本研究旨在探討基於知識翻新原則之小組問題解決歷程與成效。研究方法採個案研究。研究對象為48名修習「生活科技概論」課程的大學生，以小組為單位進行課程，共分為十組，一組四至五人。教學設計是以知識翻新為原則、以知識論壇（Knowledge Forum）為學習平台（用以提供學生一提出想法、討論想法、並進而培養解決問題能力的線上學習環境）。 資料來源包括：(1)各組創意產品成果、(2)平台討論內容、(3)平台活動紀錄（例如：討論文章之數量）。資料分析兼採質性與量化方法，分析過程如下：首先、針對各組創意成品進行評分；第二、評量各組團體動力表現，並進一步將創意產品分數與團體動力分數進行相關的統計分析；第三、針對平台活動紀錄（例如：貼文數量）進行分析；第四、分析學生於平台上之想法品質，並使用「時間序列分析」探討學生想法演變歷程；第五、探討不同小組間在創意成品與問題解決歷程中表現之差異情形。 研究結果如下：(1)學生歷經14周之知識翻新活動之後，確實能提出創意想法並設計各組創意產品成果。各個小組針對生活中不同之實際問題進行發想、翻新知識，最後產出有別於既有產品之生活科技產品；(2) 團體動力（問題解決歷程的表現面向之一）與創意產品表現具有正向相關─若小組團體動力表現較優，則在該組之創意產品表現也有較佳的表現；(3)各組所經歷的創造性問題解決歷程，並非循序漸進由階段一（搜尋目標、問題）發展至階段六（實踐設計）；(4)知識翻新能幫助學生發展較高層次的認知活動，特別是關於「想法深化與澄清」之活動；(5)問題解決歷程表現較好之組別也較易產出較好之創意產品成果。反之，如果小組探究的主題已存在既有產品，或如果小組成員參與有限、或所探究的主題聚焦時間太晚，或主要參與成員並非良好的領導者時，則較無法產出較佳之創意產品成果。 本研究建議教師在教學上可以融合知識翻新原則。此外，教師應適時了解學生之團體動力與互動之情形；教師應重視學生想法品質的討論，鼓勵學生深入思考、提升想法層次。 / The purpose of this case study was to investigate group problem solving processes and outcomes in an online environment that were supported by knowledge building principles. Participants in this study were 48 undergraduate students who engaged in a course concerning with living technologies. They were divided into ten groups, with each group consisting of four or five students. This course employed Knowledge Forum as a tool to provide a collaborative learning space to help cultivate students’ ability to work creatively with ideas and solve problems. Data sources included: (1) group’s creative product design (in concept); (2) the content of students’ online discussion; (3) students’ online interaction logs (e.g., number of notes discussed). The study adopted both qualitative and quantitative analysis methods. The process of data analysis was as follows: First, group’s creative product design was assessed by a self-developed evaluation form. Second, using another self-developed rubrics, group dynamics was assessed by means of three dimensions. Additionally, the relationships between group’s creative product design and group dynamics were computed. Third, the quantity of students’ online discussion (e.g., number of notes posted) were calculated. Fourth, open coding was performed to assess the quality of students’ ideas posted in the online forum. Moreover, time series analysis was conducted to find out if students’ idea development process followed a certain pattern. Fifth, different groups’ learning outcomes and problem solving performance were compared to understand the performance differences between different groups. The main findings were as follows: (1) students could generate creative ideas and design creative products after fourteen weeks of knowledge building activities. Each group focused on a particular problem that happened in real life, and tried to solve their technology problems by means of knowledge building, in order to finally design a creative product ; (2) group’s product design and their social dynamics were found to be positively co-related, meaning that if a group had better social dynamics, this group would more likely to produce more creative product; (3) each groups’ creative problem solving process was non-linear, meaning that the process did not usually go through the six steps of creative problem solving, that is, starting from stage one (searching goals or problems) and ending with stage six (design); (4) engaging students in knowledge building was able to help them improve their ideas while developing higher-level cognitive thinking skills (e.g., how to elaborate ideas); (5) groups that have better performance in terms of problem-solving process also tended to result in better overall group learning outcomes. In contrary, when a group’s final product is similar to an existing product, or when a group’s members could not fully participate in their group’s discussion, or when a group could not develop a clear theme for design at an early problem-solving stage, or when a group’s major participants could not lead the whole team well, that group was less likely to achieve better learning outcome. Building on the findings, it is suggested that teachers should refer to some knowledge building principles as guidance for their teaching. Moreover, it is important for teachers to help monitor a group’s social dynamics during its problem-solving process. It is also equally important that teachers should pay attention to the quality of ideas discussed in the online forum and accordingly try to encourage students to think deeply, in order to improve their ideas while using higher-level thinking skills.

本研究主要目的在探討不同年齡幼兒解決需同時考量兩個因素的科學問題及遷移的表現，並探討不同教學介入對幼兒解決科學問題表現及遷移表現的影響。本研究共分二個研究，使用「幼兒認知作業」，分別在研究一探討128位，研究二探討286位3至6歲幼兒的表現。研究結果顯示，幼兒的蒐集訊息、分析整理訊息與解決問題表現間有因果關係。年齡愈大的幼兒在各個歷程的表現愈好。若是作業內容與幼兒生活經驗相關，4歲幼兒在行為上可以表現出同時考量兩個因素解決問題。解決不同概念的問題，幼兒有不同的表現。6歲幼兒無法表現需同時考量兩個因素問題的遷移。幼兒在解決需同時考量兩個因素問題時，行為及語言知識表徵層次有六個層次（層次0至層次5）。各種教學介入對層次1幼兒沒有影響。當幼兒處於層次3時，教學介入有影響效果，透過語言的說明可以幫助此時的幼兒提升表徵層次，但這些教學介入效果不足以讓幼兒達到層次5，也無法影響至幼兒的遷移表現上。 / The purposes of this study were to investigate young children’s ability to resolve problems with two dimensions and transfer, and the influences of instructional interventions on resolving these problems and transferring. There were 128 and 286 3 to 6-year-old young children in study 1 and study 2 respectively. Young children’s cognitive task was used. Results revealed the processes of searching information and analyzing information were related to the problem-solving. 4-year-old children could resolve the problems with two dimensions, when the problems were familiar. There was domain-specific knowledge on problem-solving. 6-year-old children could not transfer two dimensions to new and similar conditions. There were 6 levels knowledge representations of resolving problems with two dimensions in this study. The instructional intervention of explaining improved the level of children with level 3 to level 4, but not to level 5. And there were not effects of instructional interventions on transferring.

本研究旨在探討玩興、情緒調節能力、親子互動關係與問題解決能力之關係。首先，對學前幼兒的問題解決能力進行瞭解，再分別探討社經地位、玩興、情緒調節能力、親子互動關係與問題解決能力之相關。其次，進一步分析社經地位、玩興、情緒調節能力與親子互動關係四者在問題解決能力上的交互作用情形。最後，探討社經地位、玩興、情緒調節能力與親子互動關係對問題解決能力的預測力。 本研究採用調查研究法，以「幼兒玩興量表」、「幼兒行為問卷」以及研究者改編之「親子互動關係量表」與修訂之「幼兒問題解決能力量表」作為主要研究工具，並以立意取樣從台北市54個公立幼稚園大班中，每班選取5名五足歲幼兒為研究對象，共發出270份問卷進行調查，回收有效樣本為179份，回收率為66%，隨後使用SPSS14.0統計軟體進行描述統計、內部一致性、皮爾森積差相關、二因子多變量變異數、逐步多元迴歸等分析，得到以下研究結果： 壹、學前幼兒在問題解決能力量表上的得分大致為中等，且信心因素比起分析問題、決定兩因素得分為高。 貳、情緒調節能力、親子互動關係與問題解決能力皆有顯著的正相關，且親子互動關係與問題解決能力的相關程度最高。 參、社經地位、玩興、情緒調節能力、親子互動關係等四個因素在問題解決能力上並沒有交互作用存在。 肆、情緒調節能力的「壓抑控制」與親子互動關係的「情感性」兩者皆能有效預測問題解決能力，且情感性比壓抑控制更能有效預測問題解決能力。

科技的進步改變了當代童年的樣貌，孩子語言中的「遊戲」二字不再是過往的傳統遊戲，而是充滿聲光效果的多媒體遊戲。這樣的現象讓許多研究相繼投入探討數位遊戲對兒童造成的影響，然而在這眾聲喧嘩的議題中，關注的對象並不包含學齡前幼兒。因此，本研究站在積極理解的角度，探究學齡前幼兒在數位遊戲中的思維活動，企盼增加對當代童年的瞭解。 本研究目的是探討五歲幼兒在數位小遊戲中的問題解決歷程和策略，因此從臺北市邀請18位五歲的大班幼兒，以兩人一組的方式共同進行遊戲<小羊回家>約20分鐘，並隨後訪談5分鐘關於在遊戲中遇到的問題與策略。研究採集的資料內容包含觀察紀錄、訪談語料、錄音和錄影，並將整理後的資料以質性方式分析和詮釋。 研究發現幼兒的問題表徵受到遊戲畫面複雜程度的影響，但幼兒初始建立的遊戲假設和過關成功沒有絕對關係。而本研究考量到幼兒在遊戲中的動作與想法，重新提出六種問題解決策略：(1)反覆操作來內化按鍵功能、(2)排列組合已知條件、(3)逐步縮短與目標的差距、(4)用相同動作試探發生的可能、(5)錯誤排除、(6)重新表徵遊戲目標」。同時也發現隨著幼兒個性和風格不同，會產生出不同樣貌的問題解決歷程：「在簡單道路上循序漸進」、「賭博般孤注一擲」、「在規則中發散遊走」，最後意外地看見，過關並不是遊戲唯一的目標，在遊戲中獲得不同程度的滿足感也是相當重要的。 / The development and growth of digital games have been changing people’s childhood in the world. Nowadays, most children tend to play digital games instead of traditional ones. Though there are a great number of studies into how digital games affect children’s behavior, few ones on preschool children have been found. Through positive approach, this study, as a result, is aimed at discussing and analyzing the thinking of five-year-old children while they are playing digital games, and is also for future reference about children in digital times. The purposes of this study are designed to explore five-year-old children’s problem-solving process and strategies during playing digital game. In this study, eighteen young children in Taipei City are selected to play a digital game, “Home sheep home.” They played in pairs about twenty minutes, and then were given an interview about ‘How did you pass the game?’ and ‘what strategies did you use?’ around five minutes. In order to confirm the trustworthiness of the study, the raw data were collected from various sources including observation, conversation, audio and video. Afterwards, those records were reorganized into qualitative information for further data analysis and interpretation The conclusions of the study are: 1. Young children’s problem representation has nothing to do with accomplishing the game’s mission. Instead, it is affected by the complication of the content on screen. 2. Six problem-solving strategies are re-raised in the study like “Press keyboard repeatedly,” ”Organize all the possibilities” , ”Approach the goal gradually,” ”Repeat the same action to produce a possible result,” ”Avoid the same mistakes,” , ”represent game goal again” . 3. Three problem-solving processes have been concluded into three parts: ”Step-by-step attempt,” ”High-risk attempt” , ”Unfocused attempt “。

本研究旨在探討面對受訪者模糊及迴避難題時，記者如何追問之問題解決過程。依「受訪者模糊及迴避的相關研究」得知，「模糊」意指消息來源、訊息內容、接收者與情境的不協調狀態組成，「迴避行為」則可定義為受訪者僅對一部份或是完全未對問題提供任何相關的資訊。而「記者的追問行為」，可定義為問答接續受到挑戰或阻礙時，為滿足問答情境的一致性與連貫性，並消除接收者製造的情境障礙，提問者根據情境各個因素修正宣稱，再次提出符合對話主題情境問題。至於「問題解決過程」，問題的定義就是初始狀態與目標狀態的衝突或差異，而問題解決可說是建立問題表徵後至尋求解決方案的過程。當情境不同且社會條件改變時，人們的問題解決目標就會跟著改變，且依個體所有之不同資源形成各式各樣的問題解決策略。 本研究的研究問題為「問問題工作中，記者面臨受訪者模糊及迴避難題時的追問之解決策略、目標設定、及問題表徵相關情境之感知」，而本研究之一對一的平面媒體新聞訪問，研究方法是採取個案研究法、言說分析、及深度訪談法三種方法，分別針對新聞訪問之字詞、命題、及提問者進行分析與探究。 資料分析發現，記者在表意目標部份，常將追問目標設定於確定事物及原因，而具體資訊、限定問題範圍、及引述受訪者先前回答，則是追問策略的三大特性。在人際目標部份，記者追問問題的目標設定多為與受訪者站在同一立場，主要運用策略則為不加稱謂以展現親近之社會關係。在文本目標部份，記者追問問題的目標設定之特性，即為與受訪者之前的回答有密切關連，運用策略大多接續先前的問答情境，或與受訪者之回答在命題、語意、及功能上連貫，以及以打斷或在受訪者停頓時進行追問。 在問題表徵情境部份，在社會情境方面，記者追問時對受訪者所處的社會結構與社會團體多所感知，而採取的追問策略也會隨之強調所處的社會結構與所屬社會團體間的互動關係。在歷史情境方面，記者多以與受訪者過去之共識策略進行追問。在文化情境方面，記者會根據這些價值觀組織問題進行追問。最後，在概念與認知架構上，記者多運用理解與詮釋他人行為或事物組織追問問題。 　 本研究的研究結果可分為幾個命題呈現： 一、記者追問之解決問題策略運用，與追問目標之設定有關。 二、記者追問之解決難題策略運用，與追問時之問題表徵情境感知有關。 三、記者的追問策略運用，與其修補行為有關。 四、記者的追問目標設定，與追問時之問題表徵情境感知有關。 五、記者的追問目標設定，與立即追問與否有關。 六、記者追問之問題表徵情境，與受訪者問答互動情境有關。 七、記者追問之問題表徵情境，與受訪者模糊及迴避回答前之問答對話有關。 八、記者追問之問題表徵情境，與受訪者模糊及迴避回答有關。 九、記者追問之問題表徵情境，與新聞情境有關。 十、記者的追問時，如能感知愈多的問題表徵情境，愈能解決受訪者模糊及迴避的難題。 因此，記者進行追問行為時，首先必先判定受訪者模糊及迴避之回答為何，經由問題解決的思考過程，感知問題表徵相關情境，設定有關於表意、人際與文本之目標，進而採取可行的解決策略，順利由受訪者口中獲得所欲得的相關資訊。

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。

No description available.

本研究以確立中文版『社會問題解決量表-修正版（簡稱SPSI-R）』之因素結構及探討社會問題解決與憂鬱、壓力之關係為主要目的。 『社會問題解決』一詞指稱發生在日常生活中的問題解決歷程，社會問題解決模式與SPSI-R將社會問題解決歷程分為五個向度（因素）：「正向問題定向」、「負向問題定向」、「理性問題解決風格」、「衝動/粗心風格」、「逃避風格」。 本研究根據理論與過去文獻探索性因素分析結果，提出三種可能適合描述華人樣本社會問題解決的因素結構：五因素一階（原理論之模型）、四因素一階、五因素二階模型。以台灣大學生為樣本，採用驗證性因素分析，結果顯示五因素一階的因素結構為最佳模型，支持原模式之理論架構與SPSI-R五因素結構在華人樣本的可類比性。同時刪除第42題因其無法確切反應逃避風格因素之意涵。 採用本研究所確立的SPSI-R五因素結構探討社會問題解決與憂鬱關係，發現排除問題風格後，負向問題定向可顯著預測憂鬱；排除問題定向後，逃避風格可顯著預測憂鬱，顯示負向問題定向與逃避風格對憂鬱有獨特之預測力。探討社會問題解決對壓力—憂鬱關係的影響，結果顯示衝動/粗心風格為日常問題與憂鬱之調節變項。此結果支持社會問題解決模式中，分殊不同向度的必要性，並提供臨床上憂鬱之問題解決治療方案可採行的策略。 / Confirmatory factor analysis was used to investigate the generalizability of the factor structure of the Social Problem-Solving Inventory- Revised (SPSI-R; D’Zurilla, Nezu, & Mayden-Olivares, 2002) The SPSI-R is based on a theoretical model and was modified by empirical data consisting of five factors – positive problem orientation, negative problem orientation, rational problem solving style, impulsivity/carelessness style, avoidance style. According to the theory model and empirical data with Chinese sample, the present study proposed another two alternative model. Thus, three different model were tested. With the sample of 916 Taiwanese undergraduate students, the results showed that the original five factor model which was proposed by D’Zurilla et al. was the best for SPSI-R in the sense of goodness of fit. This finding supports the Generalizability of SPSI-R in Taiwanese. Using the five-factor model of SPSI-R to examine the relation between SPSI-R and depression. Negative problem orientation and avoidance style were both significantly related to depression even after partialing out the variance of “Style” and “Orientation” respectively. While exploring the influence of SPSI-R on the relationship of stress and depression, a support was found for the moderator hypothesis which assumes that social problem solving interacts with everyday problems to influence the level of depression. Therefore, the findings in present study supported the distinction of five factors in SPSI-R. The implications of these results for social problem solving theory and assessment are also discussed.

No description available.

国立情報学研究所で電子化したコンテンツを使用している。