本研究目的在探討體育系一年級體操課之學生，透過前空翻動作反思學習歷程，來瞭解學習者在其歷程中，動作表現如何、發現哪些問題、如何解決這些問題，以及如何發展出行動規則。研究參與對象為國立台灣師範大學體育系一百級之選修女生體操課學生，共計20位，將全班分成四組，每組5人，實施13週共9次、每組每次20分鐘(總時數180分鐘)之前空翻動作反思學習。本研究透過參與觀察、內容分析以及言談分析等量化與質性的方式進行資料蒐集與分析，在量化方面，採用內容分析法將影片內容的動作表現部分，進行全班地板前空翻動作之前測、後測成績分析；在質性方面，即針對第三小組每次練習之小組論辯部分，進行言談分析。研究結果發現：（一）在反思學習後，學習者的前空翻動作表現有明顯的進步。（二）透過小組論辯活動的進行，已分析並整理出五大類目共25項問題發現。（三）在問題解決部分，學習者利用小組論辯的方式尋找與協助個人及組員之動作問題。（四）經由第一階段先操作之問題發現與討論後，學習者亦透過第二階段再次操作之行動驗證，得以建立前空翻動作之33項行動規則，並藉此作為往後練習之操作方針。

The purpose of the study was to investigate the learning process of forward somersault movement within a reflective learning approach. Four main objectives focused on (1) movement performance, (2) finding questions, (3) solving these questions, and (4) developing action rules.
The participants of the study were the twenty 100th grade students selected in gymnastics class at National Taiwan Normal University. They were divided into four groups, which each group consists of five people on average, and the research process implements nine times in thirteen weeks. Each group made twenty-minute reflective learning per time (one hundred and eighty minutes in total) by somersaulting forward.
The main data collection instruments used in this study were participant observation、content analysis, and discourse analysis. In order to obtain empirical data on the development of the reflective learning and the action rules, we conducted both qualitative and quantitative analysis such as pre/post test scores and debate of idea.
This result indicated that there was a significant relationship between reflective learning and action rules in forward somersault learning process, as following:(1) after getting a critical reflective learning, the participants’ forward somersault performance had improved significantly, (2) through debate of ideas, we analyzed and listed every constructive way in five categories of approaching problem research, (3) about overcoming the barrier, the learners carefully analyzed and settled the movement problems in all theirs bearing between individuals and staff, (4) after performing the first stage of research, which studied and discussed movement problems, the participants also proved the second stage with practical operation to establish the standard of the thirty-three action rules, applied the finding of the thirty-three action rules to forward somersault learning process and guided the movement clues of the thirty-three action rules in the future.

一、中文部分
王妙里（2002）。反思教學中教師內省智慧的探索。未出版碩士論文，國立台北教育大學，台北市。
吳昆廷（2006）。高層次提問與同儕互評對網路學習者反思之影響。未出版碩士論文，國立中山大學，高雄市。
吳 傑（2006）。淺談管理理論的「反思性學習」方法。中國：澳門。
吳秋慧（2003）。國小教師體育教學反省、反省信念與有效體育教學之個案研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台東大學，台東市。
林玫君（2000）。實習教師之教學省思研究初探。台南師院學報，33期，頁347-365。
周文君（2002）。「多元智能統整-合作-反省思考」寫作教學對國小學童寫作態度與寫作表之影響。未出版碩士論文，國立屏東教育大學，屏東市。
高巧汶（2008）。概念圖式學習評量系統之設計建置。未出版碩士論文，私立銘傳大學，台北市。
張惠津（2004）。一個國小班級師生反省教學之行動研究--以數學科為例。未出版碩士論文，國立台北教育大學，台北市。
陳玉枝（2002）。國小實習教師體育教學反省之研究。未出版博士論文，國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
陳麗慧（2001）。數學解題反思教學對國小五年級學童數學解題能力之影響。未出版碩士論文，國立台中教育大學，台中市。
陳聖謨（1999）。國民小學教師教學反省之研究。未出版博士論文，國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
許健將（譯）（2008）。反思教學導論。台北市：心理出版社。(Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, Daniel. P., 1996)。
掌慶維（2006）。國小五年級建構取向籃球遊戲學習之研究。未出版博士論文，國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
黃藍億（2003）。概念構圖策略結合英文閱讀理解之初探性研究。91年度大學英文教學理論與課程實施研討會。日期：2003年6月20日。取自：http://www.ed-reform.tcu.edu.tw/talk/talk_index.htm
楊美伶（2004）。輔導國小數學教師發展教學反思能力之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台北教育大學，台北市。　
鄭勝吉（2005）。台東縣國小教師健康與體育學習領域教學反省之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台東大學，台東市。
蔡岳璟（2003）。台北市國民中學體育教師教學反省之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
謝甫佩（2002）。運用反思的學習策略促進電磁概念學習遷移之研究。未出版碩士論文，國立高雄師範大學，高雄市。
簡晟峰、陳秀涵（2005）。內容分析法Content Analysis，私立輔仁大學企業管理學系畢業專題。

二、外文部分
Barnes, D. (1992). The significance of teacher’s frames for teaching. In H. Munby & T. Russell (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 9-32). London: The Falmer Press.
Binkley, N., & Brandes, G. M. (1995). Reflection: Meanings and interpretations. Curriculum Inquiry, 25(2), 207-212.
Brown, R. B., & McCartney, S. (1999). Multiple mirrors: Reflecting on reflections. In D. O'Reilly, L. Cunningham & S. Lester (Eds.), Developing the capable practitioner (pp.16-32). London: Kogan Page.
Byra, M. (1996). Postlesson conferencing strategies and preservice teachers’ reflective practices. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 16, 48-65.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. Chicago: Henry Regnery.
Green, M. (1986). Reflection and passion in teaching. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 2(1), 68-81.
Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Knowing without metaphysics: Aspects of radical constructivism. Micro Film: ED 304344.
Harvey, L., & Knight, P. (1996). Transforming Higher Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Korthagen, A. J., & Wubbels, T. (1991). Characteristics of reflective practitioners: Towards an operationalization of the concept of reflection. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED334183.)
Korthagen, F. A. J. (1999). Linking Reflection and Technical Competence: The logbook as an instrument in teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 22(2-3), 191-207.
Kemmis, S. (1985). Action Research. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook(pp. 139-146). Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.
Mayo, P., Donnelly, M. B., Nash, P. P., & Schwartz, R. W. (1993). Student Perceptions of Tutor Effectiveness in problem based surgery clerkship. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 5(4), 227-233.
Noor, K. K. (1994). A constructivist/ reflective paradigm: A model for the early childhood program at Tuskegge University. (ERIC ED370888.)
Joseph, D. Novak, ＆ Gowin, D. Bob (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge.
Tsangaridou, N., ＆ O’Sullivan, M. (1994). Using pedagogical reflective strategies to enhance reflection among preservice physical education teachers. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14, 13-33.
Rovegno, I., Nevett, M., ＆ Barbariaz, M. (2001a). Learning and teaching invasion-game tactics in 4th grade: Introduction and theoretical perspective. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 20, 341-351.
Ross, E. W., & Hannay, L. M. (1986). Toward a critical theory of reflective inquiry. Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 9-15.
Ryan, G. (1997). Ensuring that students develop an adequate and well-structured knowledge base. In D. Boud & G. Feletti (Eds.), The challenge of problem-based learning (pp.125-136). London: Kogan Page.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sebren, A. (1995). Pre-service teacher’s reflection and knowledge development in a field-base elementary physical education methods course. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 14, 262-283.
Taggart, G. L., & Wilson, A. P. (1998). Promoting reflective thinking: 44 action strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.