引導合作學習對於國小學童學習程式設計之影響─以KPL為例

Abstract

本研究將合作學習運用在國小六年級之KPL程式設計教學中，並探討引導學習單之使用對於國小學童合作學習程式設計之影響。本研究採準實驗研究法，將兩班共66位學童隨機分成引導組（實驗組）與非引導組（控制組）。引導組所使用之引導學習單乃由研究者針對分析、設計、實作、除錯和反思等五大解題步驟，分別設計引導問題，以協助學童經由互相討論，切實執行每一解題步驟，期能助其順利解題。實驗總共進行17週，其間舉行期中考與期末考；兩次考試分別包含筆試與上機考兩部份。實驗過程中，研究者另以錄影機及螢幕錄製軟體記錄學生之合作解題過程，以收集各組在解題各階段所花費之時間以及小組成員間之合作解題互動行為。研究結果顯示，引導組在期中考筆試以及期末考筆試與上機考之成績均明顯優於非引導組，其差異達到統計上之顯著性。在解題時間方面，引導組在分析、設計與實作階段所花費之時間顯著多於非引導組；相對地，引導組在除錯階段所花費之時間顯著少於非引導組。此外，引導組在反思階段也比非引導組投入較多時間。在合作解題互動行為方面，引導組出現較多解題內容相關之討論。教學實驗後針對引導組學生所進行之個別訪談顯示，學生普遍認為引導學習單有助於學生順利完成解題。This study aims to investigate if collaborative learning using guiding worksheets would facilitate sixth graders’ learning to program in KPL. A quasi-experiment was used in this study, in which two intact classes of 33 students each were randomly assigned to be the experimental (i.e., guided-collaboration) group and the control (i.e., non-guided-collaboration) group. Each team of the experimental group was provided with a worksheet for each programming task. The worksheet contained a sequence of task-specific guiding questions organized into five sections—analysis, design, coding, debugging and reflection. The purpose of the guiding questions was to prompt team members to conduct meaningful discussion during the problem-solving processes, hence helping them to solve problems successfully. The experiment lasted 17 weeks, during which a midterm and a final exam were given, each consisting of a written part and a hands-on programming part. Video recorders and screen capture software were used to collect data about how much time the teams spent on each problem-solving step and how team members collaborated with one another during the problem-solving processes. Findings from this study showed that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group in the written part of the midterm exam and in both the written and the hands-on programming parts of the final exam. As far as the amount of time spent on each problem-solving step, the experimental group spent significantly more time on analysis, design and coding, hence much less time was needed for debugging. The experimental group also spent statistically significant more time than the control group on reflection. An analysis of team dynamics revealed that the experimental group were better able to conduct meaningful discussions focusing on problem-solving-related topics. Those students of the experimental group who were interviewed after the experiment mostly agreed that the guiding questions provided in the worksheet were effective in guiding them toward successful solutions.