自從網際網路的普及之後,線上的專業討論活動也隨之蓬勃發展。我們透 過滯後序列分析(lag-sequential analysis) 與 IAM(Interaction Analysis Model) 的五個分類方法,結合了定量分析(quantitative content analysis)與序列分 析(sequential analysis)。希望可以了解在無明顯指導者存在的線上討論平台 中,使用者與使用者之間,所產生知識建構層次的深度與線上互動交流模 式。我們取得一個時間區段內(2010/09/01~2011/01/31)、523 個不同 ID 使 用者的資料,對他們的行為做了互動模式編碼與知識建構層次編碼。結果我 們發現,雖然電子佈告欄是一個純文本的系統,與多媒體學習系統在介面上 有很大的差異。但是對結果來說,此系統的知識建構層次與 problem-solved based online form(Hou et al., 2008)的性質相近。比起其他存在教師參與的網 路多媒體論壇,相對的會有較高層次的知識建構與成效。在互動模式分析 中,發現了一個可能是回答者願意回答的動機-鼓勵。也發現到此分析方法的 缺點與提供之後的研究可以如何修改模型,以進行更深的討論。

The online professional discussion has grown rapidly with the popularization of the Internet. And we wish to know the depth of knowledge construction level and the online interaction model between users without supervisor. We use five different methods include lag-sequential analysis, five sorting model of IAM (interaction analysis model), quantitative content analysis and sequen- tial analysis. We have got data from 523 different user in a time period (2010/09/01 2011/01/31), and we encode their interaction model and knowl- edge construction level. Finally we found that although BBS is a pure texture system- its user interface is much different from electric learning system, its system knowledge construction level is similar to problem-solving based online form (Hou et al., 2008), which will have higher knowledge construction level rather than other online mass media forum having teacher taking parts in. In interaction analysis, we found a possible motivation which makes people willing to answer- applaud. We also found the disadvantage of this analysis method and prove some suggestion to improve the model to have deeper research for others.

References
Bakeman, R. and Gottman, J. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge Univ Pr.
Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., and Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for ex- amining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of educational computing research, 17(4):397–431.
Gunter, P., Jack, S., Shores, R., Carrell, D., and FLOWERS, J. (1993). Lag se- quential analysis as a tool for functional analysis of student disruptive behav- ior in classrooms. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 1(3):138.
Harasim, L. (1990). Online education: Perspectives on a new environment. Greenwood Publishing Group Inc. Westport, CT, USA.
Harasim, L. (1993). Collaborating in cyberspace: Using computer confer- ences as a group learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 3(2):119–130.
Hew, K. and Cheung, W. (2003). Models to evaluate online learning commu- nities of asynchronous discussion forums. Australian journal of educational technology, 19(2):241–259.
Hiltz, S. (1990). Evaluating the virtual classroom. Online education: Perspec- tives on a new environment, pages 133–183.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2007). An analysis of peer assessment online discussions within a course that uses project-based learning. Interactive learning environments, 15(3):237–251.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2008). Analysis of problem-solving based online asynchronous discussion pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1):17–28.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2009). Using blogs as a professional develop- ment tool for teachers: analysis of interaction behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4):325–340.
Hou, H., Chang, K., and Sung, Y. (2010). Applying lag sequential analysis to detect visual behavioural patterns of online learning activities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2):E25–E27.
Jeong, A. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1):25–43.
Muilenburg, L. and Berge, Z. A framework for designing questions for online learning. Berge Collins Associates Available online: http://www. emodera- tors. com/moderators/muilenburg. html [19 July 2003].
Pena-Shaff, J., Martin, W., and Gay, G. (2001). An Epistemological Framework for Analyzing Student Interactions in Computer-Medicated Communication Environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(1).
Pena-Shaff, J. and Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers & Education, 42(3):243–265.
Puustinen, M., Bernicot, J., and Bert-Erboul, A. (2010). Written computer- mediated requests for help by French-speaking students: An analysis of their forms and functions. Learning and Instruction.
Wilkes, C. and Burnham, B. (1991). Adult Learner Motivations and Electronic Distance Education. American Journal of Distance Education, 5(1):43–50.
Willson, V. (1988). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential anal- ysis.
Zhu, E. (1996). Meaning Negotiation, Knowledge Construction, and Mentoring in a Distance Learning Course.
孫治本 (2002). 網路學習中的互動式學習-以BBS社群氛圍提昇學習參與度之研究. In ELTA2002「網路學習理論與實務」學術研討會(國立交通大學 主辦;2002.10.31.).
謝佩宜 and 周倩 (2006). 網路數學討論區使用者之批判思考表現, 參與歷程觀感, 動機與程度之相關研究. 科學教育學刊, 14(1):83–100.
馬秀蘭 (2004). 數學乘除問題情境發展之研究–以 BBS 為管道. 科學教育學刊, 12(1):53–81.
魏立欣 and Roblyer, M. (2004). 教育科技融入教學. 台北: 高等教育.