注音輸入法與縱橫輸入法教學對國小資源班學生中文輸入學習成效之比較研究

Simple item page
dc.contributor王華沛zh_TW
dc.contributor.author張心怡zh_TW
dc.contributor.authorChang, Hsin-Yien_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-28T12:16:01Z
dc.date.available2009-7-10
dc.date.available2019-08-28T12:16:01Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.description.abstract本研究旨在探討並比較注音輸入法與縱橫輸入法教學對國小資源班學生中文輸入之學習成效。研究方法採單一受試研究法的交替處理設計，教學實驗分為介入期、維持期，以及類化期。本研究自變項為注音輸入法與縱橫輸入法，依變項為輸入正確率、輸入速度及類化效果，並以視覺分析法對實驗所蒐集之資料進行分析探討。本研究結果如下： 一、注音輸入法與縱橫輸入法對於所有受試者中文輸入的輸入正確率及輸入速度均具有良好的學習成效。 二、受試A與受試B縱橫輸入法之輸入正確率及輸入速度的學習成效較注音輸入法佳。 三、受試C注音輸入法與縱橫輸入法輸入正確率的學習成效並無差異。在輸入速度方面，縱橫輸入法則優於注音輸入法。 四、從類化效果之輸入正確率可知，受試A縱橫輸入法之輸入正確率優於注音輸入法；受試B之注音輸入法優於縱橫輸入法；受試C兩種輸入法之輸入正確率則無明顯差異。 五、從類化效果之輸入速度可知，受試A與受試B的縱橫輸入法輸入速度均優於注音輸入法，受試C兩種輸入法之輸入速度則無明顯差異。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to compare the effect of Chinese Keyboarding Skills t by teaching Phonetic input method and CKC Chinese input method to primary school resource program students. An alternating treatments design of single subject research method was adopted. The experiment was divided into three phases: intervention, maintenance and generalization phases. The independent variables of this study were the Phonetic input method and CKC Chinese input method. The dependent variables were the typing accuracy rate, typing speed and generalization effects. Data were analyzed by visual analysis. The major findings were summarized as follows: 1.Phonetic input method and CKC Chinese input method did make good effect both on the typing accuracy rate and typing speed. 2.For subject A and B, CKC Chinese input method was better than Phonetic input method on the effect of the typing accuracy rate and typing speed. 3.For subject C, there is no significant difference between CKC Chinese input method and Phonetic input method on the effect of the typing accuracy rate. In the aspects of typing speed, CKC Chinese input method was better than Phonetic input method. 4.Regarding to the typing accuracy rate of generalization effects, subject A performed better when using CKC Chinese input method than Phonetic input method. Subject B performed better when using Phonetic input method than CKC Chinese input method. For subject C, there is no significant difference between CKC Chinese input method and Phonetic input method. 5.Regarding to the typing speed of generalization effects, subject A and subject B performed better when using CKC Chinese than Phonetic. For subject C, there is no significant difference between CKC Chinese input method and Phonetic input method.en_US
dc.description.sponsorship特殊教育學系zh_TW
dc.identifierGN0696090065
dc.identifier.urihttp://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22GN0696090065%22.&%22.id.&
dc.identifier.urihttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/91849
dc.language中文
dc.subject注音輸入法zh_TW
dc.subject縱橫輸入法zh_TW
dc.subject中文輸入zh_TW
dc.subject國小資源班學生zh_TW
dc.subject交替處理設計zh_TW
dc.subjectPhonetic input methoden_US
dc.subjectCKC Chinese input methoden_US
dc.subjectChinese Keyboarding Skillsen_US
dc.subjectprimary school resource program studentsen_US
dc.subjectalternating treatment designen_US
dc.title注音輸入法與縱橫輸入法教學對國小資源班學生中文輸入學習成效之比較研究zh_TW
dc.titleThe Comparative Study of the Effect of Phonetic input method and CKC Chinese input method on Chinese Keyboarding Skills for Primary School Resource Program Studentsen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
n069609006501.pdf
Size:
1.06 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

學位論文