臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

TIMSS研究指出我國學生在數學「幾何」的成就表現較其他數學主題內容表現劣。POE教學策略(預測Predict、觀察Observe、解釋Explain)的學習活動能有效幫助學生在學習中進行知識之間的推理、解釋來學習，希冀以此來提高學生在幾何的學習表現。
但研究指出進行獨自觀察、反思及解釋的POE教學策略活動時對於低成就學生的學習負擔較大，且學生若遇到學習困難沒有得到指導，學生會感到沮喪或惱怒。為了解決這個問題，研究者將加入合作學習模式，讓學生藉著討論過程來整合線索建構知識。本研究以POE教學策略結合合作學習模式之數位學習進行國小五年級數學長方體和正方體的體積概念教學，藉此探討此學習模式對學生學習成就、學習保留、學習動機、認知負荷及自我效能之影響。
本研究採準實驗研究法，研究對象為國小五年級兩個班共計41名學生，以班級區分為實驗組進行POE教學策略結合合作學習模式，而控制組則進行結合POE教學策略之學習模式進行學習。實驗結果發現POE教學策略結合合作學習模式在學習成效、學習保留及自我效能上顯著優於結合POE教學策略之學習模式；且POE教學策略結合合作學習模式並不會降低學生的學習動機，也不會增加學生的認知負荷。
實驗組學生藉由POE教學策略結合合作學習模式的協助，學生在學習成就表現好，且對自我表現也較為自信，覺得學習變得更為有趣。因此，數位學習系統加入POE教學策略結合合作學習模式是有助於學生有效學習的方式。

The TIMSS study pointed out that Taiwan students' performance in "geometry" is inferior to other mathematical topics. POE strategy can solve this problem, because it emphasize the link between the learner's prior knowledge and new concepts, which can help students to learn new concept.
Although POE strategy is effective way for students, however the steps: predict, observation and explain are greater burden of learning for low-achievement students. And some studies pointed out that students who have no guidance in learning difficulties, students will feel depressed or angry.
Collaborative learning is known to be an effective knowledge construction for helping learners integrate clues to construct knowledge through the discussion process. To address the problem, an integrated POE strategy and Collaborative learning of the digital learning model has been developed; moreover, an experiment has been conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach on students’ learning performance, learning retention, learning motivation, learning self-efficacy and cognitive load in an elementary school mathematic studies course.
This experimental result shows that the integrated collaborative POE strategy and digital learning approach can significantly improve the students’ learning achievement, learning retention and learning self-efficacy. Nevertheless, this approach has no effect on their learning motivation and cognitive load. Therefore, collaborative POE strategy and digital learning approach is a potential and effective way to help students with better learning.

摘　　要 i
Abstract ii
目 次 iii
表 次 v
圖 次 vi
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的與問題 4
第三節 名詞釋義 5
第四節 研究範圍與限制 7
第二章 文獻探討 8
第一節 數學體積教學相關研究 8
第二節 資訊科技學習相關研究 10
第三節 POE教學策略 15
第四節 合作學習 18
第三章 數位學習系統內容設計 21
第一節 數位學習系統 21
第二節 體積單元學習教材分析 24
第三節 數位學習系統教學內容設計 28
第四節 不同學習模式實驗教學情形 36
第四章 研究方法 41
第一節 研究對象 41
第二節 研究工具 42
第三節 研究設計與架構 44
第四節 實驗流程 46
第五節 資料處理與分析 48
第五章 研究結果 50
第一節 數學學習成就結果分析 50
第二節 學習保留結果分析 52
第三節 數學學習動機分析 53
第四節 認知負荷分析 55
第五節 學習自我效能結果分析 56
第六章 結論與建議 59
第一節 結論與討論 59
第二節 未來研究建議 63
參考文獻 65
一、 中文部分 65
二、 英文部分 67
附錄 71
附錄一 數學教學實驗成就前測卷 71
附錄二 數學教學實驗成就後測卷 74

一、中文部分
王金國 (2000)。簡介小組討論教學法。教育研究，8，137-147。
朱玉如 (2003)。台北市國小學童面積概念學習情形之探討。台中市：台中師範學院教育測驗統計研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
吳穎沺、蔡今中 (2005)。建構主義式的科學學習活動對國小高年級學生認知結構之影響─以「電與磁」單元為例。科學教育學刊，13(4)，387-411。
邱世學 (2008)。 國小五年級學童三角形面積概念之試題編製與分析 (未出版碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學，臺中市。
邱志忠 (2002)。國小教師運用資訊科技融入學科教學之教學策略研究。國立高雄師範大學工業科技教育學系學位論文。
林新發 (2018)。提高教師專業素養促進教育實驗創新。臺灣教育評論月刊，7(1)，128-134。
林碧珍 (2015)。TIMSS 2011 臺灣國小四年級學生的數學成就及其相關因素之探討 (III)。科學教育月刊。
紀秋雲、蔡明貴 (2016)。資訊科技融入教學策略對國小高年級學童學習成效之研究。學校行政，(103)，34-60。
國家教育研究院電子報 (2013)科技是發展還是阻礙學生學習？—「國際認知負荷理論工作坊」側寫。取自https://epaper.naer.edu.tw/index.php?edm_no=92&content_no=2263
許良榮 (2005)。序列性 POE 之特色與設計。國教輔導，45(2)，6-12。
許嵐婷 (2003)。國小五年級面積概念之教學研究。國立台中教育大學數學教育學位論文。
教育部 (2003)。國民小學九年一貫課程綱要─數學領域。取自http://teach.eje.edu.tw/data/files/class_rules/math.pdf
教育部 (2016)。2020資訊教育總藍圖。取自 http://ws.moe.edu.tw/001.Upload/3/relfile/6315/46563/65ebb64a-683c-4f7a-bcf0-325113ddb436.pdf
陳小華 (2017)。結合 POE 教學策略之數位遊戲式學習對國小生數學學習成效之影響。國立臺北教育大學數學暨資訊教育學系學位論文。1-87。
馮莉雅 (2003)。影響國中數學科低成就學生學習之因素調查研究。教育學刊，20期，2003，79-99。
黃信嘉、楊鎮華、蔣旭政 (2013)。探究式學習策略輔以行動擴增實境之學習動機探討: 以國小水生課程為例。全球華人計算機教育應用學報，第九卷第二期，126-145。
楊宗樺 (2011)。POE教學策略融入互動式電子白板對中學生月相概念學習成效之影響。臺灣師範大學生物學系在職進修碩士班學位論文，1-107。
楊明坤、李建璋、林淑惠、林依柔 (2003)。探究式教學融入國小高年級數學領域學習之行動研究─ 以體積單元為例。科學月刊，402，472-473。
楊凱翔、葉淑珍、譚寧君 (2014)。建立立體心像教學活動之國小體積課程設計本位研究。國立臺灣科技大學人文社會學報，10(3)，225-252。
劉世雄 (2000)。國小教師運用資訊科技融入教學策略之探討。資訊與教育雜誌，78，60-66。
謝秉桓 (2014)。POEC教學策略之理論與實務。取自http://chemed.chemistry.org.tw/?p=3504


二、英文部分
Antonietti, A., & Cantoia, M. (2000). To see a painting versus to walk in a painting: an experiment on sense-making through virtual reality. Computers & Education, 34(3-4), 213-223.
Ausubel, D. P.(1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive viewpoint. New York: Rinehart & Winston.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Chiu, B. C., Liu, C. C., Chiang, S. H. F., Wen, C. T., & Wu, S. W. (2017). An analysis of student collaborative problem solving activities mediated by collaborative simulations. Computers & Education, 114, 222-235.
Chen, C. H., Law, V., & Chen, W. Y. (2018). The effects of peer competition-based science learning game on secondary students’ performance, achievement goals, and perceived ability. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(2), 235-244.
Chen, Y.-L., Pan, P.-R., Sung, Y.-T., & Chang, K.-E. (2013). Correcting Misconceptions on Electronics: Effects of a simulationbased learning environment backed by a conceptual change model. Educational Technology & Society, 16 (2), 212–227.
Dunleavy, J., & Milton, P. (2008). Student engagement for effective teaching and deep learning. Education Canada, 48(5), 4-8.
Ekanayake, S. Y., & Wishart, J. (2015). Integrating mobile phones into teaching and learning: A case study of teacher training through professional development workshops. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 173-189.
Fu, Q. K., & Hwang, G. J. (2018). Trends in mobile technology-supported collaborative learning: A systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2016. Computers & Education, 119, 129-143.
Gifford, C. E., & Mullaney, J. P. (1997). From Rhetoric to Reality: Applying the Communication Standards to the Classroom.
Hatun Ataş, A., & Delialioğlu, Ö. (2018). A question–answer system for mobile devices in lecture-based instruction: a qualitative analysis of student engagement and learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(1), 75-90.
 
Hong, J. C., Hwang, M. Y., Liu, M. C., Ho, H. Y., & Chen, Y. L. (2014). Using a “prediction–observation–explanation” inquiry model to enhance student interest and intention to continue science learning predicted by their Internet cognitive failure. Computers & Education, 72, 110-120.
Hong, J. C., Tsai, C. R., Hsiao, H. S., Chen, P. H., Chu, K. C., Gu, J., & Sitthiworachart, J. (2019). The effect of the “Prediction-observation-quiz-explanation” inquiry-based e-learning model on flow experience in green energy learning. Computers & Education, 133, 127-138.
Hsiao, H. S., Chen, J. C., Hong, J. C., Chen, P. H., Lu, C. C., & Chen, S. Y. (2017). A five-stage prediction-observation-explanation inquiry-based learning model to improve students’ learning performance in science courses. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 3393-3416.
Hsu, C. Y., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Examining the effects of combining self-explanation principles with an educational game on learning science concepts. Interactive Learning Environments, 21(2), 104-115.
Hsu, C. Y., Tsai, C. C., & Liang, J. C. (2011). Facilitating preschoolers’ scientific knowledge construction via computer games regarding light and shadow: The effect of the prediction-observationexplanation (POE) strategy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(5), 482–493.
Hwang, G. J., Yang, L. H., & Wang, S. Y. (2013), A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students’ learning performance in natural science courses, Computers & Education, 69, 121-130.
Hwang, G. J., Wu, P. H., & Ke, H. R. (2011). An interactive concept map approach to supporting mobile learning activities for natural science courses. Computers & education, 57(4), 2272-2280.
Joyce, C. (2006). Predict, observe, explain (POE). Tersedia: http://arb. nzcer. org. nz/strategies/poe. php [22 Desember 2012].
Karamustafaoğlu, S., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2015). Electrochemistry concepts using the predictobserve-explain strategy. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(5), 923–936.
Kearney, M., Treagust, D. F., Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. G. (2001). Student and teacher perceptions of the use of multimedia supported predict-observe-explain tasks to probe understanding. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 589–615.
 
Liao, C. W., Chen, C. H., & Shih, S. J. (2019). The interactivity of video and collaboration for learning achievement, intrinsic motivation, cognitive load, and behavior patterns in a digital game-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 133, 43-55.
Liew, C. W., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). The Effectiveness of Predict-Observe-Explain Tasks in Diagnosing Students' Understanding of Science and in Identifying Their Levels of Achievement.
Liu, M., Geurtz, R., Karam, A., Navarrete, C., & Scordino, R. (2013). Research on mobile learning in adult education. On the move: Mobile learning for development, 105-160.
Nie, Y., & Lau, S. (2010). Differential relations of constructivist and didactic instruction to students' cognition, motivation, and achievement. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 411-423.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2010). Education at a glance 2010: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD.
Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 338122)
Price, S., & Rogers, Y. (2004). Let’s get physical: The learning benefits of interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Computers & Education, 43(1-2), 137-151.
Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students' learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43-51.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and instruction, 4(4), 295-312.
Ting, Y. L., & Tai, Y. (2004). The Design of Computer Multimedia Material for English Language Learning. In Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Computational Linguistics and Speech Processing (pp. 249-256).
Wang, L. C., & Chen, M. P. (2010). The effects of game strategy and preference‐matching on flow experience and programming performance in game‐based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(1), 39-52.
Wang, S. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2012). The role of collective efficacy, cognitive quality, and task cohesion in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 58(2), 679-687.
White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Prediction-observation-explanation. Probing understanding, 4.
Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2005). The effect of constructivist-oriented science instruction on elementary school students’ cognitive structures about basic electromagnetism. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 387–411.
Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Liu, T. C. (2016). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students' learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252-275.
Zacharia, Z. C. (2005). The impact of interactive computer simulations on the nature and quality of postgraduate science teachers’ explanations in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27(14), 1741–1767.