期刊目錄列表 - 64卷(2019) - 【教育科學研究期刊】64(3)九月刊（本期專題：創造力、STEAM與自造教育）
Directory
（專題）QR圖碼應用於汽車修護課程翻轉學習模式差異之研究
作者:國立臺灣師範大學工業教育學系暨車輛與能源工程學士學位學程張俊興、國立臺灣師範大學學習科學跨國頂尖研究中心暨國立東華大學教育與潛能開發學系蔡其瑞
卷期：64卷第3期
日期：2019年9月
頁碼：119-141
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.201909_64(3).0005
摘要：
本研究之研究目的為於汽車修護技能課程中融入QR圖碼進行翻轉學習，並探討製作翻轉課程學習內容的學習者及使用翻轉課程的學習者，兩組學習者學習成效的差異。在學習前後，將利用前、後測瞭解兩組學習者學習狀況的差異，並就前測成績將學習者分為高、低分組。而在實驗過程中，學習者自行應用智慧型裝置讀取QR圖碼，以獲得相關資訊自主學習，因此本研究將量測學習者的探究型及興趣型求知性好奇心。研究結果顯示，製作學習內容組的學習表現較使用學習內容組的學習表現來得好，且製作學習內容組的探究型求知性好奇心亦較高，但兩組在興趣型求知性好奇心並沒有顯著差異。研究結果支持教師應用QR圖碼於汽車修護翻轉學習課程中，能有助於學習者在汽車修護專業之學習。
關鍵詞：數位學習、求知性好奇心、學習表現、QR圖碼、汽車修護
《詳全文》
參考文獻：
- Akben, N. (2018). Effects of the problem-posing approach on students’ problem solving skills and metacognitive awareness in science education. Research in Science Education. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11165-018-9726-7
- Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
- Brandenburg, D. C., & Ellinger, A. D. (2003). The future: Just-in-time learning expectations and potential implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 5(3), 308-320. doi:10.1177/1523422303254629
- Brouwer, A.-M., Hogervorst, M. A., Holewijn, M., & van Erp, J. B. F. (2014). Evidence for effects of task difficulty but not learning on neurophysiological variables associated with effort. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 93(2), 242-252. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.05.004
- Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
» 展開更多
- Akben, N. (2018). Effects of the problem-posing approach on students’ problem solving skills and metacognitive awareness in science education. Research in Science Education. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11165-018-9726-7
- Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
- Brandenburg, D. C., & Ellinger, A. D. (2003). The future: Just-in-time learning expectations and potential implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 5(3), 308-320. doi:10.1177/1523422303254629
- Brouwer, A.-M., Hogervorst, M. A., Holewijn, M., & van Erp, J. B. F. (2014). Evidence for effects of task difficulty but not learning on neurophysiological variables associated with effort. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 93(2), 242-252. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.05.004
- Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116
- Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1080/00140139508925174
- Chan, T.-W., Liao, C. C.-Y., Cheng, H. N.-H., Chang, W.-C., & Chien, T.-C. (2017). Practice and prospect of digital schools. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 62(2), 1-30. doi:10. 6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).01
- Chen, N.-S., Kinshuk, Wei, C.-W., & Liu, C.-C. (2011). Effects of matching teaching strategy to thinking style on learner’s quality of reflection in an online learning environment. Computers & Education, 56(1), 53-64. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.021
- Chien, Y.-H. (2019). Technology-enhanced learning: An optimal CPS learning application. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(16). doi:10.3390/su11164415
- Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. doi:10.2307/249008
- Deng, L., & Yuen, A. H.-K. (2012). Understanding student perceptions and motivation towards academic blogs: An exploratory study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), 48-66. doi:10.14742/ajet.883
- Disterer, G., & Kleiner, C. (2013). BYOD bring your own device. Procedia Technology, 9, 43-53.
- Dökme, İ., & Koyunlu Ünlü, Z. (2019). The challenge of quantum physics problems with self- metacognitive questioning. Research in Science Education, 49(1), 1-18. doi:10.1007/s11165-019-9821-4
- Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1986). Essentials of educational measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Fabricius, W. V., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1994). The older child’s theory of mind. In A. Demetriou & A. Efklides (Eds.), Advances in psychology, vol. 106. Intelligence, mind, and reasoning: Structure and development (pp. 111-132). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62754-5
- Falk, J. H. (2011). Contextualizing Falk’s identity-related visitor motivation model. Visitor Studies, 14(2), 141-157. doi:10.1080/10645578.2011.608002
- Förster, N., & Souvignier, E. (2014). Learning progress assessment and goal setting: Effects on reading achievement, reading motivation and reading self-concept. Learning and Instruction, 32, 91-100. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.02.002
- Gray, D. L., Chang, Y., & Anderman, E. M. (2015). Conditional effects of mastery goal structure on changes in students’ motivational beliefs: Need for cognition matters. Learning and Individual Differences, 40, 9-21. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.03.025
- Green, S. B., & Salkind, N. J. (2004). Using SPSS for Windows and Macintosh: Analyzing and understanding data (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
- Hancock, G. R., & Mueller, R. O. (Eds.). (2013). Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
- Hung, I.-C., Yang, X.-J., Fang, W.-C., Hwang, G.-J., & Chen, N.-S. (2014). A context-aware video prompt approach to improving students’ in-field reflection levels. Computers & Education, 70, 80-91. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.007
- Hwang, G.-J., & Chang, H.-F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1023-1031. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.002
- Jamu, J. T., Lowi-Jones, H., & Mitchell, C. (2016). Just in time? Using QR codes for multi-professional learning in clinical practice. Nurse Education in Practice, 19, 107-112. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2016.03.007
- Kao, G. Y.-M., Lei, P.-L., & Sun, C.-T. (2008). Thinking style impacts on Web search strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1330-1341. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.07.009
- Kashdan, T. B., Stiksma, M. C., Disabato, D. J., McKnight, P. E., Bekier, J., Kaji, J., & Lazarus, R. (2018). The five-dimensional curiosity scale: Capturing the bandwidth of curiosity and identifying four unique subgroups of curious people. Journal of Research in Personality, 73, 130-149. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2017.11.011
- Kaynar, O., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2008). The effects of need for cognition on Internet use revisited. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(2), 361-371. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.033
- Kester, L., Kirschner, P. A., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Baumer, A. (2001). Just-in-time information presentation and the acquisition of complex cognitive skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(4), 373-391. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00011-5
- Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in an urban university: An exploration of design principles. Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003
- Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. Human Development, 26(4), 222-232. doi:10.1159/000272885
- Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
- Koo, D. M., & Choi, Y. Y. (2010). Knowledge search and people with high epistemic curiosity. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(1), 12-22. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.013
- Liaw, S.-S., Hatala, M., & Huang, H.-M. (2010). Investigating acceptance toward mobile learning to assist individual knowledge management: Based on activity theory approach. Computers & Education, 54(2), 446-454. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.029
- Litman, J. A. (2008). Interest and deprivation factors of epistemic curiosity. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(7), 1585-1595. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.014
- Litman, J. A. (2010). Relationships between measures of I- and D-type curiosity, ambiguity tolerance, and need for closure: An initial test of the wanting-liking model of information-seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(4), 397-402. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.11.005
- Litman, J. A., & Jimerson, T. L. (2004). The measurement of curiosity as a feeling of deprivation. Journal of Personality Assessment, 82(2), 147-157. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8202_3
- Litman, J. A., & Mussel, P. (2013). Validity of the interest-and deprivation-type epistemic curiosity model in Germany. Journal of Individual Differences, 34(2), 59-68. doi:10.1027/1614-0001/a000100
- Litman, J. A., & Spielberger, C. D. (2003). Measuring epistemic curiosity and its diversive and specific components. Journal of Personality Assessment, 80(1), 75-86. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_16
- Litman, J. A., Robert, P. C., & Spielberger, C. D. (2005). The nature and measurement of sensory curiosity. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(6), 1123-1133. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.05.001
- Liu, Y., & Wickens, C. D. (1994). Mental workload and cognitive task automaticity: An evaluation of subjective and time estimation metrics. Ergonomics, 37(11), 1843-1854. doi:10.1080/ 00140139408964953
- Loewenstein, G. (1994). The psychology of curiosity: A review and reinterpretation. Psychological Bulletin, 116(1), 75-98. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.116.1.75
- Lord, F. M. (1952). The relation of the reliability of multiple-choice tests to the distribution of item difficulties. Psychometrika, 17(2), 181-194. doi:10.1007/BF02288781
- Matrai, R., Kosztyan, Z. T., & Sik-Lanyi, C. (2008). Navigation methods of special needs users in multimedia systems. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1418-1433. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007. 07.015
- Mussel, P. (2010). Epistemic curiosity and related constructs: Lacking evidence of discriminant validity. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 506-510. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.05.014
- Nelson, T. O., Kruglanski, A. W., & Jost, J. T. (1998). Knowing thyself and others: Progress in metacognitive social psychology. In V. Y. Yzerbyt, G. Lories, & B. Dardenne (Eds.), Metacognition: Cognitive and social dimensions (pp. 69-89). London, UK: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446279212.n5
- O’Flaherty, J., & Phillips, C. (2015). The use of flipped classrooms in higher education: A scoping review. Internet and Higher Education, 25, 85-95. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.02.002
- Pérez-Sanagustín, M., Muñoz-Merino, P. J., Alario-Hoyos, C., Soldani, X., & Kloos, C. D. (2015). Lessons learned from the design of situated learning environments to support collaborative knowledge construction. Computers & Education, 87, 70-82. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015. 03.019
- 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. MIS Quarterly, 25(4), 401-426. doi:10.2307/3250989
- Piotrowski, J. T., Litman, J. A., & Valkenburg, P. (2014). Measuring epistemic curiosity in young children. Infant and Child Development, 23(5), 542-553. doi:10.1002/icd.1847
- Quinton, S., & Smallbone, T. (2010). Feeding forward: Using feedback to promote student reflection and learning − A teaching model. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(1), 125-135. doi:10.1080/14703290903525911
- Richards, J. B., Litman, J. A., & Roberts, D. H. (2013). Performance characteristics of measurement instruments of epistemic curiosity in third-year medical students. Medical Science Educator, 23(3), 355-363. doi:10.1007/BF03341647
- Sago, B. (2011). The usage level and effectiveness of quick response (QR) codes for integrated marketing communication purposes among college students. International Journal of Integrated Marketing Communications, 3(2), 7-17.
- Sansone, C., Fraughton, T., Zachary, J. L., Butner, J., & Heiner, C. (2011). Self-regulation of motivation when learning online: The importance of who, why and how. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(2), 199-212. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9193-6
- Schneider, A., von Krogh, G., & Jäger, P. (2013). “What’s coming next?” Epistemic curiosity and lurking behavior in online communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(1), 293-303. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.09.008
- Seel, N. M., & Dijkstra, S. (2004). Curriculum, plans, and processes in instructional design: International perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Shin, D.-H., Jung, J., & Chang, B.-H. (2012). The psychology behind QR codes: User experience perspective. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1417-1426. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.004
- Song, Y. (2014). “Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)” for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Computers & Education, 74, 50-60. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.005
- Sternberg, R. J. (1982). Reasoning, problem solving, and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 225-307). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511977244.008
- Tan, A.-L., Tan, S.-C., & Wettasinghe, M. (2011). Learning to be a science teacher: Reflections and lessons from video-based instruction. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(3), 446-462. doi:10.14742/ajet.954
Journal directory listing - Volume 64 (2019) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【64(3)】September (Special Issue: Creativity, STEAM and Maker Education)
Directory
(Special Issue) Comparing the Learning Progress of Creating and Using QR Codes in a Vehicle Maintenance Course
Author: Chun-Hsin Chang (Department of Industrial Education and Undergraduate Program of Vehicle and Energy Engineering, National Taiwan Normal University), Chi-Ruei Tsai (Institute for Research Excellence in Learning Sciences, National Taiwan Normal University Department of Education and Human Potentials Development, National Dong Hwa University)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 64, No.3
Date：September 2019
Pages：119-141
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.201909_64(3).0005
Abstract：
To understand how QR code technology can be integrated into an engineering course and affects learning outcomes in a vehicle maintenance course, this study divided students into two groups: one that created QR-code content (hereafter “creating-QR code”) and another that used QR-code content (hereafter “using-QR code”). This study then examined which approach was more beneficial for learning outcomes. The students were required to either search for or scan information and would thus exhibit two types of epistemic curiosity (EC), namely “deprivation-type EC” and “interest-type EC,” in relation to information seeking. Teachers administered pretests to identify participants’ abilities, and students were segmented into either a high- or low-level ability group. Results revealed that with respect to learning progress, the creating-QR code group outperformed the using-QR code group in learning about vehicle maintenance. In addition, comparison of the results of the two types of EC indicated that students in the creating-QR code group employed a higher degree of “deprivation-type EC” than those in the using-QR code group. However, there were no differences between the two groups with regard to “interest-type EC.” These results suggest that as one form of flipped learning, teachers can assign students the task of creating QR codes. This can enable knowledge consolidation and improve student learning outcomes in a vehicle maintenance course.
Keywords：e-learning, epistemic curiosity, learning outcomes, QR code, vehicle maintenance