處於一個不斷變化和顛覆的時代，具備反思能力在教育學習中具有潛在的價值。反思能力是一種需要認知理解、調整、修正與改進學習的過程，能夠帶來積極且有意義的學習。本研究視焦點討論法（ORID）與數位敘事反思平台（RDST）為一種學習策略與工具，設計反思平台，提供精簡且步驟化的提示引導，深化師資生的反思思考能力，主要探究師資生之共創數位故事經驗與對反思思考的影響，以及其看待學習策略與工具的支持和不足。本研究對象為修習師資培育概論課程的12位師資生，分為四組，每組3人，共歷經10週的研究時間，每週三節，每節50分鐘，研究過程分為二部分：一為在翻轉教室環境學習使用焦點討論法的策略，二為在數位敘事反思平台藉由後設認知提示的輔助小組共創數位敘事的反思思考。此研究著重於焦點討論法（ORID）和數位敘事反思平台（RDST）兩種學習工具與策略的反思學習經驗，並運用詮釋現象學作為研究方法，採用觀察紀錄資料、個別訪談以及問卷調查收集資料，探究師資生反思之歷程，以期深入瞭解其學習經驗、挑戰及因應策略。歸納本研究之研究結果如下：（一）ORID焦點討論法有助於師資生「引導思考」、「聚焦討論」的反思學習；（二）數位敘事融入提示設計有助提升師資生反思思考的學習表現；（三）兩者學習策略與工具皆需要提供足夠的引導練習與長時間的使用。最後根據研究結果，提出因應師資生學習之教學建議及未來研究建議：（一）問題引導的說明與設計的精準（二）提供充足的時間應用學習工具與策略，以提升學習成效（三）提前翻轉教室的實施時間。

In an era with constant changes, having the ability to make reflections on learning is potentially valuable in terms of teaching and learning. Making reflections is a process that requires a person to improve learning by cognitive comprehension, adjustment, and continual monitoring, which leads to positive and meaningful learning. The current study aims to explore how to enhance student teachers’ reflective thinking through the ORID methods and a learning platform that integrates social issues and digital storytelling practices. In this study, the ORID methods (Objective, Reflective, Interpretational and Decisional) and RDST (Reflection with Digital StoryTelling platform) are regarded as learning strategies and tools. The RDST platform is designed to provide step-by-step prompt guidance, deepen the reflective thinking ability of student teachers, and mainly explore the experience of student teachers' co-creation of digital stories and the impact on reflection thinking, as well as its support and deficiency of learning strategies and tools. The subjects of this study are 12 student teachers who take the course of Introduction to Education in Teacher Education program. They are divided into four groups of three. The experiment lasts 10 weeks, with three sessions per week and each session lasting 50 minutes. The research process is divided into two parts: one is the strategy of using ORID methods to learn in the flipped classroom environment, and the other is the reflective thinking experience of co-creating digital narrative with metacognitive prompts. In the study, the process of how the student teachers reflect on their learning has been explored by the ORID methods and the data collected from their learning experience through RDST platform. Hermeneutic phenomenology is applied as the research method of the study to explore the process students develop reflective thinking by using observational record data, individual interviews and a questionnaire survey, expecting to deeply learn their learning experience, difficulty and coping strategies. The results of this study are summarized as follows: (a) ORID methods can help student teachers to "guide thinking" and "focus discussion" in their reflective learning;(b) The integration of digital narratives into metacognitive prompts will help to enhance the learning performance of teachers' reflection performance, and (c) both learning strategies and tools need to provide adequate guided practice and long-term use in the learning process. Finally, some suggestions and reflections for future research were offered:(a) design problem-guided explanations and precise questions (b) provide sufficient time to apply learning tools and strategies to improve learning effectiveness (c) bring forward the time of the flipped learning.

一、中文文獻
王秀鶯（2019）。翻轉學習結合ORID提問法應用於高中資訊科技概論課程的教學實踐。教育研究月刊，301，82-102。
卯靜儒、黃政傑、陳麗華、藍偉瑩。（2019）。課程與教學改革經驗之辨證與反思。教育研究集刊，65（4），117-139。
朱如君。（2019）。師培生的核心素養—批判性反思。臺灣教育評論月刊，8（12），12-18。
吳木崑（1999）。杜威經驗哲學對課程與教學之啟示。臺北市立教育大學學報，40（1），35-54。
芷廷陳、妤姿蔡、立弘王、智凱張。（2020）。融入後設認知策略的科技增強英語聽力活動設計。人文社會學報，16（3），301-316。
洪如薇。（2015）。由割捨到回歸-從教學策略的調整談大學國文教學理念及其實踐之可能。聯大學報，12（1），57-91。
洪祥偉、陳五洲。（2016）。以平板電腦引導後設認知學習歷程對桌球學習成效之研究。臺灣運動教育學報，11（2），55-79。
張春興（1991）。現代心理學。臺北：東華。
教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。臺北市:作者。
教育部（2019）。中華民國教師專業素養指引-師資職前教育階段暨師資職前教育課程基準第三點修正規定。108年5月下載自：http://cfte.web.nthu.edu.tw/ezfiles/20/1020/img/57/151271236.。pdf
陳佩英。（2018）。跨領域素養導向課程設計工作坊之構思與實踐。Journal of Curriculum Studies，13（2），21-42。
陳淑婷、林思玲（譯）（2010）。學問：100種提問立創造200倍企業力。（原作者：Brian Stanfield）。台北：開放智慧引導科技。（原著出版年：2000）
陳麗華（2019）。課程與教學改革經驗之辨證與反思。教育研究集刊，65（4），117-139。
曾綉惠。（2017）。讀報教育融入國小六年級學童口語表達教學之行動研究。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺北教育大學課程與教學傳播科技研究所。
高韶憶。（2020）。焦點討論法應用於社會領域課程國小六年級學童口語表達能力之探究。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺北教育大學課程與教學研究所。
黃凱螳。（2019）。焦點討論法應用於師資生反思學習之研究。〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立暨南國際大學課程教學與科技研究所。
愛思客團隊（2017）。跨領域素養導向課程設計：初階工作坊實踐手冊。臺北市：教育部。[ASK Team。（2017）。Designing an interdisciplinary & competence-based course: Workshop handbook for beginning learners。Taiwan, Taipei: Ministry of Education。]
歐陽誾。（2014）。反思提醒鷹架策略對提升大學生網路為主之資訊問題解決能力之影響。教育學誌，（32），97-151。

二、英文文獻
Alterio, M. (2002). Using storytelling to enhance student learning. Higher Education Academy.
Bannert, M. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning through prompts. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 23(2), 139-145.
Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2013). Scaffolding hypermedia learning through metacognitive prompts, Springer international handbooks of education. In R. Azevedo, & V. Aleven (Eds.), International handbook of metacognition and learning technologies, (vol. 28, pp. 171–186). New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-5546-3_12.
Bannert, M., Sonnenberg, C., Mengelkamp, C., & Pieger, E. (2015). Short- and long-term effects of students’self-directed metacognitive prompts on navigation behavior and learning performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 293–306.
Barrett, H. C. (2006). Digital stories in ePortfolios: Multiple purposes and tools. Internet document available at http://electronicportfolios. org/digistory/purposesmac. html.
Benmayor, R. (2008). Digital storytelling as a signature pedagogy for the new humanities. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 7(2), 188-204.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. Weinert & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognitive development (pp. 263-340). vol. 3. New York: Wiley.
Brown, A. L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. Theoretical issues in reading comprehension: Perspectives from cognitive psychology, linguistics, artificial intelligence, and education, 453-481.
Brown J.A. (2019) A Focused Conversational Model for Game Design and Play-Tests. In: Liapis A., Yannakakis G., Gentile M., Ninaus M. (eds) Games and Learning Alliance. GALA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 11899. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-34350-7_43
Burmark, L. (2004). Visual Presentations That Prompt, Flash & Transform Here are some great ways to have more visually interesting class sessions. Media and methods, 40, 4-5.
Chi, M. T. (2009). Active‐constructive‐interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in cognitive science, 1(1), 73-105.
Costa, J. E. (1984). Physical geomorphology of debris flows. In Developments and applications of geomorphology (pp. 268-317). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Coutinho, S. A. (2007). The relationship between goals, metacognition, and academic success. Educate~, 7(1), 39-47.
Cross, D. R., & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children's metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of educational psychology, 80(2), 131-142.
Dewi, N. R., Kannapiran, S., & Wibowo, S. W. A. (2018). Development of digital storytelling-based science teaching materials to improve students’ metacognitive ability. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 7(1), 16-24.
Dori, Y. J., Avargil, S., Kohen, Z., & Saar, L. (2018). Context-based learning and metacognitive prompts for enhancing scientific text comprehension. International Journal of Science Education, 40(10), 1198-1220.
Duvigneau, S. (2016, September 20). Teaching 1 Course (T1): Day One Session 5 Handout: ORID Focused Conversation Method. OpenDocs. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/handle/20.500.12413/12320?show=full
Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional science, 24(1), 1-24.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational technology research and development, 51(1), 21-38.
Glover, J. A., & Bruning, R. H. (1987). Educational psychology, principles and applications. Little, Brown.
Hacker, D. J. (1998). Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunloky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hill, J. R., & Hannafin, M. J. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational technology research and development, 49(3), 37-52.
Jenkins, M., & Lonsdale, J. (2007). Evaluating the effectiveness of digital storytelling for student reflection. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ASCILITE Singapore 2007 (pp. 440-444).
Kauffman, D. F., Ge, X., Xie, K., & Chen, C. H. (2008). Prompting in web-based environments: Supporting self-monitoring and problem solving skills in college students. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(2), 115-137.
Kramarski, B., & Friedman, S. (2014). Solicited versus unsolicited metacognitive prompts for fostering mathematical problem solving using multimedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 50(3), 285-314.
Lambert, J. (2010). The digital storytelling cookbook. Berkeley, CA: Digital Diner Press. Retrieved from https://wrd.as.uky.edu/sites/default/files/cookbook.pdf
Lambert, J. (2013). Digital storytelling: capturing lives, creating community. New York: Routledge.
Lambert, J., & Hessler, B. (2018). Digital storytelling: Capturing lives, creating community. New York: Routledge.
Lunar, B. C. (2014). Transforming an Exposure Trip into a Botanical Expedition: Introducing Ecological Research through an Eco-Tourism Site Visit. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(5), 94-98.
Marzano, R. J. (1998). A theory-based meta-analysis of research on instruction.
Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional science, 26(1), 49-63.
McDrury, J., & Alterio, M. (2001). Achieving reflective learning using storytelling pathways. Innovations in education and teaching international, 38(1), 63-73.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
Moon, J. (2001). Learning through reflection. Early professional development for teachers, 364-378.
Moser, S., Zumbach, J., & Deibl, I. (2017). The effect of metacognitive training and prompting on learning success in simulation‐based physics learning. Science Education, 101(6), 944-967.
Müller, N. M., & Seufert, T. (2018). Effects of self-regulation prompts in hypermedia learning on learning performance and self-efficacy. Learning and Instruction, 58, 1-11.
Nam, C. W. (2017). The effects of digital storytelling on student achievement, social presence, and attitude in online collaborative learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(3), 412-427.
Nickerson, R. S. (1985). Understanding understanding. American Journal of Education, 93(2), 201-239.
Ohler, J. B. (2013). Digital storytelling in the classroom: New media pathways to literacy, learning, and creativity. Corwin Press.
Park, H. R. (2019). ESOL pre-service teachers’ experiences and learning in completing a reflection paper and digital storytelling. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 63-77.
Rahimi, M., & Yadollahi, S. (2017). Effects of offline vs. online digital storytelling on the development of EFL learners’ literacy skills. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1285531.
Robin, B. R. (2016). The power of digital storytelling to support teaching and learning. Digital Education Review, (30), 17-29.
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into practice, 47(3), 220-228.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford University Press.
Rubino, I., Barberis, C., & Malnati, G. (2018). Exploring the values of writing collaboratively through a digital storytelling platform: A mixed-methods analysis of users’ participation, perspectives and practices. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(7), 882-894.
Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational technology research and development, 56(4), 487-506.
Schön, D. A. (Ed.). (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice (vol. 131). New York: Teachers College Press. .
Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational psychology review, 7(4), 351-371.
Shih, C. L. (2019). Metacognitive teaching of machine translation: Moving towards mind-on/thinking-based learning. Studies of Interpretation and Translation, 1-21.
Spee, J. C. (2005). Using focused conversation in the classroom. Journal of Management Education, 29(6), 833-851.
Stanfield, R. B. (Ed.). (2000). The art of focused conversation: 100 ways to access group wisdom in the workplace. New Society Publishers.
Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 11(2), 113-120.
Thompson Long, B., & Hall, T. (2018). Educational narrative inquiry through design-based research: Designing digital storytelling to make alternative knowledge visible and actionable. Irish Educational Studies, 37(2), 205-225.
Van Gils, F. (2005, June). Potential applications of digital storytelling in education. 〔Paper presentation〕. On IT at the University of Twente: 3rd Twente Student Conference. Retrieved from: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Potential-Applications-of-Digital-Storytelling-in-Gils/2667b549f648de5d20cc8ed8d6bb1eafb0577c9b?tab=references
Veenman, M. V., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H., & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and learning, 1(1), 3-14.
Wakefield, M. A., Loken, B., & Hornik, R. C. (2010). Use of mass media campaigns to change health behaviour. The Lancet, 376(9748), 1261-1271.