Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/48996
|
| Title: | 設計本位研究之個案:以數位化人文學習之教材設計為例
A case study of design-based research for evaluation of instructional design in E-humanities learning |
| Authors: | 賴昌彥 |
| Contributors: | 劉文卿
賴昌彥 |
| Keywords: | 教材設計
設計本位研究
學習元件
模糊理論
地理資訊系統 |
| Date: | 2009 |
| Issue Date: | 2010-12-08 01:54:54 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 傳統E-Learning一直存在學習教材不足的問題。然而，隨著多媒體資訊爆炸時代來臨，有愈來愈多的教育資源可開放使用，再加上資通訊技術不斷創新演進，將不斷改變知識呈現的方式。
本篇論文透過相關文獻探討，提出整合不同學習資源以解決多媒體教材不足的問題。文中以「歷史文學」通識課程為例，分析如何有效地建構輔助教材以支援學習活動。除了從教材設計及學習支援的角度上來分析，研究中更使用Design-Based Research，透過設計不同學習情境來了解教材偏好之議題。
在實作中不但使用 text mining 的技術，也整合了 GIS (Geographic Information System) 提供更創新的互動方式。此外，透過問卷來收集參與師生之使用心得及意見回饋，實際了解學生對教材設計的偏好程度。
研究發現較生動的呈現方式有助於吸引學生，並歸納出認知程度是設計教材之重要成功要素。希望藉由本文實際之發現及建議，提供數位媒體於通識教育的應用個案參考。
With the different impact of instructions design, such as open educational resources, multimedia explosion and innovative ICTs (Information and Communication Technologies), it offers a possible clue in exploiting from new forms of interaction and knowledge sharing in the Web 2.0 Age. This thesis argues that traditional learning issues in the lack of online multimedia instructions could be solved by integrating various multimedia learning resources, for example in General Education and other learning areas. Therefore, a framework of composing learning contents from the analysis of multimedia learning evolution is presented. By proposing an innovated framework and an analysis of different granularity in learning contents, ontology illustrations and examples in OWL (Web Ontology Language) are discussed.
Since the Design-Based Research can help to understand the learning phenomena through developing different kinds of learning materials. We base on the approach of Design-Based Research to evaluate e-Learning presentations and link up the prototype implementation with research objects. The study tries to present some of the problems arising when ICTs are integrated into learning environment and to provide suggestions of how to deal with the problems. Some questionnaires are designed, and it is applied to collect feedbacks of learners and as a suggestion of improving learning instruction.
In sum, this experiment provides empirical evidence that shows that, in a general education class for community university students, presenting a material with GIS (Geographic Information System) platform is more attractive than presenting the text contents together with the picture or only the text. The results indicate that a vivid presentation can help students to understand the conveyed concept. While ICTs play an important role in facilitating learning materials, cognitive load issue is so important that should be taken into account seriously. As a result, instructional designers have come to recognize the real need for multimedia instruction from our findings and take care of multiple presentations that are sensitive to cognitive load. Finally, we mainly address that the logistic of General Education must rethink under the innovative concept and the help of ICTs. |
| Reference: | 1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2-3), pp. 131-152.
2. Alonso, G., Casati, F., Kuno, H., & Machiraju, V. (2004). Web services: Concepts, architectures and applications, Springer Verlag, New York.
3. Beacham, N., Elliott, A., Alty, J.L., & Al-Sharrah, A. (2002). Media combinations and learning styles: A Dual Coding Theory approach, In the proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2002: World conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia & telecommunications, June 24-29, 2002, Denver, Colorado, USA, pp. 111-116.
4. Bednar, A.K., Cunningham, D., Duffy, T.M., & Perry, J.D. (1995). Theory into practice: How do we link? In T.M. Duffy and D.H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 17-34.
5. Berger, C., & Kam, R. (2007). Definitions of Instructional Design, April 2007, Online: http://www.umich.edu/~ed626/define.html
6. Breslow, L. (2007). Lessons Learned: Findings from an MIT initiative in educational technology (2000-2005). Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(4).
7. Brown, A.L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), pp. 141-178.
8. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, pp. 32-42.
9. Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10. Cantoni, V., Cellario, M., & Porta, M. (2004). Perspectives and challenges in e-learning: towards natural interaction paradigms. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 15(5), pp. 333-345.
11. Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 62, pp. 233-246.
12. Chatti, M.A., Jarke, M., & Frosch-Wilke, D. (2007). The future of e-learning: a shift to knowledge networking and social software. Int. J. Knowledge and Learning, 3 (4/5), pp. 404-420.
13. Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and Sociocultural Perspectives on Mathematical Development, Educational Researcher, 23(7), pp 13-20.
14. Collins, A. (1992). Towards a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O`Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology, Berlin: Springer, pp. 15-22.
15. Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design Research: Theoretical and Methodological Issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), pp. 15-42.
16. Cowie, J., & Lehnert, W. (1996). Information Extraction, Communications of the ACM special issue on Natural Language Processing, January.
17. Damiani, E., & Fugini, M.G. (1995). Automatic thesaurus construction supporting fuzzy retrieval of reusable components. SAC 1995, pp. 542-547.
18. Delgado, M., Verdegay, J.L., & Vila, M.A. (1993). On aggregation operations of linguistic labels, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 8(3), pp. 351-370.
19. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for Educational Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), pp. 5.
20. Djuknic G.M., & Richton, R.E. (2001). Geolocation and Assisted GPS. Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, Communication Magazine, pp. 123-125.
21. Downes S. (2005), E-learning 2.0, in eLearn Magazine, October. Online: http://elearnmag.org/subpage.cfm?section=articles&article=29-1
22. Ebner, M., Holzinger, A., & Maurer, H. (2007). Web 2.0 Technology: Future Interfaces for Technology Enhanced Learning? In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) HCI 2007. LNCS, 4556, pp. 559-568. Springer, Heidelberg.
23. Edelson, D.C. (2002). Design research: what we learn when we engage in design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), pp. 105-121.
24. Fan, I.C., & Liao, H.M. (2005). Historical GIS in digital archive and research : the historical GiS of CCTS and THCTS in Academia Sinica, In Proc. of The 7th Meeting for the Study of Japanese Military and Colonial Maps, pp. 16-26.
25. Ferrand, L., Segui, J., & Grainger, J. (1996). Masked priming of word and picture naming: The role of syllabic units. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, pp. 708-723.
26. Ferris, S.P., & Wilder, H. (2006). Uses and potentials of wikis in education. journal of online education, 2(5).
27. Finn, A. (2004). Trends in E-Learning, Feature Article, Online: http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/item/128732
28. Hall, B. (2003). e-Learning Guidebook: Six Steps to Implementing E Learning. Sunnyvale, CA: Brandon-Hall.
29. Harris, P. (2004). Two New Marketplaces for E-Suppliers: Health Care and Financial Services. Training and Development, 58(1), pp. 38-46.
30. Herrera, F., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Verdegay, J.L. (1995). A sequential selection process in group decision making with a linguistic assessment approach, Information Sciences, 85(4), pp. 223-239.
31. Horn, R.E. (1998). Structured writing as a paradigm. In Alexander Romiszowski and Charles Dills, editors, Instructional Development: State of the Art. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
32. Ghani, R., Probst, K., Liu, Y., Krema, M., & Fano, A. (2006). Text mining for product attribute extraction, ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, 8(1), pp. 41-48.
33. Jacobson, R. (2008). Visual learning: How the rise of digital video is transforming education. eSchool News, January 2. Online: http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-articles/index.cfm?i=51368&page=1
34. Kacprzyk, J. (1990). Multiperson Decision Making Models Using Fuzzy Sets and Possibility Theory. Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
35. Klatzky, R.L. (1975). Human memory : structures and processes, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco.
36. Kruse, K. (2004). Introduction to instructional design and the ADDIE model, E-learningGuru. com., Online: http://www.e-learningguru.com/articles/art2_1.htm
37. L`Allier, J.J. (1997). A Frame of Reference: NETg`s Map to Its Products, Their Structures and Core Beliefs, Online: http://www.netg.com/research/whitepapers/index.asp
38. Lai, C.Y., & Liou, W.C. (2007). Instruction Production Model Based On the Multimedia Learning Theory. CATE2007, Beijing, China.
39. Lai, C.Y., & Liou, W.C. (2007). A Service-Oriented Architecture for Constructing Ontology-Based Learning Objects Repository. The IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM2007), Taichung, Taiwan.
40. Lai, C.Y., & Liou, W.C. (2007). Rapid ADDIE Curriculums Design Model Based on the Heterogeneous Multimedia Information Integration. The IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM2007), Taichung, Taiwan.
41. Laurent., A.M.S. (2004). Understanding Open Source and Free Software Licensing, O`Reilly, Sebastopol CA.
42. Lawler, C. (2008). Action research as a congruent methodology for understanding wikis: the case of Wikiversity. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Online: http://jime.open.ac.uk/2008/06/
43. Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44. Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning, Educational Psychologist, 38(1), pp. 43-52.
45. Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, pp. 81-97.
46. Miller, M.V. (2009). Integrating online multimedia into college course and classroom: With application to the social sciences. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching. 5, pp. 395-423.
47. Mohan, P., & Brooks, C. (2003). Learning objects on the Semantic Web. 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Athens, Greece, July 9-11, 2003, 195-199.
48. Molenda, M. (2003). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE Model, Performance Improvement, 42(5), pp. 34-36.
49. Mor, Y., Tholander, J., & Holmberg, J. (2005). Designing for cross-cultural web-based knowledge building. In Proceedings of CSCL`05: The Tenth International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, Taipei, Taiwan.
50. Newby, T.J., Stepich, D.A., Lehman, J.D., & Russell, J.D. (2000). Instructional technology for teaching and learning: Designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51. Nurmi, H., & Kacprzyk, J. (1991). On Fuzzy Tournaments and Their Solution Concepts in Group Decision Making, European Journal of Operational Research, 51, pp. 223-232.
52. O`Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0? Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software, Online: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
53. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach, Oxford University Press, Oxford, England.
54. Parker, K.R., & Chao, J.T. (2007). Wiki as a teaching tool, Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, pp. 57-72.
55. Reeves, T.C. (2000). Enhancing the Worth of Instructional Technology Research through Design Experiments and Other Development Research Strategies, International Perspectives on Instructional Technology Research for the 21st Century, a Symposium sponsored by SIG/Instructional Technology at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, USA.
56. Rollett, H., Lux, M., Strohmaier, M., Dosinger, G., & Tochtermann, K. (2007). The Web 2.0 way of learning with technologies. International Journal of Learning Technology, 3(1), pp. 87-107.
57. Rosenberg, M.J. (2001). E-Learning. Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital Age. New York: McGraw-Hill.
58. Rutkowska, D. (2002). Neuro-Fuzzy Architectures and Hybrid Learning, Springer, New York, Heidelberg.
59. Sadoski, M. (2005). A dual coding view of vocabulary learning. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21, pp. 221-238.
60. Sandoval, W.A. (2004). Developing Learning Theory by Refining Conjectures Embodied in Educational Designs, Educational Psychologist, 39(4), pp. 213-223.
61. Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), pp. 141-156.
62. Schwartz, L., Clark, S., Cossarin, M., & Rudolph, L. (2004). Educational Wikis: features and selection criteria, International Riview of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(1).
63. Sharples, M., Jeffery, N., du Boulay, J.B.H., Teather, D., Teather, B., & du Boulay, G.H. (2002). Socio-cognitive engineering: a methodology for the design of human-centred technology. European Journal of Operational Research, 136(2), pp. 310-323.
64. Shaw, I. S., & Simões, M.G. (1995). Controle e Modelagem Fuzzy, Ed. Edgar Blücher.
65. Shih, C.W., Tsai, T.H., Wu, S.H., Hsieh, C.C., & Hsu, W.L. (2004). The Construction of a Chinese Named Entity Tagged Corpus: CNEC1.0, in Proc. of the Fifteenth Conference on Computational Linguistics and Speech Processing (ROCLING XVI), pp. 305-313.
66. Sicilia, M.A., & García, E. (2003). On the Concepts of Usability and Reusability of Learning Objects. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2).
67. Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing Knowledge, Lulu.com, ISBN:978-1-4303-0230-8.
68. Spillman, R., & SpiUman, B. (1987). A Survey of Some Contributions of Fuzzy Sets to Decision Theory?, In J.C. Bezdek (ed.), Analysis of Fuzzy Information. New York: CRC Press.
69. Suchman, L. (1988). Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human/Machine Communication. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
70. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Camberwell, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research. ISBN 0-86431-312-8.
71. Tomei, L.A. (2008). Information communication technologies for enhanced education and learning : advanced applications and developments, Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA.
72. Wagner, E.D. (2002). Steps to Creating a Content Strategy for Your Organization. The e-Learning Developers` Journal, October 2002.
73. Wiest, S., & Zell, A., (2001). Improving Web Based Training using an XML content base, In Proc. ED-MEDIA 2001, Tampere, Finland, pp. 2045-2050.
74. Wu, Y.H., Lin, S.H., Chong, F.C., Lun, J.J., & Lin, Y.J. (2005). An E-learning Content Authoring tool for Transforming DICOM into SCORM, In Proc. IEEE EMBC-2005, Shanghai, China, pp. 2890-2893. |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
資訊管理研究所
91356503
98 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0913565031 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [資訊管理學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| index.html | 0Kb | HTML2 | 268 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
