線上繪圖計算機Desmos融入國中學習障礙學生二次函數教學之成效研究

Use of Online Desmos Graphing Calculator to Improving the Quadratic Function Learning Outcomes Among Junior High School Students With Learning Disabilities

10.6278/tjme.202304_10(1).002

曾敏(Min Tseng)；陳國龍(Kuo-Long Chen)

Desmos ； 二次函數 ； 學習障礙 ； 繪圖計算機 ； Desmos ； quadratic functions ； learning disabilities ； graphing calculator

臺灣數學教育期刊

10卷1期（2023 / 04 / 01）

29 - 55

繁體中文;英文

本研究旨在探討透過線上繪圖計算機Desmos融入國中學習障礙學生二次函數教學成效。研究以臺北市兩名國中九年級學習障礙學生為研究對象，採用單一受試實驗研究法的跨受試多探試設計。實驗設計分為三個階段，即基線期、介入期及保留期。實驗期間以研究者編製之二次函數圖形課程為內容，進行為期3周的課程。研究發現繪圖計算機Desmos融入二次函數圖形教學對於學習障礙學生有立即及保留的學習效果，這兩位學生在未使用繪圖計算機Desmos的基線期階段其答題的平均正確率為38.3%和40%，到了開始使用繪圖計算機Desmos的介入期階段其答題的平均正確率為84%和70%，使用繪圖計算機Desmos除了能增加答題正確率並能提升其學習態度，使他們學習更加主動、有自信。

This study investigated the effectiveness of Desmos graphing calculator in improving the quadratic function learning outcomes of junior high school students with learning disabilities. A between-subject multiple probe design, which is one of the single-subject research approach, was conducted on 2 ninth grade students with learning disabilities at a junior high school in Taipei. The experiment consisted of 3 stages: baseline, intervention, and retention. A 3-week quadratic function graphics course developed by the investigator was provided, revealing that incorporating Desmos in quadratic function graphics teaching produced immediate and retained learning effects among the students. The average correct rates of these two students were 38.3% and 40% in the baseline period when they did not use Desmos, and their average correct rates were 84% and 70% in the intervention period after they started using Desmos. Using Desmos can not only increase the correct rate of test questions, but also improved their learning attitudes; specifically, the students learned more proactively and confidently.

1. 戴文賓、邱守榕（2000）。國一學生由算術領域轉入代數領域呈現的學習現象與特徵。科學教育月刊，10，148–175。
   連結：
2. Baki, A., & Güveli, E. (2008). Evaluation of a web based mathematics teaching material on the subject of functions. Computers and Education, 51(2), 854–863.
   連結：
3. Bouck, E. C. (2009). Calculating the value of graphing calculators for seventh-grade students with and without disabilities: A Pilot Study. Remedial and Special Education, 30(4), 207–215.
   連結：
4. Bouck, E. C., Bouck, M. K., & Hunley, M. (2015). The calculator effect: Understanding the impact of calculators as accommodations for secondary students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 30(2), 77–88.
   連結：
5. Ellis, A. B., & Grinstead, P. (2008). Hidden lessons: How a focus on slope-like properties of quadratic functions encouraged unexpected generalizations. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27(4), 277–296.
   連結：
6. Gagnon, J. C., & Maccini, P. (2001). Preparing students with disabilities for algebra. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 34(1), 8–15.
   連結：
7. Gagnon, J. C., & Maccini, P. (2007). Teacher-reported use of empirically validated and standards-based instructional approaches in secondary mathematics. Remedial and Special Education, 28(1), 43–56.
   連結：
8. Geary, D. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of learning disabilities, 37(1), 4–15.
   連結：
9. Godwin, S., & Beswetherick, R. (2003). An investigation into the balance of precription, experiment and play when learning about the properties of quadratic functions with ICT. Research in Mathematics Education, 5(1), 79–95.
   連結：
10. Harskamp, E., Suhre, C., & Van Streun, A. (2000). The graphics calculator and students’ solution strategies. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 12(1), 37–52.
    連結：
11. Parrot, M. A. S., & Leong, K. E. (2018). Impact of using graphing calculator in problem solving. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(3), 139–148.
    連結：
12. Spinato, H. J. (2011). The effects of graphing calculator use on high-school students' reasoning in Integral Calculus. [Doctoral Dissertation, University of New Orleans]. University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations.
    連結：
13. Witzel, B. S., Mercer, C. D., & Miller, M. D. (2003). Teaching algebra to students with learning difficulties: An investigation of an explicit instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(2), 121–131.
    連結：
14. 王秀嬿（2019）。運用計算機輔助國小五年級學習障礙學生的小數位值概念教學成效之行動研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立清華大學。
15. 杜正治（2006）。單一受試研究法。心理。
16. 孟瑛如（2003）。資源教室方案：班級經營與補救教學。五南圖書。
17. 邵慧綺（2011年2月11日）。數學學障生的學習困難。
18. 柯慶安（2013）。二次函數數位教學分析與設計之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
19. 徐敏媛（2011）。國中生在二次函數概念上的主要錯誤類型及其補救教學之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學。
20. 陳麗如（2007）。身心障礙學生教材教法。心理。
21. 曾冠博（2019）。國中二次函數相關概念GEOGEBRA補教教學之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。中華大學。
22. 鄭佩文（2020）。科技輔具融合數位遊戲式教學對於提升國中學障生的學習興趣及成效探討。臺灣教育評論月刊，9（9），154–161。
23. 羅榮福（2004）。國民中學學習障礙學生與普通學生解一元一次方程式問題之比較研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學。
24. Kandemir, M. A., & Demirbag-Keskin, P. (2019). Effect of Graphing Calculator Program Supported Problem Solving Instruction on Mathematical Achievement and Attitude. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 5(1), 203–223.
25. Maccini, P., & Hughes, C. A. (2000). Effects of a problem-solving strategy on the introductory algebra performance of secondary students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 10–21.
26. Reiken, J. J. (2008). Coming to understand slope and the Cartesian connection: An investigation of student thinking [Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (No. 3347606).
27. Steele, M. M. (2006). Graphing calculators: Teaching suggestions for students with learning problems. TechTrends, 50(6), 32–35.
28. Tajuddin, N. M., Tarmizi, R. A., Konting, M. M., & Ali, W. Z. W. (2009). Instructional efficiency of the integration of graphing calculators in teaching and learning mathematics. International Journal of Instruction, 2(2), 11–30.
29. Wurning, O. (2009, July). Modelling of a problem with the help of CAS and GeoGebra [Paper presentation]. The 9th International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching (ICTMT 9), Metz, France.
30. Ye, L. (2009). Integration of graphing calculator in mathematics teaching in China. Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(2), 134–146.