建議 - 多點觸控支援合作設計式學習活動：合作腳本設計與系統實作

本研究針對教學應用方面以及未來研究方面提出建議。

一、對教學應用的建議

在教學應用方面，本研究所提出的合作腳本可作為教師實施 M-T CDBL 活動之參考，以促進學生有效的合作行為。且 M-T CDBL 合作腳本分類明確，使用時建議依照不同的工作階段與不同的類別選擇使用。

二、對未來研究的建議

在未來研究建議上，隨著大型多點觸控設備的逐漸普及，應可蒐集到更多

M-T CDBL 合作腳本之實際案例，以建立更符合學生需求之合作腳本。此外，也可將 M-T CDBL 合作腳本實際於教學現場進行實驗，以檢驗各項合作腳本的實際成效。

參考文獻

Agostini, A., Di Biase, E., & Loregian, M. (2010). Stimulating cooperative and participative learning to match digital natives' needs. In Proceedings of 8th IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops (pp. 274-279). IEEE.

Apedoe, X., Ellefson, M., & Schunn, C. (2012). Learning together while designing:

Does group size make a difference? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(1), 83-94.

Apedoe, X., & Ford, M. (2010). The empirical attitude, material practice and design activities. Science & Education, 19(2), 165-186.

Apedoe, X., Reynolds, B., Ellefson, M. R., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Bringing engineering design into high school science classrooms: The heating/cooling unit. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(5), 454-465.

Aronson, E., Blaney, N., Stephan, C., Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing Company.

Barnett, M. (2005). Engaging inner city students in learning through designing remote operated vehicles. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(1), 87-100.

Barron, B. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning. The Journal of The Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 271-311.

Battocchi, A., Esposito, G., Ben-Sasson, A., Gal, E., Pianesi, F., Venuti, P., et al.

(2008). Collaborative puzzle game - an interface for studying collaboration and social interaction for children who are typically developed or who have autistic spectrum disorder. In P. Sharkey (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference Series on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies, Maia, Portugal. Reading University Press.

Beail, N. (1985). An introduction to repertory grid technique. In N. Beail (Ed.), Repertory grid technique and personal constructs: Applications in clinical and educational settings (pp. 1-24). London: Croom Helm.

Chu, H. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2008). A delphi-based approach to developing expert systems with the cooperation of multiple experts. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(4), 2826-2840.

Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.

Cohen, E. G., & Lotan, R. A. (1995). Producing equal status interaction in the heterogeneous classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 99-120.

Curtis, A. M., Wells, T. M., Higbee, T., & Lowry, P. B. (2008). An overview and tutorial of the repertory grid technique in information systems research.

Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 23(3), 37-62.

Dansereau, D. F. (1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T.

Goetz & P. A. Alenander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies (pp. 103-120).

San Diego, CA: Academic Press Inc.

Darling-Hammond, L., Barron, B., Pearson, P. D., Schoenfeld, A. H., Stage, E. K., Zimmerman, T. D., et al. (2008). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Dietz, P., & Leigh, D. (2001). Diamondtouch: A multi-user touch technology. In J.

Marks & E. D. Mynatt (Eds.), Proceedings of 14th annual ACM symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (pp. 219-226). Association for Computing Machinery.

Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Overscripting cscl: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of cscl. Can we support cscl? (pp. 61-91). Heerlen, The Netherlands: Open Universiteit Nederland.

Dillenbourg, P., & Hong, F. (2008). The mechanics of cscl macro scripts.

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 5-23.

Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007). Designing integrative scripts. In F. Fischer, I.

Kollar, H. Mandl & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning. New York: Springer.

Donaghue, H. (2003). An instrument to elicit teachers' beliefs and assumptions. ELT journal, 57(4), 344-351.

Doppelt, Y., Mehalik, M. M., Schunn, C. D., Silk, E., & Krysinski, D. (2008).

Engagement and achievements: A case study of design-based learning in a science context. Journal of Technology Education, 19(2), 22-39.

Ellefson, M. R., Brinker, R. A., Vernacchio, V. J., & Schunn, C. D. (2008).

Design-based learning for biology: Genetic engineering experience improves understanding of gene expression. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 36(4), 292-298.

Elliott, J., & Bruckman, A. (2002). Design of a 3d interactive math learning environment. In B. Verplank, A. Sutcliffe, W. Mackay, J. Amowitz & W.

Gaver (Eds.), Proceedings of 4th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems:

Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (pp. 64-74). ACM.

Epting, F. R., Suchman, D. I., & Nickeson, C. J. (1971). An evaluation of elicitation procedures for personal constructs. British Journal of Psychology, 62(4), 513-517.

Fessakis, G., Tatsis, K., & Dimitracopoulou, A. (2008). Supporting “learning by design” activities using group blogs. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 199-212.

Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004).

Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1081-1110.

Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., Dershimer, R. C., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok‐Naaman, R. (2005).

Design‐based science and real‐world problem‐solving. International Journal of Science Education, 27(7), 855-879.

Foster, J. J., Barkus, E., & Yavorsky, C. (2006). Understanding and using advanced statistics: A practical guide for students (1 ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE

Publications.

Hagans, L. C., Neimeyer, G. J., & Robert Goodholm Jr., C. (2000). The effect of elicitation methods on personal construct differentiation and valence. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 13(2), 155-173.

Han, S., & Bhattacharya, K. (2001). Constructionism, learning by design, and project based learning. In M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Harris, A., Rick, J., Bonnett, V., Yuill, N., Fleck, R., Marshall, P., et al. (2009).

Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children's collaborative interactions? In C. O'Malley, D. Suthers, P. Reimann &

A. Dimitracopoulou (Eds.), Proceedings of Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Computer supported collaborative learning - Volume 1 (pp. 335-344). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Hartmann, C., & Lehrer, R. (2000). Quilt design as incubator for geometric ideas and mathematical habits of mind. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Tucson. AZ.

High, J. (1993). Second language learning through cooperative learning. San Clement, CA: Kagan.

Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 247-298.

Hsu, C. K., Hwang, G. J., & Chang, C. K. (2010). Development of a reading material recommendation system based on a knowledge engineering approach.

Computers & Education, 55(1), 76-83.

Hwang, G. J. (1994). Knowledge elicitation and integration from multiple experts.

Journal of Inforamtion Science and Engineering, 10(1), 99-109.

Hwu, S.-H. (2000). Constructionism. Manhattan, KS: Kansas State University College of Education.

Jankowicz, D. (2004). The easy guide to repertory grids (1 ed.). Chichester, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons.

Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D.

H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1017-1044). New York, NY: Macmillan Library Reference USA.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1998). Advanced cooperative learning (3 ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs (1 ed. Vol. 1). New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company.

Kharrufa, A., Leat, D., & Olivier, P. (2010). Digital mysteries: Designing for learning at the tabletop. Paper presented at the 5th ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. Saarbrücken, Germany.

Kobourov, S., Pavlou, K., Cappos, J., Stepp, M., Miles, M., & Wixted, A. (2005).

Collaboration with diamondtouch. In M. Costabile & F. Paternò (Eds.),

Human-computer interaction - interact 2005 (Vol. 3585, pp. 986-989):

Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.

Kolodner, J. L. (2002). Learning by design: Iterations of design challenges for better learning of science skills. Cognitive Studies, 9(3), 338-350.

Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al.

(2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle-school science classroom: Putting learning by design into practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495-547.

Kreber, C. (2000). How university teaching award winners conceptualise academic work: Some further thoughts on the meaning of scholarship. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 61-78.

Lyman, F. (1987). Think-pair-share: An expanding teaching technique. MAA-CIE Cooperative News, 1, 1-2.

Marsden, D., & Littler, D. (2000). Repertory grid technique – an interpretive research framework. European Journal of Marketing, 34(7), 816-834.

Martínez Maldonado, R., Kay, J., & Yacef, K. (2010). Collaborative concept mapping at the tabletop. Paper presented at the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. Saarbrücken, Germany.

Mehalik, M. M., Doppelt, Y., & Schunn, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71-85.

Neimeyer, G., Bowman, J., & Saferstein, J. (2005). The effects of elicitation techniques on repertory grid outcomes: Difference, opposite, and contrast methods. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18(3), 237-252.

Neimeyer, G. J., & Hagans, C. L. (2002). More madness in our method?: The effects of repertory grid variations on construct differentiation. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 15(2), 139-160.

Nelson, D. (2004). Design based learning delivers required standards in all subjects, k-12. The Cal Poly Pomona Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 17, 27-36.

O'Donnell, A. M., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads:

A method for analysing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120-144). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Papert, S. (1986). Constructionism: A new opportunity for elementary science education. Cambridge, MA.

Papert, S. (1990). Introduction. In I. Harel (Ed.), Constructionist learning (pp. 1-8).

Boston, MA: MIT Media Laboratory.

Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

Pontual Falcão, T., & Price, S. (2011). Interfering and resolving: How tabletop interaction facilitates co-construction of argumentative knowledge.

International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4),

539-559.

Reger, R. K. (1990). The repertory grid technique for eliciting the content and structure of cognitive constructive systems. In A. S. Huff (Ed.), Mapping strategic thought. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Rick, J., Rogers, Y., Haig, C., & Yuill, N. (2009). Learning by doing with shareable interfaces. Children, Youth and Environments, 19(1), 321-342.

Rogers, Y., & Lindley, S. (2004). Collaborating around vertical and horizontal large interactive displays: Which way is best? Interacting with Computers, 16(6), 1133-1152.

Schweinsberg, S. (2009). Sustainable tourism development and rural community values: An examination of australia's forest regions (1 ed.). Saarbruken, Germany: Lambert Academic Publishing.

Shaw, M. L. G., & Thomas, L. F. (1978). Focus on education—an interactive computer system for the development and analysis of repertory grids.

International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 10(2), 139-173.

Shen, C., Everitt, K., & Ryall, K. (2003). {ubitable}: Impromptu face-to-face collaboration on horizontal interactive surfaces. In A. Dey, A. Schmidt & J.

McCarthy (Eds.), Ubicomp 2003: Ubiquitous computing (Vol. 2864, pp.

281-288): Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.

Silk, E., Schunn, C., & Strand Cary, M. (2009). The impact of an engineering design curriculum on science reasoning in an urban setting. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(3), 209-223.

Silk, E. M., Higashi, R., Shoop, R., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). Designing technology activities that teach mathematics. The Technology Teacher, 69(4), 21-27.

Sultanum, N., Sharlin, E., Sousa, M. C., Miranda-Filho, D. N., & Eastick, R. (2010).

Touching the depths: Introducing tabletop interaction to reservoir engineering.

Paper presented at the ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces. Saarbrücken, Germany.

Tan, F. B., & Hunter M. G. (2002). The repertory grid technique: A method for the study of cognition in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 26(1), 39-57.

Tio, J., LaCaze, A., & Cottrell, W. N. (2007). Ascertaining consumer perspectives of medication information sources using a modified repertory grid technique.

Pharmacy World & Science, 29(2), 73-80.

Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills : Learning for life in our times (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Vattam, S. S., Kramer, C. W., Kim, H., & Kolodner, J. L. (2007). Effects of technology-based support for explanation construction on learners' discourse during design-based learning in science. In C. A. Chinn, G. Erkens & S.

Puntambekar (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 741-750). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Villasclaras-Fernández, E. D., Isotani, S., Hayashi, Y., & Mizoguchi, R. (2009).

Looking into collaborative learning: Design from macro-and micro-script perspectives. In Proceedings of The international conference on artificial

intelligence in education (pp. 231-238).

Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1-30.

Yorke, D. M. (1978). Repertory grids in educational research: Some methodological considerations. British Educational Research Journal, 4(2), 63-74.

Yorke, D. M. (1985). Administration, analysis and assumption: Some aspects of validity. In N. Beail (Ed.), Repertory grid technique and personal constructs:

Applications in clinical & educational settings (pp. 383-399). London: Croom Helm.

Yorke, M. (2001). Bipolarity… or not? Some conceptual problems relating to bipolar rating scales. British Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 171-186.

Zuber-Skerritt, O., & Roche, V. (2004). A constructivist model for evaluating postgraduate supervision: A case study. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(2), 82-93.

王佑鎂、李璐（2009）。設計型學習──一種正在興起的學習範式。中國電化教 育, 10, 12-16.

吳百興、吳心楷（2010）。八年級原住民學生在設計導向活動的科學學習。科學 教育學刊, 18(4), 277-304。

呂英撰（2007）。利用可設計組裝的表演說故事機器人來達到從設計中進行學習。

未出版碩士論文，國立中央大學，桃園。

邱瓊慧（2013）。多點觸控增進合作設計式創新學習模式之發展與評估：以平面 幾何為主題（1/3）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫期中成果報告

（NSC 101-2511-S-003-033-MY3）。臺北：行政院國家科學委員會。

教育部（2008）。97 年國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北：教育部。

陳啟亮（2010）。以凱利方格法探索書後索引編製行為。圖書館學與資訊科學，

36(2)，35-51。

黃政傑、林佩璇（1996）。合作學習 (初版 ed.)。臺北：五南。

謝建全、施能木、鄭承昌（2004）。機械人組合教學輔具在國小學童創意學習與問題解決歷程教學上之應用。國立臺南大學特殊教育中心，特教叢書 (Vol.

47, pp. 1-18) 。臺南：國立臺南大學。

附錄一：個人構念與合併構念對照表

A、澄清問題階段

類別個人構念合併構念

分工 S1-01：每個組員有固定的工作內容／每個組員沒有固定的工作內容 S1-19：有設計任務的分工／沒有將任務進行細分

S2-01：工作分配／共同完成

S2-09：交叉合作／一項小任務由一人負責

S4-05：非分工型態的任務設計（角色的安排跟任務無密切的結合，未強調個人權責）／

以任務分工來進行分組（組內成員每人有一份特定的工作內容）

S4-06：任務分工的設計比較多／非任務分工的設計比較多（共作比較多）

S5-06：組內分工（每人有不同任務）／每個人任務相同

S6-01：活動一開始即進行組內工作分配（分配組員任務）／未進行任務分工

S7-01：有任務以及工作的分配／無特定的任務以及工作的分配，各自做相同的任務再來討論

A1：組員間分工，分頭澄清問題／組員間未分工，共同澄清問題

個人 S1-20：學生會先閱讀設計問題／腳本中沒有安排學生閱讀設計問題（呈現設計問題）

S2-02：個人思考時間／腦力激盪

S4-03：先個人再小組／直接進行小組活動

A2：個別澄清問題／未個別澄清問題

個人 S1-16：學生要個別閱讀評量標準／老師沒有給評量標準,學生不需先知道評量標準 S2-02：個人思考時間／腦力激盪

S4-03：先個人再小組／直接進行小組活動

S8-10：於設計作品前讓學生瞭解設計任務的評量標準（學生各自閱讀評量標準）／

於設計後才跟學生說明評量標準

A3：個別澄清評分標準／未個別澄清評分標準

小組 S1-13：每個組員沒有分配固定的角色／組內有分配固定的角色 S3-07：於探索背景階段分派角色／於探索背景階段未分派角色 S4-02：有安排小組內的角色／沒有特定安排小組內的角色 S7-05：有角色的分配／沒有特定角色的分配

S8-01：針對組內進行編組（分配角色）／組內沒有分配角色

A4：組內討論設計問題有安排角色／組內討論設計問題未安排角色

小組 S3-10：學生於探索背景時共同討論與分享／學生於探索背景時無討論與分享

S3-12：（逐字稿）他們都是要輪流提出，有輪流的意思，輪流做什麼事，根據分派給他的任務，輪流發表自己的結果

S8-21：（逐字稿）每一個同學他會依序去說明他們初步的設計的構想，然後之後才集體去決定要討論的一個過程，或者是決定要用的後續的主題。

A5：組內討論設計問題有安排發言順序／組內討論設計問題未安排發言順序

B、蒐集資料階段