以專題導向為基礎之相互教學翻轉教室對於工程教育的高認知層次與學習成效之影響

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	吳祖賢 Tsu-Hsien Wu
論文名稱：	以專題導向為基礎之相互教學翻轉教室對於工程教育的高認知層次與學習成效之影響 Investigation of Reciprocal Teaching and Flipped Classroom of PBL and their Influences on High Cognitive Level and Learning Achievements in Engineering education.
指導教授：	黃武元 Wu-Yuin Hwang
口試委員:
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	資訊電機學院 - 網路學習科技研究所 Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology
論文出版年：	2018
畢業學年度：	106
語文別：	中文
論文頁數：	113
中文關鍵詞：	工程教育、專題導向式學習、翻轉教室、相互教學
外文關鍵詞：	Engineering Education, Project-Based Learning (PBL), Flipped Classroom, Flipped Classroom
相關次數：	點閱：14 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

有鑑於傳統工程教育中，學生缺乏實作、溝通、表達與創造等能力的培養，因此我
們希望藉由PBL (Project Based Learning)、翻轉教室及相互教學等機制的導入，讓學生能
透過實作更了解課堂所學，並增加團隊合作的互動機會，經由多重互動的過程中，激發
學生在工程教育中高認知層次的發展。

本研究分為一與二，且對象皆為工程背景的大學研究所學生，實驗時間皆為期18
週，教師皆為同一人，研究一共12 人採自由分組，且兩人為一組，研究二共10 人並採
異質分組，一樣兩人為一組。

研究一，基於專題導向式學習，我們進一步導入翻轉教室的教學機制，從訪談中得
知，學生們覺得可促進交流整合各種想法，也可以聽到很多新奇的概念，有助於加深對
課堂內容的理解，且比起以往老師只是要同學們回家預習更有效，不像傳統課程僅僅是
上課然後考試，經由與同學討論、報告分享、實作，會更瞭解老師上課的內容觀念與應
用方法，但也存在一些缺點的部分，像是此次上課方式學生們覺得較少得到老師的幫助
與互動，較難的課程內容需要老師更多的協助和教學，且作業量對學生們來說負擔太大，
另外學生們期待實作軟體可多增加教學與輔助，也建議老師使用電腦教室上這門課，會
幫助他們讓LabView 的實作完程度更高，希望能直接在課堂上有操作演練。

研究二在課程的規劃上，比研究一更有彈性且減少了學生所感受作業量的負擔，讓
學生有更多時間來發展高認知層次，此外，研究二也為學生安排每隔一週的實作練習，
有助加速學生對工程知識的記憶與理解，同時促進在應用與分析等高認知層次上的發展。

其中研究二還另外加入相互教學法，與翻轉教室相輔相成，促進學生在課堂上的討
論與反思，藉此逐步激發出學生們的高認知能力，如:創造層次。而研究結果發現，透過
研究一與研究二的觀察，除了已幫助學生跳脫傳統教學基本的記憶、理解認知層次，並
提升在工程教育中應有的應用與分析等認知層次外，也逐漸激發出學生們在該領域的新
思維和創新想法，但未來仍存在我們能繼續改進的地方和努力方向。

Compare to traditional engineering education, it is common that students have little
training on project implementation or less chances to cultivate their abilities of communication,
expression, and creativity. Therefore, we hope to incorporate project based learning(PBL),
flipped classroom, and reciprocal teaching into the classroom to help students become better
team players and also enhance their advanced cognitive skills through multiple activities.

The object of study one is twelve graduate students from a university in Taiwan, major in
Electrical Engineering and took "Signal Processing of Power Quality Disturbances" class in
their first year. They were divided into six groups with two students per group. The results show
that the learning activities we incorporated into the class have put a weight on students' loading.
Therefore, students have no enough time to think about new ideas or move forward to develop
their advanced cognitive skills such as evaluation or creative ability.

The study two shares the same background of object and same teacher as study one, except
only ten students included in the study. However, we had made suggestions to group students
through questionnaires based on their tendency of leadership and creativity for five groups with
two on each group. The results show that students' advanced cognitive skills improve gradually
through and students are satisfied for this course via online survey.

Compare to study one, the plan of study two is more flexible and hence to reduce students'
class loading. Furthermore, we arranged LabView course at a computer lab twice per month.
The goal is to enhance students' concept knowledge and develop their advanced cognitive skills
through hands on practice. We have found students gradually develop their advanced cognitive
skills. In the future, we hope to work continually and find out more to improve students' learning
experiences on this field.

目 錄
中文摘要 ..................................................................................................................................... i
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... ii
致謝 ........................................................................................................................................... iii
目 錄 ......................................................................................................................................... iv
圖目錄 ..................................................................................................................................... viii
表目錄 ....................................................................................................................................... ix
第一章 緒論 ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 研究背景與動機 ............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 研究目標與待答問題 ..................................................................................................... 2
1.3 研究介紹 ......................................................................................................................... 3
1.3.1 兩研究的課程主架構 ............................................................................................... 3
1.3.2 研究對象 ................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.3 研究時間 ................................................................................................................... 5
1.3.3 研究地點 ................................................................................................................... 5
第二章 文獻探討 .................................................................................................................... 6
2.1 專題導向學習(Project-based learning, PBL) .................................................................. 7
2.2 翻轉教室(Flipped Classroom) ........................................................................................ 8
2.3 相互教學(Reciprocal Teaching) ...................................................................................... 9
2.4 布魯姆認知層次(Bloom) .............................................................................................. 10
第三章 研究方法 .................................................................................................................. 11
3.1 研究架構與研究變項 ................................................................................................... 11
3.1.1 獨立變項 ................................................................................................................. 11
3.1.2 控制變項 ................................................................................................................. 11
3.1.3 依變項 ..................................................................................................................... 12
3.2 研究流程與程序 ........................................................................................................... 16
3.3 質性分析方法 ............................................................................................................... 22
3.3.1 編碼理論基礎 ......................................................................................................... 22
3.3.1 編碼過程 ................................................................................................................. 23
第四章 資料分析與結果討論 .............................................................................................. 25
4.1 研究一 ........................................................................................................................... 25
4.1.1 預習與課前報告 ..................................................................................................... 25
4.1.2 每週課後作業 ......................................................................................................... 26
4.1.3 每月專題報告 ......................................................................................................... 27
4.1.4 互評表 ..................................................................................................................... 27
4.1.5 問卷回饋 ................................................................................................................. 28
4.1.6 其他發現 ................................................................................................................. 29
4.2 研究二 ........................................................................................................................... 29
4.2.1 預習與課前報告 ..................................................................................................... 29
4.2.2 相互教學活動 ......................................................................................................... 31
4.2.3 LabView 課堂實作練習 .......................................................................................... 35
4.2.4 雙週課後作業 ......................................................................................................... 35
4.2.5 每月專題報告 ......................................................................................................... 36
4.2.6 互評表 ..................................................................................................................... 37
4.2.7 問卷回饋 ................................................................................................................. 38
4.3 研究一與研究二的比較 ............................................................................................... 40
4.3.1 預習與課前報告 ..................................................................................................... 42
4.3.2 作業 ......................................................................................................................... 43
4.3.3 每月專題報告 ......................................................................................................... 45
4.3.4 學習成效 ................................................................................................................. 46
4.4 結果討論 ....................................................................................................................... 48
4.4.1 探討研究一中預習與課前報告對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ....... 48
4.4.2 探討研究一中每週課後作業對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ........... 48
4.4.3 探討研究一中每月專題報告對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ........... 48
4.4.4 探討研究二中預習與課前報告對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ....... 48
4.4.5 探討研究二中相互教學活動對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ........... 49
4.4.6 探討研究二中雙週課後作業對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ........... 49
4.4.7 探討研究二中每月專題報告對於學習者的認知發展與影響關係為何? ........... 50
第五章 結論 .......................................................................................................................... 51
參考文獻 .................................................................................................................................. 53
附錄一 研究一之翻轉教室問卷 ............................................................................................ 57
附錄二 五大人格特質測驗-領導力 ....................................................................................... 58
附錄三 創造力風格測驗-創造力 ........................................................................................... 65
附錄四 翻轉相互教學活動表單 ............................................................................................ 79
附錄五 專題報告互評表-以第一組為例 ............................................................................... 81
附錄六 學習動機問卷 ............................................................................................................ 85
附錄七 專題導向之相互教學翻轉教室-接受模型問卷 ....................................................... 91
附錄八 學生訪談問卷 ............................................................................................................ 96
                                

Richard M. Felder & Linda K. Silverman. (1988). Learning and Teaching Styles In Engineering
Education. Engr. Education, 78(7), 674–681.
Isidro Calvo, Member, IEEE, Itziar Cabanes, Member, IEEE, Jerónimo Quesada, Senior
Member, IEEE,and Oscar Barambones, Senior Member, IEEE (2017). A Multidisciplinary
PBL Approach for Teaching Industrial Informatics and Robotics in Engineering.
Clyde Freeman Herreid & Nancy A. Schiller. (2013). Case Studies and the Flipped Classroom.
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning.
Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar & Ann L. Brown. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of
Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities.
Isidro Calvo, Itziar Cabanes, Jerónimo Quesada, Oscar Barambones. (2017). A
Multidisciplinary PBL Approach for Teaching Industrial Informatics and Robotics in
Engineering.2017 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION
Oliver P. John & Sanjay Srivastava. (1999).The Big-Five Trait Taxonomy : History,
Measurement,and Theoretical Perspectives.
V. K. Kumar & Dr. E. R. Holman (1997).Creativity Styles Questionnaire-Revised.
Joseph S. Krajcik & Phyllis C. Blumenfeld & R. KeithSawyer (ed.) (2006).The Cambridge
Handbook of the Learning Sciences. CHAPTER 19.
Burcu Gulay Tasci. (2014). Project Based Learning from Elementary School to College, Tool:
Architecture.
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, 369-398.
John W. Thomas, Ph. D, (2000). A REVIEW OF RESEARCHON PROJECT-BASED
LEARNING.
54
Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., Bransford, J.
D., & The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1998). Doing with
understanding: Lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning. The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 271-311.
N. Remziye Ergul , Elif Keskin Kargin. (2013). The Effect Of Project Based Learning On
Students’ Science Success.
Gultekin, M. (2005). The effect of project based learning on learning outcomes in the 5th grade
social studies course in primary education. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 5(2):
548–56.
Boaler, J. 1999. Mathematics for the moment, or the millennium?Education Week 17(29): 30–
34.
Huang J., Improving undergraduates' teamwork skills by adapting project-based learning
methodology, 2010 5th International Conference on Computer Science & Education
(ICCSE 2010), 652-5, 2010; ISBN-13: 978-1-4244-6002-1; DOI:
10.1109/ICCSE.2010.5593527.
Martinez, F., L. C. Herrero, S. De Pablo, Project-Based Learning and Rubrics in the Teaching
of Power Supplies and Photovoltaic Electricity, IEEE Transactions on Education, March
25, 2010; ISSN: 00189359; DOI:10.1109/TE.2010.2044506.
Kilmartin, L., E. McCarrick, A Case Study of Enhancing Learning Outcomes for
Undergraduate Electronic\Computer Engineering Students through a Service Learning
Based Project Module, 2010 IEEE Transforming Engineering Education: Creating
Interdisciplinary Skills for Complex Global Environments,18 pp., 2010; ISBN-13: 978-1-
4244-6042-7.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class
every day. Alexandra, VA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research.
55
American Society for Engineering Education National Conference Proceedings, 30.
Retrieved July 10, 2016, from http://www.studiesucces ho.nl/wp
content/uploads/2014/04/flippedclassroom-artikel.pdf
Herreid, C. F., & Schiller, N. A. (2013). Case studies and the flipped classroom. Journal of
College Science Teaching, 42, 62–66.
Jeong-eun Kim, Hyunjin Park, Mijung Jang, Hosung Nam. (2017). Exploring Flipped
Classroom Effects on Second Language Learners’Cognitive Processing.
Sung, K. (2015). A case study on a flipped classroom in an EFL content course. Multimedia-
Assisted Language Learning, 18,159–187.
Chung Kwan Lo and Khe Foon Hew.(2017).A critical review of flipped classroom challenges
in K-12 education: possible solutions and recommendations for future research.
G.S. Mason, T.R. Shuman and K.E. Cook, “Comparing the Effectiveness of an Inverted
Classroom to a Traditional Classroom in an Upper-Division Engineering Course, `IEEE
Trans on Education, 2013, pp 1-6.
J.L. Bishop and M. A. Verleger, “The flipped classroom: A survey of the research,” in Proc.
ASEE Annu. Conf. Expo., Jun 2013.
Barbara Kerr.(2015).The flipped classroom in engineering education: A survey of the research.
Barak Rosenshine & Carla Meister.(1994).Reciprocal Teaching: A Review of the Research.
Palinscar, A.S.(1984)."Reciprocal Teaching: Field Evaluations in Reme-dial and Content-Area
Reading."Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research,
Wash-ington,D.C.
Palinscar, A.S.(1986)."The Role of Dialogue in Providing Scaffolded Instruction."Educational
Psychologist 21: 73-98.
Palinscar, A.S.,and A.L. Brown.(1984)."Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension—Fostering
and Monitoring Activities."Cognition and Instruction 1, 2:111-175.
Christophe Piombo, Hadj Batatia, Alain Ayache.(2003). A Framework for Adapting
56
Instruction to Cognitive Learning Styles.
Riding, R., and S. Rayner. (1998). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: understanding
differences in learning and behaviour, London: David Fulton Pub.
UW Teaching Academy Short-Course.(2003).Exam question types & student Competencies :
How to measure learning accurately: Bloom's Taxonomy. Retrieved October 1, 2007 from
http://teachingacademy.wisc.edu/archive/Assistance/course/blooms.htm
Mary Forehand. (2011). Bloom's Taxonomy.
Mary J. Pickard. (2007). THE NEW BLOOM’S TAXONOMY: AN OVERVIEW FOR
FAMILY AND CONSUMER SCIENCES.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文