查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- 練習式與情境式電腦輔助學習教材應用於英文文法課後練習之成效探究
- 重視學生學習滿意度
- 影響軍校政治學習因素的探討--八十六年反共愛國教育的個案調查
- 綜合高中學生對工業類科職業學程學習滿意度研究
- 專科體育教師教導方式對學生學習滿意度及內在動機的影響
- 專科土木工程科學生對教學環境知覺之相關研究
- Can One Size Really Fit All﹖ A Study of the Relationship between Learning Needs and Learning Satisfactions of Non-traditional Students--A Case from a Typical Two-Year College Extension Degree Programs in Taiwan
- 體育課學習滿意度量表之編製報告
- 德明網球課學生知覺教師教導方式與學習滿意度之相關研究
- 中國文化大學印刷傳播學系師生互動與學生學習滿意度之研究
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 練習式與情境式電腦輔助學習教材應用於英文文法課後練習之成效探究=A Study on the Effect of Applying Drill-and-Practice and Situational Computer-Assisted Learning Courseware to English Grammar after Class Learning |
---|---|
作者姓名(中文) | 潘靖瑛; 巫美娟; 盧俊信; | 書刊名 | 慈濟大學教育研究學刊 |
卷期 | 3 2007.07[民96.07] |
頁次 | 頁67-104 |
分類號 | 521.598051 |
關鍵詞 | 英文文法教學; 練習式電腦輔助學習; 情境式電腦轉助學習; 學習滿意度; English grammar instruction; Drill-and-practice computer-assisted learning courseware; Situational computer assisted learning courseware; Learning satisfaction; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本研究的目的在發展練習式與情境式電腦輔助學習教材應用於英文文法課後練習,並探討學生使用這兩種電腦輔助學習教材之學習成效、電腦態度及學習滿意度,以及探討電腦態度對英文文法學習成效之影響。 本研究採用「不等組前後測設計」,以慈濟大學九十二學年度第一學期修習「英文文法與句型」課程之學生為控制組,使用練習式電腦輔助學習教材進行英文文法課後練習;以第二學期修習相同課程之學生為實驗組,使用情境式電腦輔助學習教材來進行英文文法課後練習。本研究於上、下學期各進行九個英文文法單元、各為期一學期之實驗教學。於每學期初即分別對實驗組與控制組進行前測,然後進行實驗處理,兩組所教授之教材內容與進度皆一致,並於教學實驗結束後進行後測。前測包括學期初之英文文法成就測驗與電腦態度量表測驗;後測則包括英文文法成就測驗(各單元測驗及期中、期末考)、電腦態度量表與學習滿意度問卷。 本研究的主要結果如下: 一、英文文法學習成效 控制組在期中考成績上顯著優於實驗組,而在期末考成績上,兩組未達顯著差異。在十一次的英文文法單練習式與情境式電腦輔助學習教材 69 應用於英文文法課後練習之成效探究元練習成績中,控制組有五次顯著高於實驗組,而其餘六次,兩組的成績未達顯著差異,但控制組的成績仍皆高於實驗組。整體而言,使用練習式電腦輔助學習教材之學生在英文文法的學習成效上,優於使用情境式電腦輔助學習教材之學生。 二、電腦態度 實驗組與控制組在後測電腦態度量表之總得分與分量表得分之比較上皆未達顯著差異。兩組學生的電腦態度與其學習成效呈現低相關。整體而言,實驗組與控制組在電腦態度上並無顯著差異,且電腦態度與學習成效之間並無顯著相關。 三、學習滿意度 實驗組與控制組在學習滿意度問卷之總得分及分量表得分上,皆未達顯著差異,但以平均數來看,控制組在「練習內容」及「使用者介面」分量表上的得分高於實驗組,實驗組則在「教學設計」、「學習結果」及總得分上高於控制組。整體而言,使用情境式電腦輔助學習教材的學生其滿意度略高於使用練習式電腦輔助學習教材之學生。 綜合上述研究結果可知,使用練習式電腦輔助學習教材於英文文法課後練習之學生,在英文文法學習成效上的表現優於使用情境式電腦輔助學習教材之學生;使用情境式電腦輔助學習教材的學生,其學習滿意度高於使用練習式之學生。由學生在學習滿意度開放式問題的回饋中發現,無論是使用情境式或練習式電腦輔助學習教材之學生,皆對使用電腦輔助學習教材給予相當高的肯定。事實上,練習式與情境式電腦輔助學習教材,各有其優異之處,教師可依據自己對教學的期許選擇使用,例如重視學習成效,可選擇練習式,重視提升學生興趣者,可考慮使用情境式。 |
英文摘要 | The purposes of this study were four. First, develop both drill-and-practice and situational computer-assisted learning courseware. Second, explore the learning effects and satisfaction of applying both courseware’s to English grammar learning. Third, examine how students’ attitudes towards using computers affected the results of applying both courseware to English grammar learning. Finally, researchers attempted to compare both computer-assisted learning courseware, and figure out which worked better for English grammar learning. The pretest-posttest nonequivalent group experimental design was chosen. Students who took the English Grammar and Sentence Pattern course in fall semester 2003 were designated the control group, and adopted drill-and-practice computer-assisted learning courseware for their English grammar learning; students who took the English Grammar and Sentence Pattern course in spring semester 2004, were designated the experimental group, and used situational computer-assisted learning courseware for their English grammar learning. Both groups had the same teacher, teaching materials and scheduled progress. This study was carried out for one year, and nine grammar topics were taught each semester. At the beginning of each semester, a pretest was conducted to measure the students’ English grammar proficiency and computer attitudes. At the semester’s end, students’ computer attitudes and learning satisfaction were measured, as parts of posttests, and the mid-term and final exams were collected for examining the effects on their English grammar learning. The main findings of this study are as follows: 1. The learning effects of English grammar The control group’s mid-term exam scores were significantly higher than the experimental group’s. There was no significant difference between the two groups’ final exams; however, the control group’s average score was higher than the experimental group’s. The control group had five out of eleven English grammar unit practice scores significantly higher than the experimental group’s, and no significant differences occurred among the remaining six English grammar unit practice scores. But, the control group’s average scores were all higher than the experimental group’s. On the whole, English grammar learning effects from the drill-and-practice computer-assisted learning courseware were better than those in the situational computer-assisted learning courseware. 2. Computer attitudes There was no significant difference between the two groups’ posttest computer attitude scores, and there was no significant correlation between their computer attitudes and learning effects. On the whole, there was no significant difference between the two groups’ computer attitudes, nor was there any significant relation between the two group’s computer attitudes and learning effects. 3. Learning Satisfaction There was no significant difference between the learning satisfaction scores or the sublevel scores of either group, but the experimental group’s average scores were higher than the control group’s. The control group’s scores on “Item Content” and “User Surface” sublevels, however, were higher than the experimental group’s. On the other hand, the experimental group’s scores on “Course Design” and “Learning Effect” sublevels were higher than the control group’s. On the whole, learning satisfaction in the situational computer assisted learning courseware group was higher than that of the drill-and-practice computer-assisted learning courseware group. In conclusion, learning effects from applying drill-and-practice computer-assisted learning courseware to English grammar learning are better than for situational computer-assisted learning courseware. Learning satisfaction in the group using situational computer assisted learning courseware was higher than in the group using drill-andpractice computer-assisted learning courseware. According to the response of three open-ended questions, both groups of students gave positive confirmation to the learning effects. In fact, both drill-and-practice and situational computer-assisted learning courseware have their own merits. Criteria for selecting courseware depend on the teachers’ need(s). If teachers want to promote students’ learning effects in English grammar, drill-and-practice computer-assisted learning courseware may be a good choice. Otherwise, teachers can choose computer-assisted learning courseware to foster students’ interest in learning English grammar. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。