臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：小學課堂中分享式筆記與提問複習之效益
書刊名：當代教育研究
作者：陳政煥／邱瓊慧 引用關係／吳秋儀
作者(外文)：Chen, Cheng-huan／Chiu, Chiung-hui／Wu, Chiu-yi
出版日期：2012
卷期：20:2
頁次：頁47-91
主題關鍵詞：寫筆記策略；分享式筆記；分享式提問複習；小學課室；Note-taking strategies；Shared note-taking；Shared-questioning review；Elementary school classes
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:11
  • 點閱點閱:69
寫筆記活動包括兩個部分：一是產出筆記的「筆記」過程，另一是檢閱筆記的「複習」過程。本研究旨在探討於小學資訊課課堂教學中導入分享式筆記與提問（含回答）複習的效益。為促進筆記和提問的編輯與分享，本研究並以blog為基礎平台，建置相關的功能和介面。 　　本研究由臺南市一小學二個六年級班級共54位學生參與。實驗教學包括四個單元，歷時四週，於該校電腦教室進行，由該校資訊教師講授，學生以二人為一組，相鄰而座，於聽講時各自以blog記下筆記，並於之後進行提問複習，過程中，學生均可透過blog或彼此的螢幕檢視對方的筆記及提問內容，可以透過blog給對方意見，也可以直接與對方做口頭討論。為瞭解分享式提問複習的效果，本研究另於同校安排二個六年級班級共56位學生也進行分享式筆記活動，不過，其複習方式則由學生自行檢閱筆記。 　　研究發現，學生透過分享能在聽講時記下25.80%～37.43%重點；學生進行分享式提問複習時，雖能提出理解類問題，不過，答案多未完整。研究也發現，學生的筆記品質對提問、回答品質有顯著的效益；先備知識、答案品質對學習也有顯著的立即與保留成效。不過，分享式提問複習與自行檢閱筆記對學生立即與保留學習效益則並無顯著差異。
A note-taking activity involves two main processes: taking notes and reviewing notes. This study investigated the effects of integrating shared note-taking and questioning review (including answering) in elementary school computer classes. A blog platform was adopted and modified to allow students in a group to create and share notes and questions. Fifty-four students from 2 sixth-grade classes at an elementary school in southern Taiwan comprised the shared-questioning review group of this study. The experiment included 4 units and lasted 4 weeks in total. Each lesson was conducted in a computer classroom by a computer teacher at the participants’ school. Students worked in pairs and sat next to each other to take notes individually while listening to a lesson. The students then proposed questions themselves to review the lesson. During the experiment, students could view the notes, questions, and answers of their partner via the blog or computer screen, give comments on the blog, or discuss the notes, questions, and answers with their partner directly. To understand the effects of shared questioning, this study formed another group of 56 students from 2 sixth-grade classes at the same school to engage in a shared note-taking activity without shared-questioning review, but had students read their own notes independently in the review process. Our findings showed that the students in the shared-questioning review group could comprehend 25.80%-37.43% of the ideas presented during the lectures, and could pose comprehensive questions, but most students answered their questions incompletely. We also found that the quality of students’ notes had a significant effectiveness on the quality of the students’ questions and answers, and prior knowledge and the quality of students’ answers had a significant effectiveness on immediate achievement and retention. However, no significant differences in immediate achievement and retention were found between the shared-questioning review group and the independent note-reading group.
期刊論文
1.Kobayashi, K.(2006)。Combined effects of note-taking/reviewing on learning and the enhancement through interventions: A meta-analytic review。Educational Psychology，26(3)，459-477。  new window
2.Kiewra, K. A.,、Benton S. L.,、Kim, S.,、Christensen, M(1995)。Effects of note-taking format and study technique on recall and relational performance。Contemporary Educational Psychology，20(2)，172-187。  new window
3.Kiewra, K. A.(1989)。A Review of Note-Taking: The Encoding-Storage Paradigm and Beyond。Educational Psychology Review，1(2)，147-172。  new window
4.King, A.(1991)。Improving Lecture Comprehension: Effects of a Metacognitive Strategy。Applied Cognitive Psychology，5(4)，331-346。  new window
5.Ge, X.、Land, S. M.(2003)。Scaffolding students' problem solving-processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions。Educational Technology Research and Development，51(1)，21-38。  new window
6.Rosenshine, B.、Meister, C.、Chapman, S.(1996)。Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies。Review of Educational Research，66(2)，181-221。  new window
7.Yu, F. Y.(2009)。Scaffolding student-generated questions: Design and development of a customizable online learning system。Computers in Human Behavior，25(5)，1129-1138。  new window
8.O’Donnell, A. M.、Dansereau, D. F.(1993)。Learning from lectures: Effects of cooperative review。Journal of Experimental Education，61(2)，116-125。  new window
9.Glaubman, R.、Glaubman, H.、Ofir, L.(1997)。Effects of self-directed learning, story comprehension, and self-questioning in kindergarten。The Journal of Educational Research，90(6)，361-374。  new window
10.King, Alison(1992)。Comparison of Self-Questioning, Summarizing, and Notetaking-Review as Strategies for Learning from Lectures。American Educational Research Journal，29(2)，303-323。  new window
11.簡馨瑩(2010)。學生提問策略教學對教室裡師生互動與教學序列結構之影響研究。當代教育研究，18(3)，125-163。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.何榮桂(19950600)。練習式CAI選題策略之比較研究。師大學報，40，77-110。new window  延伸查詢new window
13.陳木金、蘇芳嬅、邱馨儀(20100900)。國民小學教師創新班級經營指標建構之研究。創造學刊，1(2)，17-42。  延伸查詢new window
14.Choi, I.、Land, S. M.、Turgeon, A. J.(2005)。Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion。Instructional Science，33(5/6)，483-511。  new window
15.Call, P. E.(2000)。Reflective questioning: A strategy to review notes。Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy，43(5)，487-488。  new window
16.McKinney. D.、Dyck, J. L.、Luber, E. S.(2009)。iTunes university and the classroom: Can podcasts replace professors?。Computers & Education，52(3)，617-623。  new window
17.Ferriter, B.(2009)。Learning with blogs and wikis: Technology has made it easy for educators to embrace continual professional development。Educational Leadership，66(5)，34-38。  new window
18.Janssen, T.(2002)。Instruction in self-questioning as a literary reading strategy: An exploration of empirical research。L1-Educational Studies in Language & Literature，2(2)，95-120。  new window
19.Taboada, A.、Guthrie, J. T.(2006)。Contributions of student questioning and prior knowledge to construction of knowledge from reading information text。Journal of Literacy Research，38(1)，1-35。  new window
20.Chen, N.-S.、Wei, C.-W.、Wu, K.-T.、Uden, L.(200902)。Effects of high level prompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflection levels。Computers & Education，52(2)，283-291。  new window
21.Chen, C. H.(2010)。Promoting college students’ knowledge acquisition and ill-structured problem solving: Web-based integration and procedure prompts。Computers & Education，55(1)，292-303。  new window
22.Cho, Y. H.、Lee, J.、Jonassen. D. H.(2011)。The role of tasks and epistemological beliefs in online peer questioning。computers & Education，56(1)，112-126。  new window
23.Denning. P. J.(2007)。Computing is a natural science。Communications of the ACM，50(7)，13-18。  new window
24.Dror, I. E.(2008)。Technology enhanced learning: The good, the bad, and the ugly。Pragmatics & Cognition，16(2)，215-223。  new window
25.Faust, J. L.、Paulson, D. R.(1998)。Active learning in the college classroom。Excellence in College Teaching，9(2)，3-24。  new window
26.Kiewra. K. A.、DuBois, N. F.、Christian. D.、McShane, A.、Meyerhoffer, M.、Roskelley, D.(1991)。Note-taking functions and techniques。Journal of Educational Psychology，83(2)，240-245。  new window
27.King. A.(1992)。Facilitating elaborative learning through guided self-questioning。Educational Psychologist，27(1)，111-126。  new window
28.Kramarski, B.、Dudai, V.(2009)。Group-metacognitive support for online inquiry in mathematics with differential self-questioning。Journal of Educational Computing Research，40(4)，377-404。  new window
29.Laidlaw, E. N.、Skok. R. L.、McLaughlin, T. F.(1993)。The effects of notetaking and self-questioning on quiz performance。Science Education，77(1)，75-82。  new window
30.Lee. P. L.、Lan. W.、Hamman. D.、Hendricks. B.(2008)。The effects of teaching notetaking strategies on elementary students’ science learning。Instructional Science，36(3)，191-201。  new window
31.McInerney. V.、McInerney. D. M.、Marsh, H. W.(1997)。Effects of metacognitive strategy training within a cooperative group learning context on computer achievement and anxiety: An aptitude-treatment interact ion study。Journal of Educational Psychology，89(4)，686-695。  new window
32.Narjaikaew. P.、Emarat. N.、Cowie. B.(2009)。The effect of guided note taking during lectures on Thai university students’ understanding of electromagnetism。Research in Science & Technological Education，27(1)，79-54。  new window
33.Pardini. E. A.、Domizi. D. P.、Forbes. D. A.、Pettis, G. V.(2005)。Parallel note-taking: A strategy for effective use of webnotes。Journal of College Reading and Learning，35(2)，38-55。  new window
34.Robinson. D. H.、Katayama. A. D.、Beth. A.、Odom. S.、Hsieh. Y.-P.、Vanderveen, A.(2006)。Increasing text comprehension and graphic note taking using a partial graphic organizer。The Journal of Educational Research，100(2)，103-111。  new window
35.Song, M. Y.(2012)。Note-taking quality and performance on an L2 academic listening test。Language Testing，29(1)，67-89。  new window
36.Trafton, J. G.、Tricketi. S. B.(2001)。Note-taking for self-explanation and problem solving。Human-Computer Interaction，16(1)，1-38。  new window
37.van der Meer, J.(2012)。Students’ note-taking challenges in the twenty-first century: Considerations for teachers and academic staff developers。Teaching in higher Education，17(1)，13-23。  new window
38.van der Meij. H.(1994)。Student questioning: A componential analysis。Learning and individual Differences，6(2)，137-161。  new window
會議論文
1.Klamma, R.、Cao, Y.、Spaniol, M.(2007)。Watching the Blogosphere: Knowledge Sharing in the Web 2.0。The 1st International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Boulder, CO.。  new window
2.Pierre, A. A. S.、Carruthers. S.、Coady. Y.、Dunn-Krahn, R.、Dunn-Krahn. S.、Gibbs. C. et al(200705)。Young minds storming through challenging computer science concepts。The 12th Annual Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education. Kamloops, Canada。  new window
3.Rakes, T. A.、Scott. S. M.(198310)。Using teacher/student generated questions。The 21st Florida Reading Association Conference. Hollywood, FL.。  new window
圖書
1.朱錦鳳(2010)。心理測驗：理論與應用。台北市：雙葉書廊。  延伸查詢new window
2.王文中、呂金燮、吳毓瑩、張郁雯、張淑慧(2004)。教育測驗與評量--教室學習觀點。臺北市：五南圖書出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
3.Topping, D.、McManus, R.(2002)。Real reading, real writing: Content-area strategies。Portsmouth, NH：Heinemann。  new window
4.Hopkins, Kenneth D.(1998)。Educational and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation。Boston：Allyn & Bacon。  new window
5.Mehrens, W. A.、Lehmann, I. J.(1991)。Measurement and evaluation in education and psychology。New York, NY：Holt, Rinehart & Winston。  new window
6.王保進(2006)。英文視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究。臺北市：心理出版社股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
7.郭生玉(2001)。心理與教育研究法。臺北市：精華書局。  延伸查詢new window
8.教育部(2008)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市：教育部。  延伸查詢new window
9.Bell, T.、Witten, I.、Fellows. M.(2005)。Computer science unplugged: An enrichment and extension programme for primary-aged children。Christchurch：University of Canterbury。  new window
10.Bligh, D. A.(2000)。What’s the use of lectures?。San Francisco：Jossey-Bass。  new window
11.Dillon. J. T.(1988)。Questioning and teaching: A manual of practice。Beckenham：Croom Helm。  new window
12.Trawick-Smith, J.(2010)。Early Childhood development: A multicultural perspective。Upper Saddle River, NJ：Merrill。  new window
其他
1.James. I.，Carter, T. S.(2007)。Questioning and informational texts scaffolding students comprehension of content areas，http://www.forumonpublicpolicy.com/archivesum07/james.rev.pdf。  new window
2.Sheridan, P.(2006)。Higher level thinking through student generated questions，http://mwp.umn.edu/summer/2006/2006images/2006demos/sheridan.pdf， 2012/05/31。  new window
圖書論文
1.Armbruster. B. B.(2009)。Notetaking from lectures。Handbook of college reading and study strategy research。New York：Rout ledge。  new window
2.Ayyangar, L.(2007)。Skewness, multicollinearity, heteroskedasticity- You name it, cost data have it! Solutions to violations of assumptions of ordinary least squares regression models using SAS。Proceedings of SAS Global Forum 2007: Paper 131-2007。Cary, NC：Editor。  new window
3.Davis, R. C.、Landay. J. A.、Chen. V.、Huang, J.、Lee. R. B.、Li, F. C. et al.(1999)。NotePals: Lightweight note sharing by the group, for the group。Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems: The CHI is the limit。New York：Association for Computing Machinery。  new window
4.Landay. J. A.(1999)。Using note-taking appliances for student to student collaboration。Proceeding of the 29th Frontiers in Education Conference。Piscataway, NJ：Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers。  new window
5.Singh, G.、Denoue, L.、Das, A.(2004)。Collaborative note taking。Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education。Piscataway. NJ：IEEE Service Center。  new window
6.Smith. J. A.(2005)。Maximizing student learning through effective note-giving。Teaching Concerns, Spring。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1489（臺灣：1451，外國：38） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1972506 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67783216
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上