1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 從釋意觀點探討大學生資訊系統專案團隊之運作
作者 尤松文
貢獻者 楊亨利
尤松文
關鍵詞 釋意
資訊系統專案開發
學習策略
專案團隊運作
Sense-making
Information System Development
Learning strategies
Project Team, Team Work
日期 2004
上傳時間 14-Sep-2009 09:15:57 (UTC+8)
摘要 在知識的理論中，最惹人注目的問題之一，就是概念和知識怎樣產生，以及經驗與新的組織有什麼關係，在這個問題上有兩大對立的理論：行為主義與認知主義。在認知主義□又有一個很重要的關鍵點，就是探討出「人何以得知」的疑問，而這個疑問經由許多學者的研究仍沒有一個整合性的概念。架構在學習認知的這個疑問下，本研究利用Weick「釋意」概念做為理解的工具，針對學生的複雜學習歷程進行分析，採用個案研究的方式來進行，以了解學生如何將學習環境予以結構化、理解、詮釋與分析，最後採納行動並進行預測。
      資訊系統專案開發一直是資訊相關科系必要訓練之一。雖然此類資訊系統開發的規模不如業界，但是從學校教學的角度來看，透過一些實際個案的演練，學生應仍可獲得實務開發的經驗累積。而此種專題式的學習主要的重點在於學生如何運用團體的力量來獲得最佳的學習效果，因此團隊如何組成與運作，還有後續學習策略的運用對學生來說都是相當重要的。本研究個案一即以資料庫系統開發的十組學生團隊進行觀察，了解他們如何從自己的定位、組員的互動、領導角色的扮演到團隊集體共識的形成，而研究結果發現許多與實務專案團隊運作上相當不同之處，例如團隊領導與團隊情感的關係，分工型態的演變等。個案二建基於個案一的研究結果上，觀察學生的團隊狀況與他們所採行的學習策略之間的關係，研究結果亦發現學生之學習策略均建基於對團隊的認同上，對於學習環境的不同釋意也會影響所採行的學習策略。
      最後本研究從團隊合作與學生學習策略的說明來補足認知理論的不足，並以多層次的分析架構，從學生個人認同、團隊認同、班級認同逐層擴展，確立在專題式學習中個人地位、團體地位與組織地位的重要性，同時共提出十二大命題說明研究結果。
From the perspective of the theory of knowledge, the most critical question is how concept and knowledge are produced, what are the relationship between experience and the new group. There are two opposing theories of this question: the association theory and the cognitive theory. In cognitive theory, the key point is to confer the doubt of how people get knows. Based on the cognitive theory, this research explored students’ sensemaking in the team formation, operation, and learning strategies through observation and interviews.
      Developing an information system is a requisite training for all MIS students. The learning activities include system analysis and design, database, programming, team working, schedule planning, etc. Such a project-based leaning, a database management course, was chosen by this study. There were two cases. In the first case, this research observed ten student teams to interpret how sensemaking to be a central activity in the construction of both the learning environments and the environments it confronts. Students continuously interpreted the meaning of learning environments, adjusted their steps with other team members in order to finish an information system. The results indicate that the characteristics of student project teamwork are different from the real world. In the second case, this research explored the relationship of team working and learning strategies. The findings show that students adopt learning strategies through their organization identity. Different interpretation of environment cause distinct learning strategies that students use.
      Finally, this research provides complementary explanations to the cognitive theory and uses multi-level theorizing model to replenish students sensemaking process. Twelve propositions are introduced to understand the IS development process from students’ deep insides.
參考文獻 1. 王文科(1995)，教育研究法，台北：五南。
2. 王克先(1996)，學習心理學，台北：桂冠。
3. 王祖康(1997)，軟體產業能力評估與發展策略，財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心。
4. 王美芬、熊召弟(1998)，國民小學自然科技教材教法，台北：心理出版社。
5. 宋文娟，黃振國譯(2001)，專案管理，台中市：滄海。
6. 宋鎮照(1997)，社會學，台北：五南。
7. 范建得(2001)，研究組織、分工、科際整合、研究方法與社會互動，生物科技與法律研究通訊，9，65-72。
8. 林家五(1999)，企業主持人的釋意歷程及其影響，國立台灣大學商學研究所博士論文。
9. 林清山譯(1990)，教育心理學－認知取向，台北：遠流出版社。
10. 林清山(1998)，有效學習的方法，台北：教育部訓育委員會。
11. 林振霖(1991)，國中資賦優異學生的邏輯思考與科學過程技能的研究，彰化師範大學學報，2，335-379。
101. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J.S., Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly, B., & Meyer, K. M. (1994). Enacting Project-based science: Experiences of four middle grade teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 517-538.
102. Maxwell, J. (1992). Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 3, 279-300.
103. Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
104. Mayer , R. E.(1987).Educational　Psychology .Harper Collins Publishers .
105. McGuire, J. (1986). Management and qualitative methodology. Journal of Management, 12, 1-20.
106. Michael M. & Desmond C. (2002). Teaching with Java: Evaluation of student attitudes to learning the Java language. Proceedings of the inaugural conference on the Principles and Practice of programming.
107. Moffet, J. (1968). Teaching the Universe of Discourse. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
108. Moursund, D. (1999). Project-based learning using information technology, OR： International Society for Technology in Education Books and Courseware Department.
109. Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
110. Nijhot, W. & Kommers, P. (1985). An analysis of cooperation in relation to cognitive controversy. In R. Slavin et al. (Eds). Learning to cooperating to learn , 125-146.
12. 林達森(1999)，論析統整性課程及其對九年一貫課程的啟示，教育研究資訊，7(4)，97-116。
111. Oles, T. P., Black, B. M., Cramer, E. P. (1999). From attitude change to effective practice: Exploring the relationship. Journal of Social Work Education, Washington: Winter, 35(1), pp. 87-100.
112. O’neil, H. F. (1978). Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.
113. Paris , S. G., Lipson , M. Y., & Wixson , K. K.(1983).Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 8 , 293-316.
114. Pintrich, P. R. (1987). Motivation and learning strategies in the college classroom. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Convention Washington, DC.
115. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. & McKeachie, W. J. (1989). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Michigan: National Center for research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL). School of Education, The University Michigan.
116. Posey, P., & Klein, J. (1990). Revitalizing manufacturing: Text and cases. Irwin: Homewood.
117. Pressley, M., Woloshyn, L. M., Martin, V., Wood, E., & Willoughby, T. (1990). A primer of research on cognitive strategy instruction: The important issues and how to address them. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 1-58.
118. Recsnick, L. & Beck, I.L. (1976). Designing instruction in reading: Interaction of theory and proactive. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Aspect of reading acquisition. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
119. Richardson, L. (1994). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.
120. Rifner, P. J., & Feldhusen, J. F.（1997）. Checkmate-Capturing gifted students’ logical thinking using chess. Gifted Child Today, 20, 36-41.
13. 徐友漁(1996)，語言與哲學－當代英美與德法傳統比較研究，三聯書店。
121. Rigney, J. (1978). Learning strategies: A theoretical perspective. In O`Neil, H. F. Jr. (Ed.). Learning Strategies. New York: Academic Press.
122. Robert, M. G. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. 4th ed, New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
123. Roadrangka, V. & Yeany, R. H. (1983). The construction and vilidation of group assessment of logical think(GALT)., Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dalas.
124. Rogers, C. R(1969)., Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become, Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill.
125. Salas E., Dickinson T. L., Converse S. A. & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. Teams: Their Training and Performance, Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, 3-29.
126. Salas E., Rozell D., Mullen B. & Driskell J. E., (1999). The effect of team building on performance: an integration. Small Group Research, 30, 309-329.
127. Schmeck, R. R. (1983). Learning styles of college student. In R. F. Dillion & R. R. Schemck(Eds). Individual differences in cognition.(pp. 133-279). New York: Academic Press.
128. Shulman, L.S.(1981). Recent developments in the studies of teaching. In B. Tabachnik, T.S. Popkewitz, & P. B. Szekely(Eds.). Studying Teaching and Learning. New York:Praeger.
129. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
130. Sloyer, C. W. (2004). The Extension-Reduction Strategy: Activating Prior Knowledge. Mathematics Teacher, 98(1), 48-50.
14. 施良方(1996)，學習理論，高雄：麗文文化公司。
131. Snowman, J (1986). Learning tactics and strategies. In G. D. Phye & T. Andre(Eds.), Cognitive classroom learning: understanding, thinking, and problem　solving. New York: Academic Press, 243-275.
132. Sternberg ,R.J.(1984).Toward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 7 , 269-316
133. Suchman, L. A.,(1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.
134. Thomas, J.B. & McDaniel, R.R.Jr.(1990). Interpreting strategic issues: Effects of strategy and top management team information processing structure. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 286-306.
135. Thomas L. G., Jere E. B. (1987). Looking in classroom, 4th ed, New York : Harper & Row.
136. Thompson, R. A. & Zamboanga, B. L. (2003). Prior Knowledge and Its Relevance to Student Achievement in Introduction to Psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30(2), 96-101.
137. Tosi, H. (1992). The environment/organization/person contingency model: A meso approach to the study of organizations. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
138. Tripp, D. (1983). Co-Authorship and Negotiation: The Interview as Act of Creation. Interchange 14/3. The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
139. Tuckman, B. W., (1965). Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399.
140. Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C., (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Studies, 2(4), 419-427.
15. 張春興(1994)，教育心理學，台北：東華書局。
141. Van Maanen, J. (1995). An end to innocence: The ethnography of ethnography. In Van Maanen (Ed.), Representation in ethnography. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
142. von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzlawick (Ed), The invented reality. New York: Norton.
143. von Glasersfeld, E. (1990). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds), Constructivist view on the teaching and learning of mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
144. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In Leslie P. Steffe & Jerry Gale (Eds), Constructivism in education, 3-16. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
145. von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed), Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
146. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
147. Walker, J. T. (1996). The psychology of learning: principles and processes. Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Prentice Hall.
148. Webb，N.M.(1982).Group composition，group interaction，and achievement incooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology，74(4)，475-484.
149. Webb，N.M.(1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups：Aresearch summary. In R. Slavin ，S. Sharan，S.Kagan，R.Hertz-Lazarowitz，C.Webb，＆R.Schmuck(eds.)，Learning to Cooperate，cooperating to learn, 147-172. New York：Plenum Press.
150. Weick, K.E. (1977). Organizational design: organizations as self-designing systems. Organizational Dynamics, Autumn, 31-46.
16. 張春興(1988)，知之歷程與教之歷程：認知心理學的發展及其在教育上的應用，教育心理學報，21，17-38。
151. Weick, K.E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.
152. Weick, K. E. (1983). Managerial thought in the context of action. In Srivastava, S. (Ed), The Executive mind. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 221-242.
153. Weick, K. E.(1984). Small Wins: Redefining the Scale of Social Problems. American Psychologist. 39(1), 40-49.
154. Weick, K.E. (1988). Enacted Sensemaking in Crisis Situation. Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305-317.
155. Weick, K. E.(1993a). The Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch Disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly. 38, 628-652.
156. . Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations, Thousand Oaks London New Delhi, Sage Publications.
157. Weick, K.E. & Gilfillan, D.P. (1971). Fate of arbitrary traditions in a laboratory microculture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17(2), 179-191.
158. Weinstein, C. F., & Mayer, R. F. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp.305-327). N.Y.: Macmillan.
159. Wheatley, M.J. & Kellner-Roger, M.(1996). Self-organization: The irresistible future of organizing. Strategy & Leadership, 24(4), 18-24.
160. Wiley, N. (1988). The Micro-macro Problem in Social Theory. Sociological Theory, 6, 254-261.
17. 郭重吉(1992)，從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進，科學發展月刊。第20卷第5期，548-570。
161. Wolk, S. (1994). Project-based learning:pursuits with a purpose, Educational Leadership, 52(3), .42-45.
162. Woods, P. (1992). Symbolic interactionism: theory and method. In M. D LeCompte, W. L. Millroy and J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 337-446). London: Academy Press.
163. Yin, R. K. (1987). Case Study Research: Design and Method. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
164. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self regulated learning strategies, phases in self regulation :　shifting　from　process　goals to outcome goals. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
18. 陳向明(2002)，社會科學質的研究，台北：五南出版社。
19. 陳李綢(1988)，學習策略的研究與教學，資優教育，29，15-24。
20. 陳皎眉、鍾思嘉(1996)，人際關係，台北：幼獅。
21. 黃政傑(1987)，教育研究極需擺脫量化的支配，教育研究方法論，台北：師大書苑。
22. 黃瑞琴(1999)，質的教育研究方法，台北：心理。
23. 黃俊儒(2000)，從社會互動與認知投入的觀點探討理化實驗客中學習機會之分佈，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
24. 黃鴻文(1994)，學生次文化，研究、理論與方法論之檢討，社會教育學刊，23，149-193。
25. 潘英海（1998），文化識盲與文化糾結：本土田野工作者的「文化」問題。本土心理學研究，8期，37-71。
26. 楊錦登(1999)，論述人際關係，國教輔導，38(3)，48-53，台中市：國立台中師範學院。
27. 賈馥茗，梁志宏，陳如山，林月琴，黃□，侯志欽，簡仁育(1999)，教育心理學，台北：國立空中大學。
28. 蔡秀玲、楊智馨(1999)，情緒管理，台北：揚智文化出版社。
29. 楊惠貞(2000)，影響資管學生學習焦崩及電腦學習成效因素之探討，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所博士論文。
30. 經濟部工業局台灣軟體業之窗資訊產業推動工作室網站。認識軟體產業。2001年11月1日，http://it.moeaidb.gov.tw/soft5/centry/c03.htm。
31. 趙居蓮(1997)，學習與教學，台北：心理出版社。
32. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms : goals structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.
33. Ann B. F. & Marian L. H. (2000). The teacher-student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication Education, 49(3), 207-220.
34. Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39.
35. Bernstein,B. (1996). Pedagogy,symbolic control and identity. London:Taylor & Francise.
36. Binkley, N. & Brandes, G. M. (1995). Book review: Reflection Meaning and interpretation. Curriculum Inquiry, 25, 2, pp. 207-212.
37. Birenbaum, M. & Dochy, F. J. R. C. (1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning process, and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer academic publishers.
38. Bitner, B. L. (1986). The GALT: A measure of logical thinking ability of eight grade students and a predictor of science and mathematics achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
39. Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 272-281.
40. Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M. & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3&4), 369-398.
41. Boje, D.M.(1991). The Storytelling Organization: A study of Story Performance in an Office-Supply Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 106-126.
42. Brandt, R. S. (1987). Strategic teaching and learning: cognitive instruction in the content areas. Alexandria, VA, ASCD.
43. Bransford, J., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York: W.H. Freeman.
44. Brown, J. S., Collin, A., & Duguid, P.(1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Education Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
45. Burk, J. (2001). Communication apprehension among Master`s of Business Administration students: Investigating a gap in communication education. Communication Education, 50(1), pp. 51-58.
46. Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann.
47. Carley, K. (1991). A theory of group stability. American Sociological Review, 56, 331-354.
48. Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The Implications of Strategy and Social Context for the Relationship between Top Management Team Heterogeneity and Firm Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(3), 275-284.
49. Clark, N., (1994). Team building: a practical guide for trainers, Mcgraw-Hill, New York.
50. Cobb, P. (1996). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivist perspectives. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed), Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
51. Cooper, G., & Sweller, j. (1987). The effects of schema acquisition and rele automation of mathematical problem-solving transfer, Journal of educational Psychology, 79, 347-362.
52. Costley, D. L. & Melgoza, C. S. & Todd, R.,(1993). Human Relations in Organization, 5th ed., West Publishing Company, New York.
53. Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Development and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 131-142.
54. Cuseo, J., B. (1992). Cooperative learning vs. small-group discussions and group projects: The critical differences. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 2(3), 4-9.
55. Daft, R. L. and Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations interpretation system. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284-295.
56. Dalton, M. (1959). Men who manage: Fusions of feeling and theory in administration. New York: John Wiley.
57. Dansereau, D. F. (1979). Development and evaluation of a learning strategy training program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 64-73.
58. Dansereau, D. F. (1987). Transfer from cooperative to Individual studying. Journal of Reading, 30(7), 614-619.
59. Dansereau, D. F. (1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In　C.E.Weinstein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander. (Eds.). Learning and　study strategies. New York：Academic Press.
60. Diehl, W., Grobe, T., Lopez, H. & Cabral, C. (1999). Project-based learning: A strategy for teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Center for Youth Development and Education, Crporation for Business, Work, and Learning.
61. Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A. & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999). Multilevel Theorizing about Creativity in Organizations: A Sensemaking Perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 286-307.
62. Driver, R. & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.
63. Erickson, D.and Ellett, F. (1982). Interpretation,understanding,and educational research. Teacher College Record, 83(4), 497-513.
64. Erickson, F. (1989). The Meaning of Validity in Qualitative Research. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
65. Fineman, S. (1983). Working meanings, non-work, and the taken-for-granted. Journal of Management Studies, 20, 143-157.
66. Fiol, C.M. (1989). A semiotic analysis of corporate language: Organizational boundaries and joint venturing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 277-303.
67. Fischer, F., Grasel, C., & Mandl, H. (2000). Fostering problem-oriented learning with auxiliary hypertext and graphical information. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Hew Orleans, LA. (April 24-28, 2000)
68. Gage, N. L. (1988). Educational psychology, Boston : Houghton Mifflin.
69. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The condition of learning and theory of instruction. NY: Holt, Rinehert & Winston.
70. Gersick, C. J. (1988). Time and transition in work team: toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9-41.
71. Gioia, D.A., & Chittipeddi, K.(1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 433-448.
72. Glover, T.(1993). The teaching of educational psychology through project-based learning, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 367703.
73. Good, T. L.,Mulryan, C., and Mccaslin, M.(1992).Grouping for instruction in mathematics: A call for programmatic research on small group processes. In D. A. Growns(Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. New York: MaMillan. 165-196.
74. Gioia, D. A. and Thomas, J. B. (1996). Identity, Image, and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in Academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 370-403.
75. Hilke, E. V. (1990). Cooperative learning. The Phi Delta:Kappa Education Foundation.
76. Hiroaki, H. (2000). Bounded rationality, social and cultural norms, and interdependence via reference groups. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 43(1), 1-34.
77. Hiroshi, K. (1997). Learning/memory processes under stress conditions. Behavioural Brain Research, 83(1-2), 71-74.
78. Hofer, B. K., Yu S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). Teaching college students to be self-regulated learners. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Ed.), Self- regulated learning: From teaching to self-regulative practice (pp.57-85). New York: The Guilford Press.
79. Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Sego, D. J., Hedlund, J. (1995). Multilevel theory of team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed expertise. Journal of Applied Psychology. Washington: 80(2), 292-316.
80. Holsti, O.R. (1969), Content Analysis for the Social Science and Humanities, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
81. House, R., Rousseau, D. M., Thomas-Hunt, M. (1995). The meso paradigm: A framework for the integration of micro and macro organizational behavior. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 17, 71-114.
82. Hunt, S. D., Morgan, R M., (1995). The Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition, Journal of Marketing, 59, 1-15.
83. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Joining together: group theory and group skills (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
84. Johnson, D. W.,& Johnson, R. T.(1994). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th ed). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
85. Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Why violence Prevention program don’t work and work does. Educational Leadership, 52, 63-67.
86. Jessup, H. R. (1990). New roles in team leadership. Training and Development Journal, 44, 79-83.
87. Joan K & Eileen B. E. (2002). Comparison of in-class and distance-learning students` performance and attitudes in an introductory computer science course. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 17(6), 206-219.
88. Jorgensen , D. L.(1989). Paticipant observation:A methodology for human studies. Newbury Park　CA:Sage.
89. Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K, (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-performance Organization, New York: Harper Collins.
90. Ken, B. and Eunice P. C. (2000). The One Minute Manager Builds High Performing Teams, William Morrow.
91. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., Hall, R. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19, 195-229.
92. Klein, K.J., Tosi, H. & Cannella, A.A. (1999). Multilevel Theory Building: Benefits, Barriers, and New Developments. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 243-248.
93. Klein, G. A., Calderwood, R., & Clinton-Cirocco, A. (1986). Rapid decision making on the fire ground. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting, 1, 576-580.
94. Kracke, W. (1978). Force and Persuation: Leadership in an Amazonian Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
95. Krajcik, J.S., Czeniak, C. & Berger, C. (1999). Teaching children science: a project– based approach, Boston: McGraw-Hill Collage.
96. Krieger, S. (1979). Hip capitalism. Berverly Hills, CA: Sage.
97. Leach, E. R. (1967). An anthropologist`s in the field. Atlantic Highlands. NJ: Humanities Press.
98. Leanna, L.H. (2001). Will We Teach Leadership or Skilled Incompetence? The Challence of Student Project Teams. Journal of Management Education, 25(5), 590-605.
99. Lewis, R., (1995). Team-Building Skills-Participants’ Guide, Logan Page Ltd.
100. Lori, J. C. & Kent E. M. (2001). Variations in learning, motivation, and perceived immediacy between live and distance education classrooms. Communication Education. 50(3), 230-240.
描述 博士
國立政治大學
資訊管理研究所
89356505
93
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0893565053
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 楊亨利zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 尤松文zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 尤松文zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2004en_US
dc.date.accessioned 14-Sep-2009 09:15:57 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 14-Sep-2009 09:15:57 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 14-Sep-2009 09:15:57 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0893565053en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/31107-
dc.description (描述) 博士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 資訊管理研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 89356505zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 93zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 在知識的理論中，最惹人注目的問題之一，就是概念和知識怎樣產生，以及經驗與新的組織有什麼關係，在這個問題上有兩大對立的理論：行為主義與認知主義。在認知主義□又有一個很重要的關鍵點，就是探討出「人何以得知」的疑問，而這個疑問經由許多學者的研究仍沒有一個整合性的概念。架構在學習認知的這個疑問下，本研究利用Weick「釋意」概念做為理解的工具，針對學生的複雜學習歷程進行分析，採用個案研究的方式來進行，以了解學生如何將學習環境予以結構化、理解、詮釋與分析，最後採納行動並進行預測。
      資訊系統專案開發一直是資訊相關科系必要訓練之一。雖然此類資訊系統開發的規模不如業界，但是從學校教學的角度來看，透過一些實際個案的演練，學生應仍可獲得實務開發的經驗累積。而此種專題式的學習主要的重點在於學生如何運用團體的力量來獲得最佳的學習效果，因此團隊如何組成與運作，還有後續學習策略的運用對學生來說都是相當重要的。本研究個案一即以資料庫系統開發的十組學生團隊進行觀察，了解他們如何從自己的定位、組員的互動、領導角色的扮演到團隊集體共識的形成，而研究結果發現許多與實務專案團隊運作上相當不同之處，例如團隊領導與團隊情感的關係，分工型態的演變等。個案二建基於個案一的研究結果上，觀察學生的團隊狀況與他們所採行的學習策略之間的關係，研究結果亦發現學生之學習策略均建基於對團隊的認同上，對於學習環境的不同釋意也會影響所採行的學習策略。
      最後本研究從團隊合作與學生學習策略的說明來補足認知理論的不足，並以多層次的分析架構，從學生個人認同、團隊認同、班級認同逐層擴展，確立在專題式學習中個人地位、團體地位與組織地位的重要性，同時共提出十二大命題說明研究結果。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) From the perspective of the theory of knowledge, the most critical question is how concept and knowledge are produced, what are the relationship between experience and the new group. There are two opposing theories of this question: the association theory and the cognitive theory. In cognitive theory, the key point is to confer the doubt of how people get knows. Based on the cognitive theory, this research explored students’ sensemaking in the team formation, operation, and learning strategies through observation and interviews.
      Developing an information system is a requisite training for all MIS students. The learning activities include system analysis and design, database, programming, team working, schedule planning, etc. Such a project-based leaning, a database management course, was chosen by this study. There were two cases. In the first case, this research observed ten student teams to interpret how sensemaking to be a central activity in the construction of both the learning environments and the environments it confronts. Students continuously interpreted the meaning of learning environments, adjusted their steps with other team members in order to finish an information system. The results indicate that the characteristics of student project teamwork are different from the real world. In the second case, this research explored the relationship of team working and learning strategies. The findings show that students adopt learning strategies through their organization identity. Different interpretation of environment cause distinct learning strategies that students use.
      Finally, this research provides complementary explanations to the cognitive theory and uses multi-level theorizing model to replenish students sensemaking process. Twelve propositions are introduced to understand the IS development process from students’ deep insides.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章　緒論………………………………………………………………………1-1
     第一節 研究背景…………………………………………………………….1-1
     第二節 研究動機…………………………………………………………….1-3
     第三節 研究目的…………………………………………………………….1-6
     第四節 研究流程…………………………………………………………….1-8
     第二章　文獻探討………………………………………………………………….2-1
     第一節 釋意………………………………………………………………….2-1
     一、Weick(1993)對Mann Gulch災難個案研究的分析…………………2-1
     二、釋意的意涵…………………………………………………………..2-3
     三、釋意活動中的主動建構觀點………………………………………..2-7
     四、學習情境中釋意概念的發展……………………………………….2-10
     第二節 專案團隊與合作學習……………………………………………...2-15
     第三節 學習策略…………………………………………………...………2-23
     第四節 專題式學習與系統開發…………………………………………..2-29
     第三章　研究方法與設計……………………………………………………….…3-1
     第一節 研究方法…………………………………………………………….3-2
     第二節 研究設計……………………………………………………………3-4
     一、研究設計……….…………..…………………………………………3-6
     二、資料來源與蒐集方法…………….…………………………………3-11
     三、研究對象……….……………………………………………………3-14
     四、研究工具……….……………………………………………………3-16
     五、資料分析方法….……………………………………………………3-17
     六、研究信效度………………………………………………………….3-20
     第四章　學生資訊系統專案團隊之運作..………………………………..……….4-1
      第一節　個案介紹…………………………………………………………….4-5
     一、課程初始之團隊組成………………………………………………...4-5
     二、學生專案團隊之運作………………………………………………...4-8
     三、學生釋意標的……………………………………………………….4-12
     第三節 個案討論……………………………………..…………………….4-16
     一、學生個人的釋意歷程……………………………………………….4-16
     二、從個人詮釋到團隊共識的釋意…………………………………….4-19
     三、釋意歷程中的主動建構…………………………………………….4-21
     四、團隊運作對群組合作效果的影響………………………………….4-26
     第四節 小結………………………………………………………………...4-32
     一、學生專案團隊組成與運作………………………………………….4-33
     二、從認知理論概念來看……………………………………………….4-33
     三、Weick釋意分析的補足…………………………………………….4-34
     第五章　個案二：團隊運作下之學習策略……………………………………….5-1
     第一節 個案緣起…………………………………………………………….5-1
     第二節 研究場域、研究樣本與研究者…………………………………….5-1
     第三節 個案背景…………………………………………………………….5-4
     一、學期初之課程概念建構………………..…………………………….5-5
     二、學期中之系統概念設計…………………………………………….5-18
     三、學期末之系統整合設計…………………………………………….5-23
     第四節 個案二之綜合分析……………………………………...…………5-27
     一、團隊運作與學習策略……………………………………………….5-27
     二、學習策略的規劃與採用…………………………………………….5-39
     三、小結…………………………….……………………………………5-53
     第六章　綜合討論…………………………………………………………….……6-1
     第一節 命題討論…………………………………………………………….6-2
     一、學生資訊系統專案團隊組成與運作………………………………...6-2
     二、團隊運作與學習策略………………………………………………...6-5
     三、學生之多層次動態釋意歷程………………………………………...6-9
     第二節 本論文之研究貢獻………………………………………………...6-15
     一、對認知學習理論的補足與批判…………………………………….6-15
     二、對專題式學習應用的貢獻………………………………………….6-17
     第三節 研究限制………………………………………………………….6-18
     第四節 未來的研究方向………………………………………………….6-19
     參考文獻……………………………………………………………………………R-1
     附錄一　GALT……………………………………………………………………附-1
     附錄二　訪談大綱…………………………………………………...…………..附-17
     附錄三　程式設計先備知識測驗…………………………………….…………附-19
     附錄四　學習態度量表……………………………………………….…………附-23
     附錄五　電腦態度量表……………………………………………….…………附-24
     附錄六　學習動機量表……………………………………………….…………附-25
     
     圖　目　錄
     
     圖1-1　學習的認知黑箱示意圖…………………………….…………….…..…..1-7
     圖1-2　本研究之研究流程圖…………………………….………………………1-10
     圖2-1　組織化模型………………………………………...………………………2-7
     圖2-2 Weick組織化的天擇模型…………………………………...…………….2-8
     圖2-3　詮釋過程三階段…..………………….……..………..…………………..2-11
     圖2-4　團隊演進模型…………………………….……..……………………..…2-18
     圖3-1　影響學習的因素分類…………………………………………………...…3-5
     圖3-3　認知的歷程…………………………………………...…………………..3-12
     圖3-4　學習環境中之相關主體………….…………………..…..………………3-15
     圖4-1　個人之釋意標的………….……………………………..…………………4-3
     圖4-2　學生專案團隊的觀察面向……………………….……..…………………4-4
     圖4-3　學生釋意過程之螺旋示意圖………….……..………….……….………4-19
     圖4-4　學生專案團隊的組織化釋意過程………….……..……..………………4-21
     圖4-5　學生團隊歷程…………………………………………………………….4-21
     圖4-6　學生團隊之主動建構過程……………………………………………….4-25
     圖5-1　個案二之研究樣本與研究參與者…………………………….………..…5-3
     圖5-2　分組的釋意歷程………………………………………………….………5-32
     圖5-3　學習改變的釋意歷程……………………………………………….……5-34
     圖5-4　分工的釋意歷程………………………………………………….………5-36
     圖5-5　團隊運作的釋意歷程……………………………………………….……5-38
     圖5-6 學習策略及模式之觀察面向……………………………………..….……5-39
     圖5-7　學生情緒消長與主動建構圖……………………………………….……5-43
     圖5-8　學生訊息理解的循環與主動建構……………………………….………5-46
     圖5-9　使用學習資源與主動建構……………………………………...………..5-49
     圖5-10　反省思考學習模式與主動建構…………………..…………...………..5-51
     圖5-11　學習反應的擴展與主動建構…………………………...………………5-53
     圖5-12　學生團隊運作與學習策略的一般化釋意過程………………...………5-55
     圖5-13　訊息處理系統中學習歷程……………………………………………...5-56
     圖5-14　本研究學生之學習策略運作歷程…………………………………...…5-57
     圖6-1學生釋意對團隊運作與學習策略的影響…………………………………6-9
     圖6-2學生資訊系統專案團隊之多層次動態釋意歷程……….………….……6-15
     
     表　目　錄
     
     表2-1　團隊合作優缺點………………………………………………………….2-15
     表3-1　兩個案學校之先備知識與邏輯思考能力檢定……………………….…3-11
     表3-2　展東商業技術學院樣本常態性檢定………………………………….…3-11
     表3-3　國立政治大學樣本常態性檢定……………………………………….…3-11
     表4-1　屏東商業技術學院專案團隊介紹……………………………………...…4-4
     表4-2　學生組成專案團隊的因素………………………………………………...4-7
     表4-3　專案團隊A組與J組之整理…………………………………………….4-31
     表5-1　政治大學專案團隊介紹………………………………………………...…5-2
     表5-2　學生分工方式的改變………………………………………………....…5-16
     表5-3　團隊分工種類與項目對照………………………………………….....…5-16		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0893565053en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 釋意zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 資訊系統專案開發zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 學習策略zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專案團隊運作zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Sense-makingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Information System Developmenten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Learning strategiesen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Project Team, Team Worken_US
dc.title (題名) 從釋意觀點探討大學生資訊系統專案團隊之運作zh_TW
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. 王文科(1995)，教育研究法，台北：五南。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 2. 王克先(1996)，學習心理學，台北：桂冠。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 3. 王祖康(1997)，軟體產業能力評估與發展策略，財團法人資訊工業策進會資訊市場情報中心。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 4. 王美芬、熊召弟(1998)，國民小學自然科技教材教法，台北：心理出版社。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 5. 宋文娟，黃振國譯(2001)，專案管理，台中市：滄海。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 6. 宋鎮照(1997)，社會學，台北：五南。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 7. 范建得(2001)，研究組織、分工、科際整合、研究方法與社會互動，生物科技與法律研究通訊，9，65-72。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 8. 林家五(1999)，企業主持人的釋意歷程及其影響，國立台灣大學商學研究所博士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 9. 林清山譯(1990)，教育心理學－認知取向，台北：遠流出版社。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 10. 林清山(1998)，有效學習的方法，台北：教育部訓育委員會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 11. 林振霖(1991)，國中資賦優異學生的邏輯思考與科學過程技能的研究，彰化師範大學學報，2，335-379。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 101. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J.S., Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly, B., & Meyer, K. M. (1994). Enacting Project-based science: Experiences of four middle grade teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 94(5), 517-538.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 102. Maxwell, J. (1992). Understanding and Validity in Qualitative Research. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 3, 279-300.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 103. Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 104. Mayer , R. E.(1987).Educational　Psychology .Harper Collins Publishers .zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 105. McGuire, J. (1986). Management and qualitative methodology. Journal of Management, 12, 1-20.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 106. Michael M. & Desmond C. (2002). Teaching with Java: Evaluation of student attitudes to learning the Java language. Proceedings of the inaugural conference on the Principles and Practice of programming.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 107. Moffet, J. (1968). Teaching the Universe of Discourse. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 108. Moursund, D. (1999). Project-based learning using information technology, OR： International Society for Technology in Education Books and Courseware Department.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 109. Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 110. Nijhot, W. & Kommers, P. (1985). An analysis of cooperation in relation to cognitive controversy. In R. Slavin et al. (Eds). Learning to cooperating to learn , 125-146.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 12. 林達森(1999)，論析統整性課程及其對九年一貫課程的啟示，教育研究資訊，7(4)，97-116。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 111. Oles, T. P., Black, B. M., Cramer, E. P. (1999). From attitude change to effective practice: Exploring the relationship. Journal of Social Work Education, Washington: Winter, 35(1), pp. 87-100.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 112. O’neil, H. F. (1978). Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 113. Paris , S. G., Lipson , M. Y., & Wixson , K. K.(1983).Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 8 , 293-316.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 114. Pintrich, P. R. (1987). Motivation and learning strategies in the college classroom. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Convention Washington, DC.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 115. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. & McKeachie, W. J. (1989). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Michigan: National Center for research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL). School of Education, The University Michigan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 116. Posey, P., & Klein, J. (1990). Revitalizing manufacturing: Text and cases. Irwin: Homewood.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 117. Pressley, M., Woloshyn, L. M., Martin, V., Wood, E., & Willoughby, T. (1990). A primer of research on cognitive strategy instruction: The important issues and how to address them. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 1-58.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 118. Recsnick, L. & Beck, I.L. (1976). Designing instruction in reading: Interaction of theory and proactive. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Aspect of reading acquisition. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 119. Richardson, L. (1994). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. London: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 120. Rifner, P. J., & Feldhusen, J. F.（1997）. Checkmate-Capturing gifted students’ logical thinking using chess. Gifted Child Today, 20, 36-41.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 13. 徐友漁(1996)，語言與哲學－當代英美與德法傳統比較研究，三聯書店。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 121. Rigney, J. (1978). Learning strategies: A theoretical perspective. In O`Neil, H. F. Jr. (Ed.). Learning Strategies. New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 122. Robert, M. G. (1985). The conditions of learning and theory of instruction. 4th ed, New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 123. Roadrangka, V. & Yeany, R. H. (1983). The construction and vilidation of group assessment of logical think(GALT)., Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dalas.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 124. Rogers, C. R(1969)., Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become, Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 125. Salas E., Dickinson T. L., Converse S. A. & Tannenbaum, S. I. (1992). Toward an understanding of team performance and training. Teams: Their Training and Performance, Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, 3-29.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 126. Salas E., Rozell D., Mullen B. & Driskell J. E., (1999). The effect of team building on performance: an integration. Small Group Research, 30, 309-329.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 127. Schmeck, R. R. (1983). Learning styles of college student. In R. F. Dillion & R. R. Schemck(Eds). Individual differences in cognition.(pp. 133-279). New York: Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 128. Shulman, L.S.(1981). Recent developments in the studies of teaching. In B. Tabachnik, T.S. Popkewitz, & P. B. Szekely(Eds.). Studying Teaching and Learning. New York:Praeger.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 129. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 130. Sloyer, C. W. (2004). The Extension-Reduction Strategy: Activating Prior Knowledge. Mathematics Teacher, 98(1), 48-50.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 14. 施良方(1996)，學習理論，高雄：麗文文化公司。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 131. Snowman, J (1986). Learning tactics and strategies. In G. D. Phye & T. Andre(Eds.), Cognitive classroom learning: understanding, thinking, and problem　solving. New York: Academic Press, 243-275.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 132. Sternberg ,R.J.(1984).Toward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 7 , 269-316zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 133. Suchman, L. A.,(1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 134. Thomas, J.B. & McDaniel, R.R.Jr.(1990). Interpreting strategic issues: Effects of strategy and top management team information processing structure. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 286-306.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 135. Thomas L. G., Jere E. B. (1987). Looking in classroom, 4th ed, New York : Harper & Row.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 136. Thompson, R. A. & Zamboanga, B. L. (2003). Prior Knowledge and Its Relevance to Student Achievement in Introduction to Psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 30(2), 96-101.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 137. Tosi, H. (1992). The environment/organization/person contingency model: A meso approach to the study of organizations. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 138. Tripp, D. (1983). Co-Authorship and Negotiation: The Interview as Act of Creation. Interchange 14/3. The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 139. Tuckman, B. W., (1965). Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384-399.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 140. Tuckman, B. W., & Jensen, M. A. C., (1977). Stages of small-group development revisited. Group & Organization Studies, 2(4), 419-427.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 15. 張春興(1994)，教育心理學，台北：東華書局。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 141. Van Maanen, J. (1995). An end to innocence: The ethnography of ethnography. In Van Maanen (Ed.), Representation in ethnography. Thousand Oaks: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 142. von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. Watzlawick (Ed), The invented reality. New York: Norton.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 143. von Glasersfeld, E. (1990). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, & N. Noddings (Eds), Constructivist view on the teaching and learning of mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 144. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In Leslie P. Steffe & Jerry Gale (Eds), Constructivism in education, 3-16. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 145. von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed), Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 146. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Presszh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 147. Walker, J. T. (1996). The psychology of learning: principles and processes. Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Prentice Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 148. Webb，N.M.(1982).Group composition，group interaction，and achievement incooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology，74(4)，475-484.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 149. Webb，N.M.(1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups：Aresearch summary. In R. Slavin ，S. Sharan，S.Kagan，R.Hertz-Lazarowitz，C.Webb，＆R.Schmuck(eds.)，Learning to Cooperate，cooperating to learn, 147-172. New York：Plenum Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 150. Weick, K.E. (1977). Organizational design: organizations as self-designing systems. Organizational Dynamics, Autumn, 31-46.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 16. 張春興(1988)，知之歷程與教之歷程：認知心理學的發展及其在教育上的應用，教育心理學報，21，17-38。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 151. Weick, K.E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 152. Weick, K. E. (1983). Managerial thought in the context of action. In Srivastava, S. (Ed), The Executive mind. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 221-242.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 153. Weick, K. E.(1984). Small Wins: Redefining the Scale of Social Problems. American Psychologist. 39(1), 40-49.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 154. Weick, K.E. (1988). Enacted Sensemaking in Crisis Situation. Journal of Management Studies, 25(4), 305-317.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 155. Weick, K. E.(1993a). The Collapse of Sensemaking in Organizations: The Mann Gulch Disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly. 38, 628-652.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 156. . Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations, Thousand Oaks London New Delhi, Sage Publications.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 157. Weick, K.E. & Gilfillan, D.P. (1971). Fate of arbitrary traditions in a laboratory microculture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17(2), 179-191.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 158. Weinstein, C. F., & Mayer, R. F. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (pp.305-327). N.Y.: Macmillan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 159. Wheatley, M.J. & Kellner-Roger, M.(1996). Self-organization: The irresistible future of organizing. Strategy & Leadership, 24(4), 18-24.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 160. Wiley, N. (1988). The Micro-macro Problem in Social Theory. Sociological Theory, 6, 254-261.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 17. 郭重吉(1992)，從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進，科學發展月刊。第20卷第5期，548-570。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 161. Wolk, S. (1994). Project-based learning:pursuits with a purpose, Educational Leadership, 52(3), .42-45.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 162. Woods, P. (1992). Symbolic interactionism: theory and method. In M. D LeCompte, W. L. Millroy and J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 337-446). London: Academy Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 163. Yin, R. K. (1987). Case Study Research: Design and Method. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 164. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self regulated learning strategies, phases in self regulation :　shifting　from　process　goals to outcome goals. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 18. 陳向明(2002)，社會科學質的研究，台北：五南出版社。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 19. 陳李綢(1988)，學習策略的研究與教學，資優教育，29，15-24。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 20. 陳皎眉、鍾思嘉(1996)，人際關係，台北：幼獅。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 21. 黃政傑(1987)，教育研究極需擺脫量化的支配，教育研究方法論，台北：師大書苑。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 22. 黃瑞琴(1999)，質的教育研究方法，台北：心理。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 23. 黃俊儒(2000)，從社會互動與認知投入的觀點探討理化實驗客中學習機會之分佈，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 24. 黃鴻文(1994)，學生次文化，研究、理論與方法論之檢討，社會教育學刊，23，149-193。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 25. 潘英海（1998），文化識盲與文化糾結：本土田野工作者的「文化」問題。本土心理學研究，8期，37-71。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 26. 楊錦登(1999)，論述人際關係，國教輔導，38(3)，48-53，台中市：國立台中師範學院。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 27. 賈馥茗，梁志宏，陳如山，林月琴，黃□，侯志欽，簡仁育(1999)，教育心理學，台北：國立空中大學。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 28. 蔡秀玲、楊智馨(1999)，情緒管理，台北：揚智文化出版社。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 29. 楊惠貞(2000)，影響資管學生學習焦崩及電腦學習成效因素之探討，國立中央大學資訊管理研究所博士論文。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 30. 經濟部工業局台灣軟體業之窗資訊產業推動工作室網站。認識軟體產業。2001年11月1日，http://it.moeaidb.gov.tw/soft5/centry/c03.htm。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 31. 趙居蓮(1997)，學習與教學，台北：心理出版社。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 32. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms : goals structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 33. Ann B. F. & Marian L. H. (2000). The teacher-student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Communication Education, 49(3), 207-220.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 34. Ashforth, B. E. & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14, 20-39.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 35. Bernstein,B. (1996). Pedagogy,symbolic control and identity. London:Taylor & Francise.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 36. Binkley, N. & Brandes, G. M. (1995). Book review: Reflection Meaning and interpretation. Curriculum Inquiry, 25, 2, pp. 207-212.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 37. Birenbaum, M. & Dochy, F. J. R. C. (1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning process, and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer academic publishers.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 38. Bitner, B. L. (1986). The GALT: A measure of logical thinking ability of eight grade students and a predictor of science and mathematics achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 39. Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning motivation: Clarifying and expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 272-281.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 40. Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M. & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3&4), 369-398.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 41. Boje, D.M.(1991). The Storytelling Organization: A study of Story Performance in an Office-Supply Firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 106-126.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 42. Brandt, R. S. (1987). Strategic teaching and learning: cognitive instruction in the content areas. Alexandria, VA, ASCD.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 43. Bransford, J., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York: W.H. Freeman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 44. Brown, J. S., Collin, A., & Duguid, P.(1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Education Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 45. Burk, J. (2001). Communication apprehension among Master`s of Business Administration students: Investigating a gap in communication education. Communication Education, 50(1), pp. 51-58.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 46. Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organizational analysis. London: Heinemann.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 47. Carley, K. (1991). A theory of group stability. American Sociological Review, 56, 331-354.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 48. Carpenter, M. A. (2002). The Implications of Strategy and Social Context for the Relationship between Top Management Team Heterogeneity and Firm Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(3), 275-284.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 49. Clark, N., (1994). Team building: a practical guide for trainers, Mcgraw-Hill, New York.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 50. Cobb, P. (1996). Where is the mind? A coordination of sociocultural and cognitive constructivist perspectives. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed), Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 51. Cooper, G., & Sweller, j. (1987). The effects of schema acquisition and rele automation of mathematical problem-solving transfer, Journal of educational Psychology, 79, 347-362.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 52. Costley, D. L. & Melgoza, C. S. & Todd, R.,(1993). Human Relations in Organization, 5th ed., West Publishing Company, New York.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 53. Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Development and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 131-142.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 54. Cuseo, J., B. (1992). Cooperative learning vs. small-group discussions and group projects: The critical differences. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 2(3), 4-9.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 55. Daft, R. L. and Weick, K. E. (1984). Toward a model of organizations interpretation system. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 284-295.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 56. Dalton, M. (1959). Men who manage: Fusions of feeling and theory in administration. New York: John Wiley.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 57. Dansereau, D. F. (1979). Development and evaluation of a learning strategy training program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(1), 64-73.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 58. Dansereau, D. F. (1987). Transfer from cooperative to Individual studying. Journal of Reading, 30(7), 614-619.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 59. Dansereau, D. F. (1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In　C.E.Weinstein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander. (Eds.). Learning and　study strategies. New York：Academic Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 60. Diehl, W., Grobe, T., Lopez, H. & Cabral, C. (1999). Project-based learning: A strategy for teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Center for Youth Development and Education, Crporation for Business, Work, and Learning.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 61. Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A. & Kazanjian, R. K. (1999). Multilevel Theorizing about Creativity in Organizations: A Sensemaking Perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 286-307.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 62. Driver, R. & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 63. Erickson, D.and Ellett, F. (1982). Interpretation,understanding,and educational research. Teacher College Record, 83(4), 497-513.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 64. Erickson, F. (1989). The Meaning of Validity in Qualitative Research. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 65. Fineman, S. (1983). Working meanings, non-work, and the taken-for-granted. Journal of Management Studies, 20, 143-157.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 66. Fiol, C.M. (1989). A semiotic analysis of corporate language: Organizational boundaries and joint venturing. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 277-303.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 67. Fischer, F., Grasel, C., & Mandl, H. (2000). Fostering problem-oriented learning with auxiliary hypertext and graphical information. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Hew Orleans, LA. (April 24-28, 2000)zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 68. Gage, N. L. (1988). Educational psychology, Boston : Houghton Mifflin.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 69. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The condition of learning and theory of instruction. NY: Holt, Rinehert & Winston.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 70. Gersick, C. J. (1988). Time and transition in work team: toward a new model of group development. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 9-41.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 71. Gioia, D.A., & Chittipeddi, K.(1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 433-448.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 72. Glover, T.(1993). The teaching of educational psychology through project-based learning, ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 367703.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 73. Good, T. L.,Mulryan, C., and Mccaslin, M.(1992).Grouping for instruction in mathematics: A call for programmatic research on small group processes. In D. A. Growns(Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. New York: MaMillan. 165-196.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 74. Gioia, D. A. and Thomas, J. B. (1996). Identity, Image, and issue interpretation: Sensemaking during strategic change in Academia. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 370-403.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 75. Hilke, E. V. (1990). Cooperative learning. The Phi Delta:Kappa Education Foundation.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 76. Hiroaki, H. (2000). Bounded rationality, social and cultural norms, and interdependence via reference groups. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 43(1), 1-34.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 77. Hiroshi, K. (1997). Learning/memory processes under stress conditions. Behavioural Brain Research, 83(1-2), 71-74.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 78. Hofer, B. K., Yu S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). Teaching college students to be self-regulated learners. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Ed.), Self- regulated learning: From teaching to self-regulative practice (pp.57-85). New York: The Guilford Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 79. Hollenbeck, J. R., Ilgen, D. R., Sego, D. J., Hedlund, J. (1995). Multilevel theory of team decision making: Decision performance in teams incorporating distributed expertise. Journal of Applied Psychology. Washington: 80(2), 292-316.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 80. Holsti, O.R. (1969), Content Analysis for the Social Science and Humanities, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 81. House, R., Rousseau, D. M., Thomas-Hunt, M. (1995). The meso paradigm: A framework for the integration of micro and macro organizational behavior. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, 17, 71-114.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 82. Hunt, S. D., Morgan, R M., (1995). The Comparative Advantage Theory of Competition, Journal of Marketing, 59, 1-15.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 83. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Joining together: group theory and group skills (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 84. Johnson, D. W.,& Johnson, R. T.(1994). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th ed). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 85. Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Why violence Prevention program don’t work and work does. Educational Leadership, 52, 63-67.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 86. Jessup, H. R. (1990). New roles in team leadership. Training and Development Journal, 44, 79-83.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 87. Joan K & Eileen B. E. (2002). Comparison of in-class and distance-learning students` performance and attitudes in an introductory computer science course. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 17(6), 206-219.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 88. Jorgensen , D. L.(1989). Paticipant observation:A methodology for human studies. Newbury Park　CA:Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 89. Katzenbach, J. R. & Smith, D. K, (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-performance Organization, New York: Harper Collins.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 90. Ken, B. and Eunice P. C. (2000). The One Minute Manager Builds High Performing Teams, William Morrow.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 91. Klein, K. J., Dansereau, F., Hall, R. (1994). Levels issues in theory development, data collection, and analysis. Academy of Management Review, 19, 195-229.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 92. Klein, K.J., Tosi, H. & Cannella, A.A. (1999). Multilevel Theory Building: Benefits, Barriers, and New Developments. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 243-248.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 93. Klein, G. A., Calderwood, R., & Clinton-Cirocco, A. (1986). Rapid decision making on the fire ground. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual Meeting, 1, 576-580.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 94. Kracke, W. (1978). Force and Persuation: Leadership in an Amazonian Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 95. Krajcik, J.S., Czeniak, C. & Berger, C. (1999). Teaching children science: a project– based approach, Boston: McGraw-Hill Collage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 96. Krieger, S. (1979). Hip capitalism. Berverly Hills, CA: Sage.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 97. Leach, E. R. (1967). An anthropologist`s in the field. Atlantic Highlands. NJ: Humanities Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 98. Leanna, L.H. (2001). Will We Teach Leadership or Skilled Incompetence? The Challence of Student Project Teams. Journal of Management Education, 25(5), 590-605.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 99. Lewis, R., (1995). Team-Building Skills-Participants’ Guide, Logan Page Ltd.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 100. Lori, J. C. & Kent E. M. (2001). Variations in learning, motivation, and perceived immediacy between live and distance education classrooms. Communication Education. 50(3), 230-240.zh_TW