| 摘要: | 撰寫英文議論文的能力普遍受到大學英文教學者的重視，因為大學生必須具備這個未來在學術領域或是職場所需要的重要能力。研究指出學生在學習撰寫英文議論文時會面臨諸多困難，這些困難根源於對議論本質的理解。因為議論是以合作、整合及產出含有論點、證據及論證的有系統之論述。過往的議論文教學著重在個人的教學，因此學生少有機會以合作的方式學習。近年來，英文教學及研究者也不斷在尋找能協助學生增加議論文品質的教學法。而以合作方式來精進想法的知識翻新理論及以電腦輔助的知識翻新活動，由於與議論的本質不謀而合，或許是一個可行的方式。因此本研究旨在探討透過電腦輔助知識翻新的活動對於大學生英文議論文寫作表現之影響。活動的設計採用並結合Zhang, et al., (2009)提出的二種知識翻新合作環境：小組式合作(Fixed small-groups)及機遇式合作(Opportunistic collaboration)。前者符合大多數課堂的學習情境及台灣的學習文化脈絡，每個小組由3-5人組成，屬於小型社群，後者則是最接近知識翻新理論的大型社群。由於考量學生並沒有相關的知識翻新學習經驗，所以本研究結合上述兩種合作環境結合成二種新的知識翻新合作方式：漸進式知識翻新合作方式(Progressive knowledge building setting)及傳統式知識翻新合作方式(Conventional setting)。漸進式先讓學生進行小組式合作後，再進行機遇式合作，傳統式則均以小組式合作方式進行。
研究對象為台灣北部某國立大學修習通識英文閱讀及寫作課程的66位大學生，採用準實驗研究法。整個研究設計是在現有的課程架構下結合知識翻新的活動，在知識翻新的環境中依據不同的知識翻新合作方式分為實驗組(32位)及對照組(34位)，實驗組採用漸進式合作方式，對照組採用傳統式合作方式。本研究用「知識論壇」平台作為支持學生以精進想法、知識自主學習、及形成社群的電腦輔助知識翻新的環境。學生在知識翻新的原則引導下，在知識論壇進行二次社會性議題的討論，並將討論後的想法實踐於所需寫出的二篇英文議論文。本研究資料來源包含：(1)知識翻新環境的感知(包含想法、自主學習、社群的形成等三面向)在二次知識翻新活動前中後的評分；(2)學生所寫的二篇英文議論文(包含架構及品質二面向)前後的評分；(3)學生在知識論壇的想法發展歷程、序列分析結果及自我反思的意見；(4)議論文寫作自我效能前後測。
資料分析方式是將量化資料分析，質性資料內容則先進行編碼後進行量化分析。研究結果摘要如下：(1)知識翻新環境：本研究所營造的知識翻新環境有助於支持兩組學生精進想法、知識自主學習和形成社群。實驗組在第二次知識翻新活動後的感知在精進想法及形成社群的二個面向明顯優於對照組；(2)議論文的架構及品質：二組學生在進行知識翻新活動後所寫的英文議論文經過編碼及分析後，在整體架構及立場、提出的主觀客觀的證據及反駁等論點的議論品質均有明顯提升。特別是採用漸進式合作方式的實驗組在第二次以機遇式合作方式進行的知識翻新活動後相較於對照組有顯著進步；(3)知識論壇想法發展歷程、序列分析及自我反思：從量化的分析結果得知，兩組在知識論壇發表想法、閱讀他人想法並給予回應，顯示學生在平台上會主動進行想法的討論與翻新。然而，在第二次知識翻新活動中，不同的合作方式對於學生的發展歷程和第一次的活動在發表想法、閱讀他人想法及給予回應的數量則產生明顯的差異。從序列分析的結果發現實驗組與對照組在知識翻新活動中的鷹架使用策略有所不同。從自我反思的結果也發現採用漸進式知識翻新合作方式的實驗組更能體會知識翻新的含意；(4)議論文寫作自我效能：整體而言，兩組學生在進行完二次知識翻新活動後，對於英文議論文的寫作更有信心，值得注意的是實驗組學生在進行完知識翻新活動後，對於想法、議論文想法及寫議論文時的自我規律等三個面向更有顯著差異。
綜上所述，電腦輔助知識翻新活動對於大學生英文議論文寫作表現有顯著的幫助，學生透過不同的合作方式在知識論壇進行討論時，能共同將想法翻新、自主學習、並形成社群，將精進後的想法實踐在英文譯論文的寫作上，使議論文的架構及品質均獲得明顯進步。本研究結果亦可提供給未來想要在現有的課程進度中結合知識翻新活動的教師一個重要參考。然而，在想法的精進過程、各個想法之間的關聯性、及使用不同知識翻新合作方式與在知識翻新活動中的鷹架使用策略及學生議論文寫作自我效能之間的相互關係尚未能完全釐清，值得未來作進一步之研究。
;In English education, argumentative essay writing ability that can help university students succeed in both their future academic contexts or workplaces has been recognized as an important goal. Previous research found out that argumentative essay writing is difficult for university students to learn. In order to help students to overcome the difficulties, some studies have been conducted to use different teaching approaches or computer-assisted language learning tools. However, these studies showed that students might increase their content knowledge but they might not efficiently attain higher levels of argumentation in their writings. In addition, students did not necessarily have the intentions to collaborate with others, which is the key to successful argumentation, and their discussion were sometimes out of focus. Thus, there is still scope for improvement.
Recently, the computer-supported collaborative knowledge building pedagogy focusing on ideas improvement, active agents, and collective community knowledge advancement has been proposed and may be a possible solution. In this study, two knowledge building environment settings were adopted: progressive knowledge building setting and conventional setting. The main purposes of this study were to see if the two groups of students with different knowledge building environment settings differ in their perceptions of the knowledge building learning environment, argumentative essay writing performance, KB process and reflections, and the relationship between students’ argumentation writing self-efficacy and their argumentative essay performance. Moreover, how teachers in practice implement the KB activities in the existing curriculum.
This study adopted quasi-experimental method. The participants (n=66) were divided into the experimental group (n=32) with progressive knowledge building setting and the control group (n=34) with conventional setting. The conduct of this study was divided into two phases. In each phase, both groups of students used the Knowledge Forum to discuss one topic for finishing an argumentative essay after class and provided reflections in class. According to the students’ responses, they perceived the knowledge building learning environments in both phases compared to their previous learning environments. From the analysis of students’ argumentative essays in this study, the results showed that both groups of students have improved the structure and quality of their argumentative essays. It is noted that the experimental group that used progressive knowledge building setting in the second phase outperformed the control group in this study. The two groups of students in both knowledge building environment settings increased their ideas diversity, became more active agents, and tended to form a collaborative community especially the experimental group. Finally, the results of the argumentation self-efficacy writing scale showed that the experimental group had higher confidence on the dimensions related to argumentation and they seemed to perform better on their argumentative essays.
In sum, this study was one of the initial attempts to explore the possibility of the implementation of computer-supported collaborative knowledge building to promote university students’ English argumentative essay writing performance. The results in this study may not only validate the effects of computer-supported collaborative knowledge building on the argumentative essay writing, but also offer some suggestions to the English educators who are interested in helping students improve their argumentative essay writing performance. Especially for those who want to combine the KB activities with their existing curriculums. However, the correlations between the students’ KB process and their argumentative essay performance need more clarifications in the future research. |
