節 實驗環境 37
第五節 評估工具 39
第六節 資料分析 43
第七節 評估結果 43
第五章 討論與結論 52
第一節 討論 52
第二節 結論 53
參考文獻 55
中文部份 55
英文部份 55
附錄 58
附錄一 58
附錄二 63
附錄三 67
中文部份
行政院國家科學委員會(2003)。數位學習國家型科技計畫。台北市:行政院。2004 年12月20日,取自 http://elnpweb.ncu.edu.tw/index.htm
余民寧(1997)。教育測驗與評量─成就測驗與教學評量。台北:心理。
吳明隆(2000)。SPSS 統計應用實務。台北:松崗。
邱瓊慧(2004)。智慧型程式設計數位學習策略庫之研究─多重數位學習策略之分析、設計與研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(報告編號:NSC-93-2524-S-024-00 1),未出版。
英文部份
Advanced Distributed Learning. (2004 b). SCORM Content Aggregation Model version 1.3.1 Retrieved November 22, 2004, from http://www.adlnet.org/
Advanced Distributed Learning. (2004 c). SCORM Sequencing and Navigation version 1.3.1 Retrieved November 22, 2004, from http://www.adlnet.org/
Allert, H., Dhraief, H., & Nejdl, W. (2002). Meta-level category “role” in metadata standards for learning: Instructional roles and instructional qualities of learning objects. Proceedings of Computational Semiotics in Games and New Media, COSIGN 2002 (pp. 14-21).
Becker, B. W. (2001). Teaching CS1 with Karel the Robot in Java. ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education (pp. 50-54). New York: ACM Press.
Can, G. (2004). Instructional Design Principles for “Analogy in Instruction”. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://it.usu.edu:16080/~gucan48/articles/analogy_design.pdf Curtis, R.V. & Reigeluth, C.M. (1984). The Use of Analogies in Written Text. Instructional Science, 13, p. 99-117.
Dagher, Z. R. (1998). The case for analogies in teaching science for understanding. In Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View. New York: Academic Press.
Derntl, M., & Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2004). Patterns for Blended, Person-Centered Learning: Strategy, Concepts, Experiences, and Evaluation. ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, (pp. 916-923).
Foshay, W. R., Silber, K. H., & Stelnicki, M. (2003). Writing training materials that work. Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.
Gagne, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1997). The Cognitive Psychology of School learning (2nd ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Glynn, S. M., Russell, A. & Noah, D. (1997). Teaching Science Concepts to Children: The Role of Analogies. University of Georgia. Retrieved October 15, 2004, from http://www.coe.uga.edu/edpsych/faculty/glynn/twa.html.
Gunstone, R. J., & Mitchell, L. J. (1998). Metacognition and conceptual change. In Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View. New York: Academic Press.
Gunter, M. A., Estes, T. H., & Schwab, J.(1995). Instruction: a models approach (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
IMS. (2003). IMS Simple Sequencing Information and Behavior Model, Version 1.0 Final Specification, IMS Global Learning Consortium.
Mintzes, J. J., & Wandersee, J. H. (1998). Reform and innovation in science teaching: a human constructivist view. In Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View. New York: Academic Press.
Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (1998). Epilogue: meaningful learning, knowledge restructuring, and conceptual change: on ways of teaching science for understanding. In Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivist View. New York: Academic Press.
Orgill, M., & Bodner, G. (2004). What research tells us about using analogies to teach chemistry. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 5(1), 15-32.
Pasini, N., & Rehak, D. (2003). A process model for applying standards in content development. Retrieved December 12, 2004, from Open Carnegie Mellon University, Learning Systems Architecture Lab Web site: http://www.lsal.cmu.edu/
Repenning, A., & Perrone, C. (2000). Programming by Analogous Examples. Communications of the ACM, 43(3), 90-97.
Rule, A. & Rust, C. (2001). A Bat is Like A...Teaching Science Concepts Using Analogies. Retrieved September 6, 2004, from http://www.soe.umd.umich.edu/grl/model_research/bat_analogy_paper.pdf
Schwarm, S., & VanDeGrift, T. (2003). Making Connections: Using Classroom Assessment to Elicit Students'' Prior Knowledge and Construction of Concepts. ITiCSE''03, June 30-July 2, 2003, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, R. J., Coulson, R. L., & Anderson, D. K. (1989). Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & Ortony (eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 498-531). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Venville, G. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1997). Analogies in Biology Education: A Contentious Issue. The American Biology Teacher. 59(5), 282-286.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔