研究生: |
鄭光閔 Kuang-min Cheng |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
自律學習與科技創造力相關性之探討研究 A research on the relationship between the performance of self-regulated learning and technological creativity |
指導教授: |
游光昭
Yu, Kuang-Chao |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
科技應用與人力資源發展學系 Department of Technology Application and Human Resource Development |
論文出版年: | 2008 |
畢業學年度: | 96 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 142 |
中文關鍵詞: | 自律學習 、科技創造力 |
英文關鍵詞: | self-regulated learning, technological creativit |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:156 下載:6 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究旨在探討自律學習與科技創造力的相關性,並分別從學生的自律學習量表表現、自律學習單表現及製造科技認知測驗表現來探討自律學習表現與科技創造力表現的關係。本研究對象為經過十週製造科技自律學習教學模組教學的35位國中七年級學生,該製造科技自律學習教學模組係以Zimmerman, Bonner and Kovach (1996)的自律學習循環步驟來設計。資料分析則進行相關、t檢定等分析。本研究結果如下:
1.學生經過製造科技自律學習教學模組的學習後,並未能顯著提升其自律學習量表表現,但學生在動機分量表的期望成功、行動控制分量表的情境控制與努力堅持、認知分量表的計畫策略等方面的前、後測表現則有顯著差異。
2.學生在自律學習量表之表現與其科技創造力表現無顯著相關。
3.學生在自律學習單之表現與其科技創造力表現無顯著相關。
4.學生在製造科技認知測驗之表現與其科技創造力表現無顯著相關。
整體來說,學生的自律學習表現與其科技創造力並無顯著相關。但是,若學生的自律學習量表、自律學習單表現、及製造科技認知測驗表現較佳時,其科技創造力表現亦有較佳之表現。另外,在自律學習量表表現、自律學習單表現及製造科技認知測驗表現間,發現自律學習量表表現與製造科技認知測驗有顯著相關。
The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between the performance of self-regulated learning and technological creativity. The performance of self-regulated learning consisted of the Self-Regulated Learning Inventory (SRLI), the self-regulated learning worksheets, and the manufacturing technology cognition test. The subjects, thirty-five seventh-grade students, were taught with the manufacturing technology self-regulated learning module developed by the researcher based on the theory of the self-regulatory cycle of Zimmerman (1996). Data obtained in this study were analyzed by correlation and t-test. The results of this study showed that:
1.After the instruction of the manufacturing technology self-regulated learning module, the students’ performance of SRLI did not increase significantly. But, the posttest was significantly different from the pretest in some sub-items such as: expectancy for success of the motivation section, environmental control of the action control section, effort and persistence of the action control, and planning of the cognition section.
2.The correlation was not significant between the students’ performance of SRLI and their performance of technological creativity.
3.The correlation was not significant between the students’ performance of self-regulated learning worksheets and their performance of technological creativity.
4.The correlation was not significant between the students’ performance of manufacturing technology cognition test and their performance of technological creativity.
As a whole, the correlation were not found between the self-regulated learning and the technological creativity.However, when student’s overall self-regulated learning performance (the SRLI, the self-regulated learning worksheets, and the manufacturing technology cognition test) were better, their technological creativity was also well. Additionally, the correlation were found between the SRLI and the manufacturing technology cognition test.
一、中文部份
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(2000)。創造力研究。台北:心理。
王文科(2002)。課程與教學論。台北:五南。
王明傑(2003)。國小學生自我調整學習模式之驗證暨應用性向與事件評量融入社會領域之自我調整閱讀理解教學效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文,未出版,台北。
王保堤(2005)。設計導向課程對國中學生科技創造力影響之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業科技教學學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
王鼎銘(1999)。以人文科技為主軸的國小科技教育。生活科技教育,32(11),2-9。
伍建學(2003)。網路遊戲教學策略對國小學生科技創造力影響之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業科技教學學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
吳怡萱(2001)。主題統整教學、教室氣氛、年級及父母社經地位與國小學童科技創造力之關係。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
吳怡瑄、葉玉珠(2003)。主題統整、年級、父母社經地位與國小學生科技創造力之關係。師大學報教育類,48(2),239-260。
吳青蓉(2002)。英語學習歷程模式之驗證暨「主題建構式語言學習策略」對國中生英語學習表現影響之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文,未出版,台北。
李大偉、張玉山(2000)。科技創造力的意涵與教學(上)。生活科技教育,33(10),9-16。
李堅萍(2001)。科技教育應於九年一貫課程變革中發揮課程特質。生活科技教育,34(10),2-7。
邱志賢(2003)。教室情境中自我調整學習模式的驗證暨影響國小五年級學生數學科之自我調整學習的教室情境因素探討。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文,未出版,台北。
洪榮昭(1999)。試析科技創造力。2007年11月18日,取自http://www.ccda.org.tw/able/teacherreport.htm
翁凱昕(2005)。線上遊戲式學習對創造力之影響。國立台灣師範大學工業科技教學學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
張世慧(2003)。創造力—理論、技術/技法與培育。台北:作者。
張玉山(2003)。虛擬團隊之創造力研究-以師院勞作課程為例。國立台灣師範大學工業科技教育學系博士論文,未出版,台北。
張景媛(1992)。自我調整、動機信念、選題策略與作業表現關係的研究暨自我調整訓練課程效果之評估。教育心理學報,48,201-243。
教育部(2003)。九年一貫課程綱要。台北:作者。
郭俊賢、陳淑惠譯(譯)(2003)。Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M.著。如何培養學生的創造力。台北:心理。
陳文典(2003)。教學模組。2006年10月18日,取自
http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/nstsc/pdf/book2/03.pdf
陳逸舟、黃俊宏(1998)。科技創造力教育之初探。2006年9月28日取自http://www.ccda.org.tw/able/electric_magazine/creative_edu.htm
陳龍安(1984)。創造思考教學對國小資優班與普通班學生創造思考能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
程俊博(2005)。科技發展史課程對國中學生創造力影響之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業科技教學學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
程炳林(1995)。自我調整學習的模式驗證及其教學效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系博士論文,未出版,台北。
程炳林、林清山(2001)。中學生自我調整學習量表之建構及其信效度研究。中國測驗學會測驗年刊,48(1),1-41。
葉玉珠(2002)。國小中高年級學生科技創造力發展與其主要影響生態系統之動態關係。(行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成過報告,計劃編號:NSC902511S110006)
葉玉珠(2006)。創造力教學-過去、現在與未來。台北:心理。
二、外文部份
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Pretice Hall.
Besemer, S. P. & O’Quin, K. (1999). Confirming the three- factor product-analysismatrix: Model in an American sample. Creativity Research Journal, 12(4), 287-296
Besemer, S. P. & Treffinger, D. J. (1981). Analysis of creative products: Review and synthesis. Journal of Creative Behavior, 15, 158-178.
Corno, L. & Mandinach, E. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88-108
Hocevar, D & Bachelor, P. (1989). A Taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynold. (eds.). (1989). Handbook of Creativity. NY: Plenum.
Lewis, T. (1999). Research in Technology Education: Some areas of need. Journal of Technology Education, 10(2), 41-56.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000).Multiple goals,multiple pathways:The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement.Journal of educational Psychology ,92,544-555.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., & Mckeachie, W. J. (1989). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Mich: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL), School of Education. The University Michigan.
Pintrich, P.R., Smith, D.A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801-813.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 42, 305-310.
Williams, F. E. (1967). Intellectual creativity and the teacher. Journal of Creative Behavior, 1,173-180.
Zimmerman, B. J, & Schunk, D. H. (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Springer.
Zimmerman, B. J. & Martinez-Pons, M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 614-628.
Zimmerman, B. J., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R.(1996). Developing self-regulated learner: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington: American psychological association.