臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

網際網路快速的發展，使得學習評量變得更多元化，而網路同儕互評便是一種快速且方便的評量活動，藉由網路同儕互評評量能提供更多的回饋資訊讓我們參考研究。本研究將藉由探測學生在網路同儕互評時的認知結構，進而分析其構念結構差異度：衝突(Conflict)、一致(Consensus)、對比(Contrast)與對應(Correspondence)四種。文中將對2個不同班級課程且不同評量設計的活動進行構念結構分析，並進而探討構念結構對於網路同儕互評評量之信度的關係。
我們希望探討各種不同類型的構念差異度對於信度是否有不同的影響。不同的互評評量科目與活動設計，其構念結構差異度與信度的關係。期望能藉由探測學生構念結構差異度的機制，引導學生的學習活動，增加學習的效果，進而提升同儕互評活動時的信度。

By the fast growing of internet, the learning assessment is getting variable. And the Web-base Peer Assessment is a fast and convenient assessment. By the Web-base peer assessment, we can retrieved more feedback data for research. This paper analyze the construct variation of students by retrieving students’ cognitive structure. (Conflict, Consensus, Contrast and Correspondence). This paper analyze two different class , course , and different design assessment. And then discuss the relation between construct structure and web-based peer assessment reliability.
This paper discuss the effects of different construct structure type with reliability and the relation between different course and different design. By retrieving the students’ construct variation, we hope to guide the students’ learning activities , increase the effects of learning and improve the reliability of peer assessment.

第一章 背景與動機 5
1.1研究背景與動機 5
1.2研究目標 7
1.3 問題與對策 7
1.4 論文架構 10
第二章 文獻探討與相關研究 11
2.1 同儕自評與互評 11
2.2 同儕互評之信度指標 12
2.3 相關研究 12
第三章 構念差異度分析 14
3.1分析目的與方法 14
3.2 衝突分析 16
3.3 一致分析 17
3.4 對比分析 18
3.5 對應分析 19
第四章 實驗結果與綜合討論 21
4.1 實驗流程 21
4.2 實驗結果 24
4.2 綜合討論 36
第五章 結論 39
第六章 參考文獻 40

[1].Boud, D. and N. Falchikov, Quantitative studies of student self-assessment in higher education: a critical analysis of findings. Higher Education, 1989 , 18: p. 529 — 549
[2].Bound, D. J., & Tyree, A. L. Self and Peer assessment in professional education： A preliminary studt in law. Journal of Educational Research, 1979 , 62(10), 444-448
[3].C.C. Tsai， S.S.J. Lin & S-M. Yuan， Students’ use of web-based concept map testing and strategies for learning， Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , March 2001 ,Vol. 17， No. 1.
[4].Davies, P. Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 2000 , 37(4), 346-355.
[5].Falchikov, N. Peer feedback marking: development peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 1995 , 32, 175-187.
[6].Falchikov, N., & Goldfinch, J. Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 2000 , 70(3), 287-322.
[7].Fallows, S., & Chandramohan, B. Multiple approaches to assessment: reflections on use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 2001 , 6(2), 229-246.
[8].Forrester, M. A. The development of young children’s social-cognitive skill. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992 .
[9].J.M.K. MacALPINE. Improving and Encouraging Peer Assessment of Student Presentations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1999 , Vol. 24, No. 1.
[10].K.E. Chang， Y.T. Sung & S.F. Chen， Learning through computer-based concept mapping， Journal of Computer Assisted Learning ,March 2001 , Vol. 17， No. 1.
[11].Knoy, T., Lin, S.J ., Liu, Z. F. & Yuan, S. M. Networked peer assessment in writing: Copyediting skills instruction in an ESL technical writing course. Proceedings of International Coference on Computers in Education. Incheon, Korea , 2001 .
[12].Kwangsu Sho, Christian D. Schunn. Learning Research and Development Center.
[13].Mildred L. G. Shaw and Brian R. Gaines— Comparing Conceptual Structures: Consensus， Conflict， Correspondence， and Contrast
[14].Mildred L. G. Shaw and Brian R. Gaines， Modeling the Social Practices of Users in Internet Communities， Proceedings of 7-th International Conference on User Modeling.
[15].Mildred L. G. Shaw and Laurie， F. Thomas， Focus on Education — An Interactivr Computer System for the Development and Analysis of Repertory Grids， International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1978 , Vol. 10， pp. 139-173.
[16].O'Reilly, M. and D. Newton, Interaction online: Above and beyond requirements of assessment. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 2002. 18(1): p. 57 - 70.
[17].Paul Orsmond, Stephen Merry & Kevin Reiling. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2000 , Vol. 25, No. 1.
[18].Phil Davies. Computerized Peer Assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2000 , ISSN 1355-8005
[19].Phil Davies. Using Student Reflective Self-Assessment for Awarding Degree Classifications. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 2002 , ISSN 1470-3300
[20].Slavin，R.E. Student team learning: An overview and pratical guide. ERIC Document， ED 295910 , 1998
[21].Slivan，R.E. Motivation in social constuctivist theory , Educational Psychologist , 1986 , 21(3) , pp.209-233.
[22].Sluijsmans, D. Student involvement in assessment: The training of peer assessment skills. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Open University of the Netherlands, Heerlen, 2002 .
[23].Sluijsmans, D., Dochy, F., and Moerkerke, G. Creating a learning environment by using self-, peer- and co-assessment. Learning Environment Research, 1999, 1 , 293-319.
[24].Topping, K. J. Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 1998, 68, 249-276.
[25].Topping, K. J., Smith, E.F., Swanson, I., Elliot, A. Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Bath, 2000 Jun.
[26].Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. E. Peer.-assisted learning. Jounal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 2000 ,12(2), 113-132.
[27].Vygotsky， L. S. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978 .
[28].劉旨峰, 網路同儕互評系統的學生群組分析。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文 , 1999。
[29].劉旨峰, 網路同儕互評的探討、實施、評估與增進實施品質的建議, 2002 ,實踐大學：2002電子商務與數位生活研討會。
[30].林清山, 心理與教育統計學, 東華書局
[31].林陳涌,楊榮祥, 利用凱利方格晤談法探討教師對科學本質的觀點 ─ 個案研究, 國立師範大學生物學系, 1998 ,科學教育學刊,第六卷第二期,P.113~128.
[32].惠子安, 基於凱利方格技術的網路互評系統,。元智大學資訊工程學系碩士論文, 2002 。
[33].李嘉雄, 基於群體構念結構之群體合作學習系統,元智大學資訊工程學系,碩士論文, 2003 。