第五章 結論與建議
第二節 建議
133
134
的結果瞭解學生在數學解題自我調整學習的強弱，提供適切的協助或輔 導。所以建議數學教師應善用學生知覺數學差異化教學環境量表。
四、數學教師應營造學生合作討論的學習環境
結果發現所有數學能力的學生皆少用每個行為調整策略，也就是學 生當遇到數學困境時不善尋求支援，這些能力都仰賴與他人互動討論。
而研究結果又發現所有數學能力的學生幾乎沒有知覺到數學教師提供
「合作討論的學習環境」，也就說數學老師在教學過程少用合作討論策略。
所以建議數學教師應營造學生合作討論的學習環境，增加學生與他人互 動討論的機會。
五、數學教師應營造正向支持的學習環境
研究結果發現在非數學潛能優異的群體中正向支持的學習環境對數 學解題自我調整學習有顯著預測力且為主要預測力。此原因有可能是因 為正向支持有助於動機心理需求的促發，進而促使數學解題自我調整學 習提升。所以建議數學教師應營造正向支持的學習環境。
六、數學教師應營造高層次思考的學習環境
研究結果發現高層次思考的學習環境對數學解題自我調整學習有顯 著預測力。因為在高層次思考的學習環境下，學生要不斷地進行認知策 略的運用與調整，有利於數學解題自我調整學習的養成。所以建議數學 教師應營造高層次思考的學習環境。
七、透過外在環境提升學生數學知識信念趨近精熟
研究結果發現數學知識信念不論在數學潛能優異群體或是非數學潛
135
能優異群體對數學解題自我整學習具有顯著預測力。從自我調整學習理 論的社會認知觀點來看，環境、認知與行為三者間會交互產生作用。所 以建議教師從外在環境提升學生數學知識信念趨近精熟。
貳、未來研究方面
一、擴大研究對象
本研究僅針對原高雄市大型學校進行樣本抽樣，建議可以針對其他 縣市或地區，不同類型的學校進行信度與效度考驗，以增加這三份量表 工具的信度與效度與使用。
二、量表工具進行效標關聯效度
本研究因時間與經費因素，所發展的三項量表工具並未與相關量表 進行效標關聯效度，建議未來研究者可以進行效標關聯效度，以增加該 三份量表工具可參考的效度。
三、進行教學實驗研究
針對數學差異化教學進一步進行教學實驗研究能更嚴謹瞭解知覺數 學差異化教學環境、數學知識信念與數學解題自我調整學習三變項間的 關聯性，甚至進一步透過實驗研究探究「數學差異化教學」、「數學知識 信念」與「數學解題自我調整學習」三者間的因果關係。
四、質性訪談數學潛能優異學生的學習需求
本研究因時間因素，並未針對數學潛能優異學生進行數學學習需求 個案訪談。建議未來可以針對數學潛能優異學生進行數學學習需求的訪
136
談，或是設計數學學習需求問卷進行更大規模的調查研究。
137
參考文獻
壹、中文部分
江民瑜（2013）。學業情緒為中介的自我調整學習模式之檢驗：以數學領 域為例。當代教育研究季刊，21（3），113-150。
余民寧（2006）。潛在變項模式：SIMPLIS 的應用。台北市：高等教育。
吳明隆（2007）。結構方成模式 AMOS 的操作與應用。台北市：五南。
吳明隆（2008）。SPSS 操作與應用：多變量分析實務。台北市：五南。
吳明隆（2009）。SPSS 操作與應用：問卷統計分析實務（二版）。台北市：
五南。
林宴瑛、程炳林（2007）。個人目標導向、課室目標結構與自我調整學習 策略之潛在改變量分析。教育心理學報，39（2），173-194。
林清山（1988）。多變項分析統計法。台北市：東華。
邱皓政（2010）。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS（PASW）資料分析範例。
台北市：五南。
邱皓政（2010）。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS 資料分析範例。台北市：
五南。
侯雅齡（2010）。激發資優生對知識的熱忱---數學資優課程應有的調整。
南屏特殊教育，1，61-69。
凃金堂（2014）。中小學生「數學知識信念量表」之發展與信孝度考驗。
測驗學刊，61（4），533-556。
香港特別行政區政府教育局（2008）。照顧學生個別差異--共融校園指 標。 2014 年 6 月 20 日，取自：
http://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/tc/edu-system/special/policy-and-138
initiatives/indicators-082008_tc.pdf
唐劍嵐（2006）。學生數學認識信念：一個值得關注的領域。台灣數學教 師電子期刊，6，28-38。
教育部（1998）。國民教育階段九年一貫課程總綱綱要。台北：教育部。
教育部（2006）。身心障礙及資賦優異學生鑑定標準。台北：教育部。
教 育 部 （ 2007 ）。 資 優 教 育 白 皮 書 。 2008 年 7 月 10 日 ， 取 自
http://www.ntnu.edu.tw/spe/cage/the%20white%20book970410.pdf
許嘉家、詹志禹（2010）。「高中職個人知識論信念量表」之編製與驗證。測驗學刊，57（3），433-458。
陳志恆、林清文（2008）。國中學生自我調整學習策略量表之編製及研究。
輔導與諮商學報，30（2），1-36。
陳長益、陳美芳、李乙明、蔡桂芳、呂金燮、黃家杰、…張哲智 （2009）。 校本資優教育適才服務方案之行動研究。資優教育研究，9（2） ，35-63。
陳偉仁、黃楷茹、陳美芳（2013）。學校學習支援系統中差異化教學的實 施。教育研究月刊，233，5-20。
陳萩卿、張景媛（2007）。知是信念影響學習運作模式之驗證。教育心理 學報，39（1），23-43。
陳嘉成（2007）。區別高低分群學生數學成就因素的國際比較－以台灣、
南韓、澳洲與賽普勒斯的 TIMSS 2003 學生背景變項爲例。測驗學 刊， 54（2），377-401。
黃家杰、梁淑坤（2007）。小學一般智能資優資源班新生數學解題歷程之 分析。台灣數學教師(電子)期刊，12，1-16。
黃家杰、陳美芳、陳長益、李乙明、呂金燮（2010）。教師區分性教學行
139
為觀察量表（學生版）之編製。特殊教育研究學刊，35（1），63-82。
劉佩雲（2002）。自我調整學習的課程與教學。課程與教學季刊，5（3）， 35-48。
魏勇剛、龍長權、宋武（譯）（2010）。量表編製理論與應用。（原作者：
R. F. DeVellis）。台北市：五南。（原著出版年：2003）。
140
貳、英文部分
Aydin, Y. Ç., Uzuntiryaki, E., & Demirdöğen, B. (2011). Iterplay of motivational and cognitive strategies in predicting self-efficacy and anxiety. Educational Psychology, 31(1), 55-66.
Baxter, M., & Marcia, B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-related patterns in students' intellectual development. San Francisco:
Jossey Bass.
Belenk, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women's Ways of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind. New York:
Basic Books.
Belet, Ş. D., & Güven, M. (2011). Meta-cognitive strategy usage and epistemological beliefs of primary school teacher trainees. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11(1), 51-57.
Bråten, I., & Strømsø, H. I. (2005). The relationship between epistemological beliefs, implicit theories of intelligence, and self-regulated learning among Norwegian postsecondary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(4), 539-565.
Campbell, B. (2008). Handbook of differentiated instruction using the multiple intelligences: lesson plans and more. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Cano, F. (2005). Epistemological beliefs and approaches to learning: Their change through secondary school and their influence on academic performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 203-221.
Cassady, J. C., Neumeister, K. L. S., Adams, C. M., Cross, T. L., Dixon, F. A.,
& Pierce, R. L. (2004). The differentiated classroom observation scale.
Roeper Review, 26, 139-146.
Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Luyten, L., & Bamps, H. (2001). Assessing
141
epistemological beliefs: Schommer's questionnaire revisited. Educational Research and Evaluation: An International Journal on Theory and Practice, 7（1）, 55-77.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project.
Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
De Corte, E., Op'T Eynde, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2002). Knowing what to believe: The relevanc of students' mathematical beliefs for mathematics education. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal Epistemology (pp. 297-320). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Op'T Eynde, E. (2000). Self-regulation: A characteristic and a goal of mathematics education. In M. Boekaerts & P.
R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook f self-regulation (pp. 687-726). Florida:
Academic Press.
Garrett-Ingram, C. (1997). Something to believe in: The relationship between epistemological beliefs and study strategies. Paper presented at the the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, USA.
Gregory, G. H. (2005). Differentiating instruciton with style: aligning teacher and learner intelligneces for maximum achievement. Thousand Oaks, California: Crowin Press.
Gregory, G. H., & Chapman, C. (2007). Differentiated instructional strategies:
One size doesn't fit all (2nd). Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Corwin Press.
Harbaugh, A. G., & Cavanagh, R. F. (2012). Associations between the classroom learning environment and student engagement in learning 2: A structural equation modelling approach. Australia: AARE.
Ho, S. R. (2004). Gifted teachers' beliefs and practices regarding standards/state standardized tests, effective assessment and
142
differentiation in a special school for gifted elementary students. (Ph.D.), University of Virginia, United States -- Virginia.
Hofer B., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88-140.
Hofer NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school matahematics.
Retrieved August 19th, 2011, from
http://www.nctm.org/standards/content.aspx?id=16909
Hofer, B. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378-405.
Hofer, B. (2001). Personal epistemology research: Implications for learning and teaching. Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 353-383.
Hofer, B. (2002). Personal epistemology as a psychological and educational construct: An introduction. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology (pp. 3-13). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hofer, B. (2010). Personal epistemology in Asia: Burgeoning research and future directions. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 19(1), 179-184.
Huxtable, M. (2009). Creating inclusive and inclusional understandings of gifts and talents through living educational theory research. In T. Balchin, B. Hymer, & D. J. Matthews (Eds.), The routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 292-298). London: Routledge.
Jehng, J. J., Johnson, S. D., & Anderson, R. C. (1993). Schoolong and students' epistemological beliefs about learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18(1), 23-35.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment:
Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in
143
adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 29-63.
Lester, F. K. (1980). Problem solving: Is it a problem? In M. M. Lindquist (Ed.), Selected issues in mathematics education (pp. 29-45). Berkeley, Calif:
McCutchan Pub. Co.
Lester, F. K., Garofalo, J., & Kroll, D. L. (1989). The role of metacognition in mathematical problem solving: A study of two grade seven classes (Final report, NSF project MDR 85-50346). Bloomington: Indiana University, Mathematics Education Development Center.
Malmivuori, M. L. (2001). The dynamics of affect, cognition, and social environment in the regulation of personal learning processes: The case of mathematics research report. Helsiniki, Finland: Helsiniki Rniversity Press.
Malmivuori, M. L. (2004). A dynamic viewpoint: Affect n the functioning of self-system processes. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the PME-28 Conference, Bergen University College, Norway.
Malmivuori, M. L. (2006). Affect and self-regulation. Educational studies in mathematics, 63, 149-164.
Malpass, J. R., O'Neil, J. H. F., & Hocevar, D. (1999). Self-regulation, goal orientation, self-efficacy, worry, and high-stakes math achievement for mathematically gifted high school students. Roeper Review, 21(4), 281-288.
Marzano, R. J., & Kendall, J. S. (2008). Designing & assessing educational objectives: Applying the new taxonomy. California: Corin Press.
Mayer, R. E. (1985). Implications of cognitive psychology for instruction in
144
mathematical problem. In E. A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives (pp. 123-138). Hilsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
McCombs, B. L. (2001). Self-regulated learning and acdemic achievement: A phenomenological view. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and acdemic achievement theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 67-123). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Muis, K. R. (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regualted learning.
Educational psychologist, 42(3), 173-190.
Neber, H., & Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). Self-regulated science learning with highly gifted students: The role of cognitive, motivational, epistemological, and environmental variables. High Ability Studies, 13(1), 59-74.
Nielsen, S. G. (2010). Epistemic beliefs and self-regulated learning in music students. Psychology of Music, 40(3), 324-338.
Northey, S. S. (2005). Handbook on differentiated instruction for middle and high schools. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Educaiton.
Parpala, A., Lindblom-Ylanne, S., Komulainen, E., & Entwistle, N. (2013).
Assessing students' experiences of teaching-learning environments and approaches to learning: Validation of a questionnaire in different countries and varying contexts. Learning Environments Research, 16(2), 201-215.
Paulsen, M. B., & Feldman, K. A. (1999a). Epistemological beliefs and self-regulated learning. Journal of Staff, Program, & Organization Development, 16(2), 83-91.
Paulsen, M. B., & Feldman, K. A. (1999b). Student motivation and epistemological beliefs. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 78, 17-25.
145
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning.
In M. Boekaert & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.
451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Polya, G. (1945). How to slove it. New York: Doubleday.
Porath, M., Lupart, J., Katz, J., Ngara, C., & Richardson, P. (2009). Gifted learners' epistemological beliefs. Talent Development & Excellence, 1(1), 57-66.
Ramdass, D., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Effects of self-correction strategy training on middle school students' self-efficacy, self-evaluation, and mathematics division learning. Journal of Advanced Academics, 20(1), 18-41.
Rebbello, C. M., Siegel, M. A., Witzig, S. B., Freyermuth, S. K., & McClure, B. A. (2012). Epistemic beliefs and conceptual understanding in biotechnology: A Case Study. Res Sci Educ, 42, 353-371.
Rock, M. L., Gregg, M., Ellis, E., & Gable, R. A. (2008). REACH: A framework for differentiating classroom instruction. Preventing School Failure, 52(2), 31-47.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Florida: Academic Press.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-370). New York: Macmillan.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on
146
comprhension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498-504.
Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(3), 406-411.
Schommer, M. (1994). An emerging conceptualization of epistemological beliefs and their role in learning. In R. Garner & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Beliefs about text and instruction with text (pp. 25-40). NJ: LEA.
Schommer, M., & Dunnell, P. A. (1994). A comparison of epistemological beliefs between gifted and non-gifted high school students. Roeper Review, 16(3), 207-210.
Schommer, M., Crouse, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: Believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 435-443.
Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). An evolving theoretical framework for an epistemological belief system. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal Epistemology (pp. 103-118). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schommer-Aikins, M., Duell, O. K., & Hutter, R. (2005). Epistemological beliefs, mathematical problem-solving beliefs, and academic performance of middle school students. Elementary School Journal, 105(3), 289-304.
Schommer-Aikins, M., Mau, W.-C., Brookhart, S., & Hutter, R. (2000).
Understanding middle students' beliefs about knowledge and learning using a multidimensional paradgm. Journal of Educational Research, 94, 120-127.
Schraw, G., Bendixen, L. D., & Dunkle, M. E. (2002). Development and valiation of the Epistemic Belief Inventory (EBI). In B. K. Hofer & P. R.
Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology (pp. 261-275). New York:
147
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated Learning.
In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and acdemic achievement theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 125-151).
Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (2000). Self-regulation and academic learning:
Self-efficacy enhancing interventions. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 631-649). Florida: Academic Press.
Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding.
Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20-26.
Stager, A. (2007). Differentiated instruction in mathematics. (M.A.), Caldwell College, New Jersey.
Stahl, E., Pieschl, S., & Bromme, R. (2006). Task complexity, epistemological beliefs and metacognitive calibration: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 319-338.
Tolhurst, D. (2007). The influence of learning environments on students' epistemological beliefs and learning outcomes. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(2), 219-233.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Eidson, C. C. (2003). Differentiation in practice: a resource guide for differentiating curriculum, grades 5-9. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A., & McTighe, J. (2006). Intergrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: Connection content and kids. Alexandrea, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
148
VanTassel-Baska, J., & Stambaugh, T. (2006). Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (3rd). Boston, MA: Person Education.
VanTassel-Baska, J., Quek, C. G., & Feng, A. X. (2007). The development and use of a structured teacher observation scale to assess differentiated best practice. Roeper Review, 29(2), 84-92.
Velayutham, S., & Aldridge, J. M. (2013). Influence of psychosocial classroom environment on students' motivation and self-regulation in science learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Research in Science Education, 43(2), 507-527.
Verschaffe, l., De Corte, E., Lasure, S., Van Vaerenbergh, G., Bogaerts, H., &
Ratinckx, E. (1999). Learning to solve mathematical application problems: A design experiment with fifth graders. Mathematical Learning and Thinking, 1(3), 195-229.
Wolters, C. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English.
Instructional Science, 26, 27-47.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Development of self-regulated learning: Which are the key sub-processes? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 307-313.
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulating academic learning and achievement:
The emergence of a social cognitiv perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 2, 173-201.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A socal cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). Florida: Academic Press.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and Analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H.
Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and acdemic achievement
149
theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
150
附 錄
附錄一 知覺數學差異化教學環境量表題項
一、教材內容自主彈性的學習環境(教材內容彈性)
D1-1 老師允許我們上課時，選擇適合自己程度的數學學習內容。
D1-2 老師允許我們上課時，依照自己的計畫學習數學。
D1-3 老師允許我們在上課時，自我學習具有挑戰性的數學學習內容。
D1-4 老師允許能力好的同學在上課時，可以超前學習新的數學進度。
D1-5 老師依據班上同學能力，調整上課的教材內容。
二、合作討論的學習環境(教學歷程彈性)
D2-6 老師上課時，會提供我們有小組討論的時間。
D2-7 老師上課時，會提供我們有分享解題方法的時間。 （刪除）
D2-8 老師上課時，會提供我們彼此討論學習數學的時間。
D2-9 老師上課時，會提供我們相互合作解題的時間。
D2-10 老師上課時，會提供我們個別指導的時間。
三、高層次思考的學習環境
D3-11 老師會讓我們用不同的方法來解數學問題。
D3-12 老師會讓我們針對自己數學解題的結果，提出合理的解釋。
D3-13 老師會讓我們先分析數學題目的意思。
D3-14 老師會讓我們說明解題方法。
D3-15 老師會讓我們想想數學概念與日常生活的關聯。
四、正向支持的學習環境
D4-16 老師讓我們很放心地說出自己的想法。 （刪除）
D4-17 老師讚美我們的想法。 （刪除）
D4-18 老師支持我們的想法。 （刪除）
D4-19 老師激發我們數學學習的興趣。
D4-20 老師讓我們覺得學習數學是件快樂的事。
D4-21 老師讓我們覺得自己有機會學好數學。
D4-22 老師鼓勵我們接納自己獨特的想法。