科學探究是科學教育的核心，鼓勵學生參與真實情境的科學調查和實踐，通過觀察、實驗設計、數據收集和解釋、溝通辯證以及同儕協作等方式解決真實問題，培養學生的科學素養和協作能力。然而，科學探究教學也面臨一些挑戰，學生可能因情境內容缺乏實用性或能力不足而對科學探究失去興趣和學習動機下降。為解決這些挑戰，科技可以融入科學探究環境，輔助學習者進行協作科學探究學習。數位遊戲式學習策略能夠激發學習動機，並在擬真的遊戲環境中激發學生的情境興趣，同時提升他們的協作問題解決能力。基於模擬真實問題情境的複雜性，整合多維度鷹架，可望提高學習成效，同時減輕學習者的認知負荷和焦慮感。
本研究運用擬真情境與多維度鷹架，開發了一款線上協作科學探究遊戲。有別於一般的教育遊戲，本研究以科學探究流程為基礎來逐一設計對應的遊戲機制與流程，通過多種雲端科技的整合，搭配列車維修的情境構建遊戲場景與非玩家角色(NPC)的對話機制，以幫助學習者學習電磁學知識。研究採線上招募的方式進行，共分為三組：「文件式鷹架遠距案例教學活動」的控制組 (一)、「無鷹架遠距案例教學活動」的控制組(二)和「NPC擬真互動鷹架遠距遊戲教學活動」的實驗組，每組30人，共90名大專生參與本研究。本研究探討學習成效、心流、活動焦慮、科學探究有用性，以及鷹架有用性，結果顯示控制組(一)與實驗組學習成效顯著優於控制組(二)，而控制組(一)與實驗組之間則無顯著差異，推測原因在於活動中提供的鷹架有助於提升學習成效。在心流和科學探究有用性方面，三組學習者均顯著大於量表中位數，且三組之間沒有顯著差異，表示學習者均覺得這三種探究活動有助於進行科學探究學習，並一定程度的投入到活動中。研究也發現，三組學習者的活動焦慮均顯著低量表中位數，且三組之間沒有顯著差異，表示學習者在這三種探究活動的焦慮感低。另外，活動中的多維度鷹架被注意到的比例很高，均有高度的有用性。此外，本研究也提出相關研究和教學實務建議，供研究者參考。

Scientific inquiry is the core of science education, encouraging students to engage in authentic scientific investigations and practices. By utilizing methods such as observation, experimental design, data collection and interpretation, communication and argumentation, as well as peer collaboration, students can develop their scientific literacy and collaboration skills. However, science inquiry teaching also faces some challenges. Students may lose interest and motivation in scientific inquiry due to the lack of practicality in the context or their inadequate skills. To address these challenges, technology can be integrated into the science inquiry environment to support learners in collaborative scientific inquiry learning. Digital game-based learning strategies can stimulate learning motivation and generate situational interest among students in a realistic game environment, while enhancing their collaborative problem-solving skills. Based on the complexity of simulating real-world problem scenarios, integrating multidimensional scaffolding is expected to improve learning outcomes while reducing learners' cognitive load and anxiety.
In this study, a collaborative online science inquiry game was developed using realistic context and multidimensional scaffolding. Unlike typical educational games, this study designed game mechanisms and sequence based on the science inquiry process. Through the integration of various cloud technologies, combined with the scenario of train maintenance, game scenes and non-player character (NPC) dialogue mechanisms were created to assist learners in learning knowledge about electromagnetism. The study was conducted through online recruitment and divided into three groups: the control group (1), which involved a remote case study activity with document-based scaffolding; the control group (2), which involved a remote case study activity without scaffolding; and the experimental group, which participated in an NPC interactive scaffolding remote game-based learning activity. Each group consisted of 30 participants, making a total of 90 college students involved in the study. The study investigated learning effectiveness, flow experience, activity anxiety, usefulness of scientific inquiry, and usefulness of scaffolding. The results showed that the learning outcomes of the control group (1) and the experimental group were significantly better than the control group (2), while there was no significant difference between the control group (1) and the experimental group. This suggests that the scaffolding provided during the activity contributed to improved learning effectiveness. Regarding flow experience and usefulness of scientific inquiry, all three groups of learners scored significantly higher than the median of the scale, with no significant differences between the groups. This indicates that learners perceived all three inquiry activities as beneficial for conducting scientific inquiry learning and were to some extent engaged in the activities. The study also found that the activity anxiety of all three groups of learners was significantly lower than the median of the scale, with no significant differences between the groups, indicating low anxiety levels during the three inquiry activities. Additionally, the multidimensional scaffolding in the activities was highly recognized and perceived as useful. Furthermore, the study provides analysis of correlation and instructional recommendations for researchers and teaching practice.

洪美雪（2001）。字幕對外語學習成效影響之探究〔未出版之博士論文〕。國立成功大學教育研究所。
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H.-L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419.
Abrahams, I. (2009). Does Practical Work Really Motivate? A study of the affective value of practical work in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 31(17), 2335–2353.
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.
Bell, T., Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., & Ploetzner, R. (2010). Collaborative inquiry learning: Models, tools, and challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 349–377.
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33.
Belland, B. R. (2017). Instructional scaffolding in STEM education: Strategies and efficacy evidence. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Belland, B. R., Weiss, D. M., Kim, N. J., Piland, J., & Gu, J. (2018). An Examination of Credit Recovery Students’ Use of Computer-Based Scaffolding in a Problem-Based, Scientific Inquiry Unit. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(2), 273–293.
Berg, C. (2005). Factors related to observed attitude change toward learning chemistry among university students. Chemical Education Research Practice, 6(1), 1–18.
Bolte C., Streller S. and Hofstein A., (2013), How to Motivate Students and Raise Their Interest in Chemistry Education. Teaching chemistry – a Studybook, 67–95.
Bourque, D. R., & Carlson, G. R. (1987). Hands-on versus computer simulation methods in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 64(3), 232–234.
Brown, P. L., Abell, S. K., Demir, A., & Schmidt, F. J. (2006). College science teachers’ views of classroom inquiry. Science Education, 90(5), 784-802.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Bruce, B. C., & Casey, L. (2012). The practice of inquiry: a pedagogical ‘sweet spot’ for digital literacy? Computers in the Schools, 29, 191–206.
Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A Framework for Supporting Metacognitive Aspects of Online Inquiry Through Software-Based Scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 235–244.
Çalik, M. (2013). Effect of technology-embedded scientific inquiry on Senior science student teachers’ self-efficacy. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 9(3), 223–232.
Çalik, M., Özsevgeç, T., Ebenezer, J., Artun, H., & Küçük, Z. (2014). Effects of ‘environmental chemistry’ elective course via technology-embedded scientific inquiry model on some variables. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(3), 412–430.
Casanoves, M., Salvadó, Z., González, Á., Valls, C., & Novo, M. T. (2016). Learning genetics through a scientific inquiry game. Journal of Biological Education, 51(2), 99–106.
Chan, J. W. W., & Pow, J. W. C. (2020). The role of social annotation in facilitating collaborative inquiry-based learning. Computers & Education, 147, 103787.
Chan, H. Y., Liu, S. W., & Hou, H. T. (2023). Interacting with real-person non-player characters to learn history: development and playing behavior pattern analysis of a remote scaffolding-based situated educational game. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–21.
Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Lee, C. L. (2003). Web-based collaborative inquiry learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(1), 56– 69.
Chang, H.-Y., Wang, C.-Y., Lee, M.-H., Wu, H.-K., Liang, J.-C., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chiou, G.-L., Lo, H.-C., Lin, J.-W., Hsu, C.-Y., Wu, Y.-T., Chen, S., Hwang, F.-K., & Tsai, C.-C. (2015). A review of features of technology-supported learning environments based on participants’ perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 223–237.
Chee, S. Y., & Tan, K. (2012). Becoming chemists through game-based inquiry learning: the case of Legends of Alkhimia. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10(2), 185-198.
Chen, S. (2010). The view of scientific inquiry conveyed by simulation-based virtual laboratories. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1123–1130.
Chen, M.-F., Chen, Y.-C., Zuo, P.-Y., & Hou, H.-T. (2023). Design and evaluation of a remote synchronous gamified mathematics teaching activity that integrates multi-representational scaffolding and a mind tool for gamified learning. Education and Information Technologies.
Chen, Y.-C., Chao, C.-Y., & Hou, H.-T. (2023). Learning Pattern Recognition Skills From Games: Design of an Online Pattern Recognition Educational Mobile Game Integrating Algebraic Reasoning Scaffolding. Journal of Educational Computing Research, (In press).
Cheng, M., Su, C.-Y., & Kinshuk. (2021). Integrating Smartphone-Controlled Paper Airplane Into Gamified Science Inquiry for Junior High School Students. 59(1), 71–94.
Chou, Y.-S., Hou, H.-T., Chang, K.-E., & Su, C.-L. (2021). Designing cognitive-based game mechanisms for mobile educational games to promote cognitive thinking: an analysis of flow state and game-based learning behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–18.
Chou, R.-J., Liang, C.-P., Huang, L., & She, H.-C. (2022). The Impacts of Online Skeuomorphic Physics Inquiry–Based Learning With and Without Simulation on 8th Graders’ Scientific Inquiry Performance. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(3), 357–371.
Cirkony, C., Tytler, R., & Hubber, P. (2022, February 19). Designing and delivering representation-focused science lessons in a digital learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(3), 881–908.
Deng, X., Wang, M., Chen, H., Xie, J., & Chen, J. (2019). Learning by progressive inquiry in a physics lesson with the support of cloud-based technology. Research in Science & Technological Education, 38(3), 308–328.
Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Heath.
Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2008). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22.
Duran, M. (2016). The effect of the inquiry-based learning approach on student’s critical-thinking skills. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(12), 2887–2908.
Ebenezer, J., Kaya, O. N., & Ebenezer, D. L. (2011). Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 94–116.
Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3–4), 391–450.
Fernández, M., Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Rojas-Drummond, S. (2015). Re-conceptualizing “Scaffolding” and the Zone of Proximal Development in the Context of Symmetrical Collaborative Learning. The Journal of Classroom Interaction, 50(1), 54–72.
Gillies, R. M., & Nichols, K. (2015). How to support primary teachers’ implementation of inquiry: teachers’ reflections on teaching cooperative inquiry-based science. Research in Science Education, 45(2),171–191.
H.-K., & Huang, Y.-L. (2007). Ninth grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Science Education, 91(5), 727–749.
Habig, S., Blankenburg, J., van Vorst, H., Fechner, S., Parchmann, I., & Sumfleth, E. (2018). Context characteristics and their effects on students’ situational interest in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 40(10), 1154–1175.
Häussler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2000). A curricular frame for physics education: Development, comparison with students’ interests, and impact on students’ achievement and self-concept. Science Education, 84(6), 689–705.
Hidi S. and Renninger K. A., (2006), The four-phase model of interest development, Educ. Psychol., 41(2), 111–127.
Hofstein A. and Kempa R. F., (1985), Motivating strategies in science education: attempt at analysis. Eur. J. Sci. Educ., 7(3), 221–229.
Hogle, J. G. (1996). Considering games as cognitive tools: In search of effective" edutainment." (p. 28). ERIC Clearinghouse.
Hou, H-T. (2023). Learning Science through Cloud Gamification: A Framework for Remote Gamified Science Learning Activities Integrating Cloud Tool Sets and Three-Dimensional Scaffolding" Information 14(3), 165.
Hou, H.-T., & Li, M.-C. (2014). Evaluating multiple aspects of a digital educational problem-solving-based adventure game. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 29–38.
Hou, H.-T., & Keng, S.-H. (2020). A dual-scaffolding framework integrating peer-scaffolding and cognitive-scaffolding for an augmented reality-based educational board game: An analysis of learners’ collective flow state and collaborative learning behavioral patterns. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 547-573.
Hsu, Y. S., Lai, T. L., & Hsu, W. H. (2015). A design model of distributed scaffolding for inquiry-based learning. Research in Science Education, 45(2), 241–273.
Hwang, G. J., Tsai, C. C., & Chen, C. Y. (2012). Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(5).
Hwang, G.-J., & Chen, C.-H. (2016). Influences of an inquiry-based ubiquitous gaming design on students’ learning achievements, motivation, behavioral patterns, and tendency towards critical thinking and problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 950–971.

Hwang, G. J., & Chen, C. H. (2017). Influences of an inquiry-based ubiquitous gaming design on students’ learning achievements, motivation, behavioral patterns, and tendency towards critical thinking and problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 950–971.
Inkinen, J., Klager, C., Schneider, B., Juuti, K., Krajcik, J., Lavonen, J., & Salmela‐Aro, K. (2019). Science classroom activitiesand student situational engagement. International Journal of Science Education,41(3), 316–329
Ireland, J., Watters, J. J., Lunn Brownlee, J., & Lupton, M. (2014). Approaches to inquiry teaching:Elementary teacher’s perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1733-1750.
Kear, K., Chetwynd, F., Williams, J., & Donelan, H. (2012). Web conferencing for synchronous online tutorials: Perspectives of tutors using a new medium. Computers & Education, 58(3), 953–963.
Kiili, K. (2006). Evaluations of an Experiential Gaming Model. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments, 2(2), 187–201.
Kiili, K. (2007). Foundation for problem-based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 394-404.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006, June). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Kluge, A. (2014). Combining laboratory experiments with digital tools to do scientific inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 36(13), 2157–2179.
Kluge, A. (2019). Learning science with an interactive simulator: negotiating the practice-theory barrier. International Journal of Science Education, 41(8), 1071–1095.
Koskinen, A., McMullen, J., Ninaus, M., & Kiili, K. (2022). Does the emotional design of scaffolds enhance learning and motivational outcomes in game‐based learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(1), 77-93
Krajcik, J. S., & Czerniak, C. M. (2018). Teaching science in elementary and middle school : a project-based learning approach. Routledge.
Kyza, E. A., & Georgiou, Y. (2019). Scaffolding augmented reality inquiry learning: The design and investigation of the TraceReaders location-based, augmented reality platform. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(2), 211–225.
Latour, B., Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press, New Jersey

Lederman, N. G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2012). Nature of Science, Scientific Inquiry, and Socio-Scientific Issues Arising from Genetics: A Pathway to Developing a Scientifically Literate Citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285–302.
Lee, H. S., & Butler, N. (2003). Making authentic science accessible to students. International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), 923-948.
Liang, H. Y., Hsu, T. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2021). Promoting children's inquiry performances in alternate reality games: A mobile concept mapping-based questioning approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(5), 2000– 2019.
Lim, B. R. (2004). Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the Web. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 627–643.
Lin, C. L., Hou, H. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2016). Analyzing the Social Knowledge Construction and Online Searching Behavior of High School Learners During a Collaborative Problem Solving Learning Activity: a Multi-Dimensional Behavioral Pattern Analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(5–6), 893–906.
Lin, X. -F., Tang, D., Lin, X., Liang, Z. -M., & Tsai, C. -C. (2019). An exploration of primary school students’ perceived learning practices and associated self-efficacies regarding mobile-assisted seamless science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 41(18), 2675–2695.
Lin, Y. C., & Hou, H. T. (2023, May 21). Designing a Strategic Analysis and Planning Skills Training Board Game Using Mobile Technology and a Dual-Scaffolding Mechanism. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. (In Press)
Lord, T., & Orkwiszewski, T. (2006). Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. The American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 342-345.
Lu, K., Pang, F., & Shadiev, R. (2022). How to deepen college students’ approach to using technologies in T‐O‐IBL ? Examining the mediating influence of deep approaches to using technologies between learning factors and higher order thinking skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(1), 182–193.
McLellan, H. (Ed.) (1996). Situated Learning Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Mnguni, L. E. (2014). The theoretical cognitive process of visualization for science education. Springer-Plus, 3(1).
Mohamad Sattar Rasul, Norsalehan Zahriman, Halim, L., & Amnah, R. (2018). Impact of integrated STEM smart communities program on students scientific creativity. 13, 80–89.
Moreno-Ger, P., Burgos, D., Martínez-Ortiz, I., Sierra, J. L., & Fernandez-Manjon, B. (2008). Educational game design for online education. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2530-2540.
Mortara, M., Catalano, C. E., Bellotti, F., Fiucci, G., Houry-Panchetti, M., & Petridis, P. (2014). Learning cultural heritage by serious games. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 15(3), 318–325.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.
Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Appendix F—Science and engineering practices in the next generation science standards. In Next generation science standards: For states, by states (pp. 48-78). The National Academies Press.
Novak, E., & Wisdom, S. (2018). Effects of 3D Printing Project-based Learning on Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Science Attitudes, Science Content Knowledge, and Anxiety About Teaching Science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(5), 412–432.
Okada, A., Kowalski, R. P. G., Kirner, C., & Torres, P. L. (2019). Factors influencing teachers’ adoption of AR inquiry games to foster skills for Responsible Research and Innovation. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(3), 324–335.
Osborne, J., & Collins, S. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: a focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441–467.
Peleg, R., Yayon, M., Katchevich, D., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Fortus, D., Eilks, I., & Hofstein, A. (2017). Teachers’ views on implementing storytelling as a way to motivate inquiry learning in high-school chemistry teaching. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(2), 304–309.
Perkins, K. N., Carey, K., Lincoln, E., Shih, A., Donalds, R., Kessel Schneider, S., Holt, M. K., & Green, J. G. (2021). School Connectedness Still Matters: The Association of School Connectedness and Mental Health During Remote Learning Due to COVID-19. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 42(6), 641–648
Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 21.
Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304.
Röllke, K., Sellmann-Risse, D., Wenzel, A., & Grotjohann, N. (2021, November 21). Impact of inquiry-based learning in a molecular biology class on the dimensions of students’ situational interest. International Journal of Science Education, 43(17), 2843–2865.
Rutten, N., van der Veen, J. T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (2015). Inquiry-based whole-class teaching with computer simulations in Physics. International Journal of Science Education, 37(8), 1225–1245.
Sanna Järvelä, Malmberg, J., Sobocinski, M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2021). Metacognition in Collaborative Learning. Metacognition in Collaborative Learning. SpringerLink, 281–294.
Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77-96.
Shin, S., Brush, T. A., & Glazewski, K. D. (2020). Patterns of peer scaffolding in technology-enhanced inquiry classrooms: application of social network analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(5), 2321–2350
Song, Y., Cao, J., Yang, Y., & Looi, C.-K. (2022). Mapping primary students’ mobile collaborative inquiry-based learning behaviours in science collaborative problem solving via learning analytics. International Journal of Educational Research, 114, 101992.
Srisawasdi, N., & Panjaburee, P. (2018). Implementation of Game-transformed Inquiry-based Learning to Promote the Understanding of and Motivation to Learn Chemistry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(2), 152–164.
Suits, J. P., & Srisawasdi, N. (2013). Use of an Interactive Computer-Simulated Experiment To Enhance Students’ Mental Models of Hydrogen Bonding Phenomena. Pedagogic Roles of Animations and Simulations in Chemistry Courses, 241–271.
Tan, T. T. M., & Lee, Y.-J. (2022). Building Improvised Microbial Fuel Cells: A Model Integrated STEM Curriculum for Middle-School Learners in Singapore. Education Sciences, 12(6), 417.
TEMI Project, (2015), in McOwan P. and Olivotto C., (ed.), How using mysteries supports science learning: teaching the TEMI way, 2nd edn, London: TEMI.
Turk, C., & Kalkan, H. (2018). Teaching seasons with hands-on models: Model transformation. Research in Science & Technological Education, 36(3), 324–352.
Tytler, R., Hubber, P., Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2013). Constructing representations to learn in science. Sense Publishers.
Ucar, S., & Trundle, K. C. (2011). Conducting guided inquiry in science classes using authentic, archived, web-based data. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1571-1582.
Ventura, M., & Shute, V. (2013, November). The validity of a game-based assessment of persistence. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2568–2572.
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2008). Integrating WebQuests in preservice teacher education. Educational Media International, 45(1), 59–73.
Wilson, C. D., Taylor, J. A., Kowalski, S. M., & Carlson, J. (2010). The relative effects and equity of inquiry based and common place science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(3), 276–301.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology, Psychiatry, & Applied Disciplines, 17, 89–100.
Wu, J., Tseng, J.C., & Hwang, G. (2015). Development of an Inquiry-Based Learning Support System Based on an Intelligent Knowledge Exploration Approach. J. Educ. Technol. Soc., 18, 282-300.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34-41.
Yeoh, C.P.; Hou, H.T. Design an Online Escape Game on Gather Town to Foster Electrical Troubleshooting Skills. In Proceedings of the Southeast Asian Conference on Education (SEACE2023), Singapore, 10–13 February 2023.