近年來，培養學生整合應用跨學科知識來解決複雜問題的能力受到國際的重視，尤其是結合科學、科技、工程及數學知識的STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)活動設計更成為重要的教育方向。在推動STEM學習活動的過程，資訊技術扮演著重要的角色。它不僅是STEM的一個重要元素，也是提供學生學習資源及引導學生完成學習任務的重要管道。由於STEM活動大多以專題學習(project-based learning)的形式呈現，在實施過程中，學生需要透過資料搜集、構思、執行及修訂的步驟，需要比較長時間。在這個過程中，不但需要時間、目標及執行方式的規劃，也需要對於來自不同學科的知識與學習任務的關係有完整的瞭解。因此，如何培養學生自律學習的能力及組織跨領域知識的能力是一個重要的挑戰。在一般的科技化學習環境下，如果缺少有效的策略來引導學生進行STEM活動，他們的學習表現可能會不如預期。為了解決這個問題，本研究提出一種基於概念圖的自律學習模式(Concept mapping-based Self-Regulated Learning, CM-SRL)，透過協助學生組織跨領知識及規劃目標與策略，來提昇完成STEM任務的成效。為了驗證這個學習模式的效果，本研究以中國大陸東部一所中學的「資訊技術」課程進行準實驗設計。參與者為三個班級的中學一年級學生總共120人，平均年齡13歲。一個班級40名學生為實驗組，採用基於概念圖的自律學習模式(CM-SRL)；一個班級40名學生為控制組一，採用一般自律學習模式(Conventional Self-Regulated Learning, C-SRL)；另一個班級40名學生為控制組二，採用了一般學習模式(Conventional Learning, CL)。 本研究比較了三個學習模式對學生的學習成就、自我效能、自律表現、溝通傾向、和協作傾向以及批判性思維的差異。
實驗結果顯示，程式設計基礎知識部分，實驗組(CM-SRL)相較於控制組一(C-SRL)和控制組二(CL)並沒有顯著差異；STEM作品部分，實驗組(CM-SRL)顯著優於控制一(C-SRL)和控制組二(CL)。在自我效能方面，採用基於概念圖的自律學習模式後，實驗組(CM-SRL)相較於控制組二(CL)存在顯著差異，而相較於控制組一(C-SRL)則未達顯著差異。在自律表現方面，採用基於概念圖的自律學習模式後，實驗組(CM-SRL)學生在目標設定，環境、任務策略和時間管理方面的表現顯著優於控制組二(CL)的學生，而相較於控制組一(C-SRL)則未達顯著差異。高自律學生在尋求幫助和自我評估方面的表現，實驗組(CM-SRL)顯著優於控制組二(CL)。另外，實驗組(CM-SRL)學生的協作傾向和溝通傾向顯著優於控制組二(CL)的學生，但是相較於控制組一(C-SRL)則沒有顯著差異；在批判思考方面，實驗組(CM-SRL)學生顯著優於控制組一(C-SRL)和控制組二(CL)的學生。
總之，應用基於概念圖的自律學習模式，能夠協助學生組織跨領知識及規劃目標與策略，幫助學生更好地參與學習，管理和反思學習，進而增強學生的自我效能、提升學生的自律表現、提高學生學習成就以及強化了學生的高層次思考。

In recent years, the development of students' ability to integrate and apply interdisciplinary knowledge to solve complex problems has received international attention. In particular, the design of STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) activities, which combine science, technology, engineering, and mathematics knowledge, has become an important educational direction. Information technology plays an important role in promoting STEM learning activities. It is not only an important element of STEM, but also an important channel for providing students with learning resources and guiding them through their learning tasks. As STEM activities are mostly presented in the form of project-based learning, students need to go through the steps of data collection, conceptualization, implementation, and revision during the implementation process, which takes a relatively long time. This process requires planning in terms of time, objectives, and implementation methods, as well as a thorough understanding of the relationship between knowledge from different disciplines and learning tasks. It is therefore an important challenge to develop students' self-regulated learning skills and their ability to organize interdisciplinary knowledge. In the general technological learning environment, if there is no effective strategy to guide students in STEM activities, their learning performance may not be as good as expected. In order to solve this problem, this research proposed concept mapping-based self-regulated learning (CM-SRL), which helps students organize interdisciplinary knowledge and plan goals and strategies to enhance their effectiveness in completing STEM tasks. To examine the effectiveness of this learning model, a quasi-experimental design was conducted using the 'Information Technology' curriculum in a middle school in the eastern part of Mainland China. Participants were 120 first-year middle school students in three classes, with an average age of 13 years old. A class of 40 students in the experimental group, using the concept mapping-based self-regulated learning model (CM-SRL); a class of 40 students in the control group 1, using the general self-regulated learning model (Conventional Self-Regulated Learning, C-SRL); Another class with 40 students in the control group 2, using the traditional learning model (Conventional Learning, CL).
The experimental results showed that in terms of basic knowledge of programming, the experimental group (CM-SRL) had no significant difference compared to the control group one (C-SRL) and the control group 2(CL); in terms of the STEM works, the experimental group (CM-SRL) was significantly better than Control 1 (C-SRL) and Control Group 2 (CL). In terms of self-regulatory performance, students in the experimental group (CM-SRL) performed significantly better than students in the control group 2 (CL) in goal setting, environment, task strategies, and time management after adopting a concept mapping-based self-regulated learning strategy; students with high self-regulation performed significantly better than students in the control group 2 (CL) in help-seeking and self-assessment. In addition, students in the experimental group (CM-SRL) were significantly more likely to collaborate and communicate than students in Control Group 2 (CL), but not significantly different from students in Control Group 1 (C-SRL); in terms of critical thinking, students in the experimental group (CM-SRL) were significantly better than students in Control Group 1 (C-SRL) and Control Group 2 (CL).
In summary, the application of a concept mapping-based self-regulated learning model helped students to organize interdisciplinary knowledge and plan goals and strategies, helped students to better engage, manage and reflect on their learning, which in turn enhanced students' self-efficacy, improved their self-regulation, increased their learning achievement and strengthened their high-order thinking.

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2003). Sizing the opportunity: the quality and extent of online education in the united states, 2002 and 2003. Sloan Consortium (NJ1), 36(23), 659-673.
Alonso, F., Lopez, G., Manrique, D., & Vines, J. M. (2005). An instructional model for web‐based e‐learning education with a blended learning process approach. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2), 217-235.
Avramides, K., Hunter, J., Oliver, M., & Luckin, R. (2015). A method for teacher inquiry in cross‐curricular projects: Lessons from a case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 249-264.
Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding Self-regulated Learning and Metacognition – Implications for the Design of Computer-based Scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5), 367-379.
Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: a summary and critical analysis. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(1), 93–100.
Bannert, M., & Mengelkamp, C. (2008). Assessment of metacognitive skills by means of instruction to think aloud and reflect when prompted. Does the verbalisation method affect learning. Metacognition and Learning, 3(1), 39-58.
Barak, M. (2010). Motivating self-regulated learning in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20(4), 381-401.
Barak, M. (2012). From ‘doing’ to ‘doing with learning’: Reflection on an effort to promote self-regulated learning in technological projects in high school. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(1), 105–116.
Barnard, L., Lan, W. Y., To, Y., Paton, V. O., & Lai, S. L. (2009). Measuring self-regulation in online and blended learning environments. Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 1-6.
Bartulovic, D., Young, B. W., & Baker, J. (2017). Self-regulated learning predicts skill group differences in developing athletes. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 31, 61-69.
Bell, D., Morrison-Love, D., Wooff, D., & McLain, M. (2018). STEM education in the twenty-first century: Learning at work—an exploration of design and technology teacher perceptions and practices. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(3), 721-737.
Bernardo, A. B., Salanga, M. G. C., Khan, A., & Yeung, S. S. (2016). Internal and external loci-of-hope predict use of individual and collaborative learning strategies: Evidence from university students in four Asian cities. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(3), 367–376.
Blackley, S., & Howell, J. (2015). A STEM Narrative: 15 Years in the Making. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(7) , 101-112. DOI：10.14221/ajte.2015v40n7.8
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3-4), 369-398.
Bonk, C. J., Olson, T. M., Wisher, R. A., & Orvis, K. L. (2002). Learning from focus groups: An examination of blended learning. Journal of Distance Education, 17(3), 97–118.
Broadbent, J. (2017). Comparing online and blended learner's selfregulated learning strategies and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 33, 24–32.
Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30-35.
Cardenasrobledo, L. A., & Penaayala, A. (2019). A holistic self-regulated learning model: A proposal and application in ubiquitous-learning. Expert Systems With Applications, 299-314.
Chai, C. S., Deng, F., Tsai, P. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C. C. (2015). Assessing multidimensional students’ perceptions of twenty-first-century learning practices. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(3), 389-398.
Chang, M. M. (2007). Enhancing web-based language learning through self-monitoring. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 23, 187−196.
Chiu, J. L., Malcolm, P. T., Hecht, D., DeJaegher, C. J., Pan, E. A., & Bradley, M. (2013). WISEngineering: Supporting precollege engineering design and mathematical understanding. Computers & Education, 67, 142–155.
Chularut, P., & DeBacker, T. K. (2004). The influence of concept mapping on achievement, self-regulation, and self-efficacy in students of English as a second language. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 248-263.
Condon, M., & Wichowsky, A. (2018). Developing citizen-scientists: effects of an inquiry-based science curriculum on stem and civic engagement. Elementary School Journal, 119(2), 196-222.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of applied psychology, 78(1), 98.
DeCoito, I. (2016). STEM education in Canada: A knowledge synthesis. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 16(2), 114–128.
Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H. P. (2008). How can primary school students learn self-regulated learning strategies most effectively?: A meta-analysis on self-regulation training programmes. Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101-129.
Dökmecioğlu, B., Tas, Y., & Yerdelen, S. (2020). Predicting students’ critical thinking dispositions in science through their perceptions of constructivist learning environments and metacognitive self-regulation strategies: a mediation analysis. Educational Studies. DOI: 10.1080/03055698.2020.1833838
Eilam, B., & Reiter, S. (2014). Long-term self-regulation of biology learning using standard junior high school science curriculum. Science Education, 98(4), 705-737.
Fang, J. W., Chang, S. C., Hwang, G. J., & Yang, G. (2021). An online collaborative peer-assessment approach to strengthening pre-service teachers’ digital content development competence and higher-order thinking tendency. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(2), 1155-1181.
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., Mcdonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410-8415.
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7( 2), 95-105.
Goller, M., Harteis, C., Gijbels, D., & Donche, V. (2020). Engineering students' learning during internships: exploring the explanatory power of the job demands‐control‐support model. Journal of Engineering Education, 109(2), 307-324.
Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012, August). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. . Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42642.pdf.
Hachey, A. C., Wladis, C., & Conway, K. (2015). Prior online course experience and GPA as predictors of subsequent online STEM course outcomes. The Internet and Higher Education, 25, 11-17.
Hoicbozic, N., Mornar, V., & Boticki, I. (2009). A Blended Learning Approach to Course Design and Implementation. IEEE Transactions on Education, 52(1), 19-30.
Hwang, G. J. (2003). A conceptual map model for developing intelligent tutoring systems. Computers & Education, 40(3), 217-235.
Hwang, G. J., & Chang, C. Y. (2020). Facilitating decision-making performances in nursing treatments: a contextual digital game-based flipped learning approach. Interactive Learning Environments. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2020.1765391
Hwang, G. J., Lee, K. C., & Lai, C. L. (2019). Trends and strategies for conducting effective STEM research and applications: a mobile and ubiquitous learning perspective. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation. doi: 10.1504/IJMLO.2020.10022182
Hwang, G. J., Wang, S. Y., & Lai, C. L. (2021). Effects of a social regulation-based online learning framework on students’ learning achievements and behaviors in mathematics. Computers & Education. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104031
Hwang, G. J., Wu, P. H., & Ke, H. R. (2011). An interactive concept map approach to supporting mobile learning activities for natural science courses. Computers & education, 57(4), 2272-2280. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.011
Hwang, G. J., Kuo, F. R., Chen, N. S., & Ho, H. J. (2014). Effects of an integrated concept mapping and web-based problem-solving approach on students' learning achievements, perceptions and cognitive loads. Computers & Education, 71, 77-86.
Hwang, G. J., Shi, Y. R., & Chu, H. C. (2011). A concept map approach to developing collaborative Mind tools for context‐aware ubiquitous learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 778-789.
Howland, J. J., & Moore, J. L. (2002). Student perceptions as distance learners in internet-based courses. Distance Education, 23, 183-197.
Jarvela, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., & Jarvenoja, H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125-142.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational researcher, 38(5), 365–379.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2001). Learner experience and efficiency of instructional guidance. Educational Psychology, 21(1), 5-23.
Kati, M., Hanna, J., Jouni, P., & Pyhalto, K. (2020). Nursing students' motivation regulation strategies in blended learning: A qualitative study. Nursing & Health Sciences,22,602-611. doi:10.1111/nhs.12702
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3, 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.
Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers' STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14-31.
Ku, K. Y., & Ho, I. T. (2010). Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking. Metacognition and Learning, 5(3), 251-267. doi:10.1007/s11409-010-9060-6
Krämer, N. C., Karacora, B., Lucas, G., Dehghani, M., Rüther, G., & Gratch, J. (2016). Closing the gender gap in STEM with friendly male instructors? On the effects of rapport behavior and gender of a virtual agent in an instructional interaction. Computers & Education, 99, 34-48.
Labuhn, A. S., Bogeholz, S., & Hasselhorn, M. (2008). Fostering learning through stimulation of self-regulation in science lessons. Zeitschrift Fur Padagogische Psychologie, 22(1), 13-24.
Lai, C. L. & Hwang, G. J., (2016). A self-regulated flipped classroom approach to improving students' learning performance in a mathematics course. Computers in Education, 100(100), 126-140.
Lai, C. L., Hwang, G. J., & Tu, Y. H. (2018). The effects of computer-supported self-regulation in science inquiry on learning outcomes, learning processes, and self-efficacy. Educational Technology Research & Development. 66:863–892. doi:10.1007/s11423-018-9585-y
Lai, C. L., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). Effects of mobile learning time on students’ conception of collaboration, communication, complex problem-solving, meta-cognitive awareness and creativity. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 8(3), 276-291.
Lee, A. (2015). Determining the effects of computer science education at the secondary level on STEM major choices in postsecondary institutions in the United States. Computers & Education, 88, 241-255.
Lee, C-H., Yeh, D., Kung, R. J., & Hsu, C-S. (2007). The influences of learning portfolios and attitudes on learning effects in blended e-learning for mathematics. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 37(4), 331-350.
León, J., Núñez, J. L., & Liew, J. (2015). Self-determination and STEM education: Effects of autonomy, motivation, and self-regulated learning on high school math achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 156-163.
Leroy, N., & Bressoux, P. (2016). Does amotivation matter more than motivation in predicting mathematics learning gains? A longitudinal study of sixth-grade students in France. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44-45, 41-53.
Li, S. , Chen, G. , Xing, W. , Zheng, J. , & Xie, C. (2020). Longitudinal clustering of students' self-regulated learning behaviors in engineering design. Computers & Education, 153. doi：10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103899
Liang, C. Y., Chang, C. C., Shu, K. M., Tseng, J. S., & Lin, C. Y. (2016). Online reflective writing mechanisms and its effects on self-regulated learning: A case of web-based portfolio assessment system. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(7), 1647–1664.
Liu, P. L., Chen, C. J., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students’ English reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 54(2), 436-445.
Lynch, R., & Dembo, M. (2004). The relationship between self-regulation and online learning in a blended learning context. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 5(2), 16−30.
Magno, C. (2010). The Role of Metacognitive Skills in Developing Critical Thinking. Metacognition and Learning 5 (2): 137-156. doi:10.1007/s11409-010-9054-4.
Mason, G. S., Shuman, T. R., & Cook, K. E. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 430-435.
McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 113–139.
McCutcheon, K., O'Halloran, P., & Lohan, M. (2018). Online learning versus blended learning of clinical supervisee skills with pre-registration nursing students: A randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 82, 30–39.
Mclaughlin, J. E., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., Davidson, C. A., Glatt, D. M., Roth, M. T., & Mumper, R. J. (2013). Pharmacy student engagement, performance, and perception in a flipped satellite classroom. The American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(9), 196-196.
Michalsky, T., & Schechter, C. (2013). Preservice teachers’ capacity to teach self-regulated learning: integrating learning from problems and learning from successes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 60-73.
Molenaar, I., Roda, C., Boxtel, C., & Sleegers, P. (2012). Dynamic scaffolding of socially regulated learning in a computer-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 59, 515-523.
Murphy, S., MacDonald, A., Danaia, L., & Wang, C. (2019). An analysis of Australian STEM education strategies. Policy Futures in Education, 17(2), 122-139.
Murphy, S., Macdonald, A., Wang, C. A., & Danaia, L. (2019). Towards an understanding of STEM engagement: A review of the literature on motivation and academic emotions. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19(3), 304-320.
National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, D.C.:National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/13165
Nordin, N., Samsudin, M. A., Mansor, A. F., & Ismail, M. E. (2020). Social Network Analysis to Examine the Effectiveness of e-PBL with Design Thinking to Foster Collaboration: Comparisons between High and Low Self-regulated Learners. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 12(4), 48-59.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of research in science teaching, 27(10), 937-949.
Oliver, M., & Trigwell, K.(2005). Can ‘blended learning’ be redeemed?. E-learning and Digital Media, 2(1), 17-26.
Pace, J. R. , & Mellard, D. F. (2016). Reading achievement and reading efficacy changes for middle school students with disabilities through blended learning instruction. Journal of Special Education Technology, 31(3), 156-169.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educ Psychol Rev, 16(4), 385–407.
Ritchhart, R., Turner, T., & Hadar, L. (2009). Uncovering students’ thinking about thinking using concept maps. Metacognition and Learning, 4(2), 145-159.
Robert M. Gagné and M. David Merrill. (1990). Integrative goals for instructional design. Educational Technology Research & Development, 38(1), 23-30.
Rogat, T. K., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2011). Socially shared regulation in collaborative groups: An analysis of the interplay between quality of social regulation and group processes. Cognition and Instruction, 29(4), 375–415.
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–27.
Shanahan, M. C. , Burke, C. A. , & Francis, K. (2016). Using a boundary object perspective to reconsider the meaning of stem in a canadian context. Canadian Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Education, 16(2), 129-139.
Shorey, S., Kowitlawakul, Y., Devi, M., Kamala, M., Chen, H. C., Soong, S., & Ang, E. (2018). Blended learning pedagogy designed for communication module among undergraduate nursing students: A quasi-experimental study. Nurse Education Today, 61, 120–126
Siadaty, M., Gasevic, D., Jovanovic, J., Pata, K., Milikic, N., Holocher-Ertl, T., Hatala, M. (2012). Self-regulated workplace learning: a pedagogical framework and semantic web-based environment. Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 75-88.
Silva, João Carlos Sedraz, Zambom, E. , Rodrigues, R. L., Ramos, J. L. C., & De Souza, F. D.F.(2018). Effects of learning analytics on students' self-regulated learning in flipped classroom. International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education, 14(3), 91-107.
So, H & Brush, T. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers in Education, 51(1), 318-336.
Spellman, K. V., Deutsch, A., Mulder, C. P., & Carsten-conner, L. D. (2016). Metacognitive learning in the ecology classroom: A tool for preparing problem solvers in a time of rapid change?. Ecosphere, 7(8). doi: 10.1002/ecs2.1411
Staker, H. & Horn, M. (2012). ·Classifying K-12 blended learning. Innosight Institute, Inc.: SanMateo, CA.
Stoeger, H., Fleischmann, S., & Obergriesser, S. (2015). Self-regulated learning (SRL) and the gifted learner in primary school: the theoretical basis and empirical findings on a research program dedicated to ensuring that all students learn to regulate their own learning. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(2), 257-267.
Strauss, A, & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.
Sun, J. C., Wu, Y., & Lee, W. (2017). The effect of the flipped classroom approach to Open Course Ware instruction on students’ self-regulation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(3), 713-729.
Sung, H. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43–51.
Tabuenca, B., Kalz, M., Drachsler, H., & Specht, M. (2015). Time will tell: the role of mobile learning analytics in self-regulated learning. Computers & Education, 89, 53-74.
Takeuchi, M. A., Sengupta, P., Shanahan, M. C., Adams, J. D., & Hachem, M. (2020). Transdisciplinarity in stem education: a critical review. Studies in Science Education. doi: 10.1080/03057267.2020.1755802
Thomas, L., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2016). Using concept maps and goal-setting to support the development of self-regulated learning in a problem-based learning curriculum. Medical teacher, 38(9), 930-935.
Trees, A. R., & Jackson, M. H. (2007). The learning environment in clicker classrooms: Student processes of learning and involvement in large university-level courses using student response systems. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(1), 21–40.
Tynjala, P., Salminen, R. T., Sutela, T., Nuutinen, A., & Pitkanen, S. (2005). Factors related to study success in engineering education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 30(2), 221-231.
Vanslambrouck, S., Zhu, C., Pynoo, B., Lombaerts, K., Tondeur, J., & Scherer, R. (2019). A latent profile analysis of adult students’ online self-regulation in blended learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 99, 126-136.
Varthis, S., & Anderson, O. R. (2018). Students' perceptions of a blended learning experience in dental education. European Journal of Dental Education, 22(1), 35-41.
Vogt, C. M. (2008). Faculty as a Critical Juncture in Student Retention and Performance in Engineering Programs. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 27-36.
Wang, X. M., & Hwang, G. J. (2017). A problem posing-based practicing strategy for facilitating students’ computer programming skills in the team-based learning mode. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(6), 1655-1671.
Winberg, C., Adendorff, H., Bozalek, V., Conana, H., Pallitt, N., Wolff, K., & Roxa, T. (2019). Learning to teach STEM disciplines in higher education: a critical review of the literature. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(8), 930-947
Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (2010). Self-regulated learning and socio-cognitive theory. In B. McGaw, E. Baker, & P. Peterson (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed.)., New York.
Wladis, C., Hachey, A. C., & Conway, K. (2015). Which STEM majors enroll in online courses, and why should we care? The impact of ethnicity, gender, and non-traditional student characteristics. Computers & Education, 87, 285-308.
Wu, P. H., Hwang, G. J., Milrad, M., Ke, H. R., & Huang, Y. M. (2012). An innovative concept map approach for improving students' learning performance with an instant feedback mechanism. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(2), 217-232.
Yang, C. C., Hwang, G. J., Hung, C. M., & Tseng, S. S. (2013). An Evaluation of the Learning Effectiveness of Concept Map-Based Science Book Reading via Mobile Devices. Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 167-178.
Yang, T. C., Hwang, G. J., Yang, S. J., & Hwang, G. H. (2015). A two-tier test-based approach to improving students' computer-programming skills in a web-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(1), 198-210.
Zhang, S. (2019). Chinese-as-a-foreign-language learners’ use of self-regulated learning in flipped/blended learning environments: A descriptive study. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 10(2), 181-204.
Zheng, J., Xing, W., Zhu, G., Chen, G., Zhao, H., & Xie, C. (2020). Profiling self-regulation behaviors in stem learning of engineering design. Computers & Education, 143. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103669
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82–91. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1016
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: an overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating Self-Regulation and Motivation: Historical Background, Methodological Developments, and Future Prospects:. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183.