Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
題名 數位人文平台支援探究式學習模式發展與學習成效評估研究
The Effects of Web-based Inquiry-based Learning with the Support of a Digital Humanities Research Platform on Learning Performance作者 陳勁佑
Chen, Chin-Yu貢獻者 陳志銘
Chen, Chih-Ming
陳勁佑
Chen, Chin-Yu關鍵詞 探究式學習
數位人文平台
高中歷史課程
認知風格
學習成效
行為模式
滯後序列分析
Inquiry Based Learning
Digital humanities research platform
History curriculum in high school
Cognitive Style
Learning performance
Behavioral patterns
Lag Sequential Analysis日期 2020 上傳時間 3-Nov-2020 11:27:37 (UTC+8) 摘要 探究式學習為現代教育中常見的一種教學模式，探究式學習在過程中會激發學習者的學習興趣，透過實際操作或實驗研究，最終培養其獨立思考以及獨立解決問題的能力。根據我國教育部於108學年度正式實施的十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱，當中提到在歷史學科中，「歷史考察」可視為是一種探究式學習，歷史考察活動旨在引導學生進行閱讀與解析歷史資料，以提升學生的歷史思維。但此類型的課程在實施後也有許多執行上的問題需要解決，例如引導探究學習的方法不明確、缺乏歷史資料的分析運用等。而數位人文工具發展的主要目的之一即是幫助使用者分析並探查文本資料之脈絡，據此探索出在歷史文本中值得進一步研究的現象。因此，本研究發展高中歷史科課程探究學習模式，並使用具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔助學生進行探究學習活動，希望有助於學習者以不同的觀點以及視角了解欲探究之「歷史考察」問題，同時增進學習者對於歷史文本和脈絡的解讀與探究能力。本研究採用單組前實驗研究設計法，選取臺北市某私立高中一年級一個班級共16名學生為研究對象，以具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔以歷史科探究式學習課程，探討學習者在課程前後之探究學習成效與學習動機是否有顯著的提升，以及調查學生的學習滿意度；此外，也探討不同性別以及不同認知風格之兩組學習者，在學習成效、學習動機以及學習滿意度上是否具有顯著差異。本研究並以半結構式訪談瞭解學習者對於使用此一數位人文平台進行歷史科探究式學習課程的感受與建議。最後，透過滯後序列分析(Lag Sequential Analysis, LSA)比較高低不同學習成效學生使用具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔以歷史科探究式學習課程之有效行為模式。研究結果發現，使用具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔助歷史科探究式學習課程能有效促進整體學生、女性學生，以及場地獨立型與場地依賴型認知風格學生的學習成效；在學習動機部分，無論是整體學生、不同性別或是不同認知風格學生，其學習前的學習動機皆略高於學習後的學習動機，根據訪談資料顯示，可能是因為高中學生對於工具的使用以及分析結果的理解上仍有困難，而致使學習動機下降；而在學習滿意度上，學生無論性別或認知風格，皆呈現良好的學習滿意度，對此一學習模式均有正面肯定的態度。此外，根據滯後序列分析的結果，高學習成效學生在使用此一數位人文平台的行為模式較符合探究式學習的精神，意即高學習成效學生會反覆探索在「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」觀點網路圖中不同時期的關鍵詞概念以及資料，以及主動去查看與關鍵詞相關聯的詞彙之文本資料，並在使用「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」時，也會去採用不同的檢索方式來探索文本，且會在探索的過程中依照自身的需求交換使用另一種數位人文工具的功能；而低學習成效學生的行為模式則是使用「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」直接且單純的探索關鍵詞資料，並使用「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」搜尋以及補充閱讀與關鍵詞相關的全文，從行為模式來看並沒有充分使用這兩種數位人文工具的各項功能來進行學習。最後基於研究結果，本研究提出平台的改善建議，以及未來可行的研究方向。
Inquiry-Based Learning is a common instructional model in modern education that can stimulate learners` interest through practical operation or experimental research in the learning process, and eventually training the independent thinking and problem-solving skills. According to Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education in Taiwan, "historical investigation" can be regarded as an inquiry-based learning method in the subject of history, an activity of "historical investigation" can improve students` historical thinking skill by reading and analyzing historical materials. However, there`re still many implementation problems in this type of activity remain, such as an approach of guiding inquiry is unclear, and the lack of text analysis and application. Assisting users to analyze and explore the context of text is one of the main purposes of digital humanities tool, we can explore further research via digital humanities tool. As a result, this research aims to develop an inquiry-based learning model in high school history curriculum, by using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" to assist students in inquiry activities. Digital humanities tools in supporting inquiry-based learning model can help students find out the issue of "historical investigation" from different perspectives, improving the ability in interpreting and exploring the context of text.In this study, a one-group pre-experimental design was adopted, and 16 tenth-graders from one classes in high school in Taipei were selected as the research subjects to using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" in supporting the inquiry-based learning approach in history curriculum, comparing the difference in students` learning performance, learning motivation, and learning satisfaction after history curriculum. In addition, with sex and cognitive style as background variables, the influences in students` learning performance, learning motivation, and learning satisfaction were also thoroughly explored. Semi-structured interview was utilized for understanding students` opinions and perception of using digital humanities tools in history curriculum. Finally, lag sequential analysis was used for observing students` behavior processes with different learning performance using digital humanities tools in history curriculum.The research results found that using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" in supporting the inquiry-based learning approach in history curriculum could improve learning performance effectively for all students. As for students` learning motivation, it was slightly higher than after learning, according to interview results, the decline in learning motivation may be because students still have difficulties in the use of tools and don`t understanding the results of analysis. On the other hand, all students showed a higher level of learning satisfaction. Moreover, lag sequential analysis revealed that behavioral patterns of students with better learning performance were more in line with the concept of inquiry-based learning, they used "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" to repeatedly explored the concepts of keyword in different phase, then read the related texts. Students with better learning performance also used different retrieval methods to explore the texts with "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings". As for students with worst learning performance, their behavioral patterns were to explore the texts of keyword directly by using "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division", then using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" to collateral reading the texts related to keyword. Lastly, based on the research results, this study suggests that the improvement of "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division", and providing some directions of topics for the research field in the future.參考文獻 一、中文108課綱資訊網。十二年國民基本教育。上網日期：2019年12月12日。檢自：http://12basic.edu.tw/12about-3-1.php王美芬、熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北：心理出版社。任長松(2003)。《走向新課程》。香港：中文大學出版社。任長松(2005)。《探究式學習──學生知識的自主建構》。北京：教育科學出版社。吳百興、張耀云、吳心楷(2010)。科學探究活動中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊，56期，53-74。吳裕益(1987)。認知能力與認知型態個別差異現象之探討。教育學刊，7，253-300。辛瓊瑤(2016)。合作式網路探究課程發展與學習成效評估研究：以圖書館利用教育為例。國立政治大學圖書資訊學數位碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。邱偉雲(2011)。關鍵詞叢與文本意義挖掘的嘗試：以《清季外交史料》為例。載於項潔(主編)，數位人文在歷史學研究的應用，159-188。臺北市：國立臺灣大學出版中心。金觀濤(2011)。數位人文研究的理論基礎。載於項潔(主編)，數位人文研究的新視野：基礎與想像，43-61。臺北市：國立臺灣大學出版中心。祝平次(2018)。數位工具與文史研究。上網日期：2019年12月24日，檢自：https://kam-a-tiam.typepad.com/blog/2018/01/數位工具與文史研究.html徐宗林(1994)。現代教育思潮。臺北市：五南。教育部數位人文創新人才培育計畫。計畫介紹。上網日期：2019年12月12日。檢自：http://www.dhcreate.nccu.edu.tw/教育部資訊及科技教育司。人文社會科學教育發展建議報告書。上網日期：2019年12月15日。檢自：https://reurl.cc/0z8VlA陳志銘、徐志帆(2019)。基於主動式學習之古漢語斷句系統發展與應用研究。「第十屆數位典藏與數位人文國際研討會」發表之論文，法鼓文理學院。陳志銘、張志泓(2019)。基於自動圖像標註之圖像檢索工具發展與應用研究。「第十屆數位典藏與數位人文國際研討會」發表之論文，法鼓文理學院。陳志銘、張鐘(2018)。古籍數位人文研究平台之史料人物關係圖工具發展與應用。「第九屆數位典藏與數位人文國際研討會」發表之論文，法鼓文理學院。項潔、涂豐恩(2011)。導論—什麼是數位人文。從保存到創造：開啟數位人文研究，9-28。盧雨芯(2009)。引起學習動機—國中課程導言設計。歷史教育，15期，153-222。二、英文Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017Blessinger, P., & Carfora, J. (2014). Inquiry-based learning for the arts, humanities, and social sciences: A conceptual and practical resource for educators. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120140000002011Bradley, J. R., & Conway, R. W. (2003). Managing cyclic inventories. Production and Operations Management, 12(4), 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2003.tb00215.xBybee, R. W. (1997). The bscs 5e instructional model and 21st century skills. 1-24.Bybee, R. W., & Landes, N. M. (1988). The Science-Technology-Society (STS) Theme in Elementary School Science. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 8(6), 573–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/027046768800800604Chiang, T. H. C., Yang, S. J. H., & Hwang, G.-J. (2014). An Augmented Reality-based Mobile Learning System to Improve Students’ Learning Achievements and Motivations in Natural Science Inquiry Activities. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 352–365.Craig, W. A. (2004). Proof of concept: Performance testing in models. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 10(s2), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-9465.2004.00865.xDewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: Heath.Ehrman, M. E., Leaver, B. L., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System, 31(3), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00045-9Feldon, D., Franco, J., Chao, J., Peugh, J., & Cathy, M.-F. (2018). Self-efficacy change associated with a cognitive load-based intervention in an undergraduate biology course. Learning and Instruction, 56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.007Finn, J. D., & Cox, D. (1992). Participation and withdrawal among fourth-grade pupils. American Educational Research Journal, 29(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.2307/1162905Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Student and teacher perspectives on a close reading protocol. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53, 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2013.818175Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iversen, H., & Briggs, D. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82, 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206Gibbs, F. & Owens, T. (2012). Building Better Digital Humanities Tools: Toward broader audiences and user-centered designs. Digital Humanities Quarterly.Retrieved from http://www.trevorowens.org/wp-\\ content/uploads/2007/11/building-better-tools-owens-gibbs.pdfGrandjean, P. (2016). Paracelsus revisited: The dose concept in a complex world. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology, 119(2), 126–132.https://doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.12622Hou, Y. (2019). Gender Difference in Language Learning with Technology. In: Zaphiris P., Ioannou A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Designing Learning Experiences. HCII 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11590. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21814-0_19Jänicke, S., Franzini, G., Cheema, M. F., & Scheuermann, G. (2015). On close and distant reading in digital humanities: A survey and future challenges. 21.Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S., & Ammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in Higher Education: Reflections and Directions on Course Design and Teaching Methods. Innovative Higher Education, 31, 201–214.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9021-9Karplus & Their (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Rand McNally, Chicago, Ⅱ.Kirschenbaum, M. (2011). What is digital humanities and what’s it doing in English departments? Debates in the Digital Humanities, 3.Laursen, S., Hassi, M.-L., Kogan, M., Hunter, A.-B., & Weston, T. (2011). Evaluation of the IBL Mathematics Project: Student and Instructor Outcomes of Inquiry-Based Learning in College Mathematics.Lim, B. R. (2004). Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the web. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0007-1013.2004.00419.xLooi. (1998). Interactive learning environments for promoting inquiry learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 27(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.2190/L4Q4-8QMM-QPJ3-B5LJMartini, M. (1986). An analysis of the relationship(s} between and among computer-assisted instruction, learning style perceptual preferences attitudes, and the science achievement of seventh grade students in a suburban New York school district. Unpublished doctoral disseration, St. John`s University, Brooklyn.McCarty, T. L., Borgoiakova, T., Gilmore, P., Lomawaima, K. T., & Romero, M. E. (2005). Indigenous epistemologies and education—Self-determination, anthropology, and human rights. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.2005.36.1.001Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20347Moretti, G., Sprugnoli, R., Menini, S., & Tonelli, S. (2016). ALCIDE. Knowledge-Based Systems. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1016/j.knosys.2016.08.003Murphy, H. J., & Doucette, P. A. (1997). The group embedded figures test: Undergraduate business concentration and analytical skills. Journal of Education for Business, 73(1), 39-44.Nasreen, A., & Naz, A. (2013). A Study of Factors Effecting Academic Achievement of Prospective Teachers. /paper/A-Study-of-Factors-Effecting-Academic-Achievement-Nasreen-Naz/d449d16ff8fc236226a81d4811a980bbd3f9a21fOECD.org - OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/43023606.pdfOliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2001). Teaching and learning online: A beginner’s guide to e-learning and e-teaching in higher education. ECU PUBLICATIONS PRE.Retrieved from https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks/6832/Pedaste, M., (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Leijen, Ä., & Sarapuu, T. (2012). Improving students’ inquiry skills through reflection and self-regulation scaffolds. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 9, 81–95.Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Duncan, T., & Mckeachie, W. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor. Michigan, 48109, 1259.Preston, L., Harvie, K., & Wallace, H. (2015). Inquiry-based learning in teacher education: A primary humanities example. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(12). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n12.6Ramsay, C. R., Matowe, L., Grilli, R., Grimshaw, J. M., & Thomas, R. E. (2003). Interrupted time series designs in health technology assessment: Lessons from two systematic reviews of behavior change strategies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19(4), 613–623. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462303000576Schreibman, S., Siemens, R., & Unsworth, J. (2008). A companion to digital humanities. Retrieved from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/Schwarz, C., & White, B. (2005). Meta-modeling knowledge: Developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 165–205.Slotta, J.D., & Linn, M.C. (2009). WISE Science, Web-Based Inquiry in the Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.Smart, K. L., & Csapo, N. (2016). Learning by doing: Engaging students through learner-centered activities. Business Communication Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/10805699070700040302Soewarso. (2000). Cara-cara Penyampaian Pendidikan Sejarah Untuk Membangkitkan Minat Peserta Didik Mempelajari Bangsanya. DEPDIKNASSpronken-Smith, R., Bullard, J. O., Ray, W., Roberts, C., & Keiffer, A. (2008). Where might sand dunes be on mars? Engaging students through inquiry-based learning in geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260701731520Suchman, J. R. (1966). CHAPTER 11—A MODEL FOR THE ANALYSIS OF INQUIRY. Analyses of Concept Learning, 177–187. Academic Press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4832-3127-3.50016-XSudjana, N.(2000). Dasar-dasar Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT Sinar Baru Algensindo.Tracy, D., & Hoiem, E. F. M. (2017). Teaching digital humanities tools at a distance: A librarian-instructor partnership integrating scalar into a graduate distance course. At the Helm: Leading Transformation: The Proceedings of the ACRL 2017 Conference March 22–25, 2017. Retrieved from https://experts.illinois.edu/en/publications/teaching-digital-humanities-tools-at-a-distance-a-librarian-instrWang, D., Zheng, J., Kurosawa, M., Inaba, Y., & Kato, N. (2009). Changes in activities of daily living (ADL) among elderly Chinese by marital status, living arrangement, and availability of healthcare over a 3-year period. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 14(2), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12199-008-0072-7White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction - COGNITION INSTRUCT, 16, 3–118. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2Yager, R., & Akcay, H. (2010). The advantages of an inquiry approach for science instruction in middle grades. School Science and Mathematics, 110, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00002.xZachos, P., Hick, T. L., Doane, W. E. J., & Sargent, C. (2000). Setting theoretical and empirical foundations for assessing scientific inquiry and discovery in educational programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 938–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<938::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-S 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
圖書資訊與檔案學研究所
107155012資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107155012 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 陳志銘 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Chen, Chih-Ming en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 陳勁佑 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chen, Chin-Yu en_US dc.creator (作者) 陳勁佑 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Chen, Chin-Yu en_US dc.date (日期) 2020 en_US dc.date.accessioned 3-Nov-2020 11:27:37 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 3-Nov-2020 11:27:37 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Nov-2020 11:27:37 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0107155012 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/132445 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 圖書資訊與檔案學研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 107155012 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 探究式學習為現代教育中常見的一種教學模式，探究式學習在過程中會激發學習者的學習興趣，透過實際操作或實驗研究，最終培養其獨立思考以及獨立解決問題的能力。根據我國教育部於108學年度正式實施的十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱，當中提到在歷史學科中，「歷史考察」可視為是一種探究式學習，歷史考察活動旨在引導學生進行閱讀與解析歷史資料，以提升學生的歷史思維。但此類型的課程在實施後也有許多執行上的問題需要解決，例如引導探究學習的方法不明確、缺乏歷史資料的分析運用等。而數位人文工具發展的主要目的之一即是幫助使用者分析並探查文本資料之脈絡，據此探索出在歷史文本中值得進一步研究的現象。因此，本研究發展高中歷史科課程探究學習模式，並使用具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔助學生進行探究學習活動，希望有助於學習者以不同的觀點以及視角了解欲探究之「歷史考察」問題，同時增進學習者對於歷史文本和脈絡的解讀與探究能力。本研究採用單組前實驗研究設計法，選取臺北市某私立高中一年級一個班級共16名學生為研究對象，以具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔以歷史科探究式學習課程，探討學習者在課程前後之探究學習成效與學習動機是否有顯著的提升，以及調查學生的學習滿意度；此外，也探討不同性別以及不同認知風格之兩組學習者，在學習成效、學習動機以及學習滿意度上是否具有顯著差異。本研究並以半結構式訪談瞭解學習者對於使用此一數位人文平台進行歷史科探究式學習課程的感受與建議。最後，透過滯後序列分析(Lag Sequential Analysis, LSA)比較高低不同學習成效學生使用具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔以歷史科探究式學習課程之有效行為模式。研究結果發現，使用具「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」輔助歷史科探究式學習課程能有效促進整體學生、女性學生，以及場地獨立型與場地依賴型認知風格學生的學習成效；在學習動機部分，無論是整體學生、不同性別或是不同認知風格學生，其學習前的學習動機皆略高於學習後的學習動機，根據訪談資料顯示，可能是因為高中學生對於工具的使用以及分析結果的理解上仍有困難，而致使學習動機下降；而在學習滿意度上，學生無論性別或認知風格，皆呈現良好的學習滿意度，對此一學習模式均有正面肯定的態度。此外，根據滯後序列分析的結果，高學習成效學生在使用此一數位人文平台的行為模式較符合探究式學習的精神，意即高學習成效學生會反覆探索在「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」觀點網路圖中不同時期的關鍵詞概念以及資料，以及主動去查看與關鍵詞相關聯的詞彙之文本資料，並在使用「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」時，也會去採用不同的檢索方式來探索文本，且會在探索的過程中依照自身的需求交換使用另一種數位人文工具的功能；而低學習成效學生的行為模式則是使用「觀點變遷與年代劃分工具」直接且單純的探索關鍵詞資料，並使用「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」搜尋以及補充閱讀與關鍵詞相關的全文，從行為模式來看並沒有充分使用這兩種數位人文工具的各項功能來進行學習。最後基於研究結果，本研究提出平台的改善建議，以及未來可行的研究方向。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Inquiry-Based Learning is a common instructional model in modern education that can stimulate learners` interest through practical operation or experimental research in the learning process, and eventually training the independent thinking and problem-solving skills. According to Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education in Taiwan, "historical investigation" can be regarded as an inquiry-based learning method in the subject of history, an activity of "historical investigation" can improve students` historical thinking skill by reading and analyzing historical materials. However, there`re still many implementation problems in this type of activity remain, such as an approach of guiding inquiry is unclear, and the lack of text analysis and application. Assisting users to analyze and explore the context of text is one of the main purposes of digital humanities tool, we can explore further research via digital humanities tool. As a result, this research aims to develop an inquiry-based learning model in high school history curriculum, by using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" to assist students in inquiry activities. Digital humanities tools in supporting inquiry-based learning model can help students find out the issue of "historical investigation" from different perspectives, improving the ability in interpreting and exploring the context of text.In this study, a one-group pre-experimental design was adopted, and 16 tenth-graders from one classes in high school in Taipei were selected as the research subjects to using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" in supporting the inquiry-based learning approach in history curriculum, comparing the difference in students` learning performance, learning motivation, and learning satisfaction after history curriculum. In addition, with sex and cognitive style as background variables, the influences in students` learning performance, learning motivation, and learning satisfaction were also thoroughly explored. Semi-structured interview was utilized for understanding students` opinions and perception of using digital humanities tools in history curriculum. Finally, lag sequential analysis was used for observing students` behavior processes with different learning performance using digital humanities tools in history curriculum.The research results found that using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" in supporting the inquiry-based learning approach in history curriculum could improve learning performance effectively for all students. As for students` learning motivation, it was slightly higher than after learning, according to interview results, the decline in learning motivation may be because students still have difficulties in the use of tools and don`t understanding the results of analysis. On the other hand, all students showed a higher level of learning satisfaction. Moreover, lag sequential analysis revealed that behavioral patterns of students with better learning performance were more in line with the concept of inquiry-based learning, they used "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division" to repeatedly explored the concepts of keyword in different phase, then read the related texts. Students with better learning performance also used different retrieval methods to explore the texts with "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings". As for students with worst learning performance, their behavioral patterns were to explore the texts of keyword directly by using "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division", then using "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" to collateral reading the texts related to keyword. Lastly, based on the research results, this study suggests that the improvement of "Digital Humanities Research Platform for Mr. Lo Chia-Lun`s Writings" with "Observation Tool of Viewpoint Migration and Age Division", and providing some directions of topics for the research field in the future. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景與動機 1第二節 研究目的 4第三節 研究問題 4第四節 研究範圍與限制 5第五節 重要名詞解釋 6第二章 文獻探討 8第一節 數位人文工具與發展狀況 8第二節 探究式學習 12第三章 研究方法 17第一節 研究架構 17第二節 研究設計 20第三節 實驗流程 22第四節 研究對象 23第五節 研究工具 24第六節 資料蒐集與分析 42第七節 研究實施步驟 44第四章 實驗結果分析 46第一節 學生使用具「觀點變遷和年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」在學習成效、學習動機及學習滿意度分析 47第二節 不同性別之學生使用具「觀點變遷和年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」在學習成效、學習動機及學習滿意度分析 49第三節 不同認知風格之學生使用具「觀點變遷和年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」在學習成效、學習動機及學習滿意度分析 52第四節 學生使用具「觀點變遷和年代劃分工具」之「羅家倫先生文存數位人文平台」行為歷程分析 55第五節 訪談資料分析 77第六節 綜合討論 85第五章 結論與建議 92第一節 結論 92第二節 系統改善建議 96第三節 未來研究方向 98參考文獻 100附錄一 學習單 108附錄二 團體嵌圖測驗 113附錄三 學習滿意度問卷 120附錄四 學習動機量表 121附錄五 訪談大綱 122 zh_TW dc.format.extent 7736369 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0107155012 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 探究式學習 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 數位人文平台 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 高中歷史課程 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 認知風格 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學習成效 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 行為模式 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 滯後序列分析 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Inquiry Based Learning en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Digital humanities research platform en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) History curriculum in high school en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cognitive Style en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Learning performance en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Behavioral patterns en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Lag Sequential Analysis en_US dc.title (題名) 數位人文平台支援探究式學習模式發展與學習成效評估研究 zh_TW dc.title (題名) The Effects of Web-based Inquiry-based Learning with the Support of a Digital Humanities Research Platform on Learning Performance en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 一、中文108課綱資訊網。十二年國民基本教育。上網日期：2019年12月12日。檢自：http://12basic.edu.tw/12about-3-1.php王美芬、熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北：心理出版社。任長松(2003)。《走向新課程》。香港：中文大學出版社。任長松(2005)。《探究式學習──學生知識的自主建構》。北京：教育科學出版社。吳百興、張耀云、吳心楷(2010)。科學探究活動中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊，56期，53-74。吳裕益(1987)。認知能力與認知型態個別差異現象之探討。教育學刊，7，253-300。辛瓊瑤(2016)。合作式網路探究課程發展與學習成效評估研究：以圖書館利用教育為例。國立政治大學圖書資訊學數位碩士在職專班碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。邱偉雲(2011)。關鍵詞叢與文本意義挖掘的嘗試：以《清季外交史料》為例。載於項潔(主編)，數位人文在歷史學研究的應用，159-188。臺北市：國立臺灣大學出版中心。金觀濤(2011)。數位人文研究的理論基礎。載於項潔(主編)，數位人文研究的新視野：基礎與想像，43-61。臺北市：國立臺灣大學出版中心。祝平次(2018)。數位工具與文史研究。上網日期：2019年12月24日，檢自：https://kam-a-tiam.typepad.com/blog/2018/01/數位工具與文史研究.html徐宗林(1994)。現代教育思潮。臺北市：五南。教育部數位人文創新人才培育計畫。計畫介紹。上網日期：2019年12月12日。檢自：http://www.dhcreate.nccu.edu.tw/教育部資訊及科技教育司。人文社會科學教育發展建議報告書。上網日期：2019年12月15日。檢自：https://reurl.cc/0z8VlA陳志銘、徐志帆(2019)。基於主動式學習之古漢語斷句系統發展與應用研究。「第十屆數位典藏與數位人文國際研討會」發表之論文，法鼓文理學院。陳志銘、張志泓(2019)。基於自動圖像標註之圖像檢索工具發展與應用研究。「第十屆數位典藏與數位人文國際研討會」發表之論文，法鼓文理學院。陳志銘、張鐘(2018)。古籍數位人文研究平台之史料人物關係圖工具發展與應用。「第九屆數位典藏與數位人文國際研討會」發表之論文，法鼓文理學院。項潔、涂豐恩(2011)。導論—什麼是數位人文。從保存到創造：開啟數位人文研究，9-28。盧雨芯(2009)。引起學習動機—國中課程導言設計。歷史教育，15期，153-222。二、英文Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017Blessinger, P., & Carfora, J. (2014). Inquiry-based learning for the arts, humanities, and social sciences: A conceptual and practical resource for educators. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2055-364120140000002011Bradley, J. R., & Conway, R. W. (2003). Managing cyclic inventories. Production and Operations Management, 12(4), 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2003.tb00215.xBybee, R. W. (1997). The bscs 5e instructional model and 21st century skills. 1-24.Bybee, R. W., & Landes, N. M. (1988). The Science-Technology-Society (STS) Theme in Elementary School Science. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 8(6), 573–579. https://doi.org/10.1177/027046768800800604Chiang, T. H. C., Yang, S. J. H., & Hwang, G.-J. (2014). An Augmented Reality-based Mobile Learning System to Improve Students’ Learning Achievements and Motivations in Natural Science Inquiry Activities. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 352–365.Craig, W. A. (2004). Proof of concept: Performance testing in models. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 10(s2), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-9465.2004.00865.xDewey, J. (1933). How we think. Boston: Heath.Ehrman, M. E., Leaver, B. L., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System, 31(3), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00045-9Feldon, D., Franco, J., Chao, J., Peugh, J., & Cathy, M.-F. (2018). Self-efficacy change associated with a cognitive load-based intervention in an undergraduate biology course. Learning and Instruction, 56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.04.007Finn, J. D., & Cox, D. (1992). Participation and withdrawal among fourth-grade pupils. American Educational Research Journal, 29(1), 141–162. https://doi.org/10.2307/1162905Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Student and teacher perspectives on a close reading protocol. Literacy Research and Instruction, 53, 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388071.2013.818175Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iversen, H., & Briggs, D. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82, 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206Gibbs, F. & Owens, T. (2012). Building Better Digital Humanities Tools: Toward broader audiences and user-centered designs. Digital Humanities Quarterly.Retrieved from http://www.trevorowens.org/wp-\\ content/uploads/2007/11/building-better-tools-owens-gibbs.pdfGrandjean, P. (2016). Paracelsus revisited: The dose concept in a complex world. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology, 119(2), 126–132.https://doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.12622Hou, Y. (2019). Gender Difference in Language Learning with Technology. In: Zaphiris P., Ioannou A. (eds) Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Designing Learning Experiences. HCII 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11590. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-21814-0_19Jänicke, S., Franzini, G., Cheema, M. F., & Scheuermann, G. (2015). On close and distant reading in digital humanities: A survey and future challenges. 21.Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S., & Ammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in Higher Education: Reflections and Directions on Course Design and Teaching Methods. Innovative Higher Education, 31, 201–214.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-006-9021-9Karplus & Their (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Rand McNally, Chicago, Ⅱ.Kirschenbaum, M. (2011). What is digital humanities and what’s it doing in English departments? Debates in the Digital Humanities, 3.Laursen, S., Hassi, M.-L., Kogan, M., Hunter, A.-B., & Weston, T. (2011). Evaluation of the IBL Mathematics Project: Student and Instructor Outcomes of Inquiry-Based Learning in College Mathematics.Lim, B. R. (2004). Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the web. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0007-1013.2004.00419.xLooi. (1998). Interactive learning environments for promoting inquiry learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 27(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.2190/L4Q4-8QMM-QPJ3-B5LJMartini, M. (1986). An analysis of the relationship(s} between and among computer-assisted instruction, learning style perceptual preferences attitudes, and the science achievement of seventh grade students in a suburban New York school district. Unpublished doctoral disseration, St. John`s University, Brooklyn.McCarty, T. L., Borgoiakova, T., Gilmore, P., Lomawaima, K. T., & Romero, M. E. (2005). Indigenous epistemologies and education—Self-determination, anthropology, and human rights. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 36(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1525/aeq.2005.36.1.001Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20347Moretti, G., Sprugnoli, R., Menini, S., & Tonelli, S. (2016). ALCIDE. Knowledge-Based Systems. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1016/j.knosys.2016.08.003Murphy, H. J., & Doucette, P. A. (1997). The group embedded figures test: Undergraduate business concentration and analytical skills. Journal of Education for Business, 73(1), 39-44.Nasreen, A., & Naz, A. (2013). A Study of Factors Effecting Academic Achievement of Prospective Teachers. /paper/A-Study-of-Factors-Effecting-Academic-Achievement-Nasreen-Naz/d449d16ff8fc236226a81d4811a980bbd3f9a21fOECD.org - OECD. (2009). Creating effective teaching and learning environments. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/43023606.pdfOliver, R., & Herrington, J. (2001). Teaching and learning online: A beginner’s guide to e-learning and e-teaching in higher education. ECU PUBLICATIONS PRE.Retrieved from https://ro.ecu.edu.au/ecuworks/6832/Pedaste, M., (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Leijen, Ä., & Sarapuu, T. (2012). Improving students’ inquiry skills through reflection and self-regulation scaffolds. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 9, 81–95.Pintrich, P., Smith, D., Duncan, T., & Mckeachie, W. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor. Michigan, 48109, 1259.Preston, L., Harvie, K., & Wallace, H. (2015). Inquiry-based learning in teacher education: A primary humanities example. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(12). https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2015v40n12.6Ramsay, C. R., Matowe, L., Grilli, R., Grimshaw, J. M., & Thomas, R. E. (2003). Interrupted time series designs in health technology assessment: Lessons from two systematic reviews of behavior change strategies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19(4), 613–623. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462303000576Schreibman, S., Siemens, R., & Unsworth, J. (2008). A companion to digital humanities. Retrieved from http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/Schwarz, C., & White, B. (2005). Meta-modeling knowledge: Developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 165–205.Slotta, J.D., & Linn, M.C. (2009). WISE Science, Web-Based Inquiry in the Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.Smart, K. L., & Csapo, N. (2016). Learning by doing: Engaging students through learner-centered activities. Business Communication Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1177/10805699070700040302Soewarso. (2000). Cara-cara Penyampaian Pendidikan Sejarah Untuk Membangkitkan Minat Peserta Didik Mempelajari Bangsanya. DEPDIKNASSpronken-Smith, R., Bullard, J. O., Ray, W., Roberts, C., & Keiffer, A. (2008). Where might sand dunes be on mars? Engaging students through inquiry-based learning in geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260701731520Suchman, J. R. (1966). CHAPTER 11—A MODEL FOR THE ANALYSIS OF INQUIRY. Analyses of Concept Learning, 177–187. Academic Press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4832-3127-3.50016-XSudjana, N.(2000). Dasar-dasar Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: PT Sinar Baru Algensindo.Tracy, D., & Hoiem, E. F. M. (2017). Teaching digital humanities tools at a distance: A librarian-instructor partnership integrating scalar into a graduate distance course. At the Helm: Leading Transformation: The Proceedings of the ACRL 2017 Conference March 22–25, 2017. Retrieved from https://experts.illinois.edu/en/publications/teaching-digital-humanities-tools-at-a-distance-a-librarian-instrWang, D., Zheng, J., Kurosawa, M., Inaba, Y., & Kato, N. (2009). Changes in activities of daily living (ADL) among elderly Chinese by marital status, living arrangement, and availability of healthcare over a 3-year period. Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 14(2), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12199-008-0072-7White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction - COGNITION INSTRUCT, 16, 3–118. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2Yager, R., & Akcay, H. (2010). The advantages of an inquiry approach for science instruction in middle grades. School Science and Mathematics, 110, 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00002.xZachos, P., Hick, T. L., Doane, W. E. J., & Sargent, C. (2000). Setting theoretical and empirical foundations for assessing scientific inquiry and discovery in educational programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 938–962. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<938::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-S zh_TW dc.identifier.doi (DOI) 10.6814/NCCU202001763 en_US
