| 摘要: | 本研究旨在探討運用教學平台輔以合作學習法與傳統教學方法進行高中程式語言學習課程之學習者，在課程學習後學習成效與學習動機之差異。實驗設計採準實驗研究之不等組前後測設計，以離島某高中二年級四個班級共126人為實驗對象，隨機分成實驗組與控制組進行教學實驗，實驗組接受教學平台輔以合作學習教學法進行教學，而控制組接受傳統教學。教學實驗前，兩組學生先接受程式語言學習成效測驗與程式語言學習動機測驗前測；在實驗結束後，兩組學生再施以程式語言學習成效測驗與程式語言學習動機測驗後測，以敘述性統計、t考驗及獨立樣本單因子共變數分析(ANCOVA)進行統計分析，以探究不同教學方法對程式語言學習成效與學習動機的影響，分析其在國內離島高中教學現場實施的可行性。實驗分析結果如下：
一、學習成效方面
1-1 控制組與實驗組在「基本資料型別與計算」單元的得分表現未達到顯著差異。
1-2 控制組與實驗組在「運算子、運算式與敘述」單元的得分表現未達到顯著差異。
1-3 實驗組在「流程圖與選擇性敘述」單元得分表現高於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
1-4 實驗組在「迴圈」單元得分表現高於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
1-5 實驗組在程式語言學習成效「總成效」的得分表現高於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
二、學習動機方面
2-1 實驗組在「自我效能」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
2-2 實驗組在「主動學習策略」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
2-3 實驗組在「程式語言學習價值」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
2-4 實驗組在「表現目標」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
2-5 實驗組在「成就目標」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
2-6 實驗組在「學習環境誘因」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
2-7 實驗組在「總動機」層面的表現上優於控制組，且達到顯著差異。
最後依據上述研究結果，提出建議以做為未來實施或研究之參考。
The purpose of the research was to discuss the differences of learning achievement and motivation in senior high school computer programming language course between the learners learning through traditional method and those learning through online learning platform with cooperative learning strategy. The research adopted the pretest-posttest nonequivalent-group design, randomly selecting four 2nd grade classes in an offshore island senior high school. Two classes were randomly assigned to the experimental group and other two were assigned to the control group. There were 126 students in total. The experimental group received “online learning platform with cooperative learning strategy” while the control group received “Traditional Method Instruction”. The computer programming language learning achievement pre-test and the computer programming language learning motivation questionnaire were administered before the experiment. After the completion of the experiment, the computer programming language learning achievement post-test and the computer programming language learning motivation questionnaire were conducted. The statistical data were analyzed by descriptive statistics, t-test, and one-way ANCOVA.
The findings of this study were as follows.
1. With regard to computer programming language learning achievement:
1-1 There was no significant difference in “Primitive Data Type” between the experimental group and the control group.
1-2 There was no significant difference in “Operator, Expression and Statemants” between the experimental group and the control group.
1-3 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “Flow Chart and Decision-making Statements”, and there was significant difference.
1-4 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “Loop”, and there was significant difference.
1-5 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “total achievement toward computer programming language subject”, and there was significant difference.
2. With regard to computer programming language learning motivation:
2-1 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “self efficacy”, and there was significant difference.
2-2 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “active learning strategy”, and there was significant difference.
2-3 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “programming learning value”, and there was significant difference.
2-4 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “performance goal”, and there was significant difference.
2-5 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “achievement goal”, and there was significant difference.
2-6 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “learning environment stimulation”, and there was significant difference.
2-7 The experimental group performed better than the control group in “total motivation toward computer programming language subject”, and there was significant difference.
Based on the findings, suggestions for the application of both learning methods for educational institutions and further studies were included. |
