English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 94986/125531 (76%)
Visitors : 31014006      Online Users : 476
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    政大機構典藏 > 教育學院 > 教育學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/54722
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/54722

    Title: 知識翻新教學對學生「想法」概念理解之影響
    Effects of knowledge building on students’ understanding of the concept of “idea”
    Authors: 邱婕欣
    Contributors: 洪煌堯
    Keywords: 知識翻新教學
    knowledge building pedagogy
    computer-supported collaborative learning
    concept of idea
    idea quality
    Date: 2011
    Issue Date: 2012-10-30 11:33:20 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本研究主要目的為探究知識翻新教學對學生知識共構歷程與想法概念理解的影響。以知識翻新原則(knowledge building principles)為教學理念(Scardamalia, 2002),輔以知識論壇(Knowledge Forum™)的教學設計,提供一個電腦支援協作學習的線上環境,幫助學生體驗與想法互動、想法共構與翻新想法的過程,並紀錄學生多元的想法。本研究採個案研究法,研究對象為某國立大學的學生(N=41),教學時程為一學期。資料來源與分析包含:(1)知識論壇平台活動情形--透過知識論壇分析工具與社會網絡分析法來瞭解學生在平台上的活動量與互動關係;(2)知識論壇中學生想法互動貼文--透過Dean, Hender, Rodgers與Santanenm(2006)建立的想法品質評估量表,以新穎性、可行性、關聯性與具體性四個面向進行學生想法的評分,另外也採用Garrison, Anderson與Archer(2001)提出的實用探索模式,將學生想法分為引發事件、探索、整合、決議四個探索層次進行分析;(3)想法概念開放式問卷前後測--由學生的回答進行開放式編碼,搭配Popper(1972)三個世界知識論(3-World epistemology)的理念框架進行分析。研究結果發現:(1)知識翻新與知識論壇輔助的教學設計,能幫助學生產生想法、進行想法互動,提升想法層次;(2)在知識翻新教學環境下,能提升學生對於想法概念的多元理解,並逐漸將想法視為可被交換與運用來解決真實問題的具體產物;(3)品質與數量並重的想法共構歷程,與學生對於想法概念的理解程度有相輔相成的可能性;(4)知識翻新學習環境,能促使學生提出多元化的想法,透過探索與整合進行知識共構。以上結果顯示,知識翻新環境提供了一個開放討論的空間,讓學生願意分享想法,使想法有改進的可能;此外,也讓學生在過程中,對於想法概念的理解更多元,也更認同想法是具體且共有的社會實體。
    The purpose of this research was to investigate the effects of knowledge building pedagogy on college students’ understanding of the concept of ‘ideas’. Knowledge building principles (Scardamalia, 2002) and Knowledge Forum (KF) technology were employed to support and record the process of idea generation, idea co-construction and idea elaboration. This study adopted a case study design. Participants were 41 undergraduates who engaged in a course titled “Introduction to Living Technology” for one semester. Data sources and analyses included: (1) students’ online activities in KF, which was assessed using Analytic Toolkit and social network analysis in order to understand the process of interaction among students; (2) students’ online discourse data, which were scored using idea evaluation scale (see Dean, Hender, Rodgers & Santanenm, 2006) including four dimensions--novelty, workability, relevance and specificity; moreover, students’ ideas were content-analyzed using practical inquiry model including four levels--triggering event, exploration, integration and resolution (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2001); (3) pre-post survey with five open-ended questions that assessed students’ understanding of the concept of ‘idea’ in several aspects (e.g., definition, purpose, and source); moreover, students’ answers were analyzed by open coding using Popper’s three-world epistemological framework. The findings were as follows: (1) knowledge building and technology was found helpful for students to generate ideas, facilitate idea interaction and improve ideas; (2) engaging students in knowledge building was likely to enhance students’ diverse perceptions about ideas, and students tended to see ideas as improvable objects of value for potential knowledge construction; (3) idea co-construction processes, emphasizing both the quality and quantity of ideas, were also likely to enhance students’ diversified perceptions about ‘ideas’; (4) knowledge building environment was beneficial for students to implement knowledge co-construction through exploration and integration. To conclude, knowledge building environment provided an open space for students to share ideas and made idea elaboration more easily; besides, via co-construction process, students’ understanding of the concept of ‘idea’ becomes more diverse, and tended to recognize ideas as tangible, social epistemic entities.
    Reference: 中文部分
    教育部(2003)。創造力教育白皮書。民100年9 月18日, 取自
    http://www.edu.tw/files/site_content/B0039/92.03 創造力教育白皮書.pdf。
    鄭晉昌,蔡駿暉採訪(1996)。建構主義與合作學習-CYBERSPACE 中的合作學習。教育研究雙月刊,49,13-15

    Amabile, T. M. (1997). Motivating creativity in organization: On doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review, 40(1), 39-58.
    Amabile, T. M. (1998). How to kill creativity. Harvard Business Review, 76, 77–87.
    Argote, L. & Kane, A. A. (2003). Learning from direct and indirect experience in organizations. In P. Paulus & B. Nijstad (Eds). Group creativity: innovation through collaboration. (pp.277-303). NewYork: Oxford University Press
    Bereiter, C. (1994). Constructivism, socioculturalism, and Popper's World 3. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 21-23.
    Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET for windows: software for social network analysis (version 6). Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
    Brown, J., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40-57.
    Burt, M. R., Zweig J. M., & Roman J. (2002). Modeling the payoffs of interventions to reduce adolescent vulnerability. Journal of Adolescent Health 31, 40-57.
    Burtis, J. (2002). Analytic toolkit for knowledge forum (Version 4.0). Toronto, ON: Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto.
    Clark, H. H., & Schaefer, E. F. (1989). Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13, 259-294.
    Collins, A. & R. Halverson (2010). The second educational revolution: Rethinking education in the age of technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 18-27.
    Dean, D. L., Hender J. M., Rodgers T. L., & Santanen E. L. (2006). Identifying quality, novel, and creative ideas: constructs and scales for idea evaluation. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 7(10), 646-698.
    Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1987). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: toward the solution of a riddle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(3), 497-509.
    Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532–550.
    Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
    Gongla, P. & Rizzuto, C.R.( 2001). Evolving communities of practice: IBM global services experience. IBM System Journal , 40, 4.
    Hausmann, R. G. M., Chi, M. T. H., & Roy, M. (2004). Learning from collaborative problem solving: An analysis of three hypothesized mechanism. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 26th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Chicago, IL, 547-552.
    Heap, J. (1989). The Management of Innovation and Design, Cassell, London.
    Hong, H. Y., Scardamalia, M., Messina, R. & Teo, C.( 2008). Principle-based design to foster adaptive use of technology for building community knowledge. In G. Kanselaar, et al.(Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th ICLS. Utrecht, Netherlands, 374-381.
    Hong, H. Y., Chen, F. C., Chang, H. M., Liao, C. C. Y., & Chan, W. C. (2009). Exploring the effectiveness of an idea-centered design to foster a computer-supported knowledge building environment. In C. O'Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann, A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Computer supported collaborative learning practices: CSCL2009 Conference proceedings , 142-150. Rhodes, Greece: International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.
    Hong, H. Y., & Sullivan, F. R. (2009). Towards an idea-centered, principle-based design approach to support learning as knowledge creation. Educational Technology Research & Development, 57(5), 613-627.
    Hong, H. Y. (2010). An idea-centered view of representing and assessing community knowledge. Paper presented in 2010 Knowledge Building Summer Institute, Toronto.
    Hong, H. Y., Chen, F. C., Chai, C., S., & Chan, W. C. (2011). Teacher-education students’ views about knowledge building theory and practice. Instructional Science, 39(4), 467-482.
    So H. J., Tan, E., & Tay, J. (2010). Fostering collaborative knowledge building culture: initial experiences in the context of mobile learning. Paper presented at the 14th Knowledge Building Summer Institute, Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology.
    Jeong, H., & Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Construction of shared knowledge during collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on computer support for collaborative learning, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, pp. 130–134.
    Jeong, H. (1998). Knowledge co-construction during collaborative learning. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Pittsburgh.
    Kerr, D. S., & Murthy, U. S. (2004). Divergent and convergent idea generation in teams: A comparison of computer-mediated and face-to-face communication. Group Decision and Negotiation, 13(4), 381-399.
    Kohn, N. W., Paulus, P. B., & Choi, Y. (2011). Building on the ideas of others: An examination of the idea combination process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(3), 554-561.
    Koschmann, T. (1996). Computer supported collaborative learning: theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum.
    Koschmann, T. (2002). Dewey's contribution to the foundations of CSCL research. CSCL 2002 Proceedings, 17-23, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Hillsdale, New Jersey, USA.
    Lakkala, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2005). Teachers' pedagogical designs for technology-supported collective inquiry: A national case study. Computers and Education, 45, 337-356.
    Lawrence, T. B. (1995). Power and resources in an organizational community. Academy of Management Best Papers Proceedings, 251–255.
    Lee, E. Y. C., Chan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2006). Students assessing their own collaborative knowledge building. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 57–87.
    MacCrimmon, K. R., & Wagner, C. (1994). Stimulating ideas through creativity software. Manage. Sci., 40(11), 1514-1532.
    Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Orr, J. (1990). Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: War stories and community memory in a service culture. In D. S. Middleton & D. Edwards (Eds.), Collective remembering: memory in society, pp. 169–189. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
    Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination, principles and procedures of creative problem-solving: Scribner.
    Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Murayama, I., Inagaki, S., Takenaka, M., Nakayama, H., et al. (2004). Design experiments in Japanese elementary science education with computer support for collaborative learning: hypothesis testing and collaborative construction. International Journal of Science Education, 26(10), 1199-1221.
    Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557-576.
    Panitz, T. (1997). A definition of collaborative v.s cooperative learning. Retrieved fromhttp://www.londonmet.ac.uk/deliberations/collaborative-learning/panitz-paper.cfm
    Papert, S. (2000). What’s the big idea: Towards a pedagogy of idea power. IBM Systems Journal, vol. 39, no. 3-4.
    Paulus, P.B., & Yang, H.C. (2000). Idea generation in groups: A basis for creativity in organizations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82, 76-87.
    Paulus, P.B. & Nijstad, B.A., Eds. (2003). Group creativity: innovation through collaboration. New York, Oxford University Press Inc.
    Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Roschelle, J. (1992) Learning by collaborating: convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 3, 235–276.
    Rothaermel, F. T., & Sugiyama, S. (2001). Virtual internet communities and commercial success: individual and community-level theory grounded in the atypical case of TimeZone.com. Journal of Management, 27 (3), 297–312.
    Sarason, S. B. (1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a community psychology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Sawyer, R. K. (2004). Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12-20.
    Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1983). The development of evaluative, diagnostic and remedial capabilities in children’s composing. In M. Martlew (Ed.), The psychology of written language: Developmental and educational perspectives , pp. 67-95. New York, NJ: Wiley and Sons.
    Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society , pp.67-98. Chicago: Open Court.
    Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003a). Knowledge building environments: Extending the limits of the possible in education and knowledge work. In A. DiStefano, K.E. Rudestam, & R. Silverman (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distributed learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
    Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003b). Beyond brainstorming: Sustained creative work with ideas. Education Canada, 43(4), 4-7, 44.
    Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/Knowledge Forum®. In Education and technology: An encyclopedia , 183-192. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
    Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer(Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences , pp.97-118. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Shapiro, C., & Varian, H. R. (1999). Information rules: A strategic guide to the network economy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
    Singh, J., & Fleming, L. (2010). Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Manage. Sci., 56(1), 41-56.
    Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from http://www.cis.drexel.edu/faculty/gerry/mit/.
    Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, pp. 409-426. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
    Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group Process and Productivity. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    Sun, Y., Zhang, J., & Scardamalia, M. (2008). Addressing gender gap in literacy through knowledge building: A follow-up analysis of different content areas. Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.
    Suthers, D. (1998). Technical report: Computer aided education and training initiative. Pittsburgh: Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
    Suthers, D. (2005). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. Paper presented at the international conference of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2005), Taipei, Taiwan.
    Tao, P. K. & Gunstone, R.F. (1999) Conceptual change in science through collaborative learning at the computer. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 39-57.
    Titus, P. A. (2000). Marketing and the creative problem-solving process. Journal of Marketing Education, 22, 225-236.
    Toubia, O. (2006). Idea generation, creativity, and incentives. Marketing Science, 25(5), 411-425.
    Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Whitehead, A. N. (1970). Science and the modern world (Mentor ed.). New York: New American Library.
    Yin, R. (1984). Case study research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
    Description: 碩士
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099152003
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[教育學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    200301.pdf9497KbAdobe PDF1179View/Open

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback