跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.222.64.76) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/06/15 05:16
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:陳世璋
研究生(外文):Chen, Shih-Chang
論文名稱:教師數位遊戲認同與評量態度對遊戲啟發式評量態度 之探討--以國小教師為對象
論文名稱(外文):A Study of Teachers' Digital Game Identity and Examination Attitudes towards Game Inspired Assessment -- Targeted at elementary school teachers
指導教授:孫春在孫春在引用關係
指導教授(外文):Sun, Chuen-Tsai
口試委員:林珊如陳一平
口試委員(外文):Lin, San-JuChen, I-Ping
口試日期:2023-01-04
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立陽明交通大學
系所名稱:理學院科技與數位學習學程
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:2023
畢業學年度:111
語文別:中文
論文頁數:78
中文關鍵詞:教師數位遊戲認同評量態度遊戲化評量遊戲啟發式評量
外文關鍵詞:Teachersdigital game identityexam attitudegamified assessmentgame inspired assessment
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:72
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:16
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
在這數位匯流的時代,教學工具的數位化、遊戲化,大大改變了教學現場,因應這個現象,評量的方式是否也應該與時俱進的改變?筆者彙整出四種由數位遊戲中啟發出的新評量方式:1.鼓勵合作式評量。2.玩家自主選擇式評量。3.多元平衡式評量。4.獎賞可用式評量。並將此四種著重數位遊戲內在精神的新評量方式與著重外在形式的遊戲化評量一起做比較。
本研究主題是教師數位遊戲認同與評量態度對遊戲啟發式評量態度之探討,研究對象為國小教師,本研究探討國小教師的背景變數(性別、年齡、師資養成背景、在校擔任職務)及國小教師的數位遊戲認同高低及國小教師在小考及大考的不同評量態度(AOL;AFL;AAL)對四種數位遊戲啟發的新評量方式和遊戲化評量是否產生差異?
本研究採便利取樣問卷調查法,共計回收 306 份有效問卷。
研究發現如下:
1. 受訪教師在看待評量態度上,不論大考或是小考,大部分教師偏向認同考試的檢驗成果(分等;AOL)或者是促進學習(AFL)目的。大部分教師認同遊戲啟發式評量,但最多只會用於小考上,對於用於大考多是負面評價。
2. 受訪國小教師背景變數在數位遊戲的認同皆達顯著差異,男性教師、師範體系養成教師、科任教師、年齡層較低教師等背景對數位遊戲認同度高。
3. 受訪國小教師年齡在教師對大考的評量態度達顯著差異,年齡層較低的國小教師對於在大考中使用數位遊戲評量的態度較年齡層高的教師佳。
4. 受訪國小教師職務在遊戲化評量達顯著差異,科任教師比起班導師更傾向運用遊戲化評量,藉此引起學生興趣,降低評量味道。
5. 受訪國小教師職務在玩家自主選擇評量達顯著差異,科任教師比起班導師更傾向運用玩家自主選擇評量,藉此提升學生的自主性,能夠自我決定與選擇。
6. 教師數位遊戲認同對多元平衡式評量、鼓勵合作評量、遊戲化評量有正向影響力及顯著預測力。
7. 教師數位遊戲認同及教師對大考的評量態度對玩家自主選擇式評量、獎賞可用式評量有正向影響力及顯著預測力。
In this era of digital convergence, the digitization and gamification of teaching tools have greatly
changed the teaching scene, and in response to this phenomenon, should the way of assessment also
change with the times? The author has compiled four new assessment methods inspired by digital
games: 1. cooperative assessment, 2. player choice assessment, 3. balanced assessment, and 4. rewards
assessment. The four new measurement methods, which emphasize the inner spirit of digital games,
are compared with the gamified assessment, which emphasizes the outer form.
The theme of this study is the study of teachers' digital game identity and evaluation attitudes on
game inspired evaluation attitudes. Subjects were elementary school teachers.
This study investigates whether the background variables of elementary school teachers (gender, age,
teacher development background, and school position) and the level of digital game identity of
elementary school teachers and the different assessment attitudes (AOL; AFL; AAL) of elementary
school teachers in the Primary and Advanced Placement exams have made a difference on the four
new assessment methods and gamified assessment inspired by digital games.
In this study, a total of 306 valid questionnaires were collected through a convenience sampling
survey.The findings of this study are as follows:
1. In terms of the teachers' attitudes towards assessment, most of the teachers agreed that the
examination was either for outcome testing (grading; AOL) or for facilitating learning (AFL)
purposes, regardless of whether it was a major or minor examination.
Most of the teachers agreed with the game inspired assessment, but at most they would only use it
for the minor examinations, and most of them were negative about using it for the major
examinations.
2.The background variables of the surveyed elementary school teachers all showed significant
differences in their approval of digital games. Male teachers, teachers who were trained in teacher
training, subject teachers, and teachers of lower age groups had higher approval of digital games.
3. There were significant differences in teachers' attitudes towards monthly examinations according to
the age of the primary school teachers interviewed. Lower age group of primary school teachers had
a better attitude towards the use of digital game assessment in monthly examinations than higher
age group teachers.
4. There was a significant difference in the duties of the primary school teachers interviewed in terms
of gamified assessment, with subject teachers more inclined to use gamified assessment than
classroom teachers in order to arouse students' interest and reduce the taste of assessment.
5. The surveyed elementary school teachers' duties were significantly different in terms of player
choice ratings, and subject teachers were more likely to use player choice ratings than classroom
teachers.
This is to enhance students' autonomy and their ability to make their own decisions and choices.
6.Teachers' digital game recognition has a positive impact and significant predictive power on multiple
balanced assessment, encouraging collaborative assessment and gamified assessment.
7. Teachers' digital game recognition and teachers' evaluation attitudes - The test has a positive impact
on players' self-selected exam and reward-available evaluation exam.
中文摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
目錄 iii
圖目錄 v
表目錄 vi
第一章 緒論---------------------------------------------1
第一節 背景與動機---------------------------- -----------1
第二節 研究目的-----------------------------------------15
第三節 名詞解釋-----------------------------------------16
第二章 文獻探討------------------------------------------18
第一節 數位遊戲認同--------------------------------------18
第二節 評量態度------------------------------------------25
第三節 遊戲化評量與遊戲啟發評量---------------------------25
第三章 研究方法與設計------------------------------------27
第一節 研究架構-----------------------------------------27
第二節 研究流程-----------------------------------------28
第三節 研究對象-----------------------------------------29
第四節 研究工具與方法------------------------------------29
第四章 研究結果與分析------------------------------------49
第一節 樣本基本分析--------------------------------------50
第二節 教師個人背景變數對各量表差異分析--------------------55
第三節 「教師數位遊戲認同」、「教師對小考的評量態度」、
「教師對大考的評量態度」與「遊戲啟發式評量」差異分析-------60
第五章 結論與建議---------------------------------------63
第一節 研究結論-----------------------------------------63
第二節 研究建議-----------------------------------------66
第三節 研究範圍與限制-----------------------------------66
參考文獻-----------------------------------------------68
附錄(問卷)--------------------------------------------72
[1]維基百科,《師範學校》,
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E5%B8%AB%E7%AF%84%E5%AD%B8%E6%A0%A1
[2]維基百科,《交互式敘事》,
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zhtw/%E4%BA%A4%E4%BA%92%E5%BC%8F%E5%8F%99%E
4%BA%8B
[3]孫春在,遊戲式數位學習。臺北:高等教育,(2013)。
[4]維基百科,《數位匯流》,
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zh-tw/%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E5%8C%AF%E6%B5%81
[5] 維基百科,《數位移民》,
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zhtw/%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E5%8E%9F%E4%BD%8F%E6%B0%9191
[6] 維基百科,《數位原生》,
https://zh.wikipedia.org/zhtw/%E6%95%B8%E4%BD%8D%E5%8E%9F%E4%BD%8F%E6%B0%9191
[7] James Paul Gee(2008),What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and
Literacy ,Palgrave Macmillan Basingstoke 2008.
[8]親子天下(2020),網紅世代教養調查,https://www.parenting.com.tw/article/5087820
[9]教育評量的省思, 中等教育期刊,70:3 2019.09[民 108.09],99.6-10
[10] Graham, S. E. (1998). Developing student outcomes for the psychology major: An
assessment-as-learning framework. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7, 165-170.
doi:10.1111/1467–8721.ep10836897
[11] 作者:史鐵凡‧休維爾(Stéphane Chauvier)譯者: 蘇威任 , 什麼是遊戲?
Qu’est-ce qu’un jeu 出版社:開學文化,出版日期:2016/12/22。
69
[12] 周庚瑜(2012),碩士論文,惠欽格(J. Huizinga)的「遊戲人」(Homo Ludens)人類圖像
及其在教育上的蘊義 Johan Huizinga’s “Homo Ludens” human-picture idea and its meaning
for education,國立臺灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文,中華民國一百零一年一月(2012)。
[13]蔡淑苓(1993)。遊戲理論與應用。台南家專學報,12,151-174。
[14] Allen Bevans,Who plays mobile games?, https://www.gamesindustry.biz/who-playsmobile-games
[15]游易霖(2011)數位遊戲藝術之文化現象探討‧廣播與電視‧ 第三十二期 民 100 年
6 月頁 1-25。
[16]維基百科,《第三人效果》,
https://zh.m.wikipedia.org/zhtw/%E7%AC%AC%E4%B8%89%E4%BA%BA%E6%95%88
%E6%9E%9C
[17]張玉佩(2009)。遊戲、人生:從線上遊戲玩家探討網路世界與日常生活的結合。
[18]蔡明春、鄭青展、林淑萍(2008)。大學生線上遊戲成癮對身心健康與學習態度之
影響—以台灣北區六所大學為例。台灣公公衛生雜誌,18(2),143-157 。
[19]孫春在,20160514 孫春在 數位時代的遊戲式學習,https://youtu.be/4tAsqOWMh2k
[20] Freud, S. (1923). The Ego and the Id. In J. Strachey et al. (Trans.), The Standard Edition
of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XIX. London: Hogarth
Press.
[21]Maccoby, E. E., & Wilson, W. C. (1957). Identification and observational learning from
films. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 55, 76–87.
[22] Jonathan Cohen. (2001). Defining Identification: A theoretical look at the identification
of audiences with media characters, Mass Communication and Society, 4, 01Aug2001, 245
[23] Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986), Rediscovering Social Identity: Core Sources.
Psychology Press. 2010.
70
[24]林若慧(2011)運動賽事之球迷態度對支持行為的溢出效果--社會認同理論之運用
Appling the Social Identify Theory to the spillover effect of sport event fans’ attitudes on
supportive behaviors
計畫編號:NSC 100-2410-H-415-034 執行期間:100 年 08 月 01 日至 101 年 07
月 31 日 計畫主持人: 林若慧 國立嘉義大學觀光休閒管理研究所 計畫參與人員:
陳思伶 國立嘉義大學觀光休閒管理研究所 (兼任助理) 黃柏憲 國立嘉義大學觀光休
閒管理研究所。
[25] Knippenberg, D., & Schie, E. C. (2000). Foci and correlates of organizational
identification, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73(2), 137-147.
[26]Kibler, R. J., et al. (1974), Objectives for Instruction and Evaluation, Allyn & Bacon,
Incorporated (1 Mar. 1974)
[27]簡茂發(1989)。教學評量原理與方法。中華民國教育協會(主編),有效教學研究
(頁 395-426),台北市:台灣書店。
[28]簡茂發(1996)。評量。載於黃政傑(主編),教學評量(頁 1-40)。台北市:師大書
苑。
[29] Wikipedia,Gamification,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamif⋯⋯
[30]Nick Pelling, The (short) prehistory of “gamification”…
, https://nanodome.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/the-short-prehistory-of-gamification/
[31] Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, September). From game design
elements to gamefulness: Defining gamification. Paper presented at the 15th international
academic MindTrek conference, Tampere, Finland(2011, September).
[32] Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game
mechanics in web and mobile apps. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
71
[33]呂政勳,碩士論文,教師遊戲經驗與玩家認同對數位遊戲管教態度之探討,國立交通
大學,100 年 6 月論文。
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊