影響線上學習者反思層級與學習成效之因素： 以社會網絡理論為基礎

Factors influencing reflection and learning performance in an online learning environment: A perspective based on social network theory

林儒君(Ju-Chun Lin)

指導教授 ： 鄭秀華

朝陽科技大學/資訊學院/資訊管理系/碩士(2014年)

摘要

近年來因應網路教學的蓬勃發展，線上學習平台的興起，學生能夠自主掌握所學。然而，研究指出線上學習平台如果少了反思，其實只能稱之為是一份簡單的電子檔案。反思(reflection)在學習裡扮演著很重要的角色，如果能夠在線上學習平台內加入反思，便可以提升學生在學習上的表現。因此，對於教育學者而言，該如何促使學生進行反思是急需了解的議題。本研究目的在於了解影響學習者反思層級的前置因素，以及希望學習者透過系統學習達到良好的學習成效，並提供教學者未來教學時之參考。
本研究以社會網絡為基礎，結合反思、直接連帶與學習成效等文獻，提出研究架構。以某大學資訊管理系學生為研究對象，以獨立樣本t檢定進行資料分析。本研究結果如下所述：
一、在「社會網絡」方面
(一)討論型網絡
1.同質性班級，其各高中心性與各低中心性組別，在反思層級上沒有顯著的差異。
2.異質性班級，僅高緊密中心性組與低緊密中心性組，在反思層級上有顯著的差異。
(二)回饋型網絡
1.同質性班級，其各高中心性與各低中心性組別，在反思層級上沒有顯著的差異。
2.異質性班級，其各高中心性與各低中心性組別，在反思層級上有顯著的差異。
二、在「直接連帶」方面
(一)同質性班級，其學習能力不佳學習者與高中心性學習者有/無直接連帶，在反思層級方面沒有顯著的差異。
(二)異質性班級，其學習能力不佳學習者與高中心性學習者有/無直接連帶，在反思層級方面有顯著的差異。
三、在「學習成效」方面
無論是同質性班級或異質性班級，其反思層級高分組與低分組，在學習成效上皆有顯著的差異。
最後，本研究提供建議，給教學者、網站業者及開發線上教學平台軟體廠商，以期提升線上教學平台之學習效果。

關鍵字

反思 ； 學習成效 ； 線上學習系統 ； 合作學習 ； 社會網絡

並列摘要

Online teaching has been increasingly common in recent years, and the rise of online learning platforms gives students more autonomy over their learning process. However, studies have shown that online learning platforms are just folders of electronic files if they are not used with reflection. Reflection plays an important role in learning. If reflection can effectively function in online learning platforms, students’ learning performance can be enhanced. Therefore, for educators, how to motivate students to reflect is an issue that needs more exploration. This study aims at exploring the antecedent factors of the dimension of learners’ reflection, with the objective that learners can employ a systematic way to learning and educators can acquire useful academic references from this study.
The framework of this study is based on social network while reviewing literature of reflection, direct ties, and learning outcomes. The research subjects are a group of college students majoring in information management. The research method is data analysis based on independent samples t test. The findings are summarized as below:
1. On the perspective of Social network:
1) Discussion-based network
a. In a homogeneous classroom, the groups, which respectively belong to high centrality and low centrality, do not show significant differences in their reflection level;
b. In a heterogeneous classroom, only groups of high closeness centrality and low closeness centrality demonstrate significant differences in their reflection level.
2) Feedback-based network
a. In a homogeneous classroom, the groups of high centrality and low centrality do not show significant differences in their reflection level.
b. In a heterogeneous classroom, the groups of high centrality and low centrality demonstrate significant differences in their reflection level.
2. On the perspective of direct ties:
1) In a homogenous classroom, whether the direct ties exist or not between learners with low learning ability and learners with high centrality do not show significant differences in reflection level.
2) In a heterogeneous classroom, whether the direct ties exist or not between learners with low learning ability and learners with high centrality demonstrate significant differences in reflection level.
3. On the perspective of learning outcomes:
In both homogenous classroom and heterogeneous classroom, the dimension of reflection of high scoring teams and low scoring teams demonstrates significant differences in their learning outcomes.
At last, this study offers suggestions to educators, website managers, and online teaching software companies, hoping to contribute to the growing capability of online teaching platforms.

並列關鍵字

Learning performance ； On-line learning ； Cooperative learning ； Reflection ； Social network.

參考文獻

1. 朱彩馨、郭峰淵 (2006)，「線上學習成效：思維框架觀點之詮釋研究」，資訊管理學報，第13卷，第2期，頁243-277。

3. Artino, A. R. (2010). Online or face-to-face learning? Exploring the personal factors that predict students' choice of instructional format. Internet and Higher Education, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 272-276.

6. Bain, J. D., Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., and Mills, C. (1999). Using journal writing to enhance student teachers' reflectivity during field experience placements. Teachers and Teaching, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 51-73.

9. Boekaerts, M. (1999). Self-regulated learning: where are we today? International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 445-457.

10. Boud, D. (1999). Situating academic development in professional work: using peer learning. The International Journal for Academic Development, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 3-10.