在翻轉教室情境中，探討不同結構化的線上回饋單，對師培生批判思考、回饋品質、回饋感受與學習成就的影響

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	莊媛婷 Yuan-Ting Chuang
論文名稱：	在翻轉教室情境中，探討不同結構化的線上回饋單，對師培生批判思考、回饋品質、回饋感受與學習成就的影響 Comparing the impact of student teachers' critical thinking, feedback quality, feedback perceptions and learning achievements by using different structured online feedback templates in the context of the flipped classroom
指導教授：	陳秀玲 Hsiu-Ling Chen
口試委員:	翁楊絲茜 Cathy Weng 洪煌堯 Huang-Yao Hong
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	人文社會學院 - 數位學習與教育研究所 Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and Education
論文出版年：	2016
畢業學年度：	104
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	85
中文關鍵詞：	同儕回饋、翻轉教室、批判思考、行為序列分析
外文關鍵詞：	Peer assessment/ feedback, flipped classroom, critical thinking, sequential analysis
相關次數：	點閱：582 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

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

批判思考、自主學習及合作學習是高等教育致力培養學生具備的重要能力，翻轉教室正是一個有益於上述能力提升的學習環境，然而過去的研究指出，設計一個成功的翻轉教室仍然是個挑戰。在高等教育方面，越來越多研究投入線上回饋這方面的研究，過去文獻也指出網上學習環境可促進和提升學生的知識建構。然而，文獻也指出線上回饋需要具有健全理論基礎及更多的實證研究。本研究透過三種不同結構化的線上同儕回饋單，進一步探討學生在批判思考、回饋品質、回饋感受及學習成就上的表現，並嘗試提出有效的翻轉教學模式。
本研究的研究對象為三十位台灣北部的中等教育師培生，教學課程為期16週，研究設計是結合質性與量性的混合式個案研究，以線上討論內容、學習單分數及回饋單分數，評估師培生之批判思考、學習成就及回饋品質，同時也以開放式問答及訪談，深入了解師培生之回饋感受及教學滿意度。結果表明，學生的判性思維、回饋品質、回饋感受及學習成就在三次不同結構回饋單上無顯著的差異，然而此三種不同結構化的回饋單已被證明可支持師培生的學習，問卷中有百分之八十的師培生認為同儕回饋提供他們更深入反思的機會，同時在質性與量性資料上都顯示，學生對教學流程設計表示很滿意，另外透過批判思考行為序列分析，發現師培生線上討論大多位在批判思考第二階層，即師培習慣僅簡單地表達個人的意見，沒有提供相關的證據以支持其論點，最後根據研究結果提出對未來教學實施及研究等相關建議。

Critical thinking, self-directed learning and collaborative skills are main competences that students should acquire in higher education. Flipped classroom has been proved to be a beneficial environment to support the above skills. However, designing a successful flipped class still remains a challenge. Studies indicated that instructors are frustrated as students do not want to read the book or view the videos before class and prefer to look up answers directly from the internet rather than reflect deeply through their own thinking. The purpose of the study is to propose three different online feedback templates to further investigate student teachers’ feedback quality, critical thinking, learning achievements, feedback perceptions and course satisfaction using three different structured of feedback templates (guiding-questions/ self-directed/ goal-directed templates) within the flipped classroom context. A case study was conducted. Thirty student teachers in higher education in northern Taiwan participated in this study. Both qualitative and quantitative approaches were adapted. Online discourse analysis were adopted to evaluate the student teachers ’critical thinking. Worksheets and feedback scores were used to evaluate student teachers’ feedback quality and learning achievements. Survey questionnaires and interview results were collected to gain deep understanding on the participants’ learning perceptions towards the proposed instructional design.
Results showed that there is no significant difference among the three feedback templates regarding to students’ critical thinking, feedback quality, feedback perceptions and learning achievements. However, the three feedback templates has been proved to be effective to support student teachers’ learning. Participants gave high recommendation on the instructional design and the peer feedback activity. Eighty percent student teachers perceived that peer feedback provided them a chance to reflect on and deepen thinking. The behavioral sequential analysis indicated that student teachers’ tend to express their personal opinion briefly without evidence or supported. Further research and implementation suggestions were promoted.

Table of Contents
Abstract ………………………………………………………………………III
Acknowledgments ………………………………………………………………III
Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………IV
List of Tables……………………………………………………………………VII
List of Figures…………………………………………………………………VIII

Ch1 Introduction …………………………………………………………… 1
1.1	Research Background and Motivation……………………………………1
2.1	Research Purpose and Research Questions…………………………… 4
3.1	Terminology……………………………………………………………… 5
4.1	Significance of the Study………………………………………………… 7
5.1	Scopes and Limitations……………………………………………………… 9
Ch 2 Literature Review………………………………………………………… 10
2.1 Flipped Classroom ………………………………………………………… 10
2.2 Peer Feedback and Peer Assessment……………………………………… 11
2.3 Critical Thinking …………………………………………………………… 16
2.4 Students' Perceptions and Satisfaction ……………………………………… 19
Ch 3 Methodology………………………………………………………… 20
3.1 Research Methodology…………………………………………………… 20
3.2 Research framework and research variables………………………………20
3.3 Participants……………………………………………………………… 22
3.4 Instructional Contexts …………………………………………………… 22
3.5 Materials and TMOF System…………………………………………… 23
3.6 Structured Feedback Templates…………………………………………… 32
3.7 Data Collection and Analysis………………………………………………… 33
Ch 4 Result and Discussions……………………………………………………… 46
4.1 Descriptive Statistics ………………………………………………………… 46
4.2 Quantitative Data…………………………………………………………… 52
4.3 Quantitative Data…………………………………………………………… 66
Ch 5 Conclusions and Suggestions………………………………………………… 70
5.1 Summary of the conclusion………………………………………………… 70
5.2 Recommendations for Instructional Design………………………………… 71
5-3 Suggestions for future research……………………………………………… 73
Reference………………………………………………………………………… 74
Appendix………………………………………………………………………… 82
 
List of Tables
Table 1 Good Feedback Principles…………………………………………………12
Table 2 Three Structured Feedback Templates……………………………………31
Table 3 Criteria Standard for Individual Worksheets………………………………34
Table 4 Scoring Rubric for Peer Feedback…………………………………………36
Table 5 Online Discussion Course Coding Scheme………………………………38
Table 6 Interview Questions and Corresponding Research Domains ……………40
Table 7 Code of Interview Participants and Open-ended Questions…………………41
Table 8 Data Collection and Analysis Framework………………………………43
Table 9 Mean Scores of Critical Thinking……………………………………………44
Table 10 Multivariate Tests of Critical Thinking…………………………………44
Table 11 Mean Scores of Learning Achievements…………………………………45
Table 12 Multivariate Tests of Learning Achievements……………………………45
Table 13 Mean Scores of Feedback Scores…………………………………………46
Table 14 Multivariate Tests of Feedback Scores……………………………………46
Table 15 Mean Scores of Feedback Perceptions……………………………………47
Table 16 Multivariate Tests of Feedback Perceptions………………………………47
Table 17 Peer Feedback Perceptions among Three Different Feedback Templates…51
Table 18 Course Satisfaction…………………………………………………………52
Table 19 The Correlation between Scores of Peer Feedbacks………………………53
Table 20 The Correlation between Scores of Peer Perceptions………………………54
Table 21 The Correlation between Scores of Learning Achievements………………55
Table 22 The Correlation between Scores of Critical Thinking……………………55
Table 23 Kappa Coefficient of Discourse Analysis between Two Raters……………55
Table 24 The Frequency Distribution of Critical Thinking for the Whole Class… …56
Table 25 The Frequency Transition Table of educational 1 ………………………57
Table 26 The sequential analysis of critical thinking (educational 1) (lag=1)……58
Table 27 The Frequency Transition Table of educational 2 ………………………59
Table 28 The sequential analysis of critical thinking (educational 2) (lag=1)……60
Table 29 The Frequency Transition Table of educational 3 ………………………61
Table 30 The sequential analysis of critical thinking (educational 3) (lag=1)……62
 
List of Figures
Figure 1 Research Framework and Variables………………………………………20
Figure 2 Instruction Procedure……………………………………………………22
Figure 3 Screenshot of audio-guiding PPT………………………………………24
Figure 4 Flipped worksheet (issue 3)) …………………………………………24
Figure 5 Online Worksheet (Issue 3)……………………………………………25
Figure 6 Educational Issue (Issue 3)……………………………………………25
Figure 7 Score Distribution………………………………………………………26
Figure 8 TMOF system – the user’s interface…………………………………28
Figure 9 Discussion Section……………………………………………………29
Figure 10 Synchronous Discussion Interface………………………………………29
Figure 11 Administration Interface ………………………………………………30
Figure 12 Distribution of Level of Critical Thinking for the Whole Class………58
Figure 13 the student teacher' behavioral transfer diagram of critical thinking (educational 1)………………………………………………………………59
Figure 14 The student teacher' behavioral transfer diagram of critical thinking (educational 2)………………………………………………………………60
Figure 15 The student teacher' behavioral transfer diagram of critical thinking (educational 3)………………………………………………………………62
Figure 16 The Sequential Analysis of Critical Thinking Patterns of three educational issues………………………………………………………………………………64

                                

中文文獻
王雅玲 (2012)。探討「發言規則」應用於CSCL中學生批判思考之表現。國立台灣科技大學數位學習與教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
葉玉珠(2005)。批判思考意向量表。2012年12月19日，取自http://www3.nccu.edu.tw/~ycyeh/instrument-english/1999%20ct-disposition.edf
英文文獻
Ahmadi, A. (2009). Self and Peer Assessment Consistency over Time.
Ahmadi, A. (2009). Self and Peer Assessment Consistency over Time.
Ampa, A. T., Muhammad Basri, D., &Andriani, A. A. (2013). The development of contextual learning materials for the English speaking skills. International Journal of Education and Research, 1(9), 1-10.
analysis. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(3), 52–60.
Ashton, S., & Davies, R. S. (2015). Using scaffolded rubrics to improve peer assessment in a MOOC writing course. Distance Education, 36(3), 312-334.
Bakeman, R., &Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge university press.
Barros‐Castro, R. A., Midgley, G., &Pinzón, L. (2015). Systemic Intervention for Computer‐Supported Collaborative Learning. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(1), 86-105.
Bergmann, J., Overmyer, J., &Wilie, B. (2012). The flipped class: Myths versus reality. The Daily Riff. Retrieved 4 June 2013 from http://www.thedailyriff.com/articles/the-flipped-class-conversation-689.php
Bergmann, J., Overmyer, J., &Wilie, B. (2012). The flipped class: Myths versus reality. The Daily Riff.
Berrett, D. (2012). How “flipping” the classroom can improve the traditional lecture. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(25), 16-18.
Bharali, R. (2014). Enhancing Online Learning Activities for Groups in Flipped Classrooms. In Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Technology-Rich Environments for Learning and Collaboration (pp. 269-276). Springer International Publishing.
Bolhuis, S. (2003). Towards process-oriented teaching for self-directed lifelong learning: A multidimensional perspective. Learning and instruction, 13(3), 327-347.
Bonk, C. J., & Reynolds, T. H. (1997). Learner-centered Web instruction for higher-order thinking, teamwork, and apprenticeship. Web-based instruction, 167-178.
Brame, C. J. (2013). Flipping the classroom. Retrieved, August, 29, 2013.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting (Reprint.).
Çevik, Y. D. (2015). Assessor or assessee? Investigating the differential effects of online peer assessment roles in the development of students’ problem-solving skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 250-258.
Chan, T. W. (2010). How East Asian classrooms may change over the next 20 years. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 28-52.
Chao, C. Y., Chen, Y. T., & Chuang, K. Y. (2015). Exploring students' learning attitude and achievement in flipped learning supported computer aided design curriculum: A study in high school engineering education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 23(4), 514-526.
Cheng, K. H., &Hou, H. T. (2015). Exploring students’ behavioural patterns during online peer assessment from the affective, cognitive, and metacognitive perspectives: a progressive sequential analysis. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(2), 171-188.
Choi, H., Kim, J., Bang, K. S., Park, Y. H., Lee, N. J., & Kim, C. (2015). Applying the Flipped Learning Model to an English-Medium Nursing Course.Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, 45(6), 939-948.
Chow, W. S., & Chan, L. S. (2008). Social network, social trust and shared goals in organizational knowledge sharing. Information & Management, 45(7), 458-465.
Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., & Tseng, Judy C. R. (2010). A two-tier test approach to developing location-aware mobile learning systems for natural science courses. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1618-1627.
Cohen, R., Boud, D., & Sampson, J. (2001). Dealing with problems encountered in assessment of peer learning. Learning together: peer tutoring in higher education. London: Routledge Farmer. Ecclestone, K.(2001). I know a,2, 301-313.
Coll, C., Rochera, M. J., & de Gispert, I. (2014) whether the feedback given is well matched to the needs of student groups engaged in online collaborative learning, it is important to take into account the timing of the teacher’s interventions.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Choosing a mixed methods design. Designing and conducting mixed methods research, 58-88.
Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development,61(4), 563-580.
Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563-580.
Eichler, J. F., &Peeples, J. (2016). Flipped classroom modules for large enrollment general chemistry courses: a low barrier approach to increase active learning and improve student grades. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(1), 197-208.
Ennis, R. (1991). Critical thinking. Teaching Philosophy, 14(1), 5-24.
Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational researcher, 18(3), 4-10.
Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11(2), 146-166.
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment.Programmed Learning, 32(2), 175-187.
Flores, M. A., Simão, A. M. V., Barros, A., & Pereira, D. (2014). Perceptions of effectiveness, fairness and feedback of assessment methods: a study in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, (ahead-of-print), 1-12.
Flores, M. A., Simão, A. M. V., Barros, A., & Pereira, D. (2014). Perceptions of effectiveness, fairness and feedback of assessment methods: a study in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, (ahead-of-print), 1-12.
Fung, D., & Howe, C. (2014). Group work and the learning of critical thinking in the Hong Kong secondary liberal studies curriculum. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(2), 245-270.
Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2014). Structuring the role of assessor and assessee in the peer assessment process: the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality. In EARLI SIG1.
Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015). Scripting the role of assessor and assessee in peer assessment in a wiki environment: Impact on peer feedback quality and product improvement. Computers & Education, 88, 370-386.
Gielen, M., & De Wever, B. (2015). Structuring the peer assessment process: a multilevel approach for the impact on product improvement and peer feedback quality. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(5), 435-449.
Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., &Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of nutrition education and behavior, 47(1), 109-114.
Greenlaw, S. A., &DeLoach, S. B. (2003). Teaching critical thinking with electronic discussion. The Journal of Economic Education, 34(1), 36-52.
Gross, D., Pietri, E. S., Anderson, G., Moyano-Camihort, K., & Graham, M. J. (2015). Increased preclass preparation underlies student outcome improvement in the flipped classroom. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 14(4), ar36.
Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Disposition, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53(4), 449.
Halpern, D. F. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. The Journal of General Education, 50(4), 270-286.
Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing Self-and Peer-assessment: the students' views. Higher education research and development, 20(1), 53-70.
Hao, Y., & Lee, K. S. (2016). Teaching in flipped classrooms: Exploring pre-service teachers' concerns. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 250-260.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of educational research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hotle, S. L., &Garrow, L. A. (2015). Effects of the Traditional and Flipped Classrooms on Undergraduate Student Opinions and Success. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 142(1), 05015005.
Hou, H. T. (2010). Exploring the behavioural patterns in project–based learning
Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., &Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133-152.
Hung, H. T. (2015). Flipping the classroom for English language learners to foster active learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 81-96.
Jeong, A. C. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 25-43.
Johnson, K. (2015). Behavioral Education in the 21st Century. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 35(1-2), 135-150.
Johnson, R. B., &Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Kachka, P. (2012). Understanding the flipped classroom: Part 2. Faculty Focus, 23.
Kennedy, M., Fisher, M. B., & Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: Literature review and needed research. Educational values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform, 2, 11-40.
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., &Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50.
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., &Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50.
Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., &Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: an exploration of design principles. The Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50.
Kim, N. (2014). Critical thinking in wikibook creation with enhanced and minimal scaffolds. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 5-33.
Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160-173.
Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43.
LaRossa, R. (2005). Grounded theory methods and qualitative family research. Journal of marriage and Family, 67(4), 837-857.
Lee, W. O. (2012). Education for future-oriented citizenship: implications for the education of twenty-first century competencies. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(4), 498-517.
Lee, Y. H. (2015). Facilitating Critical Thinking Using the C-QRAC Collaboration Script: Enhancing Science Reading Literacy in a Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environment. Computers & Education.
Li, L., Liu, X., & Zhou, Y. (2012). Give and take: A re‐analysis of assessor and assessee's roles in technology‐facilitated peer assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(3), 376-384.
López-Pérez, M. V., Pérez-López, M. C., & Rodríguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students’ perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & Education, 56(3), 818-826.
Lu, J., & Law, N. (2012). Online peer assessment: effects of cognitive and affective feedback. Instructional Science, 40(2), 257-275.
Luxton-Reilly, A., & Denny, P. (2010). Constructive evaluation: a pedagogy of student-contributed assessment. Computer Science Education, 20(2), 145-167.
Maudsley, G., &Strivens, J. (2000). Promoting professional knowledge, experiential learning and critical thinking for medical students. Medical education, 34(7), 535-544.
Merriam, S. B. (2001). Andragogy and self‐directed learning: Pillars of adult learning theory. New directions for adult and continuing education, 2001(89), 3-14.
messages in undergraduate students’ writing achievement during an online peer assessment activity. The Internet and Higher Education.
Miller, A. (2012). Five best practices for the flipped classroom. Edutopia. Posted online, 24, 02-12.
Moffett, J. (2015). Twelve tips for “flipping” the classroom. Medical teacher,37(4), 331-336.
Moore, J. D., & Pollack, M. E. (1992). A problem for RST: The need for multi-level discourse analysis. Computational linguistics, 18(4), 537-544.
Moraros, J., Islam, A., Yu, S., Banow, R., &Schindelka, B. (2015). Flipping for success: evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teaching approach in a graduate level setting. BMC medical education, 15(1), 27.
Moraros, J., Islam, A., Yu, S., Banow, R., &Schindelka, B. (2015). Flipping for success: evaluating the effectiveness of a novel teaching approach in a graduate level setting. BMC medical education, 15(1), 1.
Mory, E. H. (2004). Feedback research revisited. Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2, 745-783.
Newman, D. R., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1995). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 3(2), 56-77.
Nicol, D. (2010). From monologue to dialogue: improving written feedback processes in mass higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(5), 501-517.
Niu, L., Behar-Horenstein, L. S., &Garvan, C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 114-128.
Novakovich, J. (2015). Fostering critical thinking and reflection through blog‐mediated peer feedback. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.
Partridge, H., Ponting, D., &McCay, M. (2011). Good practice report: Blended learning.
Peterson, D. J. (2016). The Flipped Classroom Improves Student Achievement and Course Satisfaction in a Statistics Course A Quasi-Experimental Study.Teaching of Psychology, 43(1), 10-15.
Pienta, N. J. (2016). A “Flipped Classroom” Reality Check. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(1), 1-2.
Poverjuc, O., Brooks, V., & Wray, D. (2012). Using peer feedback in a Master's programme: a multiple case study. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(4), 465-477.
Prins, F., Sluijsmans, D., &Kirschner, P. A. (2006). Feedback for general practitioners in training: Quality, styles, and preferences. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 11, 289–303.
Resta, P., &Laferrière, T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19(1), 65-83.
Ryan, M. D., & Reid, S. A. (2015). Impact of the Flipped Classroom on Student Achievement and Retention: A Parallel Controlled Study in General Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education.
Shetzer, H., &Warschauer, M. (2000). An electronic literacy approach to network-based language teaching. Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice, 171-185.
Simpson, V., & Richards, E. (2015). Flipping the classroom to teach population health: Increasing the relevance. Nurse Education in Practice, 15(3), 162-167.
Siriwongs, P. (2015). Developing Students’ Learning Ability by Dint of Self-Directed Learning. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 2074-2079.
Sluijsmans, D. M., Brand-Gruwel, S., & van Merriënboer, J. J. (2002). Peer assessment training in teacher education: Effects on achievement and perceptions. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), 443-454.
Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F., &Moerkerke, G. (1998). Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer-and co-assessment. Learning environments research, 1(3), 293-319.
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., &Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. Cambridge handbook of the learnings
STEPHEN, B. D. (2005). DO ELECTRONIC DISCUSSIONS CREATE CRITICAL THINKING SPILLOVERS? Contemporary Economic Policy, 23(1), 1497-163.
Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171-193.
Tarimo, W. T., Deeb, F. A., & Hickey, T. J. (2015). A Flipped Classroom with and Without Computers. In Computer Supported Education (pp. 333-347). Springer International Publishing.
Tillema, H. H. (2000). Belief change towards self-directed learning in student teachers: Immersion in practice or reflection on action. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5), 575-591.
Tomory, A., & Watson, S. L. (2015). Flipped Classrooms for Advanced Science Courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-13.
Tomory, A., & Watson, S. L. (2015). Flipped Classrooms for Advanced Science Courses. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-13.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161-1174.
Tsui, L. (1999). Courses and instruction affecting critical thinking. Research in higher education, 40(2), 185-200.
Van der Pol, J., Van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J. (2008). The nature, reception, and use of online peer feedback in higher education. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1804-1817.
Van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279.
Van Zundert, M., Sluijsmans, D., & Van Merriënboer, J. (2010). Effective peer assessment processes: Research findings and future directions. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 270-279.
Wang, S. L., & Wu, P. Y. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web-based learning: The social cognitive perspective. Computers & Education,51(4), 1589-1598.
Wegerif, R. (2006). A dialogic understanding of the relationship between CSCL and teaching thinking skills. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(1), 143-157

全文公開日期 2021/08/28 (校內網路)
全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校外網路)
全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (國家圖書館：臺灣博碩士論文系統)

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文