透過有序的分析，我們可以觀察使用者過往的經驗，也可以根據這些資料找出主要的行為模式，本論文中，我們針對線上的學習環境，探討學生在e-learning的學習行為模式。
在現今的教學環境中，學生不僅僅只是侷限於教室中，更多是透過網路學習，學生可以在任何地點、任何時間去學習自己想學的知識，在e-learning學習環境中，老師也可以根據學生的紀錄了解學生的學習狀況，適時地去進行輔導或是設計學習活動來改善學生們的學習成效。本研究使用線上學習平台BookRoll，萃取學生們在課堂前的閱讀紀錄，找出學生們課前預習的主要閱讀模式，並去觀察當老師設計學習活動時對學生們閱讀模式的影響，也會探討當學生在課前預習有跟隨閱讀策略時，是否能改善他們的學習成效。本研究主要透過三個方向去觀察學生的閱讀模式，第一個是根據SQ3R閱讀策略，學生跟隨與沒有跟隨在閱讀模式上的差別，並去探討老師的學習活動設計是否能增加學生在課前預習時的使用率；第二個是根據學生的學習成效高低去找出學生在高分組與低分組的閱讀模式差別；第三個則是根據SQ3R閱讀策略，學生的學習成效是否能有顯著的差異。

Through sequential analysis, we can observe the user's past experience, and can also find out the main behavior patterns based on these data. In this paper, we discuss the learning behavior patterns of students in e-learning for the online learning environment.
In today ’s teaching environment, students are not just limited to the classroom, but also learn through the internet. Students can learn what they want to learn at any place and any time. In e-learning environment, teachers can also learn about the student’s learning status based on the student ’s records, and provide timely intervention or design learning activities to improve students ’learning performance. This study uses the online learning platform BookRoll to extract the reading records of students before the class, find out the main reading patterns of the students' previews, and observe the impact of the teacher's reading patterns when the teacher designs learning activities. We will also explore whether students can improve their learning performance when they have preview learning strategies before class. This study mainly observes students reading patterns through three directions. The first is based on the SQ3R reading strategies, the difference between students' following and not following in reading patterns, and to explore whether the teacher's learning activity design can increase the student's utilization rate during pre-class preparation; the second is to find out the difference between the reading pattern of the students in the high group and the low group according to the student's learning performance, and observe whether the student's score is significant increase; The third is based on SQ3R reading strategies, whether there is a significant difference in student learning performance.

Dettori, G. (Ed.). (2010). Fostering self-regulated learning through ICT. IGI global.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(2), 64-70.
Harman, H. H. (1976). Modern factor analysis. University of Chicago press.
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 9(2), 79-94.
User Behavior Pattern Detection in Unstructured Processes - a Learning Management System Case Study, David Codish; Eyal Rabin; Gilad Ravid
Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 9(2), 79-94.
Williams, B., Onsman, A., & Brown, T. (2010). Exploratory factor analysis: A five-step guide for novices. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine, 8(3).
Gorsuch, R. L. (1988). Exploratory factor analysis. In Handbook of multivariate experimental psychology (pp. 231-258). Springer, Boston, MA.
Osborne, J. W. (2015). What is rotating in exploratory factor analysis?. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 20(1), 2.
Taherdoost, H. A. M. E. D., Sahibuddin, S. H. A. M. S. U. L., & Jalaliyoon, N. E. D. A. (2014). Exploratory factor analysis; concepts and theory. Advances in applied and pure mathematics, 375382
Artis, A. B. (2008). Improving marketing students' reading comprehension with the SQ3R method. Journal of Marketing Education, 30(2), 130-137.
McCormick, S., & Cooper, J. O. (1991). CAN SQ3R FACILITATE SECONDARY LEARNING DISABLED STUDENTS’LITERAL COMPREHENSION OF EXPOSITORY TEST? THREE EXPERIMENTS. Reading Psychology: An International Quarterly, 12(3), 239-271.
Feldt, R. C., & Hensley, R. (2009). Recommendations for Use of SQ3R in Introductory Psychology Textbooks. Education, 129(4).
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4-58.
Carlston, D. L. (2011). Benefits of student-generated note packets: A preliminary investigation of SQ3R implementation. Teaching of Psychology, 38(3), 142-146.
Orlando, V. P. (1980). Training students to use a modified version of SQ3R: An instructional strategy. Literacy Research and Instruction, 20(1), 65-70.
Al-Ghazo, A. (2015). The effect of SQ3R and semantic mapping strategies on reading comprehension learning among jordanian university students. English and Education, 4(3), 92-106.
Jairam, D., Kiewra, K. A., Rogers-Kasson, S., Patterson-Hazley, M., & Marxhausen, K. (2014). SOAR versus SQ3R: a test of two study systems. Instructional Science, 42(3), 409-420.
Ogle, D. M. (1986). KWL: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. The reading teacher, 39(6), 564-570.
Zygouris‐Coe, V., Wiggins, M. B., & Smith, L. H. (2004). Engaging Students With Text: The 3‐2‐1 Strategy. The Reading Teacher, 58(4), 381-384.
Umaemah, A., Latief, M. A., & Irawati, E. (2016). THE USE OF RAFT STRATEGY TO IMPROVE THE STUDENTS’WRITING ABILITY. ELT Echo: The Journal of English Language Teaching in Foreign Language Context, 1(1).
Sayed, A. S. M. (2020). Using SCAMPER Strategy For Developing Third Year English Majors’ Creative Writing Skills. Journal of Modern Research.