本研究探討提問式教學支援系統(QBISS)之同儕互評及學生學習成效。觀察學生在QBISS進行問題互評及答案互評之情況，探討學生的互評分數與學生學習成效之關係，探討學生對同儕問題及答案之互評品質，及了解學生對線上互評的態度。
本研究進行了兩次準實驗（課堂組及課後組），課堂組的參與者為高商進修部資料處理科三年級36名學生，實驗期間三週，教學時數為九節，結束後進行問卷調查學生對使用QBISS進行同儕互評的看法。課後組的參與者為高商商業經營科一年級50名學生，實驗期間八週，教學時數為十六節，結束後亦進行問卷調查學生使用QBISS進行線上同儕互評的態度。
課堂組的研究結果為：(1)55.56%的問題未做評價，25.23%的答案未做評價。學生認為同儕的問題較不具品質，但認為同儕的提問能引起後續討論的興趣，且認為同儕的答案具備一定之品質。學生很少因為同儕評價問答次數多寡而改進自己的問答。(2)參與評價較多的學生成績不一定較佳。只在「資訊安全」單元，參與答案評價較多的學生小考成績較高。學生提問及回答之優劣與考試成績無顯著相關。(3)學生認為互評的時間不夠。
課後組的研究結果為：(1)1.76%個問題未評價，1.06%個答案未評價，顯示學生積極參與同儕互評。對同儕的問答認同，肯定對自己學習的助益。學生在記憶單元中評價同儕問題的次數越多越能提升自己提問的重要性與對同儕學習的幫助性。(2)整體評價問答的次數與學科學習成效未發現顯著相關，低成就者似較不願參與問答的評鑑。(3)只有CPU和主機構造及週邊設備與輔助記憶體單元,評價問題次數多寡與學科學習成效有顯著相關。而答案評價次數多寡與學科學習成效上只有在記憶單元中發現顯著相關。(4)問題獲得的分數與學科學習成效無顯著相關，低成就者似較不願修正問題。(5)答案獲得的分數與學科學習成效上無顯著相關，然而學生對答案的評審有很高的一致性。(6)學生認為互評是公平的、肯定同儕給自己「答案」的分數有助於改進下一次的回答、會特別將得分高的問答視為課程重點、並表示認真投入同儕互評。(7)學生表示不是很在乎同儕給予「問題」的分數、因此不會改進自己的問題、不會特別去觀摩分數高的楷模問答以改進自己的問答、不會為了互評活動特別認真準備問題與答案。此外學生反應互評活動有趣好玩，是個不錯的學習方式。

The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of students’ peer assessment on learning outcomes in a Questioning-Based Instructional Support System. The research issues to be addressed were student’s question assessment and answer assessment in QBISS, the relationship between peer assessment and learning outcomes, student’s assessment quality and students’ attitude toward peer assessment. The study implemented two experiments, in-class experiment and after-class experiment rspectively.Both quasi-experiments were implemented at two independent vocational high schools. The in-class participants were 36 students. The after-class participants were 50 students.
There are three findings in the in-class experiment. (1) There are 55.56% questions and 25.23% answers have not been assessed. Students think peer’s questions don’t have good quality, but can bring interest to the follow-up discussion. There is no significant difference on the quality of student’s questions and answers and the frequency of assessment. (2) There is no significant difference on the frequency of assessment and the achievement test score except for the information security unit. There is no significant difference on the quality of student’s questions, answers and the achievement test score. (3) Students think they don’t have enough time to assess peer’s questions and answers.
There are seven findings in the after-class experiment. (1) There are only 1.76% questions and 1.06% answers have not been assessed. It showed that students took part in peer assessment actively. Students have positive perceptions toward peer’s questions and answers. Peer’s questions and answers can promote students’ learning. (2)Although there is no significant difference on the frequency of assessment and the achievement test score, we found that low achievers seem have no interest to assess peer’s questions and answers. (3) There is significant difference on the frequency of assessment and the achievement test score in some units. (4) Although there is no significant difference on the achievement test score and the question score which student received from their classmates, we found that low achievers seem have no interest to modify their own questions even they got low score. (5) There is no significant difference on the achievement test score and the answer score which student received from their classmates. (6) Students thouht peer assessment is fair and they confirmed that peer’s score to their “answers” could help them improve their following answers. They will focus on high score questions and answers and seriously take part in the peer assessment. (7) Students think they don’t care about peer’s score to their “questions”. So, they won’t improve their next question. They won’t look high score questions and answers on purposely. Students think peer assessment is an interesting, funny and effective way to learn.

參考資料
吳立明(民95)。以畫記輔助國小四年級學童網路作文互評之研究。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
吳柏蒼，2004。網路同儕互評評量之概念分析。元智大學資訊工程學系碩士論文。
卓宜青(民90)。網路化學習歷程檔案系統及同儕評量。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
周姿娟(民96)。同儕互評應用於科學寫作之研究。國立新竹教育大學應用科學系碩士班碩士論文。
林珊如、楊國鑫、劉旨峰、袁賢銘 (民90)。高工資訊科目同儕互評的實例：效度、思考歷程及學生態度。技術學刊，16 (4)，613-623。
林英文(民91)。線上同儕評量對國中生簡報製作技能學習成效之研究。國立師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
徐雍智（民90）。數學創意類比與同儕評量及其網路案例設計之研究。國立交通大學應用數學研究所碩士論文。
高慧君(民93)。網路同儕互評於教學實習之成效分析。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
陳得利(2001)。網路化歷程檔案系統之設計與實作。中山大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文。
陳曉雲(民95)。提問式教學支援系統。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育學系碩士論文。
惠子安（民90）。基於凱利方格技術的網路互評系統。元智大學資訊工程學系碩士論文。
曾聖超(民93)。以網路同儕互評系統輔助高中電腦課程教學：學習成效及同儕回饋之分析。國立交通大學理學院網路學習碩士專班碩士論文。
童冠榮(民94)。電腦輔助學生於出題中學習之系統設計與評估。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
黃芳蘭(民93)。網路同儕評量於高中應用之探討。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
楊國鑫(民90)。推廣網路同儕互評系統於高級工業職業學校教學課程之研究。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
葉東鳴(民94)。國中生非同步網路教學提問自我效能之研究。國立高雄師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
葉家忠(民90)。出題與同儕評題支援系統之設計及評估。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文。
鄒佳蕙（民91）。網路同儕互評、楷模學習在小組合作環境下對學習績效與電腦態度。國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士在職專班碩士論文。
劉勝鈺(民92)。使用資訊科技學習數學：以網路同儕互評為例。國立交通大學網路學習在職專班碩士論文。
鄭守杰(民92)。網路同儕互評對國小學童學習成效之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
謝幸玲(民94)。網路同儕評量回饋功能及自我調制歷程之研究。國立中央大學學習與教學研究所碩士論文。
Alexander, R. (1992). Policy and practice in primary education. London: Routledge.
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s educational objectives. New York : Longman.
Ballantyne, R., Hughes, K., & Mylonas, A. (2002). Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 427-444.
Barak, M., & Rafaeli, S. (2004). On-line question-posing and peer assessment as means for web-based knowledge sharing in learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61(1), 84-103.
Bhalerao, A. & Ward, A. (2001). Towards electronically assisted peer assessment: a case study. Association for Learning Technology Journal, 9 (1), pp. 26-37.
Boud, D. (1995) Enhanced learning through self assessment (London, Kogan Page).
Chin, C., Brown, D. E., & Bruce, B. C. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521-549.
Costa, J., Caldeira, H., Galla´stegui, J. R., & Otero, J. (2000). An analysis of question asking on scientific texts explaining natural phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 602–614.
Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(4), 346-355.
Dillon. J. T. (1988). The remedial status of student questioning. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 20(3), 197–210.
Dochy, F., Segers, M. & Sluijsmans, D. (1999) The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in higher education: A review, Studies in Higher Education, 24 (3), pp. 331–350.
Dori, Y. J., & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 411–430.
Falchikov, N (1995) Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(2), 175-187.
Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment : reflections on use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6 (2), pp. 229-246.
Fishbein, H. D., Eckart, T., Lauver, E., Van Leeuwen, R., & Langmeyer, D. (1990). Learners’ questions and comprehension in a tutoring setting. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 163-170.
Freeman, M., & McKenzie, J. (2002). SPARK, A confidential web-based template for self and peer assessment of student teamwork: benefits of evaluating across different subjects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), 551-569.
Hanrahan, S.J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self- and peer-assessment:The students' views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53-70.
Higgins, R. (2000). “Be more critical”: Rethinking assessment feedback. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, Cardiff University, September 7-10 2000.
Im Y. & Lee O. (2004). Pedagogical implications of online discussion for preservice teacher training. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 36(2), 155-170.
King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 111-126.
King, A. (1994) Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338–368.
Koch, A., & Eckstein, S. G. (1991). Improvement of reading comprehension of physics texts by students’ question formulation. International Journal of Science Education,13(4), 473-486.
Kwan, K., & Leung, R. (1996). Tutor versus peer group assessment of student performance in a simulation training exercise. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 205-214.
Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Web-based peer assessment: feedback for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420-432.
Marbach-Ad, G., & Sokolove,P.G. (2000). Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher-level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 854-870.
Marzano, R.J., Brandt, R.S., Hughes, C.S., Jones, B.F., Presseisen, B.Z., Rankin, S.C., & Schor, C.(1988). Dimensions of thinking: A framework for curriculum and instruction. Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Myhill, D., & Dunkin, F. (2005). Questioning Learning. Language and Education, 19(5), 415-427.
Orlich, D.C.,et al. (2001).Teaching strategies : a guide to better instruction. (6rd ed.). Boston : Houghton Mifflin.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (1996). The importance of marking criteria in the use of peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-250.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,25(1), 23-38.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. N. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Pearson, J.C., & West, R.L. (1991). An initial investigation of the effects of gender on student questions in the classroom: Developing a descriptive base. Communication Education, 40(1), 22-32.
Pedrosa de Jesus, H., Teixeira-Dias, J. J. C., & Watts, M.(2003). Questions of chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), 1015-1034.
Purchase, H. C. (2000). Learning about interface design through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 341-352.
Race, P. (1998) Practical pointers on peer-assessment, in: S. Brown (Ed.) Peer assessment in practice, SEDA Paper 102, Birmingham, SEDA.
Rafiq, Y., & Fullerton, H. (1996). Peer assessment of Group Projects in civil engineering. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(1). 69-81.
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: a review of intervention studies. Review of Educational Research,66(2),181-221.
Searby, M., & Ewers, T. (1997). An evaluation of the use of peer assessment in higher education: a case study in the school of music, Kingston University. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 371-384.
Shodell, M.(1995). The question-driven classroom: student questions as course curriculum in biology. American Biology Teacher, 57(5), 278-281.
Sivan, A. (2000). The implementation of peer assessment: an action research approach. Assessment in Education, 7(2),193-213.
Stainer, L. (1997) Peer assessment and group work as vehicles for student empowerment: a module evaluation. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 21(1), 95-98.
Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Topping, K. J., Smith, E. F., Swanson I., & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education.25(2), 149-169.
Tsai, C.C., Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). A Networked peer assessment system based on a Vee heuristic. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38(3), 220-230.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Watts, M., Gould, G., & Alsop, S. (1997). Questions of understanding: Categorizing pupils' questions in science. School Science Review, 79(286), 57-63.
Wong, B. Y. L. (1985). Self-questioning instructional research: a review. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 227-268.
Woodward, C. (1992). Raising and answering questions in primary science: some considerations. Evaluation and Research in Education, 6(2&3), 145–153.
Yu, F.Y., Liu, Y.H., & Chan, T.W. (2005). A Web-based learning system for question-posing and peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(4),337-348.
Zhang, J., Cooley, D. H. & Ni, Y. (2001) NetTest: an integrated web-based test tool, International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(1), 33–35.
Zoller, U.(1994). The examination where the student asks the questions. School Science & Mathematics, 94(7), 347-349.