學習者在學校的分組學習，通常採合作學習的方式進行學習，但往往會產生溝通不良、意見統合等問題，導致學習效果不彰，更失去了小組學習的意義。
因此，本研究依據知識管理、組織學習文獻訂定個人撰寫、組內討論及組間觀摩的知識協同建構流程，並將此流程實作為系統。搭配依序繪製陳述性概念圖、系統思考圖及程序性概念圖的實施方法，協助學生在進行分組學習時能達到有效的知識建構。
本研究主要的研究貢獻為(1) 初步建構出知識協同建構的流程，讓學習者在分組學習上能使內隱及外顯知識轉化、凝聚團體內的共識，提升彼此的知識。(2) 根據所訂定的知識同建構流程，建置出資訊系統，能輔助學習活動的進行外，也提供學習者進行成果與意見交流的平台。(3) 制定出知識建構三階段實施方法，藉由繪製敘述性概念圖、繪製系統思考圖，最後再繪製程序性概念圖的階段性學習，讓學習者能將原本的陳述性知識轉化成能靈活運用的程序性知識。

When students learn with group, they often use the way of cooperative learning to learn, However, there may be some problems when they are cooperating, such as bad communication and concluding ideas. Therefore, the problems result in bad learning effectiveness, and losses the meaning of group learning.
Thus, according to the literature of knowledge management and organization learning, this study designs the process of knowledge collaborative construction which includes the 3 steps: individual writing, group discussion and groups observation, and implementing the information system for this process. In addition, when students in group learning with system, we help students effectively construct knowledge with drawing the declarative concept man, causal loop diagram and procedural concept map sequentially.
The results of this study are as followings: (1) To construct the process of knowledge collaborative construction, it could help students convert tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge, reach a consensus and expand knowledge in progress of group learning. (2) The information system which based on the process of knowledge collaborative construction could support activity of learning, also provide the platform that students can use it to share outcomes and opinions with each other. (3) To design the implementation method of knowledge construction which include 3 drawing phase: draw the declarative concept map, causal loop diagram and procedural concept map, it could make student's declarative knowledge convert to procedural knowledge.

中文文獻
1.王建軍、黃顯華(2003)。協作式的課程發展與教師專業發展。載於黃顯華、孔繁盛(主編)，課程發展與教師專業發展夥伴協作(1-17頁)。香港：香港中文大學。
2.王繼紅(2013)。協作學習”新生代”。取自：http://mag.cnyes.com/Content/20130227/51a8efc78c9a4f05be81c8ecc325b28d_2.shtm
3.朱則剛(2002)。建構主義知識論對教學與教學研究的意義。載於詹志禹(主編)，建構論-理論基礎與教育應用(210頁)。新北市：正中書局。
4.朱錦鳳（1994）。電腦網路的應用及在教學上的評估。教學科技與媒體，17，24-28頁。
5.宋德忠、陳淑芬、張國恩(1998)。電腦化概念構圖系統在知識結構測量上的應用。中國測驗學會。
6.李芝靜(1996)。學習型組織：理論與應用。台北：五南圖書。
7.周芸薇(2000)。「學習型組織」評鑑量表之建立(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號088NCU00007026)。
8.林少軍(2008)。以貢獻與聯結為基礎之社會知識創造模型—一個資源與概念合作聯結工具(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號096NCU05726009)。
9.林玉玟(2013)。從可用性, 知覺有用性, 知覺易用性, 與組織學習對ERP 系統績效之影響(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號101NSYS5396016)。
10.林妙真(2005)。由小組討論爭議性科技議題探究國小高年級學生之知識建構--以台灣能源的開發與利用為例(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號093NCYU1576041)。
11.林東清(2009)。知識管理。台北：智勝文化。
12.林建良、黃台珠、楊錦潭(2010)。運用知識整合工具促進專科生學習電腦軟體技能檢定知識及問題解決能力之研究。科學教育研究與發展季刊。 30，95-120。
13.林家宏(2014)。知識協同建構之研究 (碩士論文)。國立臺灣科技大學資訊管理系 碩士學位論文。
14.施彥如(2010)。以概念構圖為基礎之無所不在協同學習心智工具(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號098NTNT5395024)。
15.袁海球(2004)。透過線上學習社群發展協作學習和知識建構。教育資料與圖書館學。41，4，531-543。
16.高宜敏(2001)。合作競爭式的網路分享建構學習環境(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號089NCTU0394067)。
17.屠益民、張良政(2010)。系統動力學：理論與應用。台北：智勝文化。
18.康雅菁(2009)。維基百科社群知識建構歷程之研究(博士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號097NTNU5036042)。
19.張春興(1996)。教育心理學。台北：東華書局。
20.張智鈞(2011)。以大型多點觸控螢幕進行數位遊戲式協同學習活動之研究(碩士論文)。取自臺灣博碩士論文加值系統。(系統編號099NTNU5036042)。
21.梁定澎(1997)。資訊管理研究方法總論。中華民國資訊管理學報，4，1，1-6。
22.陳可恭(2002)。系統思維在科學探究與學習上的意涵及應用。科學教育月刊。252，2-13
23.陳芸慧(2006)。建構主義理論之探討。網路社會學通訊期刊。53，檢自南華大學社會學研究所線上網刊。網址：http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~society/e-j/53/53-13.htm。
24.楊朝仲、張良正、葉欣誠、陳昶憲、葉昭憲(2007)。系統動力學：思維與應用。台北：五南圖書。
25.葉乃嘉(2004)。知識管理。台北:全華科技圖書股份有限公司。
26.劉廷揚(2005)。知識管理潮流中的優質人力發展策略。「2005年國立高雄師範大學人力與知識管理研究所會議論文」，高雄師範大學。
27.蔣治邦(2002)。由表徵觀點探討實驗教材數與計算活動的設計。載於詹志禹(主編)，建構論—理論基礎與教育應用(頁295-312)。臺北：正中書局。
28.鄭慧珍，陳雪華(2004)。知識組織方法探討-從人工智慧、認知心理學要語言學與圖書館學角度論之。圖書館學與資訊科學。30，2，69-82
29.蕭寧波(2002)。用基模啟發思考。香港教育學報，30，1，30-40。
30.賴志明，李國光(1998) ，心智模式調整的整合性架構建立之研究。「1998年企業管理國際研討會論文集」，東吳大學。
31.譚克平(2009)。理論篇：概念圖的原理及製作。「各教育階段奈米及能源科技課程概念圖建構研習營」。台北市。

英文文獻
1.Alavi,M., & Leidner, D. E.(2001). Review: Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and resreach issues. MIS quarterly, 107-136.
2.Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Psychology Press.
3.Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defenses. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
4.Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. Jossey-Bass.
5.Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune & Strattion.
6.Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view.
7.Beckman, T & International Association of Science and Technology for Development.(1997). A methodology for knowledge management. , IASTED.
8.Bellinger, G., Castro, D., & Mills, A. (2004). Data, information, knowledge, and wisdom..
9.Bereiter, C. (2002) Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age, 74, Mahwah, N.J.:L. Erlbaum Associates.
10.Blaye, A., Light, P., Joiner, R., & Sheldon, S. (1991). Collaboration as a facilitator of planning and problem solving on a computer‐based task. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 471-483.
11.Brophy, J. (1999). Teaching. Brussels: International Academy of Education.
12.Cook, S. D., & Yanow, D. (1993). Culture and organizational learning. Journal of management inquiry, 2(4), 373-390.
13.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.
14.Dabbagh, N. (2001). Concept mapping as a mindtool for critical thinking. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 17(2), 16-23.
15.De Lisi, R., & Golbeck, S. L. (1999). Implications of Piagetian theory for peer learning. In O'Donnell, A. M., & King, A. (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning, 3-37, .
16.Dixon, N. M. (1993). The organizational learning cycle: How we can learn collectively. Hampshire, England:Gower.
17.Driver, R. (1989). Changing conceptions. Adolescent development and school science, 79-99.
18.Drucker, P. (2013). Managing for the Future. Routledge.
19.Drucker, P.F.(1969). Management’s new role. Harvard Business Review, November-December, 1969,49-54
20.Duncan, R. (1979). Organizational learning: Implications for organizational design. Research in organizational behavior, 1, 75-123.
21.Eisenhardt, K. M., Building Theories from Case Study Research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 4, 1989, pp.532-550.
22.Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. The nature of intelligence, 12, 231-235.
23.Forrester, J. W. (1994). System dynamics, systems thinking, and soft OR. System Dynamics Review, 10(2‐3), 245-256.
24.Garvin, D. A.(1993), Building a Learning Organization. Harvard Business Review, July-August, 78-91
25.Gilly, M. (1989). The psychosocial mechanisms of cognitive constructions: Experimental research and teaching perspectives. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(6), 607-621.
26.Hong, H. Y., Scardamalia, M., & Zhang, J. (2010). Knowledge Society Network: Toward a dynamic, sustained network for building knowledge. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 36(1).
27.Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness (No. 6). Harvard University Press.
28.Kim, D. H. (1998). The link between individual and organizational learning. The strategic management of intellectual capital, 41-62.
29.Kintsch, W. (2014). The Representation of Meaning in Memory (PLE: Memory). Psychology Press.
30.Kosslyn, S. M. (1975). Information representation in visual images. Cognitive psychology, 7(3), 341-370.
31.Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual review of sociology, 319-340.
32.Lochhead, J., & Yager, R. E. (1996). Is science sinking in a sea of knowledge? A theory of conceptual drift. Science/technology/society as reform in science education, 25-38.
33.McDowell, J. (2014). Theaetetus. Oxford University Press.
34.McNamara, T. P. (1994). Knowledge representation. Thinking and problem solving, 81-117.
35.Medin, D. L., & Smith, E. E. (1984). Concepts and concept formation. Annual review of psychology, 35(1), 113-138.
36.Nonaka, I. (1994). A dynamic theory of organizational knowledge creation. Organization science, 5(1), 14-37.
37.Nonaka, I., & Toyama, R. (2003). The knowledge-creating theory revisited: knowledge creation as a synthesizing process. Knowledge management research & practice, 1(1), 2-10.
38.Nonaka, I., Takeuchi, H., & Umemoto, K. (1996). A theory of organizational knowledge creation. International Journal of Technology Management, 11(7), 833-845..
39.Novak, J. D. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.
40.Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge. Concept maps™ as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwaw: Lawrence Erlbaum.
41.Panitz, T. (1999). Collaborative versus Cooperative Learning: A Comparison of the Two Concepts Which Will Help Us Understand the Underlying Nature of Interactive Learning.
42.Perkins, D.N. (1986). Knowledge as Design, 2-3, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
43.Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures: The central problem of intellectual development. 32-33. University of Chicago Press.
44.Polanyi, M. (1966). The Tacit Dimension, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
45.Quinn, J. B., Anderson, P., &Finkelstein, S. (1996). Leveraging intellect. The Academy of Management Executive, 10(3), 7-27
46.Rehauser, J., and Kremar, H. (1996) Wissensmanagement im Unternehman, in: Schreyogg, G. /Conrad, P. (eds) Managementforshung 6: Wissenmanagement, 1-140, Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
47.Richmond, B. (1997). The “thinking” in systems thinking: how can we make it easier to master. The Systems Thinker, 8(2), 1-5.
48.Roth, W. M. (1994). Student views of collaborative concept mapping: An emancipatory research project. Science Education, 78(1), 1-34.
49.Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1976). Accretion, tuning and restructuring: Three modes of learning (No. 7602). California Univ San Dieg La Jolla Center For Human Information Processing.
50.Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1985). Representation of knowledge. In A. M. Aitkenhead, & J. M. Slack (Eds.), Issues in Cognitive Modeling (pp.15-62). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51.Senge, P. (1998). Sharing Knowledge: You can’t own knowledge, so why not share it?. Executive Excellence, 15, 11-12.
52.Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday Currency.
53.Sherwood, D. (2002). Seeing the Forest for the Trees. Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
54.Shrivastave, P. (1983). A typology of Organization Learning Systems. Journal of Management Studies, 20, 7-28.
55.Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 2006, 409-426.
56.Stata, R., & Almond, P. (1989). Organizational learning: The key to management innovation. The training and development sourcebook, 2.
57.Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The new organizational wealth: Managing & measuring knowledge-based assets. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
58.Sveiby, K., & Risling, A. (1986). Kunskapsforetaget (the Know-How Company).Liber, Malmo.
59.Swieringa, J., & Wierdsma, A. F. (1992). Becoming a learning organization: beyond the learning curve. Addison-Wesley Longman.
60.Tiwana, A. (2002). The Knowledge Management Toolkit: Orchestrating IT, Strategy, And Knowledge Platforms. Pearson Education India.
61.Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, 45, 93.
62.Tsang, E. W. (1997). Organizational learning and the learning organization: a dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human relations, 50(1), 73-89.
63.Von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. The invented reality, 17-40.
64.Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
65.Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2001). Educational research: A guide to the process. Psychology Press.