Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/136633
題名: 知識創新活動融入繪本教學對國中生同理心發展之影響
Effects of knowledge building activities integrated with picture book teaching on junior high school students’ empathy development
作者: 宋佳霖
Sung, Chia-Lin
貢獻者: 洪煌堯<br>郭昭佑
Hong, Huang-Yao<br>Guo, Chao-yu
宋佳霖
Sung, Chia-Lin
關鍵詞: 知識創新
繪本教學
同理心
創造思考
Knowledge building
Picture book teaching
Empathy
Creative thinking
日期: 2021
上傳時間: 4-八月-2021
摘要: 同理心在青少年發展良好人際關係上扮演重要角色。為發展出一套能有效培養青少年同理心的教學法,本研究嘗試將知識創新理念融入於學生的繪本學習活動中,並進行教學實驗。研究對象為臺北市某國中31位八年級學生。透過準實驗研究法,本研究將學生分為實驗組(n=16)與控制組(n=15)。在知識創新原則的引導下,兩組學生的討論活動皆透過知識論壇(Knowledge Forum)來記錄他們在知識創新活動時的想法與思考歷程。\n\n教學設計方面,除了運用以想法為中心的知識創新原則為基礎並結合繪本教學活動外,也輔以威廉斯創造思考教學策略設計提問,來幫助學生發展多元想法。其中,實驗組學生主要透過「經驗學習圈」整合生活經驗並進行同理心的省思與討論,以建構相關知識概念與理解;控制組則只從繪本中進行自主反思,未使用「經驗學習圈」之鷹架引導。為達研究目的,本研究搜集以下資料:(1)知識論壇閱讀、修改、貼文紀錄;(2)繪本情境討論;(3)繪本內容省思;(4)同理心回應練習;(5)生活經驗調查問卷(同理心問卷);(6)學習感受問卷(自主學習能力問卷)。資料分析採敘述統計、成對樣本t檢定、獨立樣本t檢定、共變數分析、及質性資料分析。\n\n根據分析結果,本研究的主要發現如下:(1)知識論壇活動指標如閱讀、修改、貼文紀錄等顯示兩組學生在每次的課程中,皆能善用平台進行同理心相關的討論活動;(2)實驗組的討論想法品質在「多元流暢的想法」、「改善精進的想法」、「內容想像性」等三面向上,皆明顯優於控制組;(3)實驗組較控制組更能產出實踐同理心的具體行動思維;(4)實驗組在同理心的「認知理解」、「情緒感受」及「反應傾向」等三項度上,也皆明顯優於控制組;以及(5)經驗學習圈鷹架的使用,有助於提昇學生在學習動機方面的自主學習感受。\n\n綜上所述,本研究認為聚焦於生活經驗反思的知識創新活動,在融入繪本教學後,能夠有效促進國中學生同理心的發展。實驗組的學生不僅在知識創新歷程上,能進行有效的互動與討論,並產生多元與改進的想法;且在知識創新結果上,也對於學生在同理心的認知與情緒發展方面有所助益。本研究根據研究發現提出相應的建議,以供未來同理心培育及相關研究之參考。
Empathy plays a crucial role in developing harmonious interpersonal relationship. To develop an effective pedagogy that fosters empathy among teenagers, this study integrated knowledge building principles into picture-book learning activities in an intervention experiment. Participants included 31 eighth-grade students from a junior high school in Taipei, Taiwan. Using a quasi-experimental design, the students were divided into an experimental group (n=16) and a control group (n=15). Under the guidance of knowledge building principles, both groups engaged in collaborative discussion in Knowledge Forum to work productively with their ideas while enhancing their thinking process via online knowledge building activities.\n\nRegarding instructional design, in addition to integrating the idea-centered knowledge building pedagogy with the learning activities about picture books, this study also utilized Williams` creative thinking teaching strategies to encourage in-class and online discussions to foster idea diversity. The experimental group was guided by the “experiential learning cycle” for their self-reflection and class discussion in order to develop concepts and understanding of empathy in relation to their life experiences. On the other hand, the control group only conducted self-reflection and class discussion about the picture books by themselves without the guidance of the “experiential learning cycle”. In order to achieve the research purpose, this study collected the following data: (1) online interaction records in Knowledge Forum; (2) discussion of the story plots related to the picture books; (3) reflection after reading the picture books; (4) empathetic response exercise; (5) an empathy related questionnaire; (6) learning experience questionnaire. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, paired sample t-test, independent sample t-test, ANCOVA, and qualitative analysis, etc.\n\nBased on the data analyses, the main findings were as follows: (1) the online activity indicators such as note-reading, -revising, and -posting showed that students from both groups were able to make good use of the Knowledge Forum platform to engage in empathy-related discussion in each class; (2) The quality of idea-centered discussion from the experimental group was found significantly better than that of the control group in terms of &quot; idea diversity and fluency&quot;, &quot;idea improvement&quot;, and &quot;content imagination&quot; (3) Compared with the control group, the experimental group was more likely to develop concrete action plans for translating empathy into practice; (4) The experimental group performed better than the control group in terms of the three aspects of empathy including &quot;cognitive understanding&quot;, &quot;emotional feeling&quot; and &quot;reaction tendency&quot; and (5) the students also had better self-directed learning experience and motivation with the guiding help of the experiential learning cycle.\n\nIn conclusion, knowledge building activities integrated with picture-book instruction with focus on life-experience reflection were able to successfully facilitate junior high school students’ empathy development. From a process perspective, knowledge building seemed to have encouraged students to better interact, discuss and generate diverse and improvable ideas, and from an outcome perspective, knowledge building also seemed to have enhanced the development of both cognitive and emotional empathy among students. Based on the above findings, some relevant suggestions for future studies in relation to the cultivation of empathy among junior high school students were discussed.
參考文獻: 王千倖(2004)。繪本教學在師資培育上的應用。教育研究集刊,50(1),205-234。\n王仁癸(2012)。繪本教學提升語文力。國語日報,第13版。\n王秀園(1997)。兒童EQ的開發與培育(1~3年級學童)。臺北:稻田。\n王書桓(2013)。同理心與問題解決能力在父母管教方式與青少年攻擊行為關係之角色(未出版之碩士論文)。高雄醫學大學,高雄市。\n王嬿茹(2016)。運用繪本實施國中性別平等教育之行動研究-以「性別刻板印象」為核心(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,臺中市。\n朱麗葉(2009)。探索教育活動對國小學童同理心發展影響之研究—以台北縣一所國小為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n江守峻、陳婉真(2017)。經濟弱勢青少年的教師支持、同儕支持、家庭凝聚力與心理資本之關係:台灣貧窮兒少資料庫分析。當代教育研究季刊,25(4),11-50。\n江韋逸(2012)。國小高年級學童情緒智力、幸福感與同理心發展之探究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n君儀(2009)。同儕團體。取自財團法人亞東紀念醫院青少年健康中心網址http://depart.femh.org.tw/family/teen/t_20.html\n吳佩儒(2019)。英語繪本教學對國中學習低成就學生文法概念及閱讀理解能力之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n吳亭儀(2010)。以Kolb經驗學習圈進行國民小學高關懷學生小團體輔導之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台北教育大學,臺北市。\n吳愛芠(2010)。繪本教學融入國小六年級品格教育之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。\n林月芳(2016)。從繪本引導國一學生閱讀與創作──以《狐狸孵蛋》繪本創作實施歷程為例。中等教育,67(3),43-65。\n林月琴、曾賢熙(2012)。幾米繪本應用於國中藝術教學之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。大葉大學,彰化縣。\n林明儀(2012)。以英語繪本教學實施生命教育對提升國中生人際關係之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學,臺南市。\n林苡彤、程景琳(2010)。國中生關係攻擊加害者與受害者之規範信念、同理心與因應策略。臺東大學教育學報,21(2),1-28。\n林書平(2010)。以想法為中心的教學設計對大學生在知識建構與知識信念上之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。\n邱文彬、林美珍(2000)。後形式思考與人際關係之容忍性、同理心、自我揭露、自主性之關係。教育心理學報,32(1),67-94。\n邱紹一、黃德祥、洪福源(2010)。國中學生同理心,情緒智力及人際關係之研究。新生醫護管理專科學校新生學報,6(1),205-222。\n洪國財(2018)。知識共構式教學對科技大學生多元的文化認知影響。通識學刊:理念與實務,6(2),39-71。\n洪煌堯(2019)。知識創新教育的研究心路歷程。人文與社會科學簡訊,20(3),134-136。\n索家吉(2019)。英語繪本課程對於臺灣國中學生閱讀能力發展之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n張世彗(2013)。創造力:理論、技法與教學。臺北:五南。\n張玉成(2000)。思考技巧與教學。臺北:心理。\n張玉成(2002)。教師發問技巧。臺北:心理。\n張明芳(2012)。創造思考教學融入表演藝術課程對學生創造力影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北藝術大學,臺北市。\n張盈堃、呂家豪(2018)。透過桌遊與繪本談性別。性別平等教育季刊,83, 10-11。\n郭泰(2018)。怎樣成為企劃高手。臺北:時報。民110年5月10日,取自:https://www.gvm.com.tw/article/45611\n陳宜美(2019)。知識翻新活動融入英語課程對國中生閱讀理解及口說能力之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。\n陳明珠(1998)。道德推理與同理心之實驗研究。公民訓育學報,7,375-393。\n陳美靜(2017)。淺談國小校園中的情緒教育。臺灣教育評論月刊,6(6), 181-184。\n陳雪雲(2000)。經驗、自我與學習。社會教育學刊,29,59-92。\n陳漪真、佘永吉(2018)。直接教學法結合繪本教材對提升國中學習障礙學生英語字彙學習之成效。身心障礙研究季刊,16(3&4),201-219。\n陳曉瑩(2009)。運用繪本教學增進國小學童情緒智慧之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東科技大學,屏東縣。\n陳龍安(2006)。創造思考教學的理論與實際。臺北:心理。\n陳嬿如(2007)。創造性繪本教學方案對國小低年級學生創造力之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n程景琳、廖小雯(2013)。「同理反應情境式量表」之編製與信效度檢驗。健康促進與衛生教育學報,40,69-95。\n黃春惠(2013)。國中生同理心發展、復原力與同儕人際關係之相關研究-以新北市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n黃郁庭(2019)。人之初,性本「單」?國中國語文繪本教學之多元文化課程研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n楊淑涵(2013)。[繪本] 在個別諮商上的應用。諮商與輔導,331,37-41。\n楊婷雅(2015)。同理心融入創造思考教學與傳統教學法對提升同理心之效果比較(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n詹瓊華(2003)。高中家政課程實施創造思考教學之成效(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n廖孟青(2009)。國中學生繪本創作教學研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n劉正杰、董旭英(2018)。以同儕關係,從眾行為與認知同理心探討網路霸凌旁觀者之行為傾向。中華心理學刊,60(2),101-124。\n劉斐玟、朱瑞玲(2014)。同理心、情感與互為主體:人類學與心理學的對話。臺北:中央研究院民族學研究所。\n劉懿慧(無日期)。情緒管理-同理心的妙處。取自銘傳大學,前程規劃處網址https://cpc.mcu.edu.tw/zh-hant/content/%E6%83%85%E7%B7%92%E7%AE%A1%E7%90%86%EF%BC%8D%E5%90%8C%E7%90%86%E5%BF%83%E7%9A%84%E5%A6%99%E8%99%95\n蔡秀玲、楊智馨(2007)。情緒管理。臺北:揚智文化。\n蔡孟容(2018)。國中七年級學生同理心培育課程之成效研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市\n盧玫伃(2007)。繪本教學融入擴寫作文之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學,新北市。\n賴怡芬(2017)。國小教師應用繪本教學態度之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。屏東大學,屏東市。\n賴潔(2018)。真相思考繪本對於國中生情緒教學成效之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。\n鍾宜臻(2013)。電子繪本對國中學生英語廣泛閱讀學習成效影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北科技大學,臺北市。\n簡嘉盈、程景琳(2012)。同儕對高中生之利社會行為的影響:檢視同理心與友誼特性之調節角色。教育科學期刊,11(1),105-123。\n蘇明進(2021)。老蘇老師的同理心身教。臺北:親子天下。\n蘇靜怡(2007)。英語創造思考教學方案對國中學生創造力、學習態度及學業成就之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n王仁癸(2014)。繪本教學提升語文力教學策略。民109年12月16日,取自:http://ftp.ntct.edu.tw/%E6%95%99%E8%82%B2%E5%99%97%E6%B5%AA%E5%AE%A2%E5%B9%B4%E6%9C%83/Plurk%E7%AC%AC%E5%85%AD%E5%B1%86/%E5%BF%83%E8%B7%B3300/%E6%96%87%E5%AD%97%E6%AA%94/464_%E7%8E%8B%E4%BB%81%E7%99%B820140609091602.pdf\n江韋逸(2012)。國小高年級學童情緒智力、幸福感與同理心發展之探究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n林書平(2010)。以想法為中心的教學設計對大學生在知識建構與知識信念上之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。\n張玉成(2002)。教師發問技巧。臺北:心理。\n張玉成(2000)。思考技巧與教學。臺北市:心理。\n陳宜美(2019)。知識翻新活動融入英語課程對國中生閱讀理解及口說能力之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立政治大學,臺北市。\n陳明珠(1998)。道德推理與同理心之實驗研究。公民訓育學報,7,375-393。\n陳雪雲(2000)。經驗、自我與學習。社會教育學刊,29,59-92。\n陳龍安(2006)。創造思考教學的理論與實際。臺北:心理。\n程景琳、廖小雯(2013)。「同理反應情境式量表」之編製與信效度檢驗。健康促進與衛生教育學報,40,69-95。\n黃春惠(2013)。國中生同理心發展、復原力與同儕人際關係之相關研究-以新北市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n楊婷雅(2015)。同理心融入創造思考教學與傳統教學法對提升同理心之效果比較(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學,臺北市。\n魏麗敏、黃德祥(2007)。諮商理論與技術。臺北市:五南。\n\nAssociation for Experiential Education (n.d.). What is Experiential Education?. Retrieved December 16, 2020, from https://www.aee.org/what-is-ee\nBukowski, W. M., Hoza, B., & Boivin, M. (1993). Popularity, friendship, and emotional adjustment during early adolescence. New directions for child and adolescent development, 1993(60), 23-37.\nBurmark, L. (2004). Visual presentations that prompt, flash & transform. Media and Methods, 40(6): 4–5.\nCarkhuff, R. R. (1969). Helping and Human Relations, Vols. I and II . New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.\nCaswell, B., & Bielaczyc, K. (2002). Knowledge forum: Altering the relationship between students and scientific knowledge. Education, Communication & Information, 1, 281–305.\nChan, C. K. K., & van Aalst, J. (2006). Teacher development through computer-supported knowledge building: Experience from Hong Kong and Canadian teachers. Teaching Education, 17, 7–26.\nChen, B., & Hong, H. Y. (2016). Schools as knowledge-building organizations: Thirty years of design research. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 266-288.\nGazda, G. M., Balzer, F. J., Childers, W. C., Nealy, A. U., Phelps, R. E., & Walters, R.P. (2005). Human relations development: a manual for educators(7th ed.). Boston, MA: Ally and Bacon.\nGilbert, N. J., & Driscoll, M. P. (2002). Collaborative knowledge building: A case study. Educational technology research and development, 50(1), 59-79.\nHaneda, M., & Wells, G. (2000). Writing in knowledge-building communities. Research in the Teaching of English, 34, 430-457.\nHoffman, M. L. (1990). Empathy and justice motivation. Motivation and emotion, 14(2), 151-172.\nHong, H. Y., & Sullivan, F. R. (2009). Towards an idea-centered, principle-based design approach to support learning as knowledge creation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 613.\nHong, H. Y., Lin, P. Y., Chen, B., & Chen, N. (2019). Integrated STEM learning in an idea-centered knowledge-building environment. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(1), 63-76.\nHong, H. Y., Ma, L., Lin, P. Y., & Lee, K. Y. H. (2020). Advancing third graders’ reading comprehension through collaborative Knowledge Building: A comparative study in Taiwan. Computers & Education, 157, 103962.\nKolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. N. J.: Prentice-Hell.\nLin, P. Y., Hong, H. Y., & Chai, C. S. (2019). Fostering college students’ design thinking in a knowledge-building environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-26.\nMoss, J., & Beatty, R. (2006). Knowledge building in mathematics: Supporting collaborative learning in pattern problems. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 441-465.\nPelletier, J., Reeve, R., & Halewood, C. (2006). Young children`s knowledge building and literacy development through Knowledge Forum. Early Education and Development, 17, 323–346.\nResendes, M., & Chuy, M. (2010). Knowledge building for historical reasoning in Grade 4. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS 2010) (Vol. 2, pp. 443–444). Chicago, IL.: ISLS.\nScardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal Education in A Knowledge Society, 97, 67-98.\nScardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1999). Schools as knowledge-building organizations. Today’s children, tomorrow’s society: The developmental health and wealth of nations, 274-289.\nScardamalia, 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, NY: Cambridge University Press.\nScardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2010). A brief history of knowledge building. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1).\nSelman, R. L., & Byrne, D. F. (1974). A structural-developmental analysis of levels of role taking in middle childhood. Child development, 803-806.\nŠevečková, M. (2016). Creativity in foreign language teaching. The Journal of Education, Culture, and Society, 2, 180-188.\nSheu, H. C. (2008). The value of English picture story books. Journal of English Language Teachers, 62(1), 47-55.\nStepien, K. A., & Baernstein, A. (2006). Educating for empathy. Journal of general internal medicine, 21(5), 524-530.\nWilliams, F. E.(1970).Classroom ideas for encouraging thinking and feeling. NY:D. O. K.\nZhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Lamon, M., Messina, R., & Reeve, R. (2007). Socio-cognitive dynamics of knowledge building in the work of 9-and 10-year-olds. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(2), 117-145.\nZhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the learning sciences, 18(1), 7-44.
描述: 碩士
國立政治大學
教育學系
108152006
資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108152006
資料類型: thesis
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
200601.pdf6.63 MBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.