| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北教育大學 === 教育傳播與科技研究所 === 103 === This study aimed to understand elementary students’ learning motivation and result by applying the annotation functions of All-in-One PCs and abstract text to the teaching of social studies. Based on the findings, some specific suggestions are recommended for teaching and research reference.
This study adopted a quasi-experimental research method. Four classes of sixth grade students participated in the experiment. The researcher was actually the teacher. The teacher dominated the teaching by summarizing the text and operating the annotation functions in the controlled group. For the first experimental group, the teacher summarized the text and the students operated the annotation functions. In the second experimental group, the students summarized the text and the teacher operated the annotation functions. As for the third experimental group, the students do both the abstract text and the annotation functions.
The experiment lasted for four weeks, three lessons per week, and the subject was social studies. Assessments were evaluated before and after the experiment to observe the change in students’ learning result. Data was collected and two-way ANCOVA was analyzed.
Conclusions of the study are as follows:
1. The impact on learning motivation
(a) Different teaching methods and genders did not lead to a significant interaction on learning result.
(b) There was a positive effect on learning motivation by applying All-in-One PCs to diversified teaching methods, but it didn’t reach a significant difference.
(c) Different genders did not lead to a significant difference.
2. The impact on learning efficiency
(a) Different teaching methods and genders did not lead to a significant interaction on students learning efficiency.
(b) There was a positive effect on learning efficiency by applying All-in-One PCs to diversified teaching methods.
(i) The students from the first experimental group performed better than the controlled group students, and reached a significant difference.
(ii) The students from the second experimental group performed better than the controlled group students, but did not reach a significant difference.
(iii) The students from the third experimental group performed better than the controlled group students, and reached a significant difference.
(iv) Girl students performed better than boy students.
|
|---|
