Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/17790
標題: 互動式電子白板在國小英語教學過程中 對學習成就、學習態度與學習專注度之影響
Impact of Interactive Whiteboard on Student''s Learning Achievement, Learning Attitudes and Learning Engagement in English Teaching Process of Elementary School
作者: 蔡佩君
Tsai, Pei-Jiun
關鍵字: 電子白板;interactive whiteboard (IWB);學習成就;學習態度;國小英語教學;學習專注度;learning achievement;learning attitude;learning engagement;elementary English teaching
出版社: 教師專業發展研究所
引用: 一、 中文部分 王文科、王智弘(2010)。教育研究法(第十四版)。臺北市:五南。 王文科 (1989)。學習心理學。臺中市:五南。 王克先(1996)。學習心理學。臺北市:桂冠。 王世英(2009)。國民小學學童媒體使用行為之研究:教師媒體素養教育反思。臺北市:國家教育資料館。 吳英長(2007)。深入教學現場。臺東縣:全民書局。 吳怡儒(2012)。彰化縣偏遠地區國中學生數學學習態度及其影響因素之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。中興大學,臺中市。 李茂興(譯)(1998)。教學心理學。(原作者:G. R. Lefrancois)。臺北市:弘智文化。(原著出版年:1991)。 杜正治(譯)(1994)。單一受試研究法。(原作者:J. W. Tawney與D. L. Gast)。 臺北市:心理。(原著出版年:1984)。 林生傳(1994)。教育心理學。臺中市:五南。 林天祐、簡馨瑩(2011)。所有教師都應該知道的事:有效的教學策略。臺北市:心理。 林玥秀(2009)。IWB融入英語低成就學生補救教學(未出版之碩士論文)。國立雲林科技大學,雲林縣。 林栢裕(1999)。學習態度、自信心與自然科學習成就之研究-以苗栗縣建國國中為例(未出版之碩士論文)。玄奘大學,新竹市。 林鶴原(2009)。IWB融入教學對國小學童英語學習態度與學習成效之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。 吳清山、林天祐。(2008)。教育e辭書。臺北市:高等教育出版。 余民寧(1997)。有意義的學習¬-概念構圖之研究。臺北市:商鼎文化出版社。 邱華創(1997)。學習如何學習。臺北市:世茂。 李佳容(1999)。創造性英語教學策略對國小學童英語學習態度之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南教育大學,臺南市。 李弘善(譯)(2003)。活化學習動機-營造機會平等的學習環境。(原作者:M. V. Covington & K. M. Teel)。臺北市:遠流。(原著出版年:1996)。 洪蘭(2001)。心理學。臺北市:遠流出版社。 張春興(1996)。教育心理學-三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北市:東華。 孫企平(2003)。數學教學過程中的學生參與。上海市:華東師範大學出版社。 陳惠邦(2006)。互動白板導入教室教學的現況與思考。2006年12月19日發表於宜蘭縣主辦之「全球華人資訊教育創新論壇」。 陳惠邦(2007)。以互動白板實踐互動教學理想的可能性:教師社群與專業發展觀點。2007年5月19日發表於北京師範大學主辦之「Interactive Classroom」研討會。 郭生玉(1991)。心理與教育研究法(第十版)。臺北縣:精華。 郭俊賢、陳淑惠(譯)(2001)。多元智慧的教與學。(原作者:L. Campbell & B. Campbell與D. Dickinson)。臺北市:遠流。(原著出版年:1999)。 教育部(2009)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要語文學習領域之英語領域。檢索自:http://www.edu.tw/EJE/content.aspx?site_content_sn=15326 許榮盛(2009)。IWB結合e-book之教學成效探討-以國小五年級英語教學為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立雲林科技大學,雲林縣。 黃怡甄(2011)。所有教師都應該知道的事:媒體與科技。臺北市:心理。 蔡文榮(2007)。活化教學的錦囊妙計(第二版)。臺北市:學富文化。 蔡文瓊(2009)。IWB小組系統化複習策略對國小學童英語學習成效之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學,嘉義縣。 蔡先口(2011)。所有教師都應該知道的事:教師專業與策略。臺北市:心理。 蔡敏玲(2001)。尋找教室團體互動的節奏與變奏。臺北市:桂冠。 蔡敏玲(2002)。教育質性研究歷程的展現。臺北市:心理。 賴美言、詹喬雯(2011)。所有教師都應該知道的事:學生評量。臺北市:心理。 簡馨瑩(2011)。所有教師都應該知道的事:學習記憶與大腦。臺北市:心理。 楊昌裕(2011)。所有教師都應該知道的事:學生動機。臺北市:心理。 臺中市教育局(2009)。臺中市國民小學英語課程綱要與能力指標。檢索自:http://ms1.wcjh.tc.edu.tw/~9year02/label01/junior/index.htm 溫美幸(2009)。英語創意寫作整合IWB教學對五年級學生的英文寫作成效研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。 廖元鴻(2009)。探討IWB互動教學法對學習成效之影響-以國小五年級英語為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立交通大學,新竹市。 網奕資訊(2012)。IWB。檢索自網奕資訊:http://www.habook.com.tw/ 鄭仁燦(2008)。IWB融入國小英語教學之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學,臺中市。 蘇宜珊(2012)。運用互動式電子白板融入合作學習法於提升中年級學生英語聽說能力之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。淡江大學,新北市。 楊維軒(2012)。運用互動式電子白板於英語教學對提升國小學童英語學習動機與學習成就之探究-以臺中市為例(未出版之碩士論文)。東海大學,臺中市。 覃詩(2009)。讀者劇場對國小五年級學生英文認字能力、學習態度及英語成績影響之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。朝陽科技大學,臺中縣。 賈馥茗(2000)。教育大辭書(九)。臺北市:文景。 賴保禎(1990)。學習態度問卷。臺北市:中國行為科學社。 魏立欣(譯)(2004)。教育科技融入教學。(原作者:M. D. Roblyer)。臺北市:高等教育文化事業有限公司。(原著出版年:2003)。 二、 外文部分 Allen, R. H. (2002). Impact teaching: Ideas and strategies for teachers to maximize student learning. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Alexiou-Ray, J. A., Wilson, E., Wright, V. H. & Peirano, A. (2003). Changing instructional practice: the impact on technology integration on students,parents, and school personnel. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 2(2). 58-80. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press. Baron, R. A., & Byme, D. (2003). Social psychology. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Bell, M. (2002). Teachers’ perceptions regarding the use of the interactive electronic whiteboard in instruction. Retrieved from: http://www.smarterkids.org/research/paper6.asp BECTA (2007a). Evaluation of the primary schools whiteboard expansion project. Retrieved from: http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/whiteboards_expansion.pdf BECTA (2007b). The Becta harnessing technology schools survey 2007. Retrieved from: http://partners.becta.org.uk/upload-dir/downloads/page_documents/research/harnessing_technology_schools_survey07.pdf Burke, E. B. (2010). Student perceptions of interactive whiteboards and effect on academic achievement in a fourth grade language arts classroom. Unpublished Master thesis. Cedarville University, Cedarville, Ohio. Clemens, A., Moore, T., & Nelson, B. (2001). Math Intervention "SMART" Project, student mathematical analysis and reasoning.Wichita, KS: Mueller Elementary School. Cogill, J. (2008). Primary teachers’ interactive whiteboard practice across one year: Changes in pedagogy and influencing factors. Unpublished doctoral thesis, King’s College University of London, London. Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Gerard, F., & Widener, J. (1999). A smarter way to teach foreign language: The SMART Board interactive whiteboard as a language learning tool. Cary Academy, North Carolina. Gillen, J., Staarman, K. J., Littleton, K., Mercer, N., & Twiner, A. (2007). A“learning revolution”? Investigating pedagogic practices around interactive whiteboards in British primary classrooms. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 43–256. Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D. & Door, V. (2007). The evolution of an effective pedagogy for teachers using the interactive whiteboard and modern languages: An empirical analysis from the secondary sector. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 5-20. Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2001). Running with technology: The pedagogic impact of the large scale introduction of interactive whiteboards in one secondary school, Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(3), 257–276. Glover, D. & Miller, D. (2003). Players in the management of change: Introducing interactive whiteboards into schools. Management in Education, 17(1), 20–23. Glover, D., & Miller, D., Averis, D.& Door, V. (2005). The interactive Whiteboard: A literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14 (2), 155-170. Gilbert, C. (2008). Writing improvement through the whiteboard. Great Falls, VA: Forestville Elementary. Hall, I. & Higgins, S. (2005). Original article: Primary school students’ perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 102-117. Heirigs, K. & Thurmon, H. (2008). Elementary science lab outreach efforts: Extending science lessons to support improvements in students’ study skills and math performance in grades 4, 5, and 6. Memphis, TN: St. Joseph Catholic School. Jwaifell, M., & Gasaymeh, A. M. (2013). Using the diffusion of innovation theory to explain the degree of English teachers’ adoption of interactive whiteboards in the modern systems school in Jordan: A case study. Contemporary Educational Technology, 4(2), 138-149. LeDuff, R. (2004). Enhancing biology instruction via multimedia presentations. In R. Ferdig et al. (eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference. (pp. 4693-4695). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Lefrancois, G. R. (1991). Psychology for teaching: A bear will not commit himself just now. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing. Levy, P. (2002). Interactive whiteboards in learning and teaching in two Sheffield schools: A developmental study. Retrieved from: http://www.shef.ac.uk/eirg/projects/wboards Morgan, G. (2008). Improving student engagement: Use of the interactive whiteboard as an instructional tool to improve engagement and behavior in the junior high school classroom. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Liberty University, Lynchburg, Virginia. Miller, D. & Glover, D. (2002). The interactive whiteboard as a force for pedagogic change: The experience of five elementary schools in an English authority, Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual, 2002(1), 5–19. Moyles, J., Hargreaves, L. M., Merry, R., Peterson, F. & Esarte-Sarries, V. (2003) Interactive teaching in the primary school: Digging deeper into meanings. Buckingham, England: Open University Press. Newmann, F. M. (1992). Student engagement and achievement in American secondary school. New York: Teachers College Press. Ornstein, A. & Hunkins, F. (1993). Curriculum-foundations, principles, and theory. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon Ormrod, J. E. (2011). Educational psychology: Developing learners. (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Peterson, D. (2005). Technology immersion: New tools in the hands of well-trained staff transform teaching and learning. The School Administrator, 62(7), 16-19. Prensky, M. (2007). Digital Game-Based Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Scott, W., & Ytreberg, L. H. (1990). Teaching English to children. London: Longman. Schaufeli, W.B., Martjnez, L. M., & Maqrues, P. A. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5): 464-481. Smith, F., Hardman, F., & Higgins, S. (2006). The impact of interactive whiteboards on teacher-pupil interaction in the National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies. British Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 443-457. Skutil, M., & Maněnova, M. (2012). Interactive whiteboard in the primary school environment. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 6(1), 123-130. Swan, K., Schenker, J., & Kratcoski, A. (2008). The effects of the use of interactive whiteboards on student achievement. In J. Luca & E. Weippl (eds.). Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications. 2008(pp.3290-3297). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. Tanah, L. (2009). Definition of learning achievement. Retrieved from: http://lantaitanah.blogspot.tw/2009/10/definition-of-learning-achievement.html Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Warschauer, M., Grant, D., Del Real, G., & Rousseau, M. (2004). Promoting academic literacy with technology: Successful laptop programs in K-12 school. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 32(4), 525-537. Weimer, M. J. (2001). The influence of technology such as a SMART board interactive whiteboard on student motivation in the classroom. Ligonier, IN: West Noble Middle School. Woolfolk, A. (2011). Educational Psychology. (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
摘要: 
本研究旨在探討互動式電子白板融入國小英語教學之後,對學生的學習成就與學習態度上是否有影響,研究方式是以學習態度量表、定期評量之前後測資料、以及上課行為觀察記錄表作為分析之依據。

本研究之受試者為臺中市某公立國小的22名五年級學生為樣本,教材則以使用康軒出版社之教科書與其所開發的互動式光碟WOW6電子書為主、並配合互動式電子白板來實施。在教學實驗前,先實施學生學習態度量表之前測,然後進行了六週的教學實驗,每一週有兩節的上課時數。而在六週教學後,再對受試者施以學習態度量表之後測,以探討學生對電子白板上學習態度上是否有差異。此外,本研究以該校第一次定期評量之成績為學習成就之前測,並以六週教學之後的第二次定期評量之成績為後測,然後以t檢定處理前後測之分數差異。此外,教學實驗期間,均有一位協同教師擔任記錄員進行現場觀察,當天並輔以現場錄影之檔案來檢驗學生的上課行為,以探究其學習專注度。本研究所獲得之結論如下:

一、結合互動式電子白板的英語教學後,受試者的前後測成績表現有顯著差異。
二、經由態度量表的數據顯示,受試者的在英語學習上更有自信心。
三、從上課觀察記錄表發現受試者認為使用電子白板來上英語很有趣,學習過程更專注。

最後,研究者提供進一步的建議給國小英語老師與研究人員,以作為日後教學與未來研究上的參考。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of interactive whiteboard (IWB) in English teaching upon elementary students, in terms of learning achievement, learning attitude and learning engagement. Research tools included Learning Attitude Scale, achievement tests, and classroom observation forms.

The subjects of this study were 22 fifth-grade students from a given public elementary school in Taichung City. The instructional materials include textbook of Kang-Hsuan Publisher, and its bundled interactive e-book, WOW6. In addition, the above materials were implemented on IWB platform. Before the implementation of this study, a pretest of Learning Attitude Scale was administered and scores of midterm examination were treated as their pretest for their learning achievement. Then, it came the 6-week instructional experiment, while it lasted 2 hours a week. After six weeks of experiment, a posttest of Learning Attitude Scale was administered whereas their scores on the final examination were treated as their posttest for their learning achievement. A t-test was applied to determine the extent of significance difference of learning achievement. In addition, during this experiment a collaborative teacher as a recoder always kept filling observation forms.

Immediately after the class of that day, research team always double checked observation forms with video shooted during class so as to determine the accuracy of observation and thus to explore the extent of learning engagement.
This study had the following conclusions:
1.IWB-integrated English teaching made a significant
difference upon learning achievement.
2.Subjects showed a significant confidence in learning
English after 6-week experiment.
3.Subjects showed their positive attitude toward IWB
integrated English and high engagement during learning
process.

Finally, several suggestions were provided for elementary English teachers and future researchers for reference.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/17790
其他識別: U0005-1107201309065000
Appears in Collections:教師專業發展研究所

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat Existing users please Login
nchu-102-7100082006-1.pdf1.53 MBAdobe PDFThis file is only available in the university internal network    Request a copy
Show full item record
 

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.