動機型態對不同能力合作學習成效及互動行為之研究

Effects of Motivational Model and Different Ability on Achievement and Interaction during Cooperative Learning Condition

10.6223/qcpe.2601.201203.2014

陳榮章(Rong-Chang Chen)

合作學習 ； 親和力 ； 互動行為 ； cooperative learning ； need for affiliation ； interaction behavior

中華體育季刊

26卷1期（2012 / 03 / 01）

117 - 123

繁體中文

在多元文化互動的體育教學歷程中，教師必須以新的思維、創新的教學方法來加強有效的互動行為並解決運動技能學習的問題，本文在探討動機型態對不同能力合作學習成效及互動行為之影響，採用立意取樣，以健體學習領域國中學生120人為對象，以2x3因子設計交互分析。發現高親和力學生在學習的成就上顯著的高於低親和力的學生。在能力的主要效果也發現，高能力配對與高低能力配對皆顯著的超越低能力配對的平均數。然而，高能力配對與高低能力配對的平均數，二者之間卻沒有顯著的差異。在動機與能力配對因子的顯著交互作用分析指出，高能力與高低能力配對學生接受親和力合作學習教學課程之後，在學習成效方面顯著的高於那些低能力配對的學生。然而，高能力配對與高低能力配對的平均數，二者之間卻沒有顯著的差異。在預測學習成就與互動行為的關係上，顯示『提供解釋技能問題』與『具有正面的社交行為』及『具有快樂學習氣氛』3 種互動學習成就有很強的顯著相關。另外在高能力配對與高低能力配對的平均數，二者之間卻沒有顯著的差異，合作學習可能是一項有效的學習動機策略。

It is very important to promote interaction and strategies during Physical Education program. This study was to investigate the effects of motivational Model and different ability on achievement and interaction during cooperative learning condition. A 2x3 factorial design for experimental study. 120 junior high students from purposive sampling classified as high and high, high and low and low and low, were randomly assigned to ability treatments. This study indicated that on motivational factor, Students working group high need for affiliation significantly outscored those students on low need for affiliation. On ability factor, Students working group with high and high, high and low pair significantly outscored those student on low and low pair. However, the group with high and high comparing with high and low pair was not significantly different condition. On Interaction, Students working need for affiliation cooperative learning condition with high and high, high and low pair significantly outscored those students on low and low pair. Also, the group with high and high comparing with high and low pair was not significantly difference. In addition, the results also revealed that three behavior interactions were significantly different for predicting performance including explanations skill problem, positive social skill and happy learning condition. The group with high and high comparing with high and low pair was not significantly difference. The implications for cooperative learning use of motivation strategies for sport education and future research were discussed.

1. 周建智、王育文、李朝信、黃美瑤(2010)。運用小組遊戲競賽法在國小體育課之應用－問題解決歷程理論觀點。運動教育學報，4(2)，1-14。
   連結：
2. 林信宏、黃美瑤、石國棟、周建智(2006)。國小學童動作技能表現、運動技能概念與學習動機之關聯。大專體育學刊，8(1)，47-58。
   連結：
3. 洪新來(2007)。獎勵結構與親和力在合作學習成效之研究。體育學報，40(1)，93-104。
   連結：
4. 徐岳聖、林錚、周建智(2007)。探究合作學習與概念構圖策略介入桌球課對大學生批判性思考能力與桌球動作技術之影響。北體學報，15，67-80。
   連結：
5. 葉秀煌(2011)。同儕互動回饋策略在合作學習情境下對木球學習成效與動機之研究。體育學報，44(1)，93-104。
   連結：
6. 鄭麗媛(2008)。合作學習與訊息策略運用對韻律體操動作技能學習成效之影響。體育學報，41(3)，69-80。
   連結：
7. Artut, P. D.(2010).Experimental evaluation of the effectives of cooperative learning on kindergarten children' s mathematics ability.International Journal of Educational Research,48,370-380.
8. Bulter, J. I.(ed.),Griffin, L. L.(ed.)(2005).Teaching games for understanding: Theory, research, and practive.Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.
9. Darst, P. W.(ed.),Zakrajsek, D. B.(ed.),Mancini, V. J.(ed.)(1989).Analyzing physical education and sport instruction.Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics.
10. Deci, E. L.(1975).Intrinsic motivation.New York:Plenum Press.
11. Dempsey, J.(ed.),Sales, G. C.(ed.)(1993).Interactive instruction and feedback.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Educational Technology Publications.
12. Hooper, S.(1992).Effects of peer interaction during computer-based mathematics instruction.Journal of Educational Research and Development,85(3),180-189.
13. Hooper, S.,Hannafin, M. J.(1991).Effects of group composition on achievement, interaction, and learning efficiency during computer-based cooperative instruction.Educational Technology Research and Development,39(3),27-40.
14. Jackson, D. N.(1974).Personality research form manual.New York:Research Psychologists Press.
15. Siedentop, D.(1991).Developing teaching skills in physical education.Palo Alto, CA:Mayfield.
16. Simsek, A.,Sales, G. C.(1993).The effects of instructional control on achievement, confidence, and attitudes in computer-based cooperative and individual learning.Journal of Computer- Based Instruction,20(3),81-86.
17. Slavin, R. E.(1991).Synthesis of research on cooperative learning.Educational Leadership,48(5),408-422.
18. Sutter, E. G.,Reid, J. B.(1969).Learner variables and interpersonal conditions incomputer-assisted instruction.Journal of Educational Psychology,60,153-157.
19. 國立臺灣師範大學學校體育研究發展中心編(1993)。樂趣化教材彙編。臺北市:教育部。
20. 教育部(2001)。國民中小學九年一貫課程：暫行綱要－健康與體育學習領域。臺北市:教育部。
21. 許義雄(1997)。學校體育教材教法與評量。臺北市:教育部。
22. 黃俊清(2003)。2002年國際木球研習會報告書，臺北市:
23. 黃政傑、林佩璇(1995)。合作學習。臺北市:五南。
24. 黃朝嘉(2009)。嘉義市，國立嘉義大學。

1. 陳詠儒,周建智,王駿濠,王信凱(2022)。從腦與認知科學觀點探討體育課的價值與應用。體育學報，55(2)，113-132。
2. 蔣世寶(2021)。基於問題導向課程活動之合作學習研究。中科大學報，8(2)，53-78。
3. 劉佳儒、張美珍、王裕宏(2017)。以結構方程模式檢驗大學生參與創意競賽之動機因素。科技博物，21(2)，27-50。