隨著科技的進步，教育方式亦產生很大的轉變；教學模式逐漸從過去以教學者為中心，轉變為今日以學習者為中心的科技化學習模式。學校教育不再只是提供學生知識，而是鼓勵學生主動建構知識。近年來隨著平板電腦的普及，電子書的應用快速發展，使用電子書作為學習工具的方式越來越受到重視；同時，製作電子書的專題活動成為在學校中以學生為中心的教學方法之一。許多學者指出，設計中學習的專題活動模式，若能夠輔以良好學習支持，將具有提升學生創造力傾向及學習成就之潛力。而同儕互評亦為一種以學生為中心的教學策略，不僅能夠讓學生從中瞭解教師的評量標準，更提供了學生高層次思考及反思的機會，進而提升他們在學習成果及創新思維方面的表現。因此，本研究嘗試以國小自然科植物課程為主題，擬導入同儕互評策略於電子書專題製作活動中，期望有助於提升學生對於學科知識之理解、激發學生更多創新的想法，達到對於學習產生正向影響的最終目的。為驗證此學習模式之成效，本研究採用準實驗設計法，將受試者分為實驗組與控制組；實驗組以基於同儕互評策略之電子書專題製作模式學習，而控制組進行傳統電子書專題製作學習模式。在實驗活動後，分析兩組學生在學習成就、創造力表現、學習態度及認知負荷的影響；同時，針對學生在同儕互評的表現進行更詳細的探討。研究結果顯示，導入同儕互評策略於電子書製作專題活動中之學習模式，對於學生學習成就、創造力表現、學習態度與認知負荷皆顯著優於傳統的電子書專題製作課程活動。

With the rapid progress of technology, educational settings have changed significantly. Learning has shifted from the teacher-centered mode to student-centered one; the aim of school education lies not only in providing students with knowledge but also in encouraging students to construct knowledge actively. The popularity of Tablet PC and the development of e-books application have brought the use of e-book as a learning tool into spotlight. Meanwhile, “developing e-books” has become a popular project-based learning activity in school. Scholars have indicated that such project-based learning approach of learning by design has great potential in fostering students’ creativity ability and learning achievement if appropriate learning support is provided. In addition, peer assessment-based approach is also one of learning strategy that not only makes students understand the evaluation criteria, but provides them with the chance of self-reflection and high-level thinking and then promotes their performance in learning and creative thinking. Therefore, in this study, a peer assessment-based e-book development approach was proposed in an experiment conducted on an elementary school nature science course to explore the effectiveness of the proposed approach in comparison with the conventional e-book development learning approach. It is expected that the peer assessment approach could support students to interpret and organize the knowledge they have learned. In the meantime, it also helps them make in-depth thinking and stimulates more innovative ideas. To evaluate the effectiveness of this approach, a quasi-experimental design method was adopted. The students were divided into two groups: the experimental group, in which the students learned with peer assessment-based e-book development approach, and the control group, in which the students learned with conventional e-book development approach. After the learning activities, we used statistics to evaluate the changes of students learning achievement, creativity, learning attitude and cognitive load. In the meantime, we discuss the performance of peer assessment in experimental group in detail. The experimental result showed that the peer assessment-based e-book development approach significantly benefited the students in improving their learning achievement, creativity and learning attitude and in reducing their cognitive load in constructing knowledge.

中文部分
何榮桂 (民90年10月)。序-資訊教育的發展趨勢。資訊教育雜誌， 85，1-4。
杜振亞、郭聰貴、周伶瑛、鄭麗娟、林麗娟、吳佳蕙 (民96年1月)。學習導向的教學設計原理，22-51頁。加拿大：湯普生出版社。 張春興 (民85年5月)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。臺北市：臺灣東華。 張靜儀 (民90年)。國小自然科教師教學個案研究 -教師背景與教學之探討。屏東師院學報，14，899-932。 陳學志、洪素蘋、許禕芳、邱皓政、關秉寅、詹志禹 (民98年)。擴散性思考與聚斂性思考的交會: 有限解答之擴散性思考測驗之編製與信效度檢驗。教育科學研究期刊，54(4)，29-61。
葉玉珠 (民94年)。影響國小學童科技創意發展的因素之量表發展。師大學報， 50(2)，29-54。
英文部分
AbdelRazek, M., & Al Modayan, A. (2012). Adaptive eBook framework. In Hybrid Intelligent Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, (pp. 324-329). Boston, MA.
Ackermann, E. (2001). Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference. Future of learning group publication, 5(3), 438. Ali, K., Heffernan, E., Lambe, P., & Coombes, L. (2014). Use of peer assessment in tooth extraction competency. European Journal of Dental Education, 18(1), 44-50.
Anseel, F., Lievens, F., & Schollaert, E. (2009). Reflection as a strategy to enhance task performance after feedback. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(1), 23-35. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
Barker, P. (1992). Electronic books and libraries of the future. The Electronic Library, 10(3), 139-149.
Barta, J., & Schaelling, D. (1998). Games we play: connecting mathematics and culture in the classroom. Teaching Children Mathematics, 4(7), 388-393.
Baytak, A., & Land, S. M. (2011). An investigation of the artifacts and process of constructing computers games about environmental science in a fifth grade classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 765-782. Beyer, B. K. (1985). Critical thinking: What is it. Social Education, 49(4), 270-276. Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426. Bouyias, Y., & Demetriadis, S. (2012). Peer-monitoring vs. micro-script fading for enhancing knowledge acquisition when learning in computer-supported argumentation environments. Computers & Education, 59(2), 236-249. Bruckman, A., & Resnick, M. (1995). The mediamoo project constructionism and professional community. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 1(1), 94-109.
Bruner, J. S., & Austin, G. A. (1986). A study of thinking. London, New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Burke, Q. (2012). Do-It-Yourself Media in US Education: A Brief Overview of an Uneasy Relationship. Encyclopedia of E-leadership, Counseling, and Training, (chapter26., pp. 349-362). Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global.
Chen, C. H. (2010). The implementation and evaluation of a mobile self- and peer-assessment system. Computers & Education, 55(1), 229–236.
Chen, N. S., Wei, C. W., Wu, K. T., & Uden, L. (2009). Effects of high level prompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflection levels. Computers & Education, 52, 283–291.
Choi, W. (2007). A Study on Developing of an eBook as a Supplemental Learning Material Based on eLearning Theory. The Journal of Studies in Learning, 22(3), 273-288.
Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). A knowledge engineering approach to developing mindtools for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 54(1), 289–297.
Clark, K., & Dwyer, F. M. (1998). Effect of different types of computer-assisted feedback strategies on achievement and response confidence. International Journal of Instructional Media, 25(1), 55–63. Connaway, L. S. (2001). A Web-based electronic book (e-book) library: the netLibrary model. Library Hi Tech, 19(4), 340-349.
Cramer, C., Daugman, E., & Hanson, E. (2014). Facing Faculty Fears about Embracing the Ebook: Communication Strategies for Liaison Librarians. Serials Review, 40(3), 197-199.
Dreyer, C., & Nel, C. (2003). Teaching reading strategies and reading comprehension within a technology-enhanced learning environment. System, 31(3), 349–365. El-Mowafy, A. (2014). Using peer assessment of fieldwork to enhance students’ practical training. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(2), 223-241. Eow, Y. L., & Baki, R. (2010). Computer games development and appreciative learning approach in enhancing students’ creative perception. Computers & Education, 54(1), 146-161. Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: developing peer assessment. Programmed Learning, 32(2), 175-187. Falchikov, N., & Boud, D. (1989). Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 59(4), 395-430. Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of educational research, 70(3), 287-322. Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment: reflections on use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 229-246.
Fantuzzo, J. W., Dimeff, L. A., & Fox, S. L. (1989). Reciprocal peer tutoring：A multi-modal assessment of effectiveness with college students. Teaching of Psychology, 16(3), 133-135. Fautch, J. M. (2015). The flipped classroom for teaching organic chemistry in small classes: is it effective?. Chemistry Education Research and Practice,16(1), 179-186. Francl, T. J. (2014). Is Flipped Learning Appropriate?. Publication of National University, 119-128.
Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., Keller, J. M., & Russell, J. D. (2005). Principles of instructional design, 5th edition. Performance Improvement, 44(2), 44-46.
Gibbs, G. (2006). How assessment frames student learning. In C. Bryan & K. Clegg (Eds.), Innovative assessment in higher education (Chapter 2, pp. 23-36). London, United Kingdom: Routledge. Guilford, J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267-293. Hanrahan, S. J., & Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self-and peer-assessment: The students' views. Higher education research and development, 20(1), 53-70. Harel, I. (1991). Children designers: Interdisciplinary constructions for learning and knowing mathematics in a computer-rich school. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Harel, I.,& Papert, S. (1990). Software design as a learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 1(1), 1–32. Hashweh, M. Z. (1987). Effects of subject-matter knowledge in the teaching of biology and physics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 3 (2), 109-120. Hawkins, D. (2000). Electronic Books: A Major Publishing Revolution. Online 24(5), 14-28.
Huang, Y. M., Liang, T. H., Su, Y. N., & Chen, N. S. (2012). Empowering personalized learning with an interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 703-722. Humphreys, P., Greenan, K., & McIlveen, H. (1997). Developing work-based transferable skills in a university environment. Journal of European Industrial Training, 21(2), 63-69. Hung, I., Yang, X. J., Fang, W. C., Hwang, G. J., & Chen, N. S. (2014). A context-aware video prompt approach to improving students' in-field reflection levels. Computers & Education, 70, 80-91. Hwang, G. J., Chiu, L. Y., & Chen, C. H. (2015). A contextual game-based learning approach to improving students' inquiry-based learning performance in social studies courses. Computers & Education, 81, 13-25. Hwang, G. J., Hung, C. M., & Chen, N. S. (2014). Improving learning achievements, motivations and problem-solving skills through a peer assessment-based gamedevelopment approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(2), 129-145.
Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., & Yang, S. J. H. (2008). Criteria, strategies and research issues of context-aware ubiquitous learning. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 81-91.
Hwang, G. J., Yang, L. H., & Wang, S. Y. (2013). A concept map-embedded educational computer game for improving students' learning performance in natural science courses. Computers & Education, 69(1), 121-130. Ihmeideh, F. M. (2014). The effect of electronic books on enhancing emergent literacy skills of pre-school children. Computers & Education, 79, 40-48.
Jenkins, M. (2004). Unfulfilled promise: Formative assessment using computer-aided assessment. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 67–80.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1993). Cooperative learning and feedback in technology-based instruction. In J. Dempsey & G. C. Sales (Eds.), Interactive instruction and feedback (Chapter 6, pp. 133-157). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
Jonassen, D. H., & Carr, C. S. (2000). Mindtools: Affording Multiple Knowledge Representations for Learning. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as Cognitive Tools, Vol. 2: No more walls (pp. 165-196). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Jonassen, D. H., Myers, J. M., & McKillop, A. M. (1996). From constructivism to constructionism: Learning with hypermedia/multimedia rather than from it. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (Chapter 8, pp. 93-106). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Associates, Inc.
Kafai, Y. B. (1996). Learning design by making games: Children’s development of design strategies in the creation of a complex computational artifact. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.), Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking and learning in a digital world (pp 71-96). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Kafai, Y. B., & Ching, C. C. (2001). Affordances of collaborative software design planning for elementary students’ science talk. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(3), 323-363.
Kafai, Y. B., & Peppler, K. A. (2011). Youth, technology, and DIY developing participatory competencies in creative media production. Review of Research in Education, 35(1), 89-119.
Kafai, Y. B., Ching, C. C., & Marshall, S. (1997). Children as designers of educational multimedia software. Computers & Education, 29(2), 117-126. Kerr, N. L., & Bruun, S. E. (1983). Dispensability of member effort and group motivation losses: Free-rider effects. Journal of Personality and social Psychology, 44(1), 78-94. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (Eds.). (2010). DIY media: creating, sharing and learning with new technologies. New York: Peter Lang. Korat, O., & Shamir, A. (2008). The educational electronic book as a tool for supporting children’s emergent literacy in low versus middle SES groups. Computers & Education, 50(1), 110-124.
Kress, G. (2003) Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge. Lancaster, F. W. (1989). Electronic Publishing. Library Trends, 37(3), 316-25. Lim, E. L., & Hew, K. F. (2014). Students’ perceptions of the usefulness of an E-book with annotative and sharing capabilities as a tool for learning: a case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 51(1), 34-45.
Lin, H. T., & Wang, M. J. (1994). Creativity Assessment Packet. Taipei: Psychological Publishing.
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. Littman, J., & Connaway, L. S. (2004). A Circulation Analysis of Print Books and E-Books in on Academic Research Library. Library Resources and Technical Services, 48(4), 256-262.
Marchionini, G. (1988). Hypermedia and learning: Freedom and chaos. Educational Technology, 28(11), 8-12. Merga, M. K. (2014). Are teenagers really keen digital readers? Adolescent engagement in ebook reading and the relevance of paper books today. English in Australia, 49(1), 27-37.
Merrill, M. D., & Gibert, C. G. (2008). Effective peer interaction in problem-centered instructional strategy. Distance Education, 29(2), 199-207.
Minovic, M., Milovanovic, M., Evic, I. K., Minovic, J., & Evic, D. a. S. (2011). Game Design as a Learning Tool for the Course of Computer Networks. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(3), 498-508. Moody, A. K. (2010). Using electronic books in the classroom to enhance emergent literacy skills in young children. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 11(4), 22-52. Navarrete, C. C. (2013). Creative thinking in digital game design and development: A case study. Computers & Education, 69, 320-331. Overmars, M. (2004). Learning object-oriented design by creating games. IEEE Potentials, 23(5), 11-13.
Paas, F. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429-434.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension- Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Pantiwati, Y. (2013). Authentic Assessment for Improving Cognitive Skill, Critical-Creative Thinking and Meta-Cognitive Awareness. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(14), 1-9.
Papert, S. (1990). Introduction. In I. Harel (Ed.), Constructionist learning. Boston: MIT Laboratory.
Papert, S. (2000). What's the big idea? Toward a pedagogy of idea power. IBM Systems Journal, 39(3), 720-729.
Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism (Chapter 1, pp. 1-11). New York, NY: Ablex Publishing.
Peng, H. Y., Chuang, P. Y., Hwang, G. J., Chu, H. C., Wu, T. T., & Huang, S. X. (2009). Ubiquitous performance-support system as Mindtool: A case study of instructional decision making and learning assistant. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 107-120. Peppler, K. (2013). New Media Arts, the Do-It-Yourself Movement, and the Importance of Making. New opportunities for interest-driven arts learning in a digital age (Chapter 4, pp. 43-48). New York, NY: Wallace Foundation.
Perkins, A. (1986). Knowledge as design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Piaget, J. (1976). Piaget’s theory. Piaget and His School (Chapter 1, pp. 11-23). Berlin, EU: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Planas Lladó, A., Soley, L. F., Fraguell Sansbelló, R. M., Pujolras, G. A., Planella, J. P., Roura-Pascual, N., ... & Moreno, L. M. (2014). Student perceptions of peer assessment: an interdisciplinary study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(5), 592-610.
Prins, F. J., Sluijsmans, D. M. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Strijbos, J. W. (2005). Formative peer assessment in a CSCL environment: A case study. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(4), 417-444. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2004). Distributed Scaffolding: Helping Students Learn in a ‘Learning by Design’ Environment. sadhana, 6269.
Reiber, L. P. (1991). Animation, incidental learning, and continuing motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 318-328.
Robertson, J., & Good, J. (2005). Story creation in virtual game worlds. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 61-65.
Roskos, K., Burstein, K.,You, B. K., Brueck, J., & O’Brien, C. (2011). A formative study of an e-book instructional model in early literacy. Creative Education, 2(1), 10-17.
Roth, W. M. (2001). Learning science through technological design. journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 768-790. Sankey, M. D. (2003, October). Visual and multiple representation in learning materials: an issue of literacy. In Create.ed 2003: eLearning for the Creative Industries. Melbourne, Australia: Vic. Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of educational research, 57(2), 149-174. Shamir, A., Korat, O., & Shlafer, I. (2011). The effect of activity with e-book on vocabulary and story comprehension: a comparison between kindergarteners at risk of learning disabilities and typically developing kindergarteners. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 26(3), 311-322.
Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F., & Moerkerke, G. (1999). Creating a learning environment by using self-peer-and co-assessment. Learning Environments Research, 1(3), 293-319. Spandorfer, J., Puklus, T., Rose, V., Vahedi, M., Collins, L., Giordano, C., ... & Braster, C. (2013). Peer assessment among first year medical students in anatomy. Anatomical sciences education, 7(2), 144-152.. Spencer, D., Wolf, D., & Sams, A. (2011). Are you ready to flip?. Retrieved July, 18, 2013. Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment: relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-75.
Steinkuehler, C., Squire, K., & Barab, S. (Eds.). (2012). Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Stirling, A., & Birt, J. (2014). An enriched multimedia eBook application to facilitate learning of anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education, 7(1), 19-27.
Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63(1), 43–51. Sung, K. (2009). Computer games and traditional CS courses. Communications of the ACM, 52(12), 74-78. Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., Chiou, S. K., & Hou, H. T. (2005). The design and application of a web-based self-and peer-assessment system. Computers & Education, 45(2), 187-202.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive science, 12(2), 257-285.
Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 249–276. Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A framework for consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113-132.
Torrance, E. P. (1975). Creativity research in education: Still alive. Perspectives in creativity, 278-296.
Towler, L., & Broadfoot, P. (1992). Self-assessment in the primary school. Education Review, 44(2), 137-151.
Tsai, C. C., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2002). Developing science activities through a networked peer assessment system. Computers & Education, 38(1), 241-252. 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.
Tsivitanidou, O. E., Zacharia, Z. C., & Hovardas, T. (2011). Investigating secondary school students’unmediated peer assessment skills. Learning and Instruction, 21(4), 506–519. Von Glasersfeld, E. (1991). An Exposition of constructivism: Why Some Like it Radical. Klir, G., Facets of Systems Science (Chapter 3, pp 229-238). Binghamton, NY: Springer US.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language (A. Kozulin, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Warden, C. A. (2000). EFL business writing behaviors in differing feedback environments. Language Learning, 50(4), 573-616. Warren, S. J., Dondlinger, M. J., & Barab, S. A. (2008). A MUVE towards PBL writing: Effects of a digital learning environment designed to improve elementary student writing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(1), 113-140.
Woodcock, R. W., McGrew, K. S., & Mather, N. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson tests of achievement. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing. Worm, B. S. (2013). Learning from Simple Ebooks, Online Cases or Classroom Teaching When Acquiring Complex Knowledge. A Randomized Controlled Trial in Respiratory Physiology and Pulmonology. PLOS one, 8(9), e73336. Xiao, Y., & Lucking, R. (2008). The impact of two types of peer assessment on students' performance and satisfaction within a Wiki environment. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(3), 186-193.