臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

學習策略、學習教材與學習成效已經成為密不可分的關係，每個學習者有著不同的學習背景與個人特質，教師需在教學設計上同時考慮學習者的個別差異，經由資訊科技的蓬勃發展，課程內容利用生動活潑的多樣化呈現，降低學習壓力，達到事半功倍的成效。
本研究嘗試以Ausubel(1968)所提出的「有意義學習理論」觀點，進行實驗研究，依據Ausubel有意義的學習基礎，強調新的學習必須能與學習者原有認知結構中的先備知識(prior knowledge)相互聯結才是有意義學習，另外，不同先備知識的學習者，經由不同媒體呈現的設計如何才能達到提升學習效果，因此，本研究旨於探討「不同先備知識」的學習者與不同「媒體呈現方式」之學習成效是否有關係。
實驗於高職資訊科基本電學課程中，研究設計以90位資訊科學生作為研究對象，採用複因子試驗(factorial experiment)，運用實地實驗法(field experiments)方式驗證。學習者型態依不同先備知識，採受測者國中基本能力測驗成績分為「高先備知識」與「低先備知識」二種進行學習；在媒體呈現方式則採用「純文字」、「文字+圖片」及「文字+動畫」三種不同型態組合做為訓練教材，藉以了解不同先備知識、媒體呈現方式對於學習成效是否會相互影響，實驗結果將提供未來教學研究的參考。

There are connected to one another of the learning tactic, materials and effects. Because of each student has their own background and personality, teachers must consider that when they design the instruction. As a result of developing of information technology, the diversification of instruction which can reduce the learning pressure could achieve a multiplier effect.
The study was on the basis of “Ausubel''s meaningful learning theory". It emphasize that new learning must be associated the original cognitive structure with each learner’s prior knowledge. In addition, how to achieve enhancing learning effect through the design of different media presentation in different prior knowledge of learners. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the relationship between "different prior knowledge" of learners and different "media presentation".
The experiment was proceeded in fundamentals of electrical Engineering of Department of Computer Science of High school vocational school. Study design was with factorial experiment, field experiment, and using 90 students. According to different types of learners’ prior knowledge, divided their scores of the basic competence test for junior high school students into "high prior knowledge" and "low prior knowledge". In the media instruction was using "text", "text + image" and "text + animation" as a combination of three different types of training materials. In order to understand the different prior knowledge, the media instruction of learning whether the interaction between the experimental results will provide reference for future teaching and research.

中文摘要 ...............i
英文摘要 ...............ii
目　　錄 ...............iii
表 目 錄 ...............iv
圖 目 錄 ...............v
一、緒論 ...............1
1.1研究背景與動機...............1
1.2研究目的 ...............2
1.3名詞釋義 ...............3
1.4研究流程 ...............4
1.5論文架構 ...............6
二、文獻探討 ...............8
2.1有意義的學習 ...............8
2.2媒體教材設計理論...............14
2.3先備知識 ...............25
三、研究方法 ...............29
3.1研究方法 ...............29
3.2研究架構 ...............30
3.3研究變數設計 ...............31
3.4實驗樣本 ...............31
3.5實驗環境 ...............33
3.6系統介紹 ...............34
3.7實驗工具 ...............36
3.8實驗規劃 ...............38
四、實驗資料分析...............42
4.1樣本資料分析 ...............43
4.2學習成效資料分析...............45
五、結果與建議 ...............59
5.1研究結論 ...............59
5.2研究限制 ...............60
5.3教學上的建議 ...............61
5.4未來研究方向 ...............62
參考文獻 ...............64

［1］何詩欽，「多媒體教材在行動載具上不同呈現方式之學習成效探討-以高一生活科技為例」，未出版之，國立交通大學理學院碩士在職專班網路學習學程，民國九十八年。
［2］余民寧，有意義的學習：概念構圖之研究，商鼎圖書公司，民國八十六年。
［3］吳宇穎，「多媒體組合方式與知覺偏好對學習結果的影響」，國立中正大學教育研究所，碩士論文，民國九十三年。
［4］沈翠蓮，教學原理與設計，五南圖書公司，台北，民國九十二年。
［5］施良方，學習理論，麗文文化，高雄，民國八十五年。
［6］胡曉峰、吳玲達、李國輝、老松楊，多媒體運用原理，儒林圖書公司，台北，民國八十五年。
［7］徐照麗，教學媒體：系統化的設計、製作與運用，五南圖書公司，台北，民國八十八年。
［8］張春興，現代心理學，東華書局，台北，民國八十年。
［9］張春興，教育心理學：三化取項的理論與實踐，修訂版，東華書局，台北，民國九十一年。
［10］張國恩，「資訊融入各科教學之內涵與實施」，資訊與教育雜誌，72期，2-9頁，民國八十八年。
［11］黃柏勳，「認知上的瓶頸-認知負荷理論」，教育資料與研究，55期，71-78頁，民國九十二年。
［12］魏明通，科學教育，五南圖書公司，台北，民國八十六年。
［13］羅綸新，「以互動模式設計互動多媒體教學軟體」，教學科技與媒體，12期，21-27頁，民國八十二年。 
［14］Ager, T. “Online placement testing in mathematics and chemistry＂, Journal of Computer Basded Instruction, 20,pp. 52-57,1993.
［15］Alexander, P. A. “The past, present, and future of knowledge research: a reexamination of the role of knowledge in learning and instruction”, Educational Psychologist, 31,pp. 89-92, 1996.
［16］Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. “Learning from text: a multidimensional and developmental perspective”, In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Person, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: 3,pp 285-310, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000.
［17］Ausubel, D. P. “Educational psychology: A cognitive view”, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968.
［18］Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D. & Hanesian, H. “Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.)”, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1978.
［19］Bannert, M. “Managing cognitive load : Recent trends in cognitive load theory”, Learning and Instruction,12, pp. 139-146, 2002.
［20］Clark, R. C. & Mayer, R. E., E-Learning and the Science of Instruction, San Francisco : Pfeiffer, E-Learning and the Science of Instruction, San Francisco : Pfeiffer, 2002.
［21］Cooper, D.R.,& Emory, C.W., Business Research Methods, Richard D. Irwin Inc, 1996.
［22］Dale, E. Audio-visual methods in teaching, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, New York, USA:Holt, 1946.
［23］Dochy, F. J.R.C. Prior Knowledge and learning, In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education(2nd.), pp.4698-4702, Oxford/New York: Pergamon, 1994.
［24］Dochy, F. J.R.C., Moerkerke, G., & Marten, R. “Integrating assessment, learning and instruction: assessment of domain-specific and domain-transcending prior knowledge and program.”, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 22, pp. 309-339, 1996.
［25］Dochy, F., Valcke, M., & Wagemans, L. “Learning economics in higher education: an investigation concerning the quality and impact of expertise, ” Higher Education in Europe, 4, 123-136, 1991.
［26］Dongsong Zhang, J.Leon Zhao, Lina Zhou,& Jay F. Nunamaker, Jr. “Can E-learning Replace Classroom Learning?”, Communication of The ACM, Vol. 47 No. 5, pp.75-79, 2004.
［27］Doran, M. S. and J. D. Klein , "The effect of learning structures on student achievement and attitude using a computer simulation," ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED, pp.397-788, 1996.
［28］Haertel, G. D., Walberg, H. J., & Weinstein, Th. “Psychological models of educational erformance: A theoretical synthesis of constructs”, Review of Educational Research, 53(1), pp.75-91, 1983.
［29］Harman, G. “Student selection and admission to higher education: Policies and practices in the Asian region”, Higher Education, 27, pp. 313-341, 1994.
［30］Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Moore, J. & Marra, R. M. “Learning to Solve Problems with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective.” NJ: Upper Saddle River, 2003.
［31］Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. “Expertise reversal effect”, Educational Psychologist, 38, pp. 23–31, 2003.
［32］Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. “Managing Split-Attention and Redundancy in Multimedia Instruction”, Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, pp.351- 371, 1999.
［33］Kohler,J. Die Entwicklung von Gedachtnis-und Metagedachtnis-leistungen in Abhangigkeit von bereichsspezifischen Vorkenntnissent (Memory and meta-memory achievement in relation to domain-specfic prior knowledge). Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1987.
［34］Lee, D. M. S., Pliskin, N., & Kahn, B. “The relationship between performance in a computer literacy course and students prior achievement and knowledge”, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10, pp.63-77, 1987.
［35］Marcus, N., Cooper, M. & Sweller, J. “Understanding instructions”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 49-63, 1996.
［36］Mayer, R. E. "Multimedia Learning: Are We Asking the Right Questions", Educational Psychologist, 32, pp.1-19, 1997.
［37］Mayer, R. E. “Educational Psychology：A Cognition approach”, Boston：Little, Brown and Company, 1987.
［38］Mayer, R. E., Multimedia Learning, New York: Cambridge University press, 2001.
［39］Minnaert, A. & Janssen, P. J. “The causal role of domain-specific prior knowledge on study skills and curriculum outcomes after five academic years”, Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs, 10(3), pp.134-149-2, 1992.
［40］Minnaert, A. & Janssen, P. J. “How general are the effects of domain-specific prior knowledge on study expertise as compared to general thinking skills? In M. Birenbaum, & F. Dochy (Eds.)”, Alternaives in assessment of achievents, learning processes and prior learning, pp. 265-282, 1996.
［41］Neisser, E. “Cognitive psychology”, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1967.
［42］Novak, J. D., Gowin. D. B. & Johansen, G. T. “The use of concept mappingand knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students”, Science Education, 67, pp.625-645, 1983.
［43］Paas, F. G. W. C., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. “Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent development”, Educational Psychology, 38(1), pp.1-4, 2003.
［44］Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. “Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem solving skills: A cognitive-load approach”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, pp.122–133, 1994.
［45］Paas, F., Renkl,A.,&Sweller, J. “Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture”, Instructional Science, 32, pp.1–8, 2004.
［46］Paivio, A. “Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach, Oxford”, England: Oxford University Press, 1986.
［47］Park, O., & Gittelman, S.S. “Selective use of animation and feedback in computer-based instruction”, Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(4), pp.27-38, 1992.
［48］Pendley, B. D., Bretz, R. L., & Novak, J. D. “Concept maps as a tool to assess learning in chemistry”, Journal of Chemical Education, 71(1), pp.9-15, 1994.
［49］R. Oliver and A. Omari, “Exploring student interactions in collaborative World Wide Web computer-based learning environments.” Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(2), pp.263-287, 1998.
［50］Shih, C. I. “Learning strategies and other factors influencing achievement via web courses”, ERIC , p. Document ED422876, 1998.
［51］Shin, E.C., Schallert, D.L., & Savenye, W.C. “Effects of learner control, advisement, and prior knowledge on young students’ learning in a hypertext environment”, Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(1), pp.33-46, 1994.
［52］Sweller, J. “Cognitive load during problem solving: Effect on learning”, Cognitive Science,12,pp. 257-285, 1988.
［53］Sweller, J. (1989). “Cognitive Technology: Some Procedures for Facilitating Learning and Problem Solving in Mathematics and Science,” Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), pp.457-466, 1989.
［54］Tobias, S. “Interest, Prior Knowledge and Learning”, Review of Educational Research, 64(1), pp.37-54, 1994.
［55］Weinert, F. “The impact of schooling on cognitive development: one hypothetical assumption, some empirical results, and many theoretical implications”, EARLI New, 8, pp.3-7, 1989.
［56］Wijnen, W. H. F. W. “The rationale of a school based centralized examination system”, 16 International Conference of the International Association for Educational Assessment, Maastricht, 1990.
［57］Wydra, E.W. “The effectiveness of a self-care management interactive multimedia module”, Oncology Nursing Forum, 28(9), pp.1399-1406, 2001.
［58］Xie, B., & Salvendy, G. “Review and reappraisal of modeling and predicting mental workload in single- and multi-task environments”. Work & Stress, 14(1), 74-99, 2000.