未來發展

受限於時間的限制，本研究之系統開發上仍有許多地方是可以改善的，另 外，還有相當多值得探討的地方，分述如下：

z ㄧ般的閱讀效益都是要經過長期的觀察，才能看出來，但由於時間的限制，

我們只能做短期的實驗，未來，若要進行相關的實驗時，就要考慮到長期實 驗的必要性。

z 許多使用者提到未來閱讀大量文章，系統的交叉參照功能能夠更有助於在不 同文章間交叉閱讀，但是在總文章的管理將略顯雜亂，可能還要設計有關文 章儲存分類的功能。

z 目前交叉參照必須仰賴使用者使用註記分類，未來可能可以做到利用關鍵字 查詢或是其他方法提供使用者其他的方式來交叉閱讀，發揮完整的電子文章 的互動性。

z 在先前研究及本研究所開發之系統上，註記重疊的問題是尚無法解決的一 環，而為了讓使用者在使用註記的功能來協助修改他人文章時更加方便無 阻，賴後續研究進行相關的程式碼或演算法的開發

參考文獻

[1] 《如何閱讀一本書》原著者為：莫提默．艾德勒(Mortimer J. Adler, 1902-2001) 與查理．范多倫(Charles Van Doren)，中文版由郝明義、朱衣翻譯，台灣商務 印書館股份有限公司出版。

[2] 王英傑 (2008)。以同步概念為基礎之英文協同寫作系統。中華大學資訊管理 研究所碩士論文，未出版。

[3] 成寒英文教材網站www.chenhen.com.

[4] 林珊如,大學教師網路閱讀行為之初探圖書資訊學刊 第1卷第1期（2003.6）

頁75-92。

[5] 林建丞、許政穆, 應用於網路教學的Web-based線上閱眷工具, (TANET/2001) Chiayi,Taiwan,Oct 24-26.

(http://www.ccu.edu.tw/TANET2001/TANET2001_Papers/J132.pdf

[6] 陳守賢 (2001)。建構易用線上註記平台。中原大學資訊管理研究所碩士論 文，未出版。

[7] 須文蔚（1998）。一九九七上網的觀察。中央月刊文訊別冊，頁37。

[8] 曹忠學 (2004)。應用線上註記於語言學習。中華大學資訊管理研究所碩士論 文，未出版。

[9] 吳玓玲 (2004)。線上多人修改及分析系統─以C語言教學為例。中華大學資 訊管理研究所碩士論文，未出版。

[10] Brown, G. J. (2001). Beyond print: Reading digitally. Library Hi Tech, 19(4),

390-399.

[11] Brush, A. J. B. (2002). Annotating Digital Documents for Asynchronous

Collaboration.Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Washington, Washington.

[12] Collins, A. & Smith, E. E. (1982).Teaching the process of reading comprehension.

In D. K. Detterman and R. J. Sternberg (eds), How and How Much can Intelligence be Increased? Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp.173-186.

[13] Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User

Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340.

[14] Gagné, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning, (4th edition).

New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

[15] Guthrie, J. (1982) Aim and Feathers of text.

[16] Hara, K. and Wilensky, R., A Comparison of Reading Paper and On-line

Document, CHI97. Atlanta, GA: ACM Press, (1997).

[17] Hwang, W.-Y., Wang, C.-Y., & Sharples, M. (2007).A study of multimedia

annotation of Web-based materials. Computers & Education, 48(4), 680–699.

[18] Hue, P.L., C. W., Chen, S. H., and Yang, H. Y. , Developing an On-Line

Annotation Platform ,Proceedings of the 5th Global Chinese Conference on

Computers in Education (GCCCE/ICCAI 2001), Chungli, Tai,( 2001).

[19] Kahan, J., Koivunen, M. R., Prud'Hommeaux, E., & Swick, R. R. (2002).

Annotea: an open RDF infrastructure for shared Web annotations. Computer

Networks, 39, 589-608.

[20] Koch S. and Schneider G., Implementation of an Annotation Service on the WWW

- Virtual Notes, Proceedings of PDP'2000 - 8th Euromicro Workshop on Parallel

and Distributed Processing, Rhodos, Greece, January 19th-21^st( 2000), IEEE Computer Society Press.

[21] MacLellan,E.(1997). Reading to Learn. Studies in higher education, 22(3), 277-288.

[22] Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). 質性研究 (李政賢譯). 台北:五南.

[23] Mason, D. V., & Woit, D. M. (1999). Providing Mark-up and Feedback to

Students with Online Marking. Paper presented at the thirtieth SIGCSE technical

symposium on Computer science education

[24] Nokelainen, P., Kurhila, J., Miettinen, M., Floreen, P., & Tirri, H. (2003).

Evaluating the role of a shared documentbased annotation tool in

learner-centered collaborative learning. Paper presented at the the 3rd IEEE

international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT 2003).

[25] Ovsiannikov, I.A., Arbib, M.A. and Mcneill, T. H., Annotation Technology, Int.J.

Human-Computer Studies, 50, (1999), pp. 329-362.

[26] Ogata, H., Hada, Y. and Yoneo Yano.,Versioning online markup documents in a

networked writing classroom , ICCE (1999).

[27] Ogata, H., Hada, Y. and Yoneo Yano., CoCoAJ: Supporting Online Correction

of Hypermedia Documents for CALL, ICCE (2000), Vol.1, pp. 323-329, Taipei,

Taiwan.

[28] Ogata, H., Feng, C., Hada, Y. and Yano, Y., Online Markup Based Language

Learning Environment, International Journal of Computers & Education, Vol.34,

No.1, pp.51-66.

[29] Oxford, R., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language

learning strategie by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73,

291-300.

[31]Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative research and education methods (2nd ed.).

Newbury Park: CA: sage.

[32] Wikipedia , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-reference.

[33] Wofle, J. (2002). Annotation technologies: A software and research review.

Computer and Composition, 19(4), 471-497.

附錄A

測驗一：自由回憶測驗(Free Recall Test )

1.請盡可能寫出您對 Don't do it Google 這篇文章的回憶或是任何重點

2. 請盡可能寫出您對 Google Marketing 這篇文章的回憶或是任何重點

3.請盡可能寫出您對 Search Engine Marketing 101 這篇文章的回憶或是任何重點

4.請盡可能寫出三篇文章有何關聯性?相同或相異都可?或是您認為有任何類似 或相似探討內容之處?

測驗二：線索回憶測驗(Cue Recall Test)

1.微軟想要將下列何種搜尋引擎設為瀏覽器的預設值?

(1)Yahoo (2)Google (3)MSN (4)Firefox 2.在第二篇文章中提到的 PPC 是下列何者的縮寫?

(1) Pay Per Click (2)Pocket Person Computer (3) Professional Person Computer

(4) Public Power Council

3.在 SEO – the longer term big opportunity 中下列何者”不是”它的優勢?

(1) More click volume (2) Highly measurable (3) Higher Conversion Rate than

PPC – More trust = more sales (4) It’s not immediate - it’s a journey with a good agency

4.在 Paid search – For immediate gains 中下列何者”為”它的優勢?

(1) Highly measurable (2) Lower conversion rates (3) Highly competitive (4) No Barrier to entry created

5.在第三篇文章中 SEM 為下列何者的縮寫?

(1) Search Engine Missing (2) Search Engine Mining (3) Search Engine Marketing

(4) Structural Equation Modeling

6.第三篇文章中下列何者”不是”作者探討的主題?

(1) Audience (2) Creates a barrier to entry for future competitors (3) Topics to be covered (4) New forum for SEM

7.第三篇的作者認為下列何者在第二篇提到是有助於 SEM 行銷策略的成功?

(1)Google (2)PPC (3) SEO (4) Microsoft 8.您認為此三篇文章圍繞著什麼主題去做探討?

(1) Search Engine (2) Government (3) Web Technologies (4) blog

9.看完三篇文章，您認為微軟的瀏覽器預設的搜尋引擎可以得到三篇文章中任何 提到的優勢?(簡答請 30 字以內)

附錄Ｂ

z 文章一 Don't Do It, Google

by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.

As Microsoft prepares for the new release of the new version of its browser, Google is grousing about one of Microsoft's marketing strategies. Internet Explorer E7 will likely have a little search bar in the upper right hand corner of the browser, just as Safari and Firefox do now. With it you will be able to access a number of search engines.

As usual, the argument comes down to who gets to set the default engine. Microsoft wants MSN search to be the default. Google complains that this will give the

company an unfair advantage and deny consumer choice. MS already owns the operating system, and the argument about whether Internet Explorer can be

preinstalled and defaulted on the operating system was long ago settled in MS's favor.

MS seems to be planning further to leverage its control of the desktop to make further inroads into the search market, in which it is currently not doing very well. This is the source of Google's complaint, and vague insinuations are in the air to the effect that Google might, just might, ask the Justice Department (and the European Commission) to intervene.

Microsoft responds that it is not forcing anyone to use its search engine. Consumers are free to pick any one they want to. And while that's true, Google knows full well that consumers tend to stick with defaults. We live in a world in which most people don't even know that they can control what displays on the desktop. For that matter, Microsoft serves 80 percent of the browser market even though its browser is one of the least secure and slowest of all the choices out there.

For that reason, many sophisticated computer users will be sympathetic to Google's case. To accept Microsoft's defaults is to restrict in effect people's computing experience. Might an intervention actually be good for consumers and good for the industry?

No. And we've been through this many times before.

In a free society, producers enjoy the freedom to manage how their products are presented to the customer. Bad decisions in this regard are not as profitable to the company as good ones are. We can't rule out the possibility that people will pick up on the fact that Google currently offers far superior search technologies to Microsoft.

To stave off a consumer revolt, Microsoft has more incentive to improve its search ability, while Google has incentive to maintain its advantage.

But what if Microsoft still dominates the market with inferior technology? Here we must speak to a common myth about free markets. It is not the case that the best technology always wins. All we can say about free markets is that there is a tendency for the most economically suitable products to dominate the market over the long term.

That could mean that mainstream America will settle for convenience over quality, and who is to say that the proper economic course is always to prefer the opposite?

There is also the matter of property rights. MS does own Windows and it will own its successor too. It also owns Internet Explorer. It also owns its search engine. How it bundles those products must be left to the owner. The alternative is to get the

government involved in designing and managing how software is built, managed, and marketed. Google is a company that has always thrived on its independence and innovative strategies. Government intervention is not in Google's long-term interest either. A government big enough to punch out Google's competitors is big enough to punch out Google too.

Rumors have abounded for years that someday Google will come up with an operating system that runs off its own servers and provide a serious competitive alternative to Microsoft. That may yet happen, in which case Google needs to be free to compete without having to jump through regulatory hoops. We need also to

remember that antitrust complaints are starting to be leveled against Google itself, and it would be unwise to participate in an action that can

only embolden the regulators.

The software industry is filled with rivalries of the most intense variety. They might all hate each others' guts, and no one is hated more than Microsoft, simply because it is the biggest and the one that has marketed its way to the top. But what all these companies need to agree upon is that they have a common enemy, The State. It is not the friend of rivalrous competition but its enemy. Google needs to compete in a free market, think about the long

term, and stick to what it does best, which is astounding its customers and rivals with great products. This is how it has progressed so far.

It would be a crying shame to see this wonderful company participate in an action that will end up tightening the already tight level of control that government now exercises over society.

No pundit can do Google's thinking, but what about a small link on Google's homepage that says: "Make Google your default search engine" – and so clicking it overrides MS's defaults? That's the way to compete peacefully.

z 文章二

Google Marketing, what should your search strategy and plans include?

Posted by Louis Venter on 01 May 2009 | Tagged as: SEO Strategy

I always struggle to explain what I do to people that aren’t in marketing or IT. I usually get the

“Search Marketing? What on earth is that? Do you search for marketers?”

I think the most concise response is that we help companies market their products or services in Google. I suppose Google Marketing is probably more accurate in the UK due to the search engines’

vast market share. We help client’s with their Google search marketing plans.

Most people get that fairly quickly with the odd few saying “oh the ads on the right?” Well no, we help our clients in both areas with some pretty amazing return on investment.

There are two main places to market your products and services within Google, The paid listings (top and right) are referred to as PPC because you Pay Per Click. The results on the left are natural listings often referred to organic listings.

This post covers a few basic pros and cons of each area of Google Marketing which may help you make up your mind which you should place more emphasis on.

SEO – the longer term big opportunity

Google admits that 80% of all clicks come from the organic listings, this is very relevant to the smart marketer because 80% of all search expenditure is on PPC! Any Google marketing strategy should have a key focus on the long term benefits of SEO.

Pros:

1. More click volume

2. More trust – Visitors trust the Google organic listings and that trust gets transferred to your site

3. Higher Conversion Rate than PPC – More trust = more sales

4. It gets stronger over time so the effect is cumulative and traffic generation an upward curve

5. Cost per visit is typically a tenth of the paid cost (cost per visit calculated as cost of overall SEO campaign/ number of non brand visits)

6. Highly measurable

7. Creates a barrier to entry for future competitors

Cons:

1. It’s not immediate - it’s a journey with a good agency

2. Opportunity cost of choosing the wrong agency is high as you lose time and never get that back

3. No Guarantees

Paid search – For immediate gains Pros:

1. You have complete control and any strategy changes are instant 2. Highly measurable

3. Guaranteed

Cons:

1. More expensive per click 2. Lower conversion rates 3. Highly competitive

4. No Barrier to entry created

So which is better? Well the answer is both, Google marketing delivers fantastic return on investment whichever method you use. The combination of both methods unlocks fantastic ROI.

The key is to choose a great SEO agency, measure both monthly and shift budget appropriately every quarter, in that way you’ll get the best out of your Google marketing budget.

z 文章三

Search Engine Marketing 101, a new blog series

As a VP candidate once famously said, “Who am I? Why am I here?” I’m Rick DeJarnette, and I’ve been with the Live Search Webmaster Center team since fall, 2008, learning the ropes, helping with writing and editing work on both the tools Help system and the blog. I have a long and advanced technical writing background, focused on both IT Pro and end user topics. I’ve been involved with web technologies since the mid-1990s, and have always had a particular passion for helping people get more out of technology to improve their lives. I was recently given the opportunity to develop a new series for the blog, oriented toward search engine marketing (SEM) for novices, with a particular focus on search engine optimization (SEO) topics, and I immediately ran with the idea!

Audience

My goal for this series is to help folks who suddenly find themselves responsible for promoting their organization’s website. I’ve seen many visitors in the forums who ask basic questions, so I know there is an audience for this line of articles. I personally know many folks in my life outside work (there is such a thing, right?) who manage websites for their businesses but know little-to-nothing of SEM. Here are a couple of examples of my intended audience:

• Small business owner. Think of someone like a long-time bed and breakfast owner, who knows her business inside and out. She understands that her business today is greatly dependent upon a successful online presence. Perhaps she once had decent web development skills from a prior career, so she understands basic web

technologies. Most of her successful, local competitors have websites, but she can’t understand why she is not getting better value, higher ranking, or more business from her own site.

• Business professional. Then there’s the guy who was initially hired to be a marketer/writer, but was then asked to improve the visibility of their corporate website. This employee knows basic HTML coding, and certainly knows how to write a good press release. However, knowledge of SEM had never previously been a requirement, but now success in his job requires this skill.

These sample personas actually represent everyone who delves into SEM for the first time.

The particulars of this audience will be diverse in origin, but they all share the same issues and questions. What do I do? How do I start? What’s helpful and what’s not?

When people first look into SEM, they are usually overwhelmed by new concepts, new jargon, new technologies, and the fact that there is usually an assumed level of technical knowledge that they don’t have and lack the time to learn (they’ll often tell you they’re too busy trying to run their business to devote time to the website!). As a result, they either hire a consultant to “make it work,” or if they are DYIers, they spit out some basic HTML code and call it a day. But unless the person doing the work knows the right strategies and tactics, these efforts are often only marginally successful. Let’s change that.

Topics to be covered

I want to orient these folks and others in similar situations (that would be you, my dear reader!) to what SEM is and why it is important. I will show you the particular steps you‘ll want to take to improve your website’s structure and content, and discuss other technical details to make your site more usable and more compelling to users. As a result of these optimizations, your site will also become more visible to users by showing up earlier on relevant search engine results pages (SERPs). This increased visibility will help it draw more qualified visitors, whom you can convert, with the aid of strong, compelling content, into new and repeat customers.

I’ll also go into successful search engine marketing strategies, such as relevant Pay-Per-Click (PPC) advertising campaigns, that can bring an even higher number of highly qualified visitors to your site, which usually translates into more customers. Lastly, I’ll touch on the concerns about over-zealous optimization techniques and why, in the long run, they will be more detrimental than helpful.

New forum for SEM

To enhance this new blog series, our forum is has added a new section dedicated to SEM issues. This new forum, called Search Engine Marketing and Optimization, is intended to be a place for a community of users to exchange ideas and strategies on what works, what doesn’t, and even suggest topics of interest for future SEM 101 columns (although I already have a long list of topics to cover!). Be sure to check it out!

There’s a lot to talk about. Look for new SEM 101 blog posts on a regular basis. Coming up next: What is SEM and why does it matter? Until next time…

在文檔中 中 華 大 學 (頁 80-94)