本研究旨在探討使用不同引導策略之情境任務式電子書並與Kolb的學習風格理論相結合對學生的數學學習成效：數學學習成就、數學學習態度、數學學習動機之影響，以國中七年級數學科一元一次不等式單元為主題，運用哈瑪星電子書軟體製作二種不同引導策略電子書：系統引導情境任務式電子書(將重點提示強制嵌入情境任務式電子書中)與自我引導情境任務式電子書(遇到問題時由學生自己選擇出現重點提示)。受試學生共有五十名，分成二組實驗組：系統引導情境任務式電子書進行學習；對照組：自我引導情境任務式電子書進行學習，研究結果顯示：
一、 使用二種不同引導策略(系統引導情境任務式電子書)與(自我引導情境任務式電子書)學習的學生其數學學習成就顯著提升。
二、 使用系統引導情境任務式電子書學習學數學學習成就、數學學習態度、數學學習動機皆優於使用自我引導情境任務式電子書學習學生。
三、 不同學習風格的學習者使用不同引導策略電子書學習的數學學習成效：數學學習成就、數學學習態度及數學學習動機皆無顯著差異。
本研究提出之情境任務式電子書整合了數位科技與數學學科教材可供教師進行教學時使用、研究結果亦可作為教育研究者進行後續研究之參考。

Based on Kolb’s theories on learning styles, the study investigated the effects of two types of e-books on junior high school students’ learning achievements, learning attitudes, and learning motivation for Mathematics. A seventh-grade Mathematics lesson on “linear inequalities in one unknown”, was presented in either a system-guided scenario-based learning e-book (automatically showing embedded key points) or a self-guided task-based learning e-book (allowing users to freely choose what they want to see). Fifty participants involved in the study were randomly assigned into the experimental group and the control group. The experimental group learned through a system-guided scenario-based learning e-book, and the control group used a self-guided task-based learning e-book.
There were three major findings of the study. First, both groups demonstrated significant improvement in Mathematical learning achievements and learning attitudes after the intervening treatment, indicating that the e-book was beneficial to the participants’ learning of “linear inequalities in one unknown”. Second, the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group in Mathematical leaning achievements, learning attitudes, and learning motivation. Third, there was no significant effect of leaning styles on the participants’ learning achievements, learning attitudes, and learning motivation between the two groups.
The scenario-based, task-oriented e-books proposed in the current study integrated digital technology and mathematics teaching materials, and have shown great results on students’ Mathematical learning. It is believed that the results would be valuable for mathematics educators and researchers.

參考文獻
中文部份
王淑玲、林珊如（民88）。我國大學生之學習動機及學習策略之研究。89年國科會成果報告，編號NSC 89-2413-H-011-001-S。
尹玫君 、劉世雄 （2005）。資訊科技融入教學的學習相關影響因素之研究。當代教育研究，13(2)，109-138。
史美瑤(2012)。「21 世紀的教學: 以 [學生學習為中心] 的教師發展」，評鑑雙月刊，36，42-44。
吳武典（1971），從心理動力學的觀點談影響學生學習的因素。教育文摘，16(5)，5-11。
吳武典（1987），國中學生之學習態度。張老師，16(5)，38-63。
吳靜吉、程炳林（1992）。激勵的學習策略量表之修訂。測驗年刊，39，59-78。
李宜靜、朱延平、楊朝成 （2005）。探究式網路學習對中學生學習之影響。東海科學，(7)，1-14。
邱貴發(1996)。情境學習理念與電腦輔助學習─學習社群理念探討。台北市：師大書苑。
奇摩新聞（2012/1/19）， 蘋 果 數 位教科書、互動教學革命。2014年4月14日，取自http://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E8%98%8B%E6%9E%9C%E6%95%B8%E4%
BD%8D%E6%95%99%E7%A7%91%E6%9B%B8-%E4%BA%92%E5%8B%
95%E6%95%99%E5%AD%B8%E9%9D%A9%E5%91%BD-044806451.html
聯合新聞網（2012/12/12）， 小四學生閱讀國際評比，我躍居第九。2014年4月5日，取自http://mag.udn.com/mag/campus/storypage.jsp?f_ART_ID=429512
林吟霞、王彥方（2009）。情境學習在課程與教學中的應用。北縣教育，69，69-72。
林鈺婷（2003）。 網路輔助教學應用於國小自然科學習領域之研究。屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。
林碧珍（2003）。生活情境中的數學。新竹縣教育研究集刊(第三期)。新竹縣教育研究發展記網路中心。
林宇祥（2009）。人格特質、學習風格對數位學習成效的影響---以知識創造SECI模式為干擾變數。淡江大學資訊管理學系碩士論文，未出版，台北縣。
林和秀(2005)。悅數，躍數─應用錨式教學法在國小數學障礙學童之個案研究。國立臺南大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台南市。
林秋萍(2006)。國小資優資源班教師與普通班教師互動交流現況與需求之研究。 國立台灣師範大學特殊教育系碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
林煥祥、劉聖忠、林素微、李暉(2008)。臺灣參加 PISA 2006 成果報告 (國科會專題研究計畫成果報告編號: NSC 95-2522-S-026-002)。台北:中華民國行政院國家科學委員會。
林曉菁（2007）。「故事式」數學教學模組之研究-以面積單元為例。國立嘉義大學數學教育研究所，未出版，嘉義縣。
紀詩瑩（2002）。企業員工自我導向學習傾向與其知識分享意願關係之研究。國立暨南國際大學成人與繼續教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，南投縣。
施賀建（2003）。學習風格與方式對學習成效之影響－以互動式與否為基礎。私立中原大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
周惠文、王裕方（2000）。電腦態度與學習績效的影響因素探討－中學生網頁製作教學的實地實驗研究。資訊管理學報，第七卷，第一期。
徐新逸（1998）。情境學習對教學革新之回應。研習資訊，15（1），16-24。
姚如芬（1993）。高雄地區高中一年級學生數學學習態度與其數學學習成就之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。
郎慧英(1997)。女孩子與數學。數學教育，5。
張美玲（2000）。以專題為基礎之教學與學習對國小學生自然科學習動機與學習成就之影響。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東縣。
張春興 (1994)。現代心理學。臺北市：東華。
張春興 (1996)。教育心理學。臺北市：東華。
張瑞文（2010/6/30）。教育雲：教育市場大商機。經濟日報，C12 版。
張春興、林清山（1998）。教育心理學 (二十二版)。台北: 東華。
張新仁（1982）。國中學生學習行為，學習方法，學習習慣與學習態度之研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
張新仁（2001）。實施補救教學之課程與教學設計。Educational Review, 17, 85-106.
張富然（2004）。錨式情境教學模式應用在國民小學三年級自然與生活科技學習領域之行動研究－以昆蟲單元為例。台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
張國華（2010）。資訊素養與自我導向學習對成人數位學習使用意願之影響研究。萬能科技大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
梁榮財（1998）。高中學生學習風格及其教學策略之研究。2014年5月14日，取自http://210.59.2.1/jfvs/教學組/專題報告/91機製科/學習風格之研究.doc
陳澤民（譯）（1995）。數學學習心理學（原作者：Richard R. Skemp）。臺北市：九章。(原著出版於 1987)
陳慧娟 (1998)。情境學習理論的理想與現實。教育資料與研究，25，47-55。
教育部（2014年2月）。「數位學習推動計畫」103年起全面啟動。教育部即時新聞。2014年5月14日，取自︰ http://www.edu.tw/news1/detail.aspx?Node=
1088&Page=22491&Index=1&WID=3ee9c9ee-f44e-44f0-a431-c300341d9f77
黃亞琪（2012)。iPad「老師」掀起教室大革命。商業周刊，1300，140-148。
黃富順 (1992)。成人的學習動機。高雄市：復文書局。
黃永和（2007）。情境學習理論及其對教學研究的意涵。情境理論與教學研究，19-154。台北市：心理。
游政男（2001）。學習風格與超媒體網頁架構方式對學習鐘擺週期之影響。東華大學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台東縣。
游光昭、林坤誼（2007）。數學、科學、科技統整課程對不同學習風格學習者在學習成效上之影響。教育研究學報，41(1)，1-16。
鄒淑文（2012/11/05）。迎接 2.0 時代未來教室商機夯。經濟日報，A7 版
楊采璇、呂秉修、王子華（2007）。不同學習風格國小學童在資訊科技融入教學環境之學習成效研究，TANET2007臺灣網際網路研討會，台北市:國立臺灣大學。
潘文福、蔡敏潔（2014）。運用強化錨式教學改善數學低成就學生. 文字題解題能力之研究。課程與教學季刊，17(2) ，141-166。
廖志昇（2004）。研究生學習動機與學習滿意度關係之研究─以師院在職進修碩士班為例。國立屏東師範學院國民教育研究所。未出版，屏東縣。
潘素滿（1995）。錨式情境教學法對問題解決策略運用之實證研究。私立淡江大學教育科學系碩士論文，未出版，台北縣。
劉義、高芳（2010）。情境認知學習理論與情境認知教學模式簡析。教育探索，2010（6），88-89。
劉耀明（2008）。學習風格在數位學習環境中對學習成效及學習態度影響之研究。國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義縣。
劉君毅 (1996)。錨式情境教學法對國小學童學習態度影響之研究，私立淡江大學教育資料科學所碩士論文，未出版，台北縣。
鄭孟芳（2005）。國小高年級學習風格、學習動機與學業成就相關研究。國立彰化師範大學生物學系碩士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
鄭依玲（2009）。自我導向學習傾向、資訊素養與混成學習成效之關係-以台糖公司為例。私立南台科技大學碩士論文，未出版，台南縣。
臺灣PISA國家研究中心（2011）。臺灣PISA 2009結果報告。臺北市：心理。
簡晨卉（2013）。數位遊戲式學習在城鄉國小數學加減法學習成效之研究。國立台中教育大學數位內容科技學系碩士論文，未出版，台中市。
簡綜男 (1999)。互動式多媒體輔助教材在電腦教學之學習成效影響研究。國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園市。
魏慧美、黃家溱（2009）。大一新生學習策略與學習成就關係之研究。高雄師大學報: 教育與社會科學類，26， 1-27.
鍾靜（2003）。論九年一貫課程數學領域之暫行綱要。課程綱要實施檢討與展望研究會，國立台灣師範大學。
鍾靜（2005）。論數學課程近十年來之變革。教育研究月刊，133，124-134。
龔心怡, 林素卿 & 張馨文 (2009) 。家長社經地位與數學學習動機對數學學業成就之研究-以國中基本學力測驗數學領域為例。彰化師大教育學報，15，121-142。
英文部分
Anderson, C. (2003). How can schools support teaching for understanding in mathematics and science? In A. Gamoran, C. Anderson, P. Quiroz, W. Secada, T. Williams, & S. Ashmann (Eds.), Transforming: How Schools and Districts Can Support Change, 3-21. New York: Teachers College.
Aiken, L. R. (1986). Sex difference in mathematical ability: a review of the literature. Educational Research Quarterly, 87(5), 531-543.
Birgin, O., Baloğlu, M., Catlıoğlu, H., & Gurbuz, R. (2010). An investigation of mathematics anxiety among sixth through eighth grade students in Turkey.Learning and Individual Differences, 20(6), 654-658.
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for Mastery. Instruction and Curriculum. Regional Education Laboratory for the Carolinas and Virginia, Topical Papers and Reprints, Number 1. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), n2.
Bloom, B.S.(1978). New views of the learners: Implications for instruction and curriculum. Educational Leadership, (35), 563-576.
Bostrom, R. P., Olfman, L. & Sein, M.K. (1990), The importance of learning style in end-user Trainig, MIS Quarterly, 14(1): 101-119.
Bottge, B. A., Heinrichs, M., Mehta, Z., & Hung, Y. (2002), Weighing the benefits of anchored math instruction for students with disabilities in general education classes, Journal of Special Education, (35), 186-200.
Bottge, B., Heinrichs, M., Mehta, Z., Rueda, E., Hung, Y., & Danneker, J. (2004).Teaching Mathematical Problem Solving to Middle SchoolStudents in Math, Technology Education, and Special Education Classrooms. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 27(1), 43-68.
Bottge, B., Rueda, E., & Skivington, M. (2006). Situating Math Instruction in Rich Problem-Solving Contexts: Effects on Adolescents with Challenging Behaviors. Behavioral Disorders, 31(4), 394-407.
Bottge, B. A., Rueda, E., Grant, T. S., Stephens, A. C., & LaRoque, P. T. (2010), Anchoring problem-solving and computation instruction in context-rich learning environments, Exceptional Children, 76(4), 417-437.
Boyd, R. D., Apps, J. W., & Associates. (1980). Redefining The Discipline of Adult Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bransford J., Hasselbring T., Barron B., Kulewicz S., Littlefield J.,& Goin L. (1988). Uses of macro-contexts to facilitate mathematical thinking. In R. Charles& E. Silver (Eds.), The Teaching And Assessing of Mathematical Problem Solving, 125-147.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1993). Stolen knowledge. Educational technology,33(3), 10-15.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward A Theory of Instruction, Cambridge, Mass.: Belkapp Press.
The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt(1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition ,Educational Researcher, 19, 2-10.
The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt(1991). Technology and the design of generative learning environment, Educational Researcher, 31, 34-40.
The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt(1992). The Jasper Series as an Example of Anchored Instruction: Theory, Program Description, and Assessment Data. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315.
The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt(1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52-70.
The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1997).The Jasper Project:Lessons in Curriculum,Instruction ,Assessment and Professional Develoment.Mahwah ,NJ:LEA.
Dillon, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Review of educational research, 68(3), 322-349.
Duff, A. (2004). A note on the problem solving style questionnaire: An alternative to Kolb's learning style inventory?. Educational Psychology, 24(5), 699-709.
Dunn, R. & Griggs, S.A. (1988). Learning Styles: Quiet Revolution in American Secondary Schools. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
Edens, K. M. (2000). Preparing problem solvers for the 21st century through problem-based learning. College Teaching, 48(2), 55-60.
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 57-72.
Garger, S., & Guild, P. (1984). Learning styles: The crucial differences. Curriculum Review, 23(1), 9-12.
Geiger, M. A., Boyle, E. J., & Pinto, J. (1992). A factor analysis of Kolb’s revised learning style inventory. Educational And Psychological Measurement, 52, 753-759.
Grow, G. (1991). Teaching learners to be self-directed: A stage approach. Adult Education Quarterly, 41(3), 125-149.
Grow, G. (1994). In defense of the staged self-directed learning model. Adult Education Quarterly, 44(2), 109-U4.
Guglielmino. L. M. (1978). Development ofthe self-directed learning readiness scale. (Doctoral dissertation. University of Georgia. 1977). Dissertation Abstracts Internationai, 38. 6467 A.
Ha, J. Y. (2011). Learning style, learning attitude, and self-directed learning ability in nursing students. The Journal of Korean Academic Society of Nursing Education, 17(3), 355-364.
Hall, T., Strangman, N. & Meyer A. (2003). Differentiated Instruction and Implications for UDL Implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum Retrieved April 18, 2008, from http://www.cast.org/publications/ncac_diffinstructudl. html.
Hargrove, S. K., Wheatland, J. A., Ding, D., & Brown, C. M. (2008). The Effect of individual learning styles on student GPA in engineering education at morgan state university. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 9(3 & 4), 37-46.
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, 121-130.
Hechter, R. P. (2007). An alternative method of revision. Physics Education,42(1), 12.
Hilbert, J. & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Eds). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp65-100). New York: Macmillan.
Houle, C. O. 1961. The inquiring mind. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Hong, L., Lei, j., Shu-hong, G., & Clark, B. (2007). The Relationship of Kolb Learning Styles, Online Learning Behaviors and Learning Outcomes. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 187-196.
Jonassen, D. (1991). Evaluating Constructivist Learning. Educational Technology, 36(9), 28-33.
Kablan, Z., & Kaya, S. (2013). Science Achievement in TIMSS Cognitive Domains Based on Learning Styles. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 13(53), 97-114.
Katz, D. & Stotland, E. (1959). A Preliminary Statement to a Theory of Attitude Structure and Change. Psychology: A Study of a Science. (3), 423–475.
Keller, J.M., & Koop, T. (1987). An application of the ARCS model of motivational design. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories in action: Lessons illustrating selected theories and models. Hillsdale, SJ: Lawerence 29 Eribaum.
Kidd, J. R. (1973). How adults learn. Chicago: Association Press.
Kim, J. Y. (2013). Effects of Personality Traits and Kolb Learning Styles on Learning Outcomes in a Blended Learning Environment. International Journal of Digital Content Technology & its Applications, 7(13).
Kinsella, K. (1995). Understanding and empowering diverse learners in the ESL classroom. In J. M. Reid (Eds.),Learning study in the ESL/EFL classroom, 170-194. Boston, MA: Heinle @ Heinle Publishers.
Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-directed learning. New York: association Press.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning : experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall.
Kolb, D. A. (1985). Learning Style Inventory: Technical Manual. Boston, MA: Hay Group, Hay Resources Direct.
Kolb, D. A. (1999). Learning style inventory., version 3. Boston: The Hay Group.
Kulik, J. A., Kulik, C. L. C., & Cohen, P. A. (1979). A meta-analysis of outcome studies of Keller's personalized system of instruction. American Psychologist,34(4), 307.
Kulik, J.A. & Kulik, C.C. &Cohen, P. A. (1980). Effectiveness of computer-based college teaching：A meta-analysis of findings. Review of Educational Research, 50（4）, 525-544.
Kulik, J. A. & Kulik, C. C. & Cohen, P. A. (1987). Review of research literature on computer-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 222-230.
Kredl, K. A. & Lieberman, D. A. (1988). Computers and learning：A review of recent research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4（4）, 367-389.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Periperal Participation. Cambridge , UK: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 2, 63-82.
Lewis, A. B., & Mayer, R. E. (1987). Students’ miscomprehension of relational statements in arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 363-371.
Liaw, S. S., & Huang, H. M. (2003). An Investigation of User Attitudes Toward Search Engines as an Information Retrieval Tool.Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 751-765.
Lindner, R. W. & Harris, B. R. (1993). Teaching Self-Regulated Learning Strategies. Proceedings of Selected Research and Development Presentations at the Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology Sponsored by the Research and Theory Division.
Loo, R. (2004). Kolb's learning styles and learning preferences: is there a linkage?. Educational Psychology, 24(1), 99-108.
Lott, J. W., & Souhrada, T. A. (2000). As the century unfolds: A perspective on secondary school mathematics content. In M. J. Burke & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), Learning Mathematics for A New Century (pp.96-111). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Luterbach, K. J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1994). School's Not Out, Yet. Educational Technology, 34(4), 47-54.
MacGregor, BD. (1999). 'Property investment appraisal'. British Actuarial Journal, vol 5, no. 5, pp. 955-982.
Maehr, M. L., & Meyer, H. A. (1997). Understanding motivation and schooling: Where we've been, where we are, and where we need to go. Educational Psychology Review, 9(4), 371-409.
Mahurin, M. (2000), “Twenty Ideas That Will Rule Research in the Next Twenty Years”,Discover, 21(10), 88-91.
Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.where we are, and where we need to go. Education Psychology Review , 9, 371-409.
McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
McLellan, H. (Ed.). (1996). Situated learning perspectives. Educational Technology.
Mocker, D. W. and Spear, G. E. (1982). Lifelong Learning: Formal, Non-Formal, Informal and Self-Directed. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career and Vocational Education.
Nelson, L. L., Arthur, E. J., Jensen, W. R., & Van Horn, G. (2011). Trading textbooks for technology: New opportunities for learning. Phi Delta Kappan,92(7), 46-50.
Pear, J. J., & Novak, M. (1996). Computer-aided personalized system of instruction: A program evaluation. Teaching of Psychology, 23(2), 119-123.
Platsidou, M., & Metallidou, P. (2009). Validity and Reliability Issues of Two Learning Style Inventories in a Greek Sample: Kolb's Learning Style Inventory and Felder & Soloman's Index of Learning Styles. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(3), 324-335.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33-40.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and psychological measurement, 53(3), 801-813.
Prensky, M. (2007). Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development frameworks. D. Gibson, & C. Aldrich (Eds.). IGI Global.
Rahimi, M., & Yadollahi, S. (2011). Foreign language learning attitude as a predictor of attitudes towards computer-assisted language learning. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 167-174.
Rivera, D. P. E. (1997). Mathematics education and students with learning disabilities: Introduction to the special series. Journal of Learning Disabilities.Richardson, F. C., & Suinn, R. M. (1972). The mathematics anxiety rating scale: psychometric data. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19, 551–554.
Rogers C.R. (1969) Freedom to Learn. Merrill, Columbus.
Rogers, C., & Holdstock, T. (1977). Person-centered theory. Corsini, R.(ed.). Current Personality Theories. Itasca: Peacock.
Rogers, C. R. (1985). Toward a more human science of the person. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 25(4), 7-24.
Rutkowski, K., & Domino, G. (1975). Interrelationship of study skills and personality variables in college students. Journal of educational psychology,67(6), 784-789.
Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco.
Shahabadi, M. M., & Uplane, M. (2014). Learning Styles and Academic Performance of Synchronous E-Learning Students. Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(5), 148-161
Shaftel, F. R., & Shaftel, G. A. (1967). Role-playing for social values. Prentice-Hall.
Short, E.J. & Weissberg-Benchell, J.A. (1989). The triple alliance for learning: cognition, metacognition, and motivation, In C.B. McCormick, et al. (Eds) Cognitive Strategy Research: From basic research to educational applications. N. Y.: Springer, Veilaz.
Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Off track: When poor readers become" learning disabled.". Westview Press.
Sternberg, R.J., & Grigorenko, E.L. (2000). Teaching for successful intelligence. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight. Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated Instruction: A Research Basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947.
Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge university press.
Swisher, K. (1994). American Indian learning styles survey: An assessment of teachersknowledge. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students ,13,59-77.
Tandogan, R. O., & Orhan, A. (2007). The Effects of Problem-Based Active Learning in Science Education on Students' Academic Achievement, Attitude and Concept Learning. Online Submission, 3(1), 71-81.
Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., ... & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating Instruction in Response to Student Readiness, Interest, and Learning Profile in Academically Diverse Classrooms: A Review of Literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 119-145.
Tough, A. (1966). The assistance obtained by adult self-teachers. Adult Education Quarterly, 17(1), 30-37.
Wang, S.-L., & Lin, S. S. J. (2000, August). Cross culture validation of Motivational Strategies for Learning Questionnaire. Paper presented at the 2000 annual meeting of American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., U. S. A.
Ward, K., & Heeman, P. A. (2000, April). Acknowledgments in human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics conference (pp. 280-287). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Winn, W. (1993). Instructional design and situated learning: Paradox or partnership? Educational Technology, 38(3), 16-21.