網路化檔案評量系統內反思機制之設計及其對自我調整學習影響之評估

全文

(1)31. 國立政治大學「教育與心理研究」 2015 年 3 月，38 卷 1 期，頁 31-64 DOI. 10.3966/102498852015033801002. 網路化檔案評量系統內反思機制之設計及其對自我調整學習影響之評估張基成*. 摘. 林俊宇**. 要. 本研究目的為設計與建置網路化檔案評量系統內線上反思機制，以及評估線上反思機制對自我調整學習之影響。實驗對象為高職資料處理科二年級修習「網頁設計」的兩班學生。其中一班學生為實驗組（41人），使用網路化檔案評量系統進行反思；另一組學生為對照組（41人），使用紙本式學習歷程檔案進行反思；共82 人，其中男生37人，女生45人。自我調整學習量表因素分析的累積解釋變異量接近 80%，量表整體與各向度Cronbach’s α值皆達 .86以上，顯示量表具足夠的效、信度。研究結果為線上反思機制較佳的學習者其自我調整學習顯著優於較低的（p = .000），效果量屬低至中度關聯，顯示良好的線上反思機制較能提升自我調整學習。使用網路化檔案評量系統進行線上反思的自我調整學習顯著優於使用紙本式學習檔案進行反思（p < .05），效果量屬中度關聯，顯示使用網路化檔案評量系統進行線上反思對自我調整學習有顯著正面影響。關鍵詞：反思、自我調整學習、學習歷程檔案、檔案評量 *. 張基成（通訊作者）：國立臺灣師範大學科技應用與人力資源發展系特聘教授林俊宇：國立臺灣師範大學國家華語測驗推動工作委員會規劃師電子郵件：samchang@ntnu.edu.tw **. 收件日期：2014.01.16；修改日期：2014.06.25；接受日期：2014.12.05.

(2) 32. Journal of Education & Psychology March, 2015, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 31-64. Design of Reflective Mechanisms in WebBased Portfolio Assessment System and Evaluation of their Influence in Self-Regulated Learning Chi-Cheng Chang*. Chun-Yu Lin**. Abstract. The study designed and constructed the online reflection mechanisms and evaluated their influences in learners’ self-regulated learning. The participants were two classes of students in the “Webpage Design” course at vocational-technical high schools. One class was the experimental group (41 students) using the Web-based portfolio assessment system (WBPA) in reflection writing, while the other class was the control group (41 students) using paper-based portfolio in reflection writing. There were totally 82 students with 37 males and 45 females. The accululated variance of factor analysis of selfregulated learning scale was approaching 80% and the Cronbach’s α of all aspects were greater than .86. This implied that the scale had，adequate validity and reliability. The results reveals that self-regulated learning of learners with higher satisfaction on the *. Chi-Cheng Chang (Corresponding Author): Distinguished Professor, Department of Technology Application and Human Resource Development, National Taiwan Normal University ** Chun-Yu Lin: Planner, Steering Committee for the Test of Steering Commitee for Mandarin Test, National Taiwan Normal University E-mail: samchang@ntnu.edu.tw Manuscript received: 2014.01.16; Revised: 2014.06.25; Accepted: 2014.12.05.

(3) 33. online reflection mechanism was better than those who with lower satisfaction (p = .001), while the effect size was “small to medium” correlative. It implies that the good mechanism of online reflection may facilitate learners’ self-regulated learning. Moreover, self-regulated learning of learners using the WBPA to perform online reflection was better than those who using paper-based portfolio (p < .05), while the effect size was “medium”correlative. It implies that using WBPA to perform online reflection may facilitate learners’ self-regulated learning.. Keywords: reflection, self-regulated learning, portfolio, portfolio assessment.

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

(21)

(22)

(23)

(24)

(25)

(26)

(27)

(28)

(29) 網路化檔案評量系統內反思機制之設計及其對自我調整學習影響之評估. 59. 統進行反思後雖動機信念優. 用數位化學習歷程檔案系統、使用紙本. 於紙本式學習歷程檔案的反. 式學習歷程檔案、未使用任何學習歷程. 思，不過自我觀察未有促進. 檔案）的自我調整學習的差異，使研究. 的作用，顯示學生對於問題. 結果更為豐富。. 解決及行動控制力不足使用系統之反思機制進行反思的. (六) 後續研究可採用內容分析法來分析反思內容. 自我效能與學科價值顯著優於使用紙本. 本研究主要是量化研究，對於反. 式學習歷程檔案進行反思。不過，自我. 思的內容並未詳細分析。因此，後續研. 觀察向度並未因動機信念的提升而有所. 究可採用內容分析法來分析反思的品質. 促進，顯示此學生缺乏行動控制力。亦. 並加以分類，以進一步探究反思的品質. 即，當學生在高的動機信念下，卻沒有. 與種類對自我調整學習歷程的影響。. 具體改善行動的策略或只是擱置行動，表示學生的行動控制力不夠。不過，從學生的反思內容來看，大多數使用系統內反思機制的學生不會因發現學習問題而提出有效的解決策略。因此，建議在使用反思策略的同時，可增加行動控制策略，培養學生問題解決及行動控制力，以提升自我觀察的行為。. (五) 研究設計可增加未使用檔案一組，使研究結果更為豐富本研究是使用系統之反思機制與紙本式學習歷程檔案來比較反思機制的優勢。就準實驗之實驗介入因子來看，解釋力較不易發揮，因為不能驗證使用檔案與未使用檔案的自我調整學習的差異。因此，未來研究設計可增加未使用學習歷程檔案一組，來比較使用數位化學習歷程檔案系統（具反思機制）與未使用任何學習歷程檔案（未反思）兩組自我調整學習的差異，或比較三組（使. 參考文獻王保進（2006）。中文視窗版SPSS與行為科學研究。臺北市：心理。【Wang, B. C. (2006). Window vision of SPSS and behavior science research. Taipei, Taiwan: Psychology.】. 吳明隆、涂金堂（2006）。SPSS與統計應用分析。臺北市：五南。【Wu, M. L., & Tu, C. T. (2006). SPSS and statistical application analysis. Taipei, Taiwan: Wunan.】. 巫博瀚（2005）。以結構方程模式檢驗自我調整學習對國中生學習成就之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣科技大學，臺北市。【Wu, B. H. (2005). Using SEM to examine the effect of self-regulated learning on middle high school student achievement (Unpublished master thesis). National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan.】. Abrami, P. C., Wade, C. A., Pillay, V., Aslan, O., Bures, E. M., & Bentley, C. (2008). Encouraging self-regulated learning through electronic portfolios. Canadian.

(30) 60 教育與心理研究 38 卷 1 期. Journal of Learning and Technology, 34(3), 93-117. Arsal, Z. (2010). The effects of diaries on self-regulation strategies of preservice science teachers. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 5(1), 85-103. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Winters, F. I., Moos, D. C., & Greene, J. A. (2006). Using computers as metacognitive tools to foster students’ self-regulated learning. Cognition and Learning, 3, 97104. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall. Bartlett, A., & Sherry, A. (2006). Tow views of electronic portfolios in teacher education: Non-technology undergraduates and technology graduate students. International Journal of Instructional Media, 33(3), 245-253. Barrett, H. C. (2010). Balancing the two faces of ePortfolios. Educação, Formação & Tecnologias, 3(1), 6-14. Beishuizen, J., van Boxel, P., Banyard, P., Twiner, A., Vermeij, H., & Underwood, J. (2006). The introduction of portfolios in higher education: A comparative study in the UK and the Netherlands. European Journal of Education, 41(3-4), 491-508. Berrill, D. P., & Whalen, C. (2007). Where are the children? Personal integrity and reflective teaching portfolios. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 868-884. Carneiro, B., Lefrere, P., Steffens, K., & Underwood, J. (Eds.). (2011). Self-. regulated learning in technology enhanced learning environments: A European perspective. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense. Chamber, S. M., & Wickersham, L. E. (2007). The electronic portfolio journey: A year later. Education, 127(3), 351-360. Chang, C. C., & Chou, P. N. (2011). Effects of reflection category and reflection quality on learning outcomes under a Web-based portfolio assessment environment: A case study of high school students in computer application course. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 101-114. Chang, C. C., Liang, C., & Chen, Y. H. (2013). Is learner self-assessment reliable and valid in a web-based portfolio environment for high school students? Computers & Education, 60(1), 325-334. Chang, C. C., & Tseng, K. H. (2011). Using a Web-based portfolio assessment system to elevate project-based learning performances. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(3), 211-230. Chen, N. S., Kinshuk, Wei, C. W., & Liu, C. C. (2010). Effects of matching teaching strategy to thinking style on learner’s quality of reflection in an online learning environment. Computers & Education, 56(1), 53-64. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cole, J. S., Bergin, D. A., & Whittaker, T. A. (2008). Predicting student achievement for low stakes tests with effort and task.

(31) 網路化檔案評量系統內反思機制之設計及其對自我調整學習影響之評估. value. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 609-624. Dysthe, O., Engelsen, K. S., & Lima, I. (2007). Variations in portfolio assessment in higher education: Discussion of quality issues based on a Norwegian survey across institutions and disciplines. Assessing Writing, 12(2), 129-148. Forneris, S. G., & Peden-McAlpine, C. (2007). Evaluation of a reflective learning intervention to improve critical thinking in novice nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 57(4), 410-421. Gama, C., & Idan, E. (2007, May). Electronic portfolios and self-regulated learning in the classroom. Paper presented at the 30th McGraw-Hill Ryerson National Teaching Learning and Technology Conference, Montreal, Concordia University. Garis, J. W. (2007). e-Portfolios: Concepts, designs, and integration within student affairs. New Directions for Student Services, 119, 3-16. Hadwin, A. F., Wozney, L., & Pontin, O. (2005). Scaffolding the appropriation of self-regulatory activity: A socio-cultural analysis of changes in teacher-student discourse about a graduate research portfolio. Instructional Science, 33(5-6), 413-450. Iannotti, R. J., Schneider, S., Nansel, T. R., Haynie, D. L., Plotnick, L. P., Clark, L. M., … Simons-Morton, B. (2006). Selfefficacy, outcome expectations, and diabetes self-management in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Journal of Development Behavior Pediators, 27(2),. 61. 98-105. Kay, J., Li, L., & Fekete, A. (2007). Learner reflection in student self-assessment. In S. Mann & S. Simon (Eds.), Proceedings of the ninth Australasian Computing Education Conference (pp. 89-95). Australia: Ballarat. Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2006). Supporting self-regulated learners for a while and what computers can contributes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(4), 425-435. Koole, S., Vanobbergen, J., De Visschere, L., Aper, L., Dornan, T., & Derese, A. (2013). The influence of reflection on portfolio learning in undergraduate dental education. European Journal of Dental Education, 17(1), e93-e99. MacArthur, C. A. (2006). The effects of new technologies on writing and writing processes. In C. A. MacArthur, S. G. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald. (Eds.), Handbook of witing research (pp. 248262). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Mansvelder-Longayroux, D. D., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2007). The portfolio as a tool for stimulating reflection by student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(1), 47-62. Masui, C., & Corte, E. D. (2005). Learning to reflect and to attribute constructively as basic components of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3), 351-372. McCready, T. (2007). Portfolios and the assessment of competence in nursing: A literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44(1), 143-151..

(32) 62 教育與心理研究 38 卷 1 期. 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. Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane-Dick, D. (2006). Assessing teacher education: The usefulness of multiple measures for assessing programme outcomes. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 120-138. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). Educational psychology at the millennium: A look back and a look forward. Educational Psychologist, 35, 221-227. Saito, H., & Miwa, K. (2007). Construction of a learning environment supporting learners’ reflection: A case of information seeking on the Web. Computers & Education, 49(2), 214-229. Schmitz, B., & Wiese, B. (2006). New perspectives for the evaluation of training session in self-regulated learning: Time-series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(1), 83-88. Schunk, D. H. (2005). Self-regulated learning: The educational legacy of Paul R. Pintrich. Educational Psychologist, 40(2), 85-94. Simpson, E., & Courtney, M. (2007). A framework guiding critical thinking through reflective journal documentation: A Middle Eastern experience. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 13(4), 203-208. Smith, K., & Tillema, H. (2007). Portfolio appraisal: In search of criteria. Teaching and Teacher Education 23(4), 442-456.. Strijbos, J., Meeus, W., & Libotton, A. (2007). Portfolio assignments in teacher education: A tool for self-regulating the learning process? International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(2), 1-16. Struyven, K., Dochy, F., Janssens, S., Schelfhout, W., & Gielen, S. (2006). The overall effects of end-of-course assessment on student performance: A comparison between multiple choice testing, peer assessment, case-based assessment and portfolio assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(3), 202-222. Trevitt, C., Macduff, A., & Steed, A. (2014). [e]portfolios for learning and as evidence of achievement: Scoping the academic practice development agenda ahead. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, 6978. van den Boom, G., Pass, F., & van Merrienboer, J. J. G. (2007). Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 17, 532-548. Wade, A., Abrami, P. C., & White, B. (2006). Using electronic portfolios to help students become self-regulated learners. The Canadian Association of Principals Journal, 14(2), 23-25. Wade, A., Abrami, P. C., Meyer, E., & White, B. (2008). ePEARL: Supporting learning using electronic portfolios. In F. Costa & M. Laranjeiro (Eds.), e-Portfolio in education: Practices and reflections (pp. 83-93). Portugal: Assoçiao de Professores de Sintra..

(33) 網路化檔案評量系統內反思機制之設計及其對自我調整學習影響之評估. Witherspoon, A., Azevedo, R., & Baker, S. (2007, April). Learners’ use of various types of representations during selfregulated learning and externallyregulated learning pisodes. Paper presented at the Workshop on Metacognition and SRL of AIED2007, Marina, California. Yost, D. S. (2006). Reflection and selfefficacy: Enhancing the retention of qualified teachers from a teacher education perspective. Teacher Education Quarterly, 33(4), 59-76. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a selfregulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-72.. 63. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008a). Goal setting: A key proactive source of academic selfregulation. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and selfregulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 267-295). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008b). Investigating selfregulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183..

(34) 64 教育與心理研究 38 卷 1 期. 附錄題項 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25. 自我調整學習量表項目分析. 鑑別度考驗. 鑑別度處同質性考驗考驗理題結項 Cronbach’s α t值與量表平均 Cronbach’s α t值與量表平均（決斷值）數相關（決斷值）數相關刪除前刪除後果刪除前刪除後 4.732*** 4.773*** 6.692*** 5.698*** 7.145*** 6.272*** 6.373*** 5.813*** 3.687** 6.413*** 7.066*** 6.378*** 6.971*** 5.651*** 5.283*** 5.174*** 7.501*** 4.987*** 5.174*** 4.458** 4.572*** 6.219*** 4.583*** 3.981** 4.673***. 同質性考驗. .772*** .825*** .795*** .837*** .761*** .778*** .804*** .713*** .715*** .814*** .864*** .857*** .880*** .618** .708*** .813*** .842*** .785*** .772*** .762*** .692*** .714*** .868*** .863*** .664**. .948 .948 .948 .948 .957 .988 .984 .948 .948 .984 .948 .948 .950 .951 .951 .949 .950 .949 .948 .948 .948 .941 .948 .950 .949. 註：處理結果為「D」，表示該題刪除。 **p < .01. ***p < .001. .944 .941 .942 .943 .942 .943 .943 .943 .943 .943 .942 .943 .943 .943 .945 .946 .946 .945 .945 .944 .944 .943 .943 .944 .943. 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50. 3.581** 3.980** 4.042*** 4.352*** 3.484** 4.357*** 4.054*** 4.280*** 7.390*** 5.489*** 5.522*** 5.353*** 5.715*** 5.794*** 5.283*** 6.727*** 5.152*** 1.615 1.893 1.748 5.174*** 6.175*** 6.547*** 6.038*** 6.915***. .724*** .810*** .915*** .898*** .750*** .852*** .877*** .825*** .771*** .880*** .845*** .774*** .789*** .858*** .879*** .782*** .760*** .734*** .843*** .829*** .761*** .826*** .827*** .858*** .802***. .951 .951 .949 .951 .949 .950 .950 .950 .948 .948 .948 .948 .948 .948 .948 .948 .947 .947 .948 .948 .948 .948 .948 .942 .948. 處理結果. .946 .945 .946 .946 .944 .945 .945 .945 .943 .943 .943 .943 .943 .943 .943 .943 .943 D D D .943 .943 .943 .943 .943.

(35)