英語的學習可以經由建構式自主學習來達成目的，而英語學習的建構步驟應從大的主題到必要的文法或聽說讀寫技法，而非支離片段的學習文法或句型。學習者在充分理解且融入所必須學習的主體情境後，才能合理地產生學習動機和持續的自主學習狀態；再者，由於語言學習的目的在傳遞訊息和與人溝通，因此合作學習社群與有意義的主題情境的設計具有攸關性。大部份的傳統英語教學方式往往直接提供學習內容與測驗，極易誤導學習者漠視學習策略與自我學習管理能力的發展，學習者也較沒有機會與時間融入情境，建構語言技能，發展自我學習管理技能。大部分的學習者仍採取被動式的學習，導致無法自主地學習與自信地溝通。電腦科技與設備及網際網路日益普及，學習者可以透過電腦網路、影像、圖形、聲音、視訊等建構學習者專屬的學習模組；全球資訊網(WWW)、電子郵件(E-mail)、即時通訊服務軟體(Skype)等提供資料傳輸及訊息溝通的功能，學習科技已漸成趨勢。電腦輔助合作學習透過合作社群的群體智慧解決問題，並產生穩定的學習動能，將是二十一世紀的學習科技的重要議題。
然而，英語學習者仍然須要透過體驗式的學習，融入真實的主題環境中，再根據個人的學習背景與能力，配合網路環境建構個人專屬的學習管理系統。本研究之目的為研究網路與實境混成式英語自學法之概念。期能協助學習者進行英語的自主學習的建構及群體互動，改良現今之工廠式學習模式，並更有效率地達成語言學習之目的。本研究以三組不同學習模組之學生為研究對象：電腦輔助學習組、實境體驗學習組、與自我建構學習組三組，進行實驗觀察；並透過文獻探討及個案觀察對三組個案進行深度訪談，探討英語學習者在體驗與網路建構式英語學習混合環境中的相關因素如學習者態度、網路與實境建構式學習環境、先備知識及學習管理技能等因素。本研究結果發現：(1) 先備知識如電腦技巧、網路蒐尋技巧、簡報技巧。(2) 學習管理如主題式學習資源管理、自我學習技能管理及學習群組管理等。(3) 建構式學習歷程創新。(4) 網路與實境混成式學習環境等能提升英語學習動機並增進溝通表達的效能。

The main purpose of language learning is to communicate and exchange information. It can be approached from contextual involvement into constructive self regulatory learning to develop individual language skills. Learners may get motivated in collaborative study easily and develop their scaffoldings in self-regulated learning after being involved in the contexts. Web-based instructional designs and learning management should be provided by experienced teachers and learning platform. However, most of the conventional English teaching models provide contents and assessments directly to the learners whom have little chances in developing scaffoldings and self-regulated learning management skills. As a result, most of learners stay in passive learning status which leads to unconfident and shallow performance.
For many second and foreign language learners, experience of the target language has traditionally been limited to opportunities created by the teacher in the classroom, drawing on such resources as textbooks, tapes or CDs, and videos. ICT environments such as World Wide Web、Email、 instant message、 and mobile phones are getting more popular nowadays which might offer chances for learner-centeredness and self-regulated learning. Language learners can easily get the approaches to develop their scaffoldings in language learning. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) receives more attentions in contemporary learning trends. Nowadays English learners may use computers as supportive tools to set up collaborative networks and search learning contents on the websites to construct their learning skills and take the self-regulated learning. Web-based Constructivist Environment provides rich resources for English learning constructivist to construct an extended CSCL environment. 90% of websites are in English. However, English language learners still need contextual environments to enhance and communicate skills. The research presents a framework that addresses the innovative English learning model based on mix-mode CSCL English learning environments, which contains two categories: learning environments and learning management. Data were collected from three different learning groups and identified four results from this study. (1) prior knowledge such as computer skills,web-searching skills, presentation skills (2) Learning management skills such as theme resources management, learning network community and self-regulated learning management skills. (3) Constructivist learning process (4) Mix-mode learning environment are the key successful factors in English learning. This research has conducted a field experiment creating a mix-mode self-regulated English learning model. Literature review and observational interview are applied to investigate the results of the research.

[1] Jones, a., and Issroffb, k., (2004), Learning technologies: Affective and social issues in computer-supported collaborative learning, Computers & Education Volume 44, Issue 4, May 2005, pp. 395-408.
[2] Bencze, J. L., Bowen, G. M., Alsop, S., (2006). “Teachers’ Tendencies to Promote Student-Led Science Projects: Associations with Their Views about Science”, Science Education, 90, pp. 400-419.
[3] Black, J. B., & McClintock, R. O.(1996). An interpretation construction approach to constructivist design, In Brent G. Wilson Constructivist Learning Environments: case studies in instructional design, pp.25-31. Educational Technology Publications.
[4] Brad Mehlenbacher, Carolyn R. Miller, David Covington, and Jamie S. Larsen (1999). Active and interactive learning online: A comparison of web-based and conventional writing classes. IEEE PII S 0361-1434(00)04487-8.
[5] Brooks, J. G., Brooks, M. G. (1993). The case for constructivist classrooms. Chapter 1&2 Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
[6] Chickering, A. W., Ehrmann, S. C., (1998). “Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as Lever”, American Association for Higher Education, Available on web, June 2008: http://www.aahe.org/technology/ehrmann.htm.
[7] Choi, J. I., and Hannafin, M., (1995), Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures, and implications for design, Educational Technology Research and Development, Volume 43, Number 2, 1995.
[8] Chou, H. W., (2001). Influences of cognitive style and training method on training effectiveness. Computers & Education, Volume 37, Issue 1, August 2001, pp. 11-25.
Dole, J. A., Sinatra, G. M., (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 13, No. 4, 2001
[9] David H. Jonassen1 and Lucia Rohrer-Murphy (1999), Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments, Educational Technology Research and Development, 1042-1629 (Print) 1556-6501 (Online), Vol. 47, No. 1
[10] Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., Gomez, L., (1996) Constructivism in the collaboratory. In Brent G. Wilson. Constructivist learning Environments: case studies in instructional design,(pp. 151-164). Educational Technology Publications.
[11] Gould, J.S.(1996). A constructivist perspective on teaching and learning in the language arts. In C.T. Fosnot(ed.) Constructivism: theory, perspectives and practice, (pp.92-102). New York: Teachers College Press.
[12] Hannafin, M.J. (1984). Guidelines for using locus of instructional control in the design of computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Instructional Development, 7(3), pp. 6-10.
[13] Honebein, P. C., (1996) Seven goals for the design of constructivist learning environments: In Brent G. Wilson Constructivist Learning Environments: case studies in the instructional design, pp.11-24, Educational Technology Publications.
[14] Jones, A., Issroff, K., (2005) Learning technologies: Affective and social issues in computer-supported collaborative learnig, Computers & Education, Volume 44, Issue 4, May 2005, pp. 395-408.
[15] Kinchin, I. M., (2004). Investigating students’ beliefs about their preferred role as learners. Educational Research, 46, pp. 301-312.
[16] Liaw, S. S., Huang, H. M., Chen, G. D., (2006). Surveying instructor and learner attitudes toward e-learning. Computers & Education, Volume 49, Issue 4, December 2007, pp. 1066-1080.
[17] Loyens, S. M. M., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2008). Relationships between students’ conceptions of constructivist learning and their regulation and processing strategies. Instructional Science, 36, 445-462.
[18] Limon, M., (2001), On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: a critical appraisal, Learning and Instruction 11 (2001) pp. 357-380.
[19] Maor, D. (1999). A teacher professional development program on using a constructivist multimedia learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 2, 307-330.
[20] Martin Mühlenbrock , Ulrich Hoppe, Computer supported interaction analysis of group problem solving, Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning, p.50-es, December 12-15, 1999, Palo Alto, California.
[21] Mehenbacher, B., Miller, C. R., Covington, D., and Larsen, J. S., (1999). Active and interactive learning online: A comparison of Web-based and conventional writing classes. Professional Communication, IEEE Transactions on, Vol.43, Issue 2, pp. 166-184.
[22] Oliver, R., Omari. A., (2001). Exploring Student Responses to Collaborating and Learning in a Web-Based Environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(1), pp. 34-47.
[23] Paul R. Pintrich and Elisabeth V. De Groot (1990), Motivational and Self-Regulated Learning Components of Classroom Academic Performance, Journal of Educational Psychology,1990, Vol. 82, No. 1, pp. 33-40.
[24] Piccoli, G., Ahmad, R., Ives, B., (2001). Web-Based Virtual Learning Environments: A Research Framework and a Preliminary Assessment of Effectiveness in Basic IT Skills Training, by Management Information Systems Research Center, University of Minnesota.
[25] R.M. Felder, “Reaching the second tier: Learning and teaching styles in college science education,” Journal of College Science Teaching, Vol. 23, No.5, pp.286-290, 1993.
[26] Savery, J. R.,Duffy, T. M., (1996). Problem based learning: an instructional model and its constructivist framework. In Brent G. Wilson. Constructivist Learning Environments: case studies in instructional design, pp. 135-148. Educational Technology Publications.
[27] Savery, J. R., Duffy, T. M., (2001), Problem Based Learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework, CRLT Technical Report No. 16-01, Center for Research on Learning and Technology, Indiana University
[28] Shih, M., Feng, J., Tsai, C. C., (2007). Research and trends in the field of e-learning from 2001 to 2005: A content analysis of cognitive studies in selected journals. Computers & Education, Volume 51, Issue 2, September 2008, pp. 955-967.
[29] Skehan, P., ( 1998 ), A cognitive approach to language learning, Oxford University Press.
[30] Taylor, P. C., Fraser, B. J. (1991). CLES: An instrument for assessing constructivist learning environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.
[31] Tsai, C. C. (2008). The preferences toward constructivist Internet-based learning environments among university students in Taiwan. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, pp. 16-31.
[32] Tsai, C. C. (2001). Probing students’ cognitive structures in science: The use of flow map method coupled with a meta-listening techniques. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, pp. 257-268.
[33] Vekiri, J., Chronaki, A., (2008). Gender issues in technology use: Perceived social support, computer self-efficacy and value beliefs, and computer use beyond school. Computers & Education, Volume 51, Issue 3, November 2008, pp. 1392-1404.
[34] Vermunt, J. D., (1996). Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies, a phenomenographic analysis. Higher Education, 17, pp. 647-682.
[35] Vermunt, J. D., Vermetten, Y. J., (2004).Patterns in student learning: Relationships between learning strategies, conceptions of learning, and learning orientations. Educational Psychology Review, 16, pp. 359-384.
[36] Wang, S. L., Wu, P. Y. (2008). The role of feedback and self-efficacy on web-based learning: The social cognitive perspective. Computers & Education, 51 (2008), pp. 1589-1598.
[37] Weinberger, A., Fischer, F., (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, Volume 46, Issue 1, January 2006, pp. 71-95, Methodological Issues in Researching CSCL.
[38] Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E.(1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd ed., pp. 315-327. New York: Macmillan.