本研究基於知識翻新理論設計「線上同步合作論證學習平台」(Synchronize Collaborative Argumentation Learning System，以下簡稱SCALS)，平台設計目的在於讓學生能夠透過此平台，完成小組論證，提出自身的想法與看法，持續改進與反思，進而提升學生的論證能力、反思思考能力、合作學習能力等。在完成平台開發後，本研究讓學生使用SCALS平台進行討論，並相互給予意見與回饋，研究者依據學生給予的意見與回饋，以評估SCALS，本研究採用調查研究法的問卷調查法，針對42名的高中學生進行問卷調查，評估學生對於SCALS的整體知覺有用性、整體知覺易用性、整體使用意願，以及鷹架功能與論證互動工具的知覺有用性。研究結果發現多數受測學生對於SCALS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與互動工具的知覺有用性皆給予正面的回饋，多數學生提及，SCALS平台提供之功能，具備有用性與易用性，亦願意使用系統進行論證活動，最後根據本研究的研究結果顯示，提出SCALS的建議與未來研究建議。

The main purpose of this study is to develop the "Synchronous Collaborative Argumentation Learning System"（SCALS）based on Knowledge Building Theory to. By using the SCALS platform, the students are expected to improve argumentation skills and to have the opportunity to continuously reflect on their collaborative argumentation activity. After completing the development of the SCALS, a total of 42 Taiwanese high school students participated in the platform evaluations of SCALS. A modified questionnaire was used for the platform evaluations in terms of the students’ perceived usefulness of the SCALS, overall perceived ease of use, and willingness to use the SCALS. The research results indicated that the students expressed positive and satisfying perception regarding the usefulness and ease of use regarding the SCALS. Also, they expressed high willingness of using the SCALS for synchronous collaborative argumentation. Besides, they also indicated that the functions provided by SCALS were useful and user-friendly. Finally, from this research results of the data analysis, this study proposed suggestions and future research work for the improvement on SCALS.

洪煌堯、蔡佩真與林倍伊。（2014）。透過知識創新教學理念與學習平臺以培養國小學生自然課合作學習與翻新想法的習慣。科學教育學刊，22（4），413－439。
羅希哲、蔡慧音與曾國鴻。（2011）。高中女生 STEM 網路專題式合作學習之研究。高雄師大學報：自然科學與科技類（30），41－61。
Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to Learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of: The learning sciences (pp. 443-459). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.
Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2009). Argumentation and explanation in conceptual change: Indications from protocol analyses of peer‐to‐peer dialog. Cognitive science, 33(3), 374-400.
Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2010). Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(3), 259-282.
Clark, D., Sampson, V., Stegmann, K., Marttunen, M., Kollar, I., Janssen, J., . . . Laurinen, L. (2010). Online learning environments, scientific argumentation, and 21st century skills E-Collaborative knowledge construction: Learning from computer-supported and virtual environments (pp. 1-39): IGI Global.
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2005). Analyzing the quality of argumentation supported by personally-seeded discussions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of th 2005 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning: learning 2005: the next 10 years!
Clark, D. B., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., Menekse, M., & Erkens, G. (2007). Technology-enhanced learning environments to support students' argumentation Argumentation in science education (pp. 217-243): Springer.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science education, 84(3), 287-312.
Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science education, 88(6), 915-933.
Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: A review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional science, 38(6), 571-606.
Hong, H.-Y., Chen, F.-C., Chai, C. S., & Chan, W.-C. (2011). Teacher-education students’ views about knowledge building theory and practice. Instructional science, 39(4), 467-482.
Hong, H.-Y., & Sullivan, F. R. (2009). Towards an idea-centered, principle-based design approach to support learning as knowledge creation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 613.
Huang-Yao, H., & Shu-Ping, L. (2010). Teacher-Education Students' Epistemological Belief Change through Collaborative Knowledge Building. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (De La Salle University Manila), 19(1).
Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Designing argumentation learning environments Argumentation in science education (pp. 91-115): Springer.
Joiner, R., & Jones, S. (2003). The effects of communication medium on argumentation and the development of critical thinking. International journal of educational research, 39(8), 861-871.
Jonassen, D. H., & Kim, B. (2010). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Design justifications and guidelines. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 439-457.
Kayler, M., & Weller, K. (2007). Pedagogy, self-assessment, and online discussion groups. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 136-147.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (2013). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts: Princeton University Press.
Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization science, 5(1), 14-37.
Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012). Argumentation-based computer supported collaborative learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 79-106.
Nussbaum, E. M., Kardash, C. M., & Graham, S. E. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 157.
Oliveira, A. W., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Interactive patterns and conceptual convergence during student collaborations in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 634-658.
Olson, O., Novacek, E., Whitehead, E., & Palmer, I. (1970). Investigations on selenium in wheat. Phytochemistry, 9(6), 1181-1188.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science education, 93(3), 448-484.
Sanders, J. A., Wiseman, R. L., & Gass, R. H. (1994). Does teaching argumentation facilitate critical thinking? Communication Reports, 7(1), 27-35.
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®. Education and technology: An encyclopedia, 183, 192.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the learning sciences, 1(1), 37-68.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge building environments: Extending the limits of the possible in education and knowledge work. Encyclopedia of distributed learning, 269-272.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology: na.
Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International journal of science education, 28(2-3), 235-260.
Sun, Y., Zhang, J., & Scardamalia, M. (2010). Developing deep understanding and literacy while addressing a gender-based literacy gap. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1).
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The use of argument: Cambridge University Press.
Veerman, A. L., Andriessen, J. E., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Learning through synchronous electronic discussion. Computers & Education, 34(3-4), 269-290.
Walker, S. A. (2004). Socratic strategies and devil's advocacy in synchronous CMC debate. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 172-182.
Walton, D. (2006). Examination dialogue: An argumentation framework for critically questioning an expert opinion. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(5), 745-777.
Wang, T., & Jong, M. S. (2016). Towards equitable quality education for all: Are MOOCs really a way out. Paper presented at the Conference proceedings of the 20th Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education.
Whitehead, A. N. (1959). The aims of education. Daedalus, 88(1), 192-205.
Yiong‐Hwee, T., & Churchill, D. (2007). Using sentence openers to support students’ argumentation in an online learning environment. Educational Media International, 44(3), 207-218.
Yuen, A. H., & Ma, W. W. (2008). Exploring teacher acceptance of e‐learning technology. Asia‐Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 229-243.
Zhang, J., Hong, H.-Y., Scardamalia, M., Teo, C. L., & Morley, E. A. (2011). Sustaining knowledge building as a principle-based innovation at an elementary school. The Journal of the learning sciences, 20(2), 262-307.