none

• Main Authors: Ming-yong Kang, 康明詠
• Other Authors: Yi-hsuan Lee
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2014
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/kc889s

碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 企業管理學系 === 102 === This research attempted to determine whether individual differences will influence learning approaches and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment (mobile learning as well as traditional learning). Individual differences will include learning style (convergent, divergent, assimilation, accommodative), cognitive load (intrinsic cognitive load, extraneous cognitive load) , and achievement goal (performance-approach, master-avoidance, master-approach, performance-avoidance). Furthermore, the research compared the differences between blended learning and traditional learning to investigate the effects of applying mobile devices and handheld devices. The subjects of this study were 135 students in a management class in the National Chiao Tung University. The research adopted the static group comparison of experimental design. The students were assigned to a control group, and an experimental group. Students in the experimental group had used the m-learning systems (iNCTU) and Line but students in the control group had not. The Path Analysis was conducted to analyze the data and investigate the causalities among all parameters constructed in the research. The results were summarized as follows: I. Learning style didn’t affect learning approach, learning achievement and satisfaction. II. In the traditional environment,Intrinsic cognitive load didn’t affect learning approach;in the blended learning environment intrinsic cognitive load had a negative effect on deep approach but a positive effect on surface approach. III. In the traditional environment, intrinsic cognitive load had a negative effect on satisfaction; in the blended learning environment, intrinsic cognitive load wouldn’t affect learning achievement and satisfaction. IV. In the traditional environment, extraneous cognitive load wouldn’t affect deep/surface approach;in the blended learning environment, extraneous cognitive load had a positive effect on deep approach. V. In the traditional environment, extraneous cognitive load wouldn’t affect satisfaction and learning achievement;in the blended learning environment, extraneous cognitive load had a positive effect on satisfaction and learning achievement. VI. Achievement goal would affect learning approach 、satisfaction and learning achievement. VII. In the traditional environment, learning approach wouldn’t affect satisfaction and learning achievement;in the blended learning environment, surface approach had a negative effect on learning achievement. The Multi-group analysis was conducted to explore the difference of the two groups. The results showed that the two groups were significantly difference in dimensions of the proposed research model. The results of the study were summarized as follows: I. In terms of cognitive load, Intrinsic cognitive load→deep approach、Intrinsic cognitive load→surface approach and extraneous cognitive load->satisfaction have significantly differences in two groups. II. In terms of achievement goal, performance-approach→surface approach、mastery- avoidance→surface approach、mastery-approach→surface approach 、performance- avoidance→deep approach、mastery-avoidance→satisfaction and Mastery-approach→satisfaction、Performance-approach→learning achievement have significantly differences in two groups