隨著學習應以學生為中心的理念在教育逐漸受到重視，如何在線上學習系統上運用主動式學習法已經是個相當重要的議題。運用主動式學習法不僅有助於學生建構自己的知識、發展高層次思考能力，並讓學生願意主動參與而成為主動的學習者。本論文探討如何於線上學習系統內運用主動式學習法來促進學習者之科學與科技的相關能力。論文內提出一個整合數種教學策略的結構化論證鷹架以促進學習者之科學解釋能力，並提出一個整合解謎式學習、遊戲式學習及學生出題策略的機制來增進學習者的演算法思維。以此架構及機制為基礎，本研究分別發展一論證式科學探究系統及一演算法思維學習系統，並透過實驗探討此二系統對於科學解釋技能及演算法思維的幫助與影響。實驗結果顯示論證式科學探究系統能幫助學習者增進科學解釋能力、產生更多解釋和疑問這二類的對話，同時解釋的對話中也包含更多的論述元素。除此之外，實驗結果也證實整合了遊戲機制及學生出題策略的演算法思維學習系統能夠增進學習者的演算法思維及解謎表現，同時提高學習者的投入程度及參與意願。本研究結果能夠做為增進科學解釋能力及演算法思維之相關研究及線上學習系統的參考。

In recent years, there have been considerable concerns on creating online learning environments which incorporate active learning methods, following the gradually concretized student oriented educational concepts. How to apply active learning methods to help students constructing their own knowledge, developing higher-order thinking skills and making them to become more active learners are identified very important when creating and using such online learning environments. The purpose of this study is to promote several skills of learners in science and technology by embedding active learning methods in online learning systems. This thesis proposes a structured argumentation scaffold that integrates several appropriate pedagogical strategies to promote learners’ skill in constructing scientific explanations and a mechanism that integrates puzzle-based game learning with a student-generated questions strategy to promote learners’ skill in algorithmic thinking. Based on the scaffold and the mechanism, this study implements two online learning systems, the Argumentative Scientific Inquiry System (ASIS) and the Turtle Graphics Tutorial System (TGTS), and conducts several experiments to evaluate the feasibility of ASIS and TGTS. A quasi-experiment is to examine the effectiveness of the structured argumentation scaffold in developing learners’ skills in constructing scientific explanations and engaging in electronic dialogues. Two intact sixth grade classes with 50 students participated in this experiment. The results show that the ASIS with the structured argumentation scaffold can help students improving their skills in constructing scientific explanations, making more dialogue moves for explanations and queries, and using more of all the four argumentative components. Another quasi-experiment was conducted to examine the effectiveness of using game mechanics alone and using game mechanics plus a student-generated questions strategy to promote algorithmic thinking skills in an online puzzle-based game learning system. Nine fourth-grade elementary classes with 242 students form three treatment groups, including one without game mechanics, one using game mechanics, and one using game mechanics plus a student-generated questions strategy. The results indicate that TGTS with game mechanics can significantly enhance students’ algorithmic thinking skills and puzzle-solving performance. Although TGTS with game mechanics plus a student-generated questions strategy is less effective than TGTS with only game mechanic in puzzle solving, it is in fact more effective in enhancing students’ algorithmic thinking skills. Additionally, this study shows that TGTS with game mechanics plus a student-generated questions strategy can enhance students’ engagement experiences and willingness to participate. The results of this study provide references for further researches and online learning system developments for facilitating students’ construction of scientific explanations and their algorithmic thinking.

Abdul Jabbar, A. I., & Felicia, P. (2015). Gameplay engagement and learning in game-based learning: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 740-779.
Abramovich, S., & Cho, E. K. (2006). Technology as a medium for elementary preteachers' problem-posing experience in mathematics. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(4), 309-323.
Alaswad, Z., & Nadolny, L. (2015). Designing for game-based learning: The effective integration of technology to support learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 43(4), 389-402.
Amorim, C. (2005). Beyond algorithmic thinking: An old new challenge for science education. Paper presented at the Eighth International History, Philosophy, Sociology & Science Teaching Conference, University of Leeds, England.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 29-58. doi:10.3102/00346543074001029
Barak, M., & Rafaeli, S. (2004). On-line question-posing and peer-assessment as means for web-based knowledge sharing in learning. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 61(1), 84-103. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2003.12.005
Barlow, A. T., & Cates, J. M. (2006). The impact of problem posing on elementary teachers' beliefs about mathematics and mathematics teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 106(2), 64.
Basarmak, U., & Mahiroglu, A. (2016). The Effect of Online Learning Environment Based on Caricature Animation Used in Science and Technology Course on the Success and Attitude of the Student for Humor. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 15(4), 107-118.
Bell, P. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817. doi:10.1080/095006900412284
Bell, P., & Davis, E. A. (2000). Designing mildred: Scaffolding students' reflection and argumentation using a cognitive software guide. In B. Fishman & S. O'Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 142-149). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bell, T., Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., & Ploetzner, R. (2009). Collaborative inquiry learning: Models, tools, and challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 32(3), 349-377. doi:10.1080/09500690802582241
Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55. doi:10.1002/sce.20286
Bouras, C., Igglesis, V., Kapoulas, V., Misedakis, I., Dziabenko, O., Koubek, A., . . . Sfiri, A. (2004). Game based learning using web technologies. Journal of Intelligent Games and Simulation, 3(2), 70-87.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (2005). The art of problem posing. New Jersey: Psychology Press.
Bunchball Inc. (2010). Gamification 101: An introduction to the use of game dynamics to influence behavior. Retrieved from http://www.bunchball.com/sites/default/files/downloads/gamification101.pdf
Butler, A., Phillmann, K.-B., & Smart, L. (2001). Active learning within a lecture: Assessing the impact of short, in-class writing exercises. Teaching of Psychology, 28(4), 257-259. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP2804_04
Carpeno, A., Arriaga, J., Corredor, J., & Hernandez, J. (2011). The key factors of an active learning method in a microprocessors course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 54(2), 229-235.
Cattaneo, K. H. (2017). Telling active learning pedagogies apart: From theory to practice. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 6(2), 144-152.
Chambliss, M. J., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Fourth and fifth graders representing the argument structure in written texts. Discourse Processes, 34(1), 91-115. doi:10.1207/S15326950DP3401_4
Chang, C.-S., Huang, Y.-P., & Chien, F.-L. (2014). An exploration of the attitude and learning effectiveness of business college students towards game based learning. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference e-Learning 2014. Multi Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, Lisbon, Portugal. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED557261.pdf
Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Lee, C. L. (2003). Web-based collaborative inquiry learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(1), 56-69. doi:10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00006.x
Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521-549. doi:10.1080/09500690110095249
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Students' questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 883-908. doi:10.1002/tea.20385
Chiu, C.-H., & Hsiao, H.-F. (2010). Group differences in computer supported collaborative learning: Evidence from patterns of Taiwanese students’ online communication. Computers & Education, 54(2), 427-435. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.026
Choi, A., Hand, B., & Norton-Meier, L. (2014). Grade 5 students’ online argumentation about their in-class inquiry investigations. Research in Science Education, 44(2), 267-287. doi:10.1007/s11165-013-9384-8
Cicchino, M. I. (2015). Using game-based learning to foster critical thinking in student discourse. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 9(2).
Clements, D. H. (2002). Computers in early childhood mathematics. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3(2), 160-181. doi:10.2304/ciec.2002.3.2.2
Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (1997). Research on Logo. Computers in the Schools, 14(1-2), 9-46. doi:10.1300/J025v14n01_02
Cohen, M., & Riel, M. (1989). The effect of distant audiences on students' writing. American Educational Research Journal, 26(2), 143-159. doi:10.3102/00028312026002143
Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education, 59(2), 661-686. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004
Cooper, J. L., & Robinson, P. (2000). Getting started: Informal small-group strategies in large classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2000(81), 17-24. doi:10.1002/tl.8102
Cooper, S., Dann, W., & Pausch, R. (2000). Developing algorithmic thinking with Alice. Paper presented at the Information Systems Educators Conference, Philadelphia, PA.
Coticone, S. R. (2013). Utility of self-made crossword puzzles as an active learning method to study biochemistry in undergraduate education. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(4), 33-39.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2008). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York, NY: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
Cugelman, B. (2013). Gamification: What it is and why it matters to digital health behavior change developers. JMIR Serious Games, 1(1), e3. doi:10.2196/games.3139
Dansereau, D. F., McDonald, B. A., Collins, K. W., Garland, J. C., Holley, C. D., Diekhoff, G. M., & Evans, S. E. (1979). Evaluation of a learning strategy system. In J. H. F. O'neil & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Cognitive and affective learning strategies (pp. 209-239). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
Delialioglu, O. (2012). Student Engagement in Blended Learning Environments with Lecture-Based and Problem-Based Instructional Approaches. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 310-322.
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2005). The systematic design of instruction. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Dillon, J. T. (1990). The practice of questioning. London, England: Routledge.
Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J.-J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education, 63(0), 380-392. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020
Dori, Y. J., & Herscovitz, O. (1999). Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 411-430. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199904)36:4<411::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-E
Drake, J. M., & Barlow, A. T. (2008). Assessing students' levels of understanding multiplication through problem writing. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(5), 272-277.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72. doi:10.1080/03057260208560187
Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades k-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Eick, C., Meadows, L., & Balkcom, R. (2005). Breaking into inquiry: Scaffolding supports beginning efforts to implement inquiry in the classroom. Science Teacher, 72(7), 49.
Elverdam, C., & Aarseth, E. (2007). Game classification and game design. Games and Culture, 2(1), 3-22. doi:10.1177/1555412006286892
English, L. D. (1997). Promoting a problem-posing classroom. Teaching Children Mathematics, 4(3), 172-179.
English, L. D. (1998). Children's problem posing within formal and informal contexts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 83-106. doi:10.2307/749719
Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2013). Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 67, 156-167. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.019
Falkner, N., Sooriamurthi, R., & Michalewicz, Z. (2010). Puzzle-based learning for engineering and computer science. Computer, 43(4), 20-28. doi:10.1109/MC.2010.113
Figueroa Flores, J. F. (2015). Using gamification to enhance second language learning. Digital Education Review(27), 32-54.
Flatla, D. R., Gutwin, C., Nacke, L. E., Bateman, S., & Mandryk, R. L. (2011). Calibration games: Making calibration tasks enjoyable by adding motivating game elements. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, California, USA.
Fullerton, T. (2008). Game design workshop: A playcentric approach to creating innovative games. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
Futschek, G. (2006). Algorithmic thinking: The key for understanding computer science. In R. T. Mittermeir (Ed.), Informatics Education – The Bridge between Using and Understanding Computers: International Conference in Informatics in Secondary Schools – Evolution and Perspectives, ISSEP 2006, Vilnius, Lithuania, November 7-11, 2006. Proceedings (pp. 159-168). Berlin, Germany: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Futschek, G., & Moschitz, J. (2010). Developing algorithmic thinking by inventing and playing algorithms. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2010 Constructionist Approaches to Creative Learning, Thinking and Education, Paris, France.
Futschek, G., & Moschitz, J. (2011). Learning algorithmic thinking with tangible objects eases transition to computer programming. In I. Kalaš & R. T. Mittermeir (Eds.), Informatics in Schools. Contributing to 21st Century Education: 5th International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution and Perspectives, ISSEP 2011, Bratislava, Slovakia, October 26-29, 2011. Proceedings (pp. 155-164). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Gündüz, A. Y., Alemdag, E., Yasar, S., & Erdem, M. (2016). Design of a Problem-Based Online Learning Environment and Evaluation of Its Effectiveness. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 15(3), 49-57.
Games, A., & Squire, K. (2011). Searching for the fun: A historical perspective on the evolution of educational video games. In S. Tobias & J. D. Fletcher (Eds.), Computer games and instruction. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5-22. doi:10.1007/BF02504836
Gee, J. P. (2005). Learning by Design: Good Video Games as Learning Machines. E-Learning and Digital Media, 2(1), 5-16. doi:10.2304/elea.2005.2.1.5
Golanics, J. D., & Nussbaum, E. M. (2008). Enhancing online collaborative argumentation through question elaboration and goal instructions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(3), 167-180. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00251.x
Gomez, L. M., Gordin, D. N., & Carlson, P. (1995). A case study of open-ended scientific inquiry in a technology supported classroom. In I. Greer (Ed.), Proceedings of AI-Ed '95, Seventh World Conference on Artificial lntelligence in Education (pp. 17-24). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Google Inc. (2015). Blockly games : About. Retrieved from https://blockly-games.appspot.com/about?lang=en
Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (2007). A framework for practical work in science and scientific literacy through argumentation. Research in Science & Technological Education, 25(3), 271-291. doi:10.1080/02635140701535000
Guin, T. D.-L., Baker, R., Mechling, J., & Ruyle, E. (2012). Myths and realities of respondent engagement in online surveys. International journal of market research, 54(5), 613-633.
Guzdial, M., Turns, J., Rappin, N., & Carlson, D. (1995). Collaborative support for learning in complex domains. In J. L. Schnase & E. L. Cunnius (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 95: Computer Supportfor Collaborative Learning (pp. 157-160). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hakulinen, L., Auvinen, T., & Korhonen, A. (2013). Empirical study on the effect of achievement badges in TRAKLA2 online learning environment. Paper presented at the Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering (LaTiCE), 2013, Macau, China.
Hall, R. H., Rocklin, T. R., Dansereau, D. F., Skaggs, L. P., O'Donnell, A. M., Lambiotte, J. G., & Young, M. D. (1988). The role of individual differences in the cooperative learning of technical material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 172-178. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.2.172
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014, 6-9 Jan. 2014). Does gamification work? -- A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. Paper presented at the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2014, Hawaii, USA.
Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
Harasim, L. (1993). Collaborating in cyberspace: Using computer conferences as a group learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 3(2), 119-130.
Hong, K. S., Brudvik, O. C., & Chee, Y. S. (2006). The impact of structured discussion on students' attitudes and dispositions toward argumentation. In R. Mizoguchi, P. Dillenbourg, & Z. Zhu (Eds.), Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 133-140). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Hsu, P. S., Van Dyke, M., Chen, Y., & Smith, T. J. (2015). The effect of a graph-oriented computer-assisted project-based learning environment on argumentation skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(1), 32-58.
Hu, H.-W., & Chiou, G.-F. (2012). The types, frequency and quality of elementary pupils' questions in an online environment. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 11(4), 325-335.
Huang, C.-J., Wang, Y.-W., Huang, T.-H., Chen, Y.-C., Chen, H.-M., & Chang, S.-C. (2011). Performance evaluation of an online argumentation learning assistance agent. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1270-1280. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.013
Hubalovsky, S., & Korinek, O. (2015). Evaluation of algorithmic thinking of students using control testing environment. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 9, 205-208.
Hull, D. C., Williams, G. A., & Griffiths, M. D. (2013). Video game characteristics, happiness and flow as predictors of addiction among video game players: A pilot study. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 2(3), 145-152. doi:10.1556/jba.2.2013.005
Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2012). Defining gamification: a service marketing perspective. Paper presented at the Proceeding of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference, Tampere, Finland.
Iordanou, K., & Constantinou, C. P. (2015). Supporting use of evidence in argumentation through practice in argumentation and reflection in the context of SOCRATES learning environment. Science Education, 99(2), 282-311.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or" doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84(6), 757-792.
Jong, M. S. Y. (2015). Does online game-based learning work in formal education at school? A case study of VISOLE. Curriculum Journal, 26(2), 249-267.
Kafai, Y. B. (2001). The educational potential of electronic games: From games-to-teach to games-to-learn. Paper presented at the Playing by the Rules: The Cultural Policy Challenges of Video Games, Chicago, IL.
Katai, Z. (2015). The challenge of promoting algorithmic thinking of both sciences- and humanities-oriented learners. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(4), 287-299. doi:10.1111/jcal.12070
Kebritchi, M., & Hirumi, A. c. (2008). Examining the pedagogical foundations of modern educational computer games. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1729-1743. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.05.004
Keil, G. E. (1965). Writing and solving original problems as a means of improving verbal arithmetic problem solving ability. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Indiana University, IN.
Kenyon, L., & Reiser, B. J. (2006). A functional approach to nature of science: Using epistemological understandings to construct and evaluate explanations. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Kim, B., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2009). Not just fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-cognitive strategies in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 52(4), 800-810. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.004
King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 358-368.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., & Salen, K. (2009). Moving learning games forward: Obstacles, opportunities and openness. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/ee50/5a90c16adaa764ea15241e4fcca6041b1179.pdf
Klymchuk, S. (2017). Puzzle-based learning in engineering mathematics: Students’ attitudes. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 1-14. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2017.1327088
Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Slotta, J. D. (2007). Internal and external scripts in computer-supported collaborative inquiry learning. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 708-721. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.021
Kuhn, L., & Reiser, B. (2005). Students constructing and defending evidence-based scientific explanations. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas, TX.
Lee, J. J., & Hammer, J. (2011). Gamification in education: What, how, why bother? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 15(2), 1-5.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood: Ablex Publishing Company.
Li, W., Grossman, T., & Fitzmaurice, G. (2012). GamiCAD: A gamified tutorial system for first time autocad users. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 25th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Lin, C.-H., Chiu, C.-H., Hsu, C.-C., & Wang, T.-I. (2015). The influence of playing a for or against a controversial position on elementary students’ ability to construct cogent arguments. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 24(2), 409-418. doi:10.1007/s40299-014-0193-2
Liu, Y.-H., & Yu, F.-Y. (2004). Active learning through student generated questions in physics experimentation classrooms. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
Lund, K., Molinari, G., Séjourné, A., & Baker, M. (2007). How do argumentation diagrams compare when student pairs use them as a means for debate or as a tool for representing debate? International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2-3), 273-295.
Lyman, F. T. (1981). The responsive classroom discussion: The inclusion of all students. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Mainstreaming digest (pp. 109-113). College Park: University of Maryland.
Malone, T. W. (1980). What makes things fun to learn? heuristics for designing instructional computer games. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSMALL Symposium and the First SIGPC Symposium on Small Systems, Palo Alto, California, USA.
Maloney, J., & Simon, S. (2006). Mapping children’s discussions of evidence in science to assess collaboration and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1817-1841. doi:10.1080/09500690600855419
McAlister, S., Ravenscroft, A., & Scanlon, E. (2004). Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3), 194-204.
McAllister, A. (1991). An analysis of problem solving strategies in LOGO programming using partially automated techniques. Washington, D.C.: ERIC Clearinghouse.
McCall, J. (2012). Navigating the problem space: The medium of simulation games in the teaching of history. The History Teacher, 46(1), 9-28.
McDonald, B. A., Larson, C. O., Dansereau, D. F., & Spurlin, J. E. (1985). Cooperative dyads: Impact on text learning and transfer. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 10(4), 369-377. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(85)90033-5
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanation through generic versus context-specific written scaffolds. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers' instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53-78. doi:10.1002/tea.20201
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (2011). Supporting grade 5-8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence, and reasoning framework for talk and writing. New Jersey: Pearson.
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1
Merrick, K. E. (2010). An empirical evaluation of puzzle-based learning as an interest approach for teaching introductory computer science. IEEE Transactions on Education, 53(4), 677-680. doi:10.1109/TE.2009.2039217
Michalewicz, Z., Falkner, N., & Sooriamurthi, R. (2011). Puzzle-based learning: An introduction to critical thinking and problem solving. Decision Line, 42(5), 6-9.
Miller, D. S. (1998). Improving secondary practical computer skills: Logo test scores through graphically designed computer programs and utilization of multimedia and technology. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED430544&site=ehost-live
Muntean, C. I. (2011). Raising engagement in e-learning through gamification. Paper presented at the The 6th International Conference on Virtual Learning ICVL 2011, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (1999). Being fluent with information technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2012). Argumentation-based computer supported collaborative learning (ABCSCL): A synthesis of 15 years of research. Educational Research Review, 7(2), 79-106. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.11.006
O'Donnell, A. M., Dansereau, D. F., Hall, R. H., & Rocklin, T. R. (1987). Cognitive, social/affective, and metacognitive outcomes of scripted cooperative learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 431-437. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.79.4.431
Oguz-Unver, A., & Arabacıoğlu, S. (2014). A comparison of inquiry-based learning (IBL), problem-based learning (PBL) and project-based learning (PJBL) in science education (Vol. 2).
Oliver, R., & Omari, A. (1999). Using online technologies to support problem based learning: Learners' responses and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 15(1), 58-79.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. doi:10.1002/tea.20035
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Pallrand, G. J. (1996). The relationship of assessment to knowledge development in science education. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(4), 315-318.
Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital Game-Based Learning in high school Computer Science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.004
Papert, S. A. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Papinczak, T., Peterson, R., Babri, A. S., Ward, K., Kippers, V., & Wilkinson, D. (2012). Using student-generated questions for student-centred assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37(4), 439-452. doi:10.1080/02602938.2010.538666
Pekdogan, S., & Kanak, M. (2016). A qualitative research on active learning practices in pre-school education. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(9), 232-239.
Perez, J. A. (1985). Effects of student-generated problems on problem solving performance. (Ed.D. Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Columbia University, New York, NY.
Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258-283.
Poulin-Dubois, D., McGilly, C. A., & Shultz, T. R. (1989). Psychology of computer use: X. Effect of learning Logo on children's problem-solving skills. Psychological Reports, 64(3_suppl), 1327-1337. doi:10.2466/pr0.1989.64.3c.1327
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York, NY: McGraw-H.
Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 20-21.
Purchase, H. C. (2000). Learning about interface design through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 341-352. doi:10.1080/026029300449245
Ramadhan, H. A. (2000). Programming by discovery. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16(1), 83-93. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2729.2000.00118.x
Ratcliff, C. C., & Anderson, S. E. (2011). Reviving the turtle: Exploring the use of logo with students with mild disabilities. Computers in the Schools, 28(3), 241-255.
Redd-Boyd, T. M., & Slater, W. H. (1989). The effects of audience specification on undergraduates' attitudes, strategies, and writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 23(1), 77-108.
Robson, K., Plangger, K., Kietzmann, J. H., McCarthy, I., & Pitt, L. (2015). Is it all a game? Understanding the principles of gamification. Business Horizons, 58(4), 411-420. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.03.006
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181-221. doi:10.3102/00346543066002181
Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-Driven Inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217-257. doi:10.1002/sce.20421
Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51. doi:10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_2
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2
Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345-372. doi:10.1002/sce.10130
Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37-68. doi:10.2307/1466656
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283. doi:10.2307/1466822
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students' understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 131-166. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0402_1
Sendag, S., & Odabasi, H. F. (2009). Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Computers & Education, 53(1), 132-141. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008
Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Video games and the future of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(2), 105-111. doi:10.1177/003172170508700205
Sharp, V. F. (1993). Computer education for teachers. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Inc.
Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19-28.
Simões, J., Redondo, R. D., & Vilas, A. F. (2013). A social gamification framework for a K-6 learning platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2), 345-353. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.007
Simon, S. (2008). Using Toulmin’s Argument Pattern in the evaluation of argumentation in school science. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 31(3), 277-289. doi:10.1080/17437270802417176
Sjøberg, S. (2001). Science and Technology in Education – Current Challenges and Possible Solutions. Paper presented at the Meeting of European Ministers of Education and Research, Uppsala, Sweden. http://www.iuma.ulpgc.es/~nunez/sjobergreportsciencetech.pdf
Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2007). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(4), 421-447. doi:10.1007/s11412-007-9028-y
Stover, S., & Ziswiler, K. (2017). Impact of active learning environments on community of inquiry. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 29(3), 458-470.
Su, C.-H., & Cheng, C.-H. (2013). 3D game-based learning system for improving learning achievement in software engineering curriculum. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology - TOJET, 12(2), 1-12.
Sung, H.-Y., & Hwang, G.-J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students' learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43-51. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019
Suthers, D. D., Weiner, A., Connelly, J., & Paolucci, M. (1995). Belvedere: Engaging students in critical discussion of science and public policy issues. In J. Greer (Ed.), Proceedings of Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED 1995) (pp. 266-273). Washington DC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
Swan, K., & Black, J. B. (1990). Logo programming, problem solving, and knowledge-based instruction. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED349968&site=ehost-live
Sysło, M. M. (2015). From algorithmic to computational thinking: On the way for computing for all students. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, Vilnius, Lithuania.
Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A framework for consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113-132. doi:10.1207/S1532768XJEPC1202_03
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Tsai, C.-Y. (2015). Improving students' PISA scientific competencies through online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(2), 321-339.
Tuzun, H., Yilmaz-Soylu, M., Karakus, T., Inal, Y., & Kizilkaya, G. (2009). The effects of computer games on primary school students' achievement and motivation in geography learning. Computers & Education, 52(1), 68-77. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.008
Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H., Krabbe, E. C. W., . . . Zarefsky, D. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory: A handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Vasu, E. S., & Tyler, D. K. (1997). A comparison of the critical thinking skills and spatial ability of fifth grade children using simulation software or Logo. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 8(4), 345-363.
Voss, J. F., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2001). Argumentation in psychology: Background comments. Discourse Processes, 32(2-3), 89-111. doi:10.1080/0163853X.2001.9651593
Wang, T. H. (2014). Implementation of web-based argumentation in facilitating elementary school students to learn environmental issues. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(5), 479-496. doi:10.1111/jcal.12061
Ward, M. (2008). Squaring the learning circle: Cross-classroom collaborations and the impact of audience on student outcomes in professional writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication. doi:10.1177/1050651908324381
Webb, A. W., Bunch, J. C., & Wallace, M. F. (2015). Agriscience teachers' implementation of digital game-based learning in an introductory animal science course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(6), 888-897.
Whitin, P. (2004). Promoting problem-posing explorations. Teaching Children Mathematics, 11(4), 180-186.
Witt, M., Scheiner, C., & Robra-Bissantz, S. (2011). Gamification of online idea competitions: Insights from an explorative case. Paper presented at the Informatik schafft Communities; Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI) - Series of the Gesellschaft für Informatik 2011 Proceedings, Berlin, Germany.
Wong, B. Y. L. (1985). Self-questioning instructional research: A review. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 227-268. doi:10.3102/00346543055002227
Wu, C.-L. (2006). Exploring the development of fifth-grade students’ explanation skills and their scientific epistemologies in inquiry-based activities. (Master's thesis), National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei. Retrieved from http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi/ccd=tm6MQT/record?r1=1&h1=1
Wu, H. K., & Hsieh, C. E. (2006). Developing sixth graders’ inquiry skills to construct explanations in inquiry‐based learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1289-1313. doi:10.1080/09500690600621035
Yang, H.-T., & Wang, K.-H. (2014). A teaching model for scaffolding 4th grade students' scientific explanation writing. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 531-548.
Yeh, A., & Chandra, V. (2015). Mathematics, programming, and STEM. Paper presented at the Mathematics Education in the Margins (Proceedings of the 38th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia), Sunshine Coast, Australia. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/91200/
Yeh, K.-H., & She, H.-C. (2010). On-line synchronous scientific argumentation learning: Nurturing students' argumentation ability and conceptual change in science context. Computers & Education, 55(2), 586-602. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.020
Yu, F.-Y. (2009). Scaffolding student-generated questions: Design and development of a customizable online learning system. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 1129-1138. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.05.002
Yu, F.-Y., & Chen, Y.-J. (2014). Effects of student-generated questions as the source of online drill-and-practice activities on learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(2), 316-329.
Yu, F.-Y., & Liu, Y.-H. (2009). Creating a psychologically safe online space for a student-generated questions learning activity via different identity revelation modes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(6), 1109-1123. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00905.x
Yu, F.-Y., & Liu, Y. H. (2005). Potential values of incorporating a multiple-choice question construction in physics experimentation instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 27(11), 1319-1335. doi:10.1080/09500690500102854
Yu, F. Y., Liu, Y. H., & Chan, T. W. (2005). A web‐based learning system for question‐posing and peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(4), 337-348. doi:10.1080/14703290500062557
Zhang, S., Zhao, J., & Tan, W. (2008). Extending TAM for online learning systems: An intrinsic motivation perspective. Tsinghua Science & Technology, 13(3), 312-317.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 145-181.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62. doi:10.1002/tea.10008
Zsakó, L., & Szlávi, P. (2012). ICT competences: Algorithmic thinking. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(2), 49-58.