第五章 結論與建議
第三節 未來研究方向
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
101
長、任務題目的解說與協助各組決定題目以及組內的工作分配等，使得小組成員 清楚共同目標與責任，如此將更有助於提昇合作學習之歷程。
第三節 未來研究方向
一、 發展社交角色行為特徵視覺化工具
Welser 等人（2007）在探討線上討論區中社交角色行為特徵時，將個人在固 定週期內對於論壇貢獻程度、他人回應互動狀況以及論壇整體網絡架構等現象繪 製成圖表，以視覺化方式呈現社交角色之行為特徵。而本研究在探討社群角色行 為時，係運用人工方式針對討論串進行編碼後，經過資料處理後以階層式分群圖 呈現。因此，未來若能發展社交角色行為特徵視覺化工具，如繪製社交角色互動 社會網路關係圖、行為特徵監控結果統計表等，將更能輔助教師更即時且清楚地 以視覺化工具，掌握學習者在網路學習中所扮演的各角色類型與行為特徵。
二、 設計學習社群角色行為特徵量表作為輔助教師進行網路合作式學習分 組依據
本研究以分析數位學習平台整學期課程各討論區相關紀錄，並採人工質性編 碼方式識別學習社群角色行為特徵，再利用階層式分群演算法聚類分析後之結果，
作為異質性立意分組之依據。其中透過人工進行學習社群角色行為特徵質性編碼，
為一相當耗費時間的工作，未來若能發展出基於討論區行為特徵之學習社群角色 識別量表，將可以更方便輔助教師在授課之前，使用量表填答方式識別學生社群 角色行為特徵，進而歸納出學習者的學習社群角色傾向，作為教師在進行網路合 作式學習時，進行異質性立意分組之依據。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
102
參考文獻
壹、 中文文獻
吳武典（1979）。社會及行為科學研究法（下冊，再版），臺北市：東華。
岳修平、鐘婉莉（2005）。專題式學習小組網路溝通互動之研究，國立高雄師範 大學教育學系教育學刊，25 期，p.1-23。
洪慧婷（2007）。網路合作學習之團體信念、合作學習行為與團體表現之關聯性 研究，未出版碩士，國立臺灣科技大學技術及職業教育研究所，台北市。
侯惠澤(2008)。線上合作解題討論教學之知識建構行為模式探究。2008 電腦與網 路科技在教育上的應用研討會(CNTE 2008)。新竹：新竹教育大學資訊科技 研究所。
張基成(2003)。網路學習社群之經營與管理。T&D 飛訊，第八期。
許喬雯、岳修平、林維真（2010）。專題式學習小組溝通行為與成員角色之研究，
圖書資訊學刊，8：1，p137-164。
陳盈秀（2005）。人際互動下虛擬經驗類型之硏究：以手機王虛擬社群為例，位 出版碩士，國立臺北科技大學商業自動化與管理研究所，台北市。
陸希平、王本榮、陳家玉（2006）。問題導向學習。醫學教育，10，89-87。
陸希平、林妍如、林中生、李孟智、陳家玉（2004）。問題導向式教學中老師與 學生的角色認知。醫學教育，8:3，358-362。
楊堤雅（2000）。網際網路虛擬社群成員之角色與溝通互動之探討，未出版碩士，
國立中正大學企業管理硏究所，嘉義縣。
彭慧芳（2010）。臺灣兩所大學學生網路讀書會中視訊會議與論壇討論互動模式 之言談分析，未出版碩士，國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
檢自：大英百科全書，取自：大英線上繁體中文版，日期：2010 年 10 月 21 日。
http://daying.wordpedia.com/content.aspx?id=064188
貳、 英文文獻
"role" Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Craig Calhoun, ed. Oxford University Press 2002. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. National Cheng Chi University Library. 21 October 2010
http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Mainandentry=t1
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
103 04.e1461
Agarwal, R. & Prasad, J. (1999). “Are Individual Difference Germane to the Acceptance of New Information Technologies?” Decision Sciences, 30(2), 361-391.
Ames, G. J., & Murray, F. B. (1982). When two wrongs make a right: Promoting cognitive change by social conflict. Developmental Psychology, 18, 894897.
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to
sequential analysis (2nd Ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1977). Selfefficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive
theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148.
Bandura, A. (1997). Selfefficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (2004). Introduction. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling & J. H.
Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (pp. 3-15).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. NY: Freeman.
Carron, A. V. (1982). Cohesiveness in sport groups: interpretations and considerations.
Journal of Sport Psychology, 4, 123-138.
Carless, S. A., & De Paola, C. (2000). The measurement of cohesion in work teams.
31(1), 71-88.
Carron A. V., Widmeyer, W. N., Brawley, L. R. (1985). The development of an instrument to assess cohesion in sport teams: The group environment questionnaire. Journal of Sport Psychology, 7, 244-266.
Cartwright, D., & Zander, A. (1968). Group dynamics: Research and theory. New York: Harper & Row.
Colachico, D. (2007). Developing a sense of community in an online environment.
International Journal of Learning, 14(1), 161-165.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
104
Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S., & Tinker, R. (2000). Facilitating online
learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
Conrad, D. (2005). Building and maintaining community in cohort-based online learning.
Journal of Distance Education, 20(1), 1-21.
Corsini, R. (2002). The dictionary of psychology. New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge.
Cota, A. A., Longman, S. R., Evans, C. R., & Dion, K. L. (1995). Using and misusing factor analysis to explore group cohesion. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(2), 308-316.
D’Zurilla, T. J., & Goldfried, M. R. (1971). Problem solving behavior modification.
Journal of Normal Psychology, 78(1), 112–119.
E. Triantafillou, A. Pomportsis, and S. Demetriadis (2003)“The Design and the Formative Evaluation of an Adaptive educational System Based on Cognitive Styles,” Computers and Education, Vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 87-103.
Earley, P. C. (1993). East meets west meets mideast: Further explorations of
collectivistic and individualistic work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 319-348.
Ertmer, P. A., & Stepich, D. A. (2004). Examining the relationship between
higher-order learning and students’ perceived sense of community in an online learning environment. Paper presented at the 10th Australian World Wide Web
conference, Gold Coast, Australia.Falk, Joni K. &Drayton, Brian. &. Linn, Marcia C. (2009). Creating And Sustaining
Online Professional Learning Communities. New York. Teachers College Press.
Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271-282.
Graham, M., and H. Scarborough. 1999. Computer mediated communication and collaborative learning in an undergraduate distance education environment.
Australia Journal of Educational Technology 15 (1): 20–46.
Goddard, R. D., Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy:
Its meaning, measure, and effect on student achievement. American Education
Research Journal, 37(2), 479–507.
Goddard, R. D. (2001). Collective efficacy: A neglected construct in the study of schools and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3),
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
105 467–476.
González, M. G., Burke, M. J., Santuzzi, A. M., & Bradley, J. C. (2003). The impact of group process variables on the effectiveness of distance collaboration groups.
Computers in Human Behavior, 19(5), 629-648.
Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The
American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26.
Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational
Computing Research 17(4), 397–431.
Hall, S.(1999). Encoding and decoding. In S. During (Ed.), The cutural studies
redear(2nd ed.) New York: Routledge, p.507-517.
Hara, N., C. J. Bonk, and C. Angeli. 2000. Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science 28 (2): 115–152.
Hiltz, S. R., N. Coppola, N. Rotter, M. Turoff, and R. Benbunan-Fich. (2000).
Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN:
A multi-measure, multi-method approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning
etworks 4 (2). Available online at
http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v4n2/v4n2_hiltz.asp
Hogg, M. A. (1992). The social psychology of group cohesiveness: From attraction to social identity. New York: New York University Press.
Hou, H.-T., Chang, K.-E., & Sung, Y.-T. (2008). Analysis of Problem-Solving-Based Online Asynchronous Discussion Pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11 (1), 17-28.
Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2009). A Sequential Behavioral Detection and Process Analysis of Knowledge Construction of a Collaborate Learning Instructional Discussion Activity in an Online Learning Community, paper presented at GCCCE2009, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hoy, W. K., Sweetland, S. R., & Smith, P. A. (2002). Toward an organizational model of achievement in high schools: The significance of collective efficacy.
Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 77-93.
Little, B. L., & Madigan, R. M. (1997). The relationship between collective efficacy
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
106
and performance in manufacturing work teams. Small Group Research, 28(4), 517–534.
Jeong, H. & Chi, M. T. H.(2000). Does collaborative learning lead to the construction of common knowledge?.In Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual
Conferenceof the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1983). The socialization and achievement crisis: Are cooperative learning experiences the solution? In L. Beckman (Ed.), Applied
Social Psychology Annual 4 (pp 119-164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Leading the cooperative school. Edina, MN:
Interaction.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1991). Learning together and alone (3rd ed).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Allyn & Bacon.
Jonassen, D., Peck, K., & Wilson, B. (1999). Learning with technology - A
constructivist perspective. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, D. W. Johnson, R. T. ＆ Smith, Karl A. (1991). Active learning:
Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). "Making Cooperative Learning Work".
Theory into Practice, Vol. 38, No. 2, (Spring, 1999), pp. 67-73
Kenny, D., National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, S., & And, O.
(1995). The Effects of Group Composition on Gifted and Non-Gifted Elementary Students in Cooperative Learning Groups. Retrieved from ERIC database
King, K. P. 2002. Identifying success in online teacher education and professional development. Internet and Higher Education 5 (3): 231–246.
Kolb, D. A.(1976) Learning Style Inventory, Technical Manual, McBer and Company, NewYork.
Kolb, D. A.(1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning andDevelopment, Prentice Hall, New York.
Kozinet, Robert V. (1999). E-Tribalized Marketing? The Strategic Implications of Virtual Communities of Consumption, European Management Journal, 17, pp.252-264.
Kristof, A.L.(1996). "Person-organization fit: an integrative review of its
conceptualizations, measurement, and implications." Personnel Psychology, 49
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
107 (1), 1–49.
Larson, C., Dansereau, D., O'Donnell, A., Hythecker, V., Lambiotte, J., & Rocklin, T.
(1985). Effects of metacognitive and elaborative activity on cooperative learning and transfer. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10, 342348.
Laughlin, P. (1965). Selection strategies in concept attainment as a function of number of persons and stimulus display. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70,
323-327.
Laughlin, P. (1972). Selection versus reception concept-attainment paradigms for individuals and cooperative pairs. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 116-122.
Laughlin, P., & Jaccard, J. (1975). Social facilitation and observational learning of individuals and cooperative pairs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 873-879
Laughlin, P., McGlynn, R., Anderson, J., & Jacobson, E. (1968). Concept attainment by individuals versus cooperative pairs as a function of memory, sex, and concept rule. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 410417.
Law, N. (2005). Assessing Learning Outcomes in CSCL Settings. Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005, Taipei, Taiwan,373 – 377.
Lin and Huang, F., Lin, S. and Huang, T. (2007). Knowledge sharing and creation in a teachers’ professional virtual community. Computers and Education, 50,
742-756.
Liu, X., Magjuka, R.J., Bonk, C.J., & Lee, S.-H. (2007). Does sense of community matter?
An examination of participants’ perceptions of building learning communities in online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 8(1), 9-24.
Lott, A. J. & Lott, B. E. (1965). Group cohesiveness as interpersonal attraction: A review of relationships with antecedent and consequent variables. Psychological Bulletin, 64(4), 259-309.
Marr, M. (1997). Cooperative Learning: A Brief Review. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 13(1), 7-20.
Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, problem solving, cognition. New York, NY: W. H.
Freeman and Company.
McGlynn, R. (1972). Four-person group concept attainment as a function of
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
108
interaction format. Journal of Social Psychology, 86, 89-94.
Mitchell, M., Montgomery, H., Holder, M., & Stuart, D. (2008). Group Investigation as a Cooperative Learning Strategy: An Integrated Analysis of the Literature.
Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 54(4), 388-395. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Mwerinde, P., & Ebert, C. (1995). An Examination of the Relationship between the Problem-Solving Behaviors and Achievements of Students in
Cooperative-Learning Groups. Retrieved from ERIC database
Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in selfefficacy research. In M. L. Maehr & P. R.
Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (pp. 1–49). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Palloff, R. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
personal and human resources management. Boston: Elsevier, 181–214.
Ravenscroft, S., Buckless, F., & Zuckerman, G. (1997). Student team
learning-replication and extension. Accounting Education: A Journal of Theory,
Practice and Research, 2(2), 151–172.
Rovai, A.P. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. The Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319-332.
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277, 918–924.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2001). Knowledge Building. In Encyclopedia of Education, Second Edition. New York: Macmillan Reference, USA.
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Liberal education in a knowledge society,Chicago: Open Court, 67-98
Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (ed.).Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences.
New York: Cambridge University
Seibold, G. L., & Kelly, D. R. (1988). Development of the combat platoon cohesion
questionnaire. Alexandria, VA: US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral
Sciences.‧
Seijts, G. H., Latham, G. P., & Whyte, G. (2000). Effect of self- and group efficacy on group performance in a mixed-motive situation. Human Performance, 13 (3), 279-298.
Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw Hill.
Shea, P., Li, C.S., & Pickett, A. (2006). A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 9(3), 175-190.
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: Learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), January 2005.
Retrieved May 25, 2008, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/index.htm Slavin, Robert E. (1980) "Cooperative Learning." Review of Educational Research
Summer, Vol. 50, No. 2, Pp. 315-342
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: theory, research and practice (2nd ed).
Soller, A. L. (2001). Supporting Social Interaction in an Intelligent Collaborative Learning System. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 40-62.
Spurlin, J., Dansereau, D., Larson, C., & Brooks, L. (1984). Cooperative learning strategies in processing descriptive text: Effects of role and activity level of the learner. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 451-463.
Stahl, G. (2000). A Model of Collaborative Knowledge-Building, Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences.Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum,70-77.
Sugrue, B. (1993). Specifications for the design of problem-solving assessments in science. Project 2.1 designs for assessing individual and group problem-solving.
Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.
Swan, K., Shen, J., & Hiltz, S.R. (2006). Assessment and collaboration in online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), 45-62.
Thorsten Henning – Thurau , Kevin P. Gwinner, "Gianfranco Walsh , DwayneD.
Gremler , Customer-Option Platforms：What Motives Consumers toArticulate Themselves On The Internet ? ,"Journal Of Interactive Marketing,Vol.18, No.1, 2004, pp.38-52.
Turel, Ofir & Zhang, Yi (Jenny).(2010) Does virtual team composition matter? Trait and problem-solving configuration effects on team performance. Behaviour &
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
110
Information Technology Vol. 29, No. 4, 363–375.
Van der Laan Smith, J. and R. M. Spindle. 2007. The impact of group formation in a cooperative learning environment. Journal of Accounting Education 25(4):
153-167.
Visher,Mary. Schneider,Emily. Wathington,Heather. Herbert,Collado.（2010）Scaling Up Learning Communities-The Experience of Six Community Colleges.
National Center for Postsecondary Research.
Webster, J. and Staples, S., 2006. Comparing virtual teams to traditional teams: An identification of new research opportunities. In: J.J. Martocchio, ed. Research in
Personnel and Human Resources Management. Volume 25, pp.181-215.
Welser, Howard T., Gleave, Eric. & Fish, Danyel. (2007) "Visualizing the Signatures of Social Roles in Online Discussion Groups" Journal of Social Structure; 2007;
8 (2) p.1-31.
Yager, S., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral discussion, group to individual transfer, and achievement in cooperative learning groups. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 77, 60-66.
Yang, F., Wang, M., Shen, R. & Han, P. (2007). Community-organizing agent: An artificial intelligent system for building learning communities among large numbers of learners. Computers and Education, 49, 131–147.
Yeh, Y.-C. (2010). Analyzing Online Behaviors, Roles, and Learning Communities via Online Discussions. Educational Technology and Society, 13 (1), 140–151.
Yeh, Yu-chu. (2010). Integrating collaborative PBL with blended learning to explore preservice teachers’ development of online learning communities. Teaching and
Teacher Education, v.26, 1630-1640.
Zaccaro, S. J. (1991). Nonequivalent associations between forms of cohesiveness and group-related outcomes: Evidence for multidimensionality. The Journal of Social
Psychology, 131, 387–399.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
111
附錄
壹、 團體效能與凝聚力量表
一、 團體效能
1. 我相信我們這組可以在這份作業得到優異的成績。
2. 我相信我們這組能理解這份作業最困難的部分。
3. 我們這組自信能學好這份作業所教的基本觀念。
4. 我們這組自信能理解這份作業老師所教最複雜的部分。
5. 我們這組自信能將這份作業所指定的內容做好。
6. 我們這組預期能在這份作業拿高分。
7. 我們這組確信能精通這份作業所教的方法技能。
8. 考量這份作業的困難度、老師、和我們這組的能力，我覺得我們這組 可以學好這份作業。
二、 社會凝聚力
1. 我們小組成員總能接納他人意見。
2. 我們小組常對其他成員的想法表達支持。
3. 我們小組成員溝通良好。
4. 我們小組成員互動非常良好。
5. 我們小組成員討論時總是氣氛愉快。
6. 我們小組成員對彼此都非常友善。
7. 我們小組成員對其它成員的問題都能友善回應。
三、 任務凝聚力
1. 小組成員對這份作業的完成非常投入。
2. 我們小組對達成這份作業目標非常投入。
3. 小組成員展現出要做好這份作業的企圖心。
4. 小組成員同心協力以完成這份作業。
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
112
5. 小組成員在實際工作或比賽時，會相互鼓勵以獲得成功。
5. 小組成員在實際工作或比賽時，會相互鼓勵以獲得成功。