108年新課綱首度將程式設計納入必修課程，程式積木線上學習資源已快速發展和普及，這些學習環境融入線上遊戲和問題解決元素，引導學習者使用視覺化的程式積木進行自主學習，亦有部份學習環境融入提示作為學習鷹架。本研究欲探討年紀較小、自我調節學習能力發展尚未完全的學習者，在進行自主程式學習時，如何使用鷹架來解決問題？且與運算思維、自我效能表現有何關聯？本研究旨在對國小四年級學童進行程式積木遊戲的問題解決行為進行編碼，並結合遊戲表現、運算思維評量及自我效能等資料進行監督式序列分析。透過此分析方法，探索不同學習者類型在程式積木問題解決中的行為特徵。研究發現，高運算思維表現學習者較少依賴鷹架解決問題；低運算思維表現學習者透過試誤法及使用提示鷹架解決問題。然而，高自我效能學習者有無使用鷹架並不會對問題解決有何影響；低自我效能學習者藉由鷹架逐步解決問題。希冀本研究能對程式積木遊戲情境中的鷹架設計提出建議，並對不同特質的學生，提供不同的鷹架或輔助，深化學生的學習。

In 2019, the new curriculum in Taiwan incorporated programming into mandatory courses for the first time. Online learning resources for programming blocks have rapidly developed and become popular. These learning environments integrate online games and problem-solving elements, guiding learners to engage in independent learning using visual programming blocks. Some learning environments also provide prompts as scaffolding. This study aims to explore how young learners, whose self-regulated learning abilities are still developing, utilize scaffolding in problem-solving during independent programming learning. It also investigates the relationship between scaffolding use, computational thinking, and self-efficacy performance. The study focuses on encoding the problem-solving behaviors of fourth-grade elementary school students in a programming block game. It combines game performance, computational thinking assessments, self-efficacy measures, and other data for supervised sequence analysis. Through this analysis, the study aims to uncover the behavioral characteristics of different learner types in programming block problem-solving. Findings reveal that learners with higher computational thinking skills rely less on scaffolding to solve problems, while those with lower computational thinking skills use trial-and-error and scaffolding prompts. However, the use of scaffolding does not significantly impact problem-solving for learners with high self-efficacy, whereas learners with low self-efficacy gradually solve problems with the help of scaffolding. This research provides recommendations for scaffolding design in programming block game contexts and for offering different scaffolding or support for students with different characteristics, thereby enhancing their learning experience.

中文文獻
呂子芸、林松江（2019）。基於運算思維之PBL程式設計教學活動成效初探。國立臺北教育大學數學暨資訊教育學系/研究所。2019香港運算思維教育國際研討會發表論文。頁163-168。
林令惠（2021）。探討有無提示在程式積木學習中對於國小學童程式自我效能、運算思維之影響：以Hour of Code課程為例。國立臺灣科技大學數位學習與教育研究所碩士論文，臺北市。
林育慈、吳正己（2016）。運算思維與中小學資訊科技課程。國家教育研究院教育脈動電子期刊，6，5-20。
教育部（2018）。十二年國教科技領域課程綱要。臺北：教育部。
唐立安（2012）。以鷹架引導為基礎的遊戲式學習之學習成效研究-以國小六年級體積課程為例。國立交通大學理學院科技與數位學習學程碩士論文，新竹市。
黃信溢（2020）。運用問題解決策略於程式除錯學習之研究。國立暨南大學課程教學與科技研究所碩士論文，南投縣。
禚建茹（2014）。問題解決能力及行程影響因素之研究。國立臺南大學教育學系教育經營與管理碩博士班博士論文，臺南市。
孫春在（2013）。遊戲式數位學習。高等教育出版社。
張春興（2001）。教育心理學。東華書局。
張玟慧（2016）。專題式程式設計教學對國小學童問題解決歷程之研究。教育科技與學習，4（2），137-163。
陳怡芬、林育慈、翁禎苑（2018）。運算思維導向程式設計教學–以[動手玩音樂]模組化程式設計為例。中等教育，69（2），127-141。
蔡雯欣（2018）。「不插電的資訊科學」課程對國小五年級學生於電腦程式設計課程之學習態度、自我效能與運算思維能力之影響。國立臺灣科技大學數位學習與教育研究所碩士論文，臺北市。
鍾靜宜（2004）。教學策略與學習工具對高中程式語言學習之影響。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文，臺北市。
英文部分
Bagley, C. A., & Chou, C. C. (2007, June 25). Collaboration and the importance for novices in learning java computer programming. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 12th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, Dundee, Scotland. https://doi.org/10.1145/1268784.1268846
Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. Encyclopedia of human behavior, 4, 71-81.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bembenutty, H. (2011). Introduction: Self‐regulation of learning in postsecondary education. New directions for teaching and learning, 2011(126), 3-8.
Brusilovsky, P., Calabrese, E., Hvorecky, J., Kouchnirenko, A., & Miller, P. (1997). Mini-languages: a way to learn programming principles. Education and Information Technologies, 2(1), 65-83.
Chang, C., Lin, Y.-L. & Chang, C.-K. (2013). Using Visual Programming Language for Remedial Instruction: Comparison of Alice and Scratch. In: WANG, J.-F. & LAU, R. (eds.). Advances in Web-Based Learning -- ICWL 2013, 224-233.
Code.org (2021, August 21). About Code.org. https://code.org/
Costikyan, G. (2002). I Have No Words & I must design: Towards a Critical Vocabulary for Games. Proceedings of Computer Games and Digital Cultures Conference. Tampere: Tampere University Press.
Dagienė, V., & Futschek, G. (2008). Bebras international contest on informatics and computer literacy: Criteria for good tasks. In: R. T. Mittermeier, & M. M. Syslo (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 5090 (pp. 19-30). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-69924-8_2
Feng, C. Y., & Chen, M. P. (2014). The effects of goal specificity and scaffolding on programming performance and self ‐ regulation in game design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 285-302.
Fleiss, J. L. (1981) The measurement of interrater agreement. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions (2nd Ed., pp. 212-236). John Wiley.
Fuad, M., Akbar, M., & Zubov, L. (2020, March 11-14). Social learning and scaffolding to improve student's self-efficacy and engagement. Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, New York, NY, United States, 1288. https://doi.org/10.1145/3328778.3372583
Gegenfurtner, A., Ebner, M., & Gütl, C. (2019). Exploring the effect of self-efficacy, enjoyment and prior knowledge on student performance and intention to adopt block-based programming. Education and Information Technologies, 24(4), 2243-2265.
Glass, A. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1986). Congnition (2nd Ed.). New York: Random House.
Google (2019). Exploring Computational Thinking. Retrieved January 18, 2019, from https://edu.google.com/resources/programs/exploring-computational-thinking/
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational Thinking in K-12: A Review of the State of the Field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43.
Hadwin, A. F., & Winne, P. H. (2001). CoNoteS2: A software tool for promoting self-regulation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2-3), 313-334.
Hellings, J., & Haelermans, C. (2020). The effect of providing learning analytics on student behaviour and performance in programming: a randomised controlled experiment. Higher Education, 1-18.
Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170-179. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045.
Hilton, A. D., Lipp, G. M. & Rodger, S. H. (2019). Translation from Problem to Code in Seven Steps. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education (pp. 78-84). ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/3300115.3309508
Hou, H.-T. (2015). Integrating cluster and sequential analysis to explore learners’ flow and behavioral patterns in a simulation game with situated-learning context for science courses: A video-based process exploration. Computers in Human Behavior, 48(0), 424-435.
Hsieh, Y. H., Lin, Y. C., & Hou, H. T. (2016). Exploring the role of flow experience, learning performance and potential behavior clusters in elementary students’ game based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24 (1), 178-193.
Hu Y., Wu B., Gu X. (2017). Learning analysis of K-12 students’ online problem solving: A three-stage assessment approach. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 262–279.
Hwang, G. J., Yin, C., & Chu, H. C. (2019). The era of flipped learning: promoting active learning and higher order thinking with innovative flipped learning strategies and supporting systems. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 991-994.
Jonassen, D.H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology: Research and Development, 45, 65–94.
Kasworm, C. E., Liang, R., & Nie, Y. (2018). Identifying factors impacting the problem-solving behaviors of adults with learning disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 48(3), 333-343.
Kiili, K. (2017). Foundation for problem-based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 394–404.
Kong, S. C., Chiu, M. M., & Lai, M. (2018). A study of primary school students’ interest, collaboration attitude, and programming empowerment in computational thinking education. Computers & Education, 127, 178 189.
Korkmaz, Ö., & Altun, H. (2014). Adapting computer programming self-efficacy scale and engineering students’ selfefficacy perceptions. Online Submission, 1(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.14.02.1.1.
Law, V., & Chen, C. H. (2016). Promoting science learning in game-based learning with question prompts and feedback. Computers & Education, 103, 134-143.
Lin, C. Y., & Lin, S. S. (2019). Exploring the relationship between computational thinking, learning behaviors and programming learning achievement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(7), 1752-1772.
Li, W., & Wu, L. (2020). Exploring the Relationships among Programming Learning, Problem-Solving Ability, and Logical Thinking Ability. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(2), 359-376.
Liu, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers & Education, 50(3), 627–639.
Lu, J. J., & Fletcher, G. H. (2009). Thinking about computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 41(1), 260 264.
Luxton-Reilly, A., Mcmillan, E., Stevenson, E., Tempero, E. & Denny, P. (2018). Ladebug: An online tool to help novice programmers improve their debugging skills. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education.
Maldonado-Mahauad, J., & Perez-Sanagustin, M., Kizilcec, R. F., Morales, N., Munoz-Gama, J.(2018). Mining theory-based patterns from Big data: Identifying self-regulated learning strategies in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 179-196.
Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for Understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 43–64.
Misiejuk, K., Wasson, B., & Egelandsdal, K. (2021). Using learning analytics to understand student perceptions of peer feedback. Computers in Human Behavior, 117, 106658.
Moor, B. D., & Deek, F. P. (2006). On the Design and Development of a UML-Based Visual Environment for Novice Programmers. Journal of Information Technology Education, 5, 53–76.
Oblinger, D. G. (2004). The Next Generation of Educational Engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8, 1-18.
OECD. (2012). PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework. Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Ortiz, E. (2016). The problem-solving process in a mathematics classroom. Transformations, 1(1), 4-13.
Paris, S. G., Byrnes, J. P., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Constructing theories, identities, and actions of self-regulated learners. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.) (pp. 253-287). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Pereira, F. d., Oliveira, E.H.T, Cristea, A. I., Fonseca, S. C., Toda, A., & Isotani, S.(2020). Using learning analytics in the Amazonas: understanding students' behaviour in introductory programming. British Journal of Educational Technology 51(4), 955-972.
Pérez-Marín, D., Hijón-Neira, R., Bacelo, A., & Pizarro, C. (2020). Can computational thinking be improved by using a methodology based on metaphors and Scratch to teach computer programming to children? Computers in Human Behavior, 105, Article 105849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.027
Siemens, G., & Long, P. (2011). Penetrating the fog: Analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE review, 46(5), 30.
Sinnott, J. D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: Implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and application (pp.72-99). New York: Praeger.
Sharma, R., & Shen, H. (2018). Does education culture influence factors in learning programming: A comparative study between two universities across continents. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 17(2), 1-24.
Shute, V. J., Wang, L., Greiff, S., Zhao, W., & Moore, G. (2016). Measuring problem solving skills via stealth assessment in an engaging video game. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 106-117.
Shyr, W. J., Hsieh, Y. M., & Chen, C. H. (2021). The Effects of Peer-Based Instant Response System to Promote Learning Performance, Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Efficacy. Sustainability, 13(8), 4320. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084320
Stone, N. J. (2000). Exploring the relationship between calibration and self-regulated learning. Education Psychology Review, 12(4), 437 475.
Tang, C. M., & Hsu, Y. C. (2018). Effects of Scaffolding Support and Intrinsic Motivation on Online Problem-Solving Performance: Roles of Prior Knowledge and Self-Efficacy. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(6), 914-939.
Tlili A., Chang M., J. Moon Z. Liu, Burgos D., Chen N.-S., Kinshuk. (2021) A Systematic Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Learning Analytics in Educational Games. International Journal of Interactive Multimedia and Artificial Intelligence. http://dx.doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2021.03.003
Ünal Çakıroğlu, & Mücahit Öztürk. (2017). Flipped Classroom with Problem Based Activities: Exploring Self-regulated Learning in a Programming Language Course. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 337-349. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.20.1.337
Voss, J.F. (1988). Problem solving and reasoning in ill-structured domains. In Antaki, C.(Ed.), Analyzing everyday explanation: A casebook of methods (pp. 74-93). London: Sage.
Wen, C. T., Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Chiang, S. H. F., Liu, C. C., Hwang, F. K., & Tsai, C. C. (2018). The learning analytics of model based learning facilitated by a problem solving simulation game. Instructional Science, 46(6),847-867.
Werner, L. L., Denner, J., Campe, S., & Kawamoto, D. C. (2012). The fairy performance assessment: Measuring computational thinking in middle school. SIGCSE ’12 proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 215-220). ACM Press.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.
Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Chapter 16 - Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531-566). Academic Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/b978-012109890-2/50045-7
Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Development of self-regulated learning: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 307-313.
Zhu, J., Alderfer, K., Smith, B., Char, B., & Ontañón, S. (2020). Understanding learners’ problem-solving strategies in concurrent and parallel programming: A game-based approach. arXiv:2005.04789. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.04789