题名

「生生用平板」的網絡效果：以國小數位寫作學習平臺為例

并列篇名

Network Effects of One-Tablet-Per-Student Initiative: Taking Digitalized Composition Classroom in an Elementary School as an Example

DOI

10.6925/SCJ.202112_17(4).0002

作者

陳斐卿(Fei-Ching Chen)

关键词

一對一數位學習 ； 行動者網絡理論 ； 轉變 ； 作文教學 ； 生生用平板 ； one-to-one technology-rich learning ； actor-network theory ； translation ； composition teaching ； one-tablet-per-student initiative

期刊名称

教育研究與發展期刊

卷期/出版年月

17卷4期（2021 / 12 / 31）

页次

33 - 67

内容语文

繁體中文
中文摘要

運用數位載具學習是教育的趨勢，許多研究支持學生使用載具能提升學習成效，但載具進入教室後，許多現場教師卻產生更多困惑，可能的原因是載具進入教室後，使用上引發複雜而挑戰的動態歷程，沒有受到足夠的重視。本文借用行動者網絡理論（Actor-Network Theory, ANT），對稱性地看待「人」與「物」的獨特視野，探究數位載具進入寫作課室，會促使教室裡的師生發生哪些轉變？研究資料來自一所數位資源豐沛的小學，該校生生自備載具，本研究以寫作課為場域，透過民族誌的觀察與訪談方法蒐集資料。研究發現，載具與平臺進入寫作課堂後，新的載具和教室中原有的物件，會與教師及學生的行動彼此作用，作文課堂產生了前後兩次轉變：初期的轉變為，數位寫作教學平臺以取代的方式，轉變了教師的教學角色，且在載具與平臺的遊戲設計、學生在意成績、教師在意班級績效等多種行動體相互作用下，產生了特定的網絡效果，導致學生的寫作興趣被轉變了；後期的轉變為，教師因應第一次轉變的網絡效果，對新、舊寫作教學的各種行動體重新拆解與組合，讓寫作的學習效果再度穩定。這個研究發現顯示，數位載具未必真的能促進學習，當載具加入課程時，要留意教室裡既存的各種物件，以及與師生已經產生的連結。
英文摘要

Newly implemented technologies have been considered as one of the major strategies for educational reform and pedagogical innovation worldwide. However, many teachers, after incorporating these technologies into curriculum, have since become confused about its efficacy as a teaching companion. Unfortunately, little attention has been paid to the complexities and challenges of the adoption process. Drawing from the translation perspective of Actor-Network Theory, this study put efforts on how a platform especially designed for the composition classroom during the one-laptop-per-student initiative transformed teaching practices in an elementary school. Using ethnography, interviews, and digital footprints that actors left behind on the platform, this study traces how actors ＂enact＂ and ＂enroll＂ each other, resulting in network effects. The results revealed the changing networks of how the platform, teachers, students, and other related actors enact each other. In particular, teaching practice encountered a series of translation: schools deploying the digital writing platform, attempting to enroll students' writing interests; students gamifying the platform into something more enjoyable; teachers displacing themselves and enlisting more appropriate actors to re-deploy the assemblage. This study argues that technology itself might not be considered as an individual source for learning effectiveness. Rather, technology becomes an effect of the assemblage of teacher, students, as well as the existing non-human entities.
主题分类 社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. 林文源（2007）。論行動者網絡理論的行動本體論。科技、醫療與社會，4，65-108。https://doi.org/10.6464/TJSSTM.200704.0065
    連結：
  2. 林文源（2018）。定位差異：以糖尿病衛教佈署為例。台灣社會學，36，47-110。https://doi.org/10.6676/TS.201812_(36).03
    連結：
  3. 林文源（2014）。看不見的行動能力：從行動者網絡到位移理論。中央研究院社會學研究所。
  4. 陳至中（2021，11 月 30 日）。教團憂「生生用平板」　教育部：不會訂時數 KPI。中央通訊社。https://www.cna.com.tw/news/ahel/202111300264.aspx
  5. 教育部（2021，11 月 25 日）。班班有網路生生用平板─全面推動中小學數位學習精進方案。https://www.edu.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=9E7AC85F1954DDA8&sms=169B8E91BB75571F&s=9F7133D453CC16F2
  6. 張舒涵（2016）。以行動者網絡理論探討國小教師在數位閱讀寫作推動初期的困境（碩士論文，國立中央大學）。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/25wvuq
  7. 張德銳（2015）。研習不等於教學實踐─關鍵五堂課的評論。臺灣教育評論月刊，4（4），1-4。www.ater.org.tw/教評月刊/臺評月刊第四卷第四期網路公告版/主題/001.%20張德銳_研習不等於教學實踐－關鍵五堂課的評論.pdf
  8. 曹博凱（2018）。生態藝術課程與校園植物學習平台的發展及推廣之個案研究（碩士論文，國立中央大學）。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/m7c98c
  9. 創新數位教育平台與服務產學聯盟（2016 ∼ 2017）。明日寫作：創作島（電腦軟體）。http://league.soft.org.tw
  10. 創新數位教育平台與服務產學聯盟（2016 ∼ 2017）。明日寫作：創作島─透過閱讀帶動寫作，透過互聊帶動修改。http://league.soft.org.tw/create.php
  11. 楊喻婷（2019）。一對一數位教室的另類學習：設計與湧現的觀點（碩士論文，國立中央大學）。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/x7zvy4
  12. 趙宥寧（2021，11月25日）。教部砸200億推三計畫中小學「生生用平板」　採購、維護全包。聯合新聞網。https://udn.com/news/story/6885/5916548
  13. 戴元利（2021，11 月 30 日）。「生生平板」弭平城鄉落差？　專家：關鍵在師資而非硬體。TVBS 新聞網。https://news.tvbs.com.tw/life/1648196
  14. 謝智妃（2016）。資訊科技融入教學實踐歷程之行動敘說─以國小低年級閱讀與寫作為例（碩士論文，國立中央大學）。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。https://hdl.handle.net/11296/9mqv6x
  15. Aagaard, J. (2021). Taming unruly beings: Students, discipline and educational technology. Technology, Pedagogy and Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2021.1981993
  16. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801-831. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321
  17. Barata, G., Gama, S., Jorge, J., & Gonçalves, D. (2017). Studying student differentiation in gamified education: A long-term study. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 550-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.049
  18. Bigum, C., Green, B., Fitzclarence, L., & Kenway, J. (1993). Multimedia and monstrosities: Reinventing computing in schools again? Australian Educational Computing, 8, 43-49.
  19. Blikstad-Balas, M., & Davies, C. (2017). Assessing the educational value of one-to-one devices: Have we been asking the right questions? Oxford Review of Education, 43(3), 311-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1305045
  20. Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Sociological review monograph: Vol. 32. Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? (pp. 196-223). Routledge; Kegan Paul.
  21. Campbell, D. T. (1957). Factors relevant to the validity of experiments in social settings. Psychological Bulletin, 54(4), 297-312. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040950
  22. Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., & Marjanovic, O. (2015, November 30-December 4). Ethical implications of it-enabled information flows conceived as intermediaries or mediators [Paper presentation]. Australasian Conference on Information Systems (ACIS) 2015, Adelaide, Australa.
  23. Chan, T.-W., Looi, C.-K., Chen, W., Wong, L.-H., Chang, B., Liao, C. C.-Y., Cheng, H., Chen, Z.-H., Liu, C.-C., Kong, S.-C., Jeong, H., Mason, J., So, H.-J., Murthy, S., Yu, F.-Y., Wong, S.-L., King, R. B., Gu, X., Wang, M., … Ogata, H. (2018). Interest-driven creator theory: Towards a theory of learning design for Asia in the twenty-first century. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(4), 435-461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0122-0
  24. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. Teachers College Press.
  25. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Harvard University Press.
  26. Cuban, L. (2017, April 30). Can technology change how teachers teach? (Part 1). Larry Cuban on School Reform and Classroom Practice. https://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2017/04/30/can-technology-change-how-teachers-teach-part-1/
  27. Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113(1), 1-40. https://doi.org/10.1086/517897
  28. Feenberg, A. (2017). Technosystem: The social life of reason. Harvard University Press.
  29. Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-Network Theory in education. Routledge.
  30. Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2011). Emerging approaches to educational research: Tracing the socio-material. Routledge.
  31. Ferraro, S. (2018). Is information and communication technology satisfying educational needs at school? Computers & Education, 122, 194-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.002
  32. Foucault, M. (1980). The confession of the flesh (C. Gordon, Trans.). In C. Gordon (Ed.), Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977 (pp.194-228). Pantheon Books. (Original work published 1977)
  33. Govender, D. W., & Chitanana, L. (2016). Perceptions of information and communications technology (ICT) for instructional delivery at a university: From technophobic to technologically savvy. The African Journal of Information Systems, 8(2), 70-85.
  34. Hannon, J. (2009). Breaking down online teaching: Innovation and resistance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(1), 14-29. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.1178
  35. Harper, B., & Milman, N. B. (2016). One-to-one technology in K-12 classrooms: A review of the literature from 2004 through 2014. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 48(2), 129-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2016.1146564
  36. Hembre, O. J. (2019). Exploring iPad integration in primary schools: The interaction of policyinitiated reforms, availability assemblages, and non-digital materials. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 51(4), 342-355. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2019.1646680
  37. Joyce-Gibbons, A., Galloway, D., Mollel, A., Mgoma, S., Pima, M., & Deogratias, E. (2018). Mobile phone use in two secondary schools in Tanzania. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 73-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9586-1
  38. Kamp, A. (2018). Assembling the actors: Exploring the challenges of ‘system leadership’ in education through Actor-Network Theory. Journal of Education Policy, 33(6), 778-792. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1380231
  39. Klein, A., Sørensen, C., de Freitas, A. S., Pedron, C. D., & Elaluf-Calderwood, S. (2020). Understanding controversies in digital platform innovation processes: The Google glass case. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 152, 119883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.119883
  40. Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern (C. Porter, Trans.). Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1991)
  41. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University Press.
  42. Law, J. (1999). After ANT: Complexity, naming and topology. The Sociological Review, 47(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03479.x
  43. Maninger, R. M., & Holden, M. E. (2009). Put the textbooks away: Preparation and support for a middle school one-to-one laptop initiative. American Secondary Education, 38(1), 5-33.
  44. Matthews, A. (2019). Design as a discipline for postdigital learning and teaching: Bricolage and Actor-Network Theory. Postdigital Science and Education, 1, 413-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-019-00036-z
  45. Mol, A., & Law, J. (2002). Complexities: An introduction. In J. Law & A. Mol (Eds.), Complexities: Social studies of knowledge practices (pp.1-22). Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822383550-001
  46. Nikou, S. A., & Economides, A. A. (2018). Mobile-based assessment: A literature review of publications in major referred journals from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 125, 101-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.006
  47. Peppler, K., Rowsell, J., & Keune, A. (2020). Editorial: Advancing posthumanist perspectives on technology-rich learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(4), 1240-1245. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12979
  48. Reyes Jr., V. C. (2013). Sense-making of teachers in the midst of information communication technology (ICT) reforms in schools: An exploratory study in a Singapore context. TMC Academic Journal, 8(1), 14-27. https://tmc.edu.sg/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/TMC-Acad-Journal-Vol-08-Issue-1.pdf
  49. Selwyn, N., Nemorin, S., Bulfin, S., & Johnson, N. F. (2017). Left to their own devices: The everyday realities of one-to-one classrooms. Oxford Review of Education, 43(3), 289-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2017.1305047
  50. Sharples, M., Scanlon, E., Ainsworth, S., Anastopoulou, S., Collins, T., Crook, C., Jones, A., Kerawalla, L., Littleton, K., Mulholland, P., & O’Malley, C. (2015). Personal inquiry: Orchestrating science investigations within and beyond the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(2), 308-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2014.944642
  51. Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning: Technology and knowledge in educational practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511576362
  52. Tallvid, M. (2016). Understanding teachers’ reluctance to the pedagogical use of ICT in the 1:1 classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 21(3), 503-519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9335-7
  53. Thumlert, K., de Castell, S., & Jenson, J. (2015). Short cuts and extended techniques: Rethinking relations between technology and educational theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 47(8), 786-803. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2014.901163
  54. Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: A systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555-575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2
  55. Warren, W. (2003, November 29-December 3). Actor Network Theory goes to school [Paper presentation]. NZARE/AARE Joint Conference 2003: Educational Research, Risks & Dilemmas, Auckland, New Zealand. https://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2003/war03832.pdf
  56. Zawacki-Richter, O., Baecker E. M., & Vogt S. (2009). Review of distance education research (2000 to 2008): Analysis of research areas, methods, and authorship patterns. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(6), 21-50. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i6.741
  57. Zawacki-Richter, O., & Latchem, C. (2018). Exploring four decades of research in Computers & Education. Computers & Education, 122, 136-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.001
  58. Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Lin, C.-H., & Chang, C. (2016). Learning in one-to-one laptop environments: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 1052-1084. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316628645
print cancel