| 研究生: |
李依靜 Yi-Ching Lee |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
基於知識翻新理論的教師共同備課平台之開發與初步評估 Development and Preliminary Evaluation of Knowledge Building Theory-based Online Platform for Collaborative Lesson Planning |
| 指導教授: |
吳穎沺
Ying-Tien Wu |
| 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: | 2020 |
| 畢業學年度: | 108 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 140 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 共同備課 、教師專業社群 、知識翻新理論 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | collaborative lesson planning, teacher professional learning community, knowledge building theory |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:8 下載:0 |
| 分享至: |
| 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 |
共同備課是由一群擁有共同目標的教師組成,且一起為了提升學生的學習成效努力,經由教學經驗的交流、教學內容的討論以及教學過程的反思,編寫更合適學生的教案,達到學生學習成效以及教師專業成長的過程。然而,現今教師共同備課活動的執行較少有能夠同時解決時間與空間問題,且記錄下討論過程中想法發展,又能夠進行教案內容設計的系統平台。因此本研究之目的為開發結合基於知識翻新理論的討論空間以及共同備課概念的「教師共同備課平台」,透過設計想法視覺化的討論空間,並提供多元化輔助工具,讓教師可以利用此系統進行共同備課活動,不僅可以在平台內完成教案內容的編寫與檢核,還可以清楚的看到討論活動歷程,透過討論與反思,達到專業及知識的成長。待系統建置完成後,本研究針對48位國小至高中的教師,採用問卷調查法,進行教師對於教師共同備課平台的整體知覺有用性、整體知覺易用性、整體使用意願以及鷹架功能及輔助工具知覺有用性之初步評估。研究結果發現,多數受測教師對於教師共同備課平台的整體知覺有用性、整體知覺易用性、整體使用意願以及鷹架功能及輔助工具知覺有用性皆給予正向的回饋。且針對不同教學年資、教學學生程度、教學科目背景與共同備課經驗的教師進行更進一步的分析,發現不同教學年資及有無共同備課經驗的教師對於教師共同備課平台的知覺有用性可能有不同感知。最後,依據本研究之研究結果,提出對於教師共同備課平台的建議,作為未來改善系統的參考。
Collaborative Lesson Planning (CLP) received more and more attention from educators and inservice teachers. CLP is composed of a group of teachers with the same teaching goals. Through the exchange of teaching experience, the discussion of teaching content, and the reflection of the teaching process, they can write more suitable lesson plans for students, and work hard to improve students' learning effectiveness. However, there are only a few systems that can solve time and space problems as well in collaborative lesson planning. To address this issue, this study aims to develop a "Collaborative Lesson Planning Online Platform" (CLPOP) that combines a discussion space based on Knowledge Building Theory. After the development of the CLPOP, this study uses the questionnaire survey method to conduct a preliminary system evaluation for the CLPOP. The participants were 48 teachers from elementary schools to high schools. The results of the study showed that most of the teachers expressed positive feedbacks on perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, intention to use the system. Moreover, they expressed positive perception towards the scaffolds and tools within the CLPOP. Suggestions for the improvement of the system and future study were also discussed.
《教學與評量共備工作坊》社群聯盟 共備社群經驗分享(1)(2017 年 5 月)。雲林縣國民教育輔導團。取自http://ceag.ylc.edu.tw/v2/file/downfile/files/39995
王如哲 (2002)。以知識經濟、知識社會的觀點論如何提升學校社區化之教育效能。教育資料集刊,27,63-72。
王金國(2017)。談共備與有效共備之建議。臺灣教育評論月刊,6(11),92-95。
王淑麗、丁一顧(2017)。教師專業學習社群運作成功的關鍵:信任。臺灣教育評論月刊,6(10),14-19。
佐藤學(2010)。教師花傳書—教師如何成長為專家。東京都:小學館。
宋文權、張玉蘭(2010)。集體備課與教師的專業發展。江蘇教育研究,(3),47-50。
周啟葶(2006)。以「學習社群」促進教師專業發展之分析。中等教育,57(5),94-113。
保俊(2011)。備課: 課堂教學的敲門磚。中國教育技術裝備,2011(21),81-82。
孫志麟(2010)。專業學習社群:促進教師專業發展的平台。學校行政,(69),138-158。
徐育婷(2018)。教師面對共備與觀課之困境。 臺灣教育評論月刊,7(7), 59-62。
教育部(2009)。中小學教師專業學習社群手冊。台北:教育部。
教育部(2017)。國民中學及國民小學實施跨領域或跨科目協同教學參考原則(民國106年10月26日發布)。教育部全球資訊網 https://www.edu.tw。下載日期2019年6月19日。
郭富彰(2019)。教師觀議課平台之開發與初步評估(未出版之碩士論文)。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文,桃園市。
陳志坪(2016)。線上合作共同備課平台:開發與評估。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所碩士論文,桃園市。
陳建州(2011)。國小教師備課歷程中的資訊需求與資訊尋求行為之探究。國立臺中教育大學區域與社會發展學系碩士論文,台中市。
劉世雄(2017)。臺灣國中教師對共同備課、公開觀課與集體議課的實施目的、關注內容以及專業成長知覺之研究。當代教育研究季刊,25(2),043-076。
歐用生(2013)。日本小學教學觀摩─教師專業成長之意義。教育資料集刊,57,55-76。
藍偉瑩(2017)。共同備課的意義。【臺灣化學教育】電子期刊,21,5-9。
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2003). Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. D. Corte, L. Verschaffel, N. Entwistle, & J. v. Merrienboer (Eds.), Unravelling basic components and dimensions of powerful learning environments (pp. 55–68). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
Bolam, R., McMahon, A., Stoll, L., Thomas, S., Wallace, M., Greenwood, A. et al.(2005). Creating and sustaining effective professional learning communities. London: DfES.
Chen, B., Resendes, M., Chai, C. S., & Hong, H. Y. (2017). Two tales of time: uncovering the significance of sequential patterns among contribution types in knowledge-building discourse. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 162-175.
Collaborative lesson planning. (2012, October). Teacher Development Trust. Retrieved from https://tdtrust.org/collaborative-lesson-planning
Delors, J., Mufti, I. A., Amagi, I., Carneiro, R., Chung, F., & Geremek, B. (1996). Learning: The treasure within. Paris: UNESCO.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.
DuFour, R., DuFour, R. & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree
Gao, S. & Wang, J. (2014). Teaching transformation under centralized curriculum and teacher learning community: Two Chinese chemistry teachers' experiences in developing in-quiry-based instruction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 44, 1-11.
Hord, S. M., & Sommers, W. A. (Eds.). (2008). Leading professional learning communities: Voices from research and practice. Corwin Press.
Huffman, J. B., & Hipp, K. K. (2003). Reculturing schools as professional learning communities. R&L Education.
Jackson, D., & Temperley, J. (2007). From professional learning community to networked learning community. Professional learning communities: Divergence, depth and dilemmas, 45-62.
OECD (1996). The Knowledge-Based Economy. Paris: OECD.
Popper, K. (1979). Three worlds. University of Michigan.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal education in a knowledge society, 97, 67-98.
Scardamalia, M. (2004). CSILE/Knowledge Forum®. In Education and technology: An encyclopedia (pp. 183-192). Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 97-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2010). A brief history of knowledge building. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 36(1), 1-16
UNESCO Institute for Education (2003). Nurturing the treasure: Vision and strategy 2002 – 2007. Hamburg: author.