本研究主要目的在於探討網路同儕互評活動對於國小學童學習動機、後設認知策略、批判思考能力、學力提升、自然科學習成就與同儕互評態度的影響，並瞭解不同教學策略對於後設認知策略與批判思考能力隨著時間改變的情形，並根據訪談資料探討影響評題的相關因素與對學習的幫助。本研究採3（評題方式）×3（測量階段）二因子混合設計之準實驗研究法，以高雄縣竹滬國小五年級三個班級共86位學生為研究對象，使用一網路出題互評練習系統，針對自然學科內容，進行為期七週的實驗教學。研究工具包括：學習動機量表、後設認知量表、批判思考測驗、學力提升量表、自然科學習成就測驗、同儕互評態度量表與半結構式訪談大綱。主要研究發現：
一、在學習動機方面，不評題、教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題三組之間並無差異。
二、在後設認知策略方面，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生在後測均高於不評題組，且具延宕效果，然而，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生在後測與延後測皆無顯著差異。此外，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生在後設認知策略後測亦顯著高於實驗前測，且具延宕效果。
三、在批判思考能力方面，不評題、教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題三組學生在後測皆達顯著差異，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組均高於不評題組，學生建構標準之評題組亦高於教師給予標準之評題組，在延後測上，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生仍高於不評題組，但是教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組則無顯著差異。此外，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生在批判思考能力後測亦顯著高於實驗前測，且具延宕效果。
四、在學力提升方面，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生均高於不評題組，然而，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組學生則無顯著差異。
五、在自然科學習成就方面，不評題、教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題三組之間無論在後測或延後測上並無差異。
六、在同儕互評態度方面，教師給予標準之評題與學生建構標準之評題兩組之間並無差異。
七、在影響評題的因素方面，包含評語的運思、電腦打字、語文能力、評題時間的限制與成就能力的高低等。
八、在評題對於學習的幫助方面，包含評量能力增強、幫助別人改進缺點、反省自己、讚美他人、提升語文能力、幫助思考、增進打字速度、提高自然科興趣、瞭解自然科內容等。
最後，根據資料分析結果進行討論，並提出教師教學、系統修改及未來研究之建議。

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of peer assessment on elementary school students’ motivation, meta-cognitive strategies, critical thinking, competency enhancement, academic achievement and attitudes within a web-based learning environment. Besides, the mediating effect of measuring time and peer assessment on meta-cognitive strategies and critical thinking was examined. Furthermore, students’ perceptions toward the facilitating effects of peer assessment on learning and factors influencing their use of the system were gathered via a semi-structured interview method. The study used a 3（assessment methods- no peer assessment, peer assessment with teacher-provided criteria, peer assessment with student-constructed criteria）×3（measure times）mixed experimental design research method. The subjects of the study were 86 fifth-graders from three classes from one elementary school in Kaohsiung county. Subjects involved in the study used a web-based question-posing and peer assessment learning system to supplement science instruction for seven weeks. The results were as follows:
1. There were no statistically significant differences among the three treatment conditions in motivation.
2. Students participated in both peer assessment groups performed significantly better than those in the no peer assessment group on both immediate and delayed posttests of meta-cognitive strategies. Besides, the performance of students in both peer assessment groups on both immediate and delayed posttests of meta-cognitive strategies was significantly superior to theirs on pretest.
3. Students participated in both peer assessment groups performed significantly better than those in the no peer assessment group on both immediate and delayed posttests of critical thinking. Moreover, students participated in the peer assessment with student-constructed criteria group performed significantly better than those in the teacher-provided criteria on immediate posttest of critical thinking. Besides, the performance of students in both peer assessment groups on both immediate and delayed posttests of critical thinking was significantly superior to theirs on pretest.
4. Students participated in both peer assessment groups performed significantly better than those in the no peer assessment group on competency enhancement posttest.
5. There were no statistically significant differences among the three treatment groups in academic achievement .
6. There were no statistically significant differences in students’ attitudes toward peer assessment between the peer assessment with teacher-provided criteria group and the peer assessment with student-constructed criteria group.
7. The factors affecting peer assessment learning strategy included constructing comments, keyboarding skills, time allocated for peer assessment and students’ different levels of achievement.
8. Student perceptions toward the advantages of engaging in peer assessment learning activity included enhancing their assessing and complimenting abilities, Chinese literacy, reflective thinking, typing speed, science competency, likings toward science, etc.
Finally, suggestions for teacher instruction, system enhancements and future research topics are proposed.

一、中文部分
李坤崇（民88）：多元化教學評量。台北：心理。
李坤崇（民91）：多元化教學評量理念與推動策略。教育研究月刊，98期，24-36。
李青蓉（民88）：以學習者為中心的網路教學觀：學習友(有)伴網（一）。遠距教育，10期，47-55。
李咏吟、吳金蓮（民89）：小老師制的概念分析與實施。載於黃政傑（主編），創思與合作的教學法（頁141-159）。台北：師大書苑。
李咏吟（民87）：認知教學理論與策略。台北：心理。
林清山譯（民82）：教育心理學－認知取向。台北：遠流。
林雯菁（民89）：國小兒童社會計量地位與自評同儕互動關係之研究。私立靜宜大學青少年兒童福利學系碩士論文。
林珊如、楊國鑫、劉旨峰、袁賢銘(民90)：工業職業學校組合語言程式設計推行同儕互評的個案研究：互評效度及學生態度。技術學刊，16卷，4期，613-623。
杜佳真 (民83)：交互學習建構教學課程對國小五年級不同批判思考能力學生速率問題解題歷程暨學習內發動機的影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
卓宜青（民90）：網路化學習歷程檔案系統及同儕評量。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
洪明洲（民89）：網路教學。台北：華彩軟體。
洪美雪（民90）：字幕對外語學習成效影響之探究。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
洪琮琪（民91）：網路出題與合作學習對學習成效之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文。
洪琮琪、于富雲、葉家忠、陳德懷（民90，10月）。線上出題互評練習系統於國小學童學科學習之應用。論文發表於逢甲大學圖書館、國立台灣師範大學社會教育學系主辦之『2001年資訊素養與終身學習社會國際研討會』，台中。
涂金堂(民84)： 國小學生後設認知、數學焦慮與數學解題表現之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
徐雍智（民90）：數學創意類比與同儕評量及其網路案例設計之研究。國立交通大學應用數學系碩士論文。
教育部（民90）：國民中小學學生成績評量準則。台北：作者。
陸正威、王慧豐（民89）：同儕交互指導數學解題方案對國小學童數學解題表現、數學焦慮及後設認知影響之實驗研究。花蓮師院學報，10期，273-298。
張玉成（民84）：思考技巧與教學。台北：心理。
張玉燕（民86）：批判思考與教學。教育實習輔導季刊，3卷，1期，39-46。
張春興（民78）：張氏心理學辭典。台北：東華。
張春興（民80）：現代心理學。台北：東華。
張春興（民83）：教育心理學-三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華。
張世忠（民89）：建構教學-理論與應用。台北：五南。
張美玉（民90）：從多元智能的觀點談歷程檔案評量在教育上的應用。教育研究資訊，9卷，1期，32-54。
陳密桃（民85）：我國臺灣地區國中學生批判思考的相關因素及其教學效果之分析研究。教育學刊，12期，71-148。
陳李綢、郭妙雪（民87）：教育心理學。台北：五南。
陳信汛（民91）：應用群集技術支援國小學童網路同儕互評之研究。國立台南師範學院教師在職進修資訊碩士學位班論文。
葉玉珠（民87）：有效批判思考教學的基礎之探討。教育研究雙月刊，59期，57-67。
郭生玉（民83）：心理與教育測驗。台北：精華。
葉玉珠、葉碧玲、謝佳蓁（民89）：中小學批判思考技巧測驗之發展。測驗年刊，47卷，1期，27-46。
程炳林（民89）：中學生自我調整學習之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
溫明麗（民91）：皮亞傑與批判性思考教學。台北：洪葉文化。
楊國鑫（民90）：推廣網路同儕互評系統於高級工業職業學校教學課程之研究。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
楊隆吉（民90）：少年小說中的同儕互動研究－以台灣省兒童文學創作獎得獎作品為例。國立台東師範學院兒童文學研究所碩士論文。
劉旨峰（民88）：網路同儕互評系統的學生群組分析。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
簡茂發（民88）：多元化評量之理念與方法。教師天地，4期，11-17。
魏麗敏（民84）：後設認知學習理論與策略。學生輔導，38期，66-75。
鄭麗玉（民80）：促進後設認知策略的閱讀教學。教師之友，33卷，3期14-17
鄭昭明 (民82)：認知心理學。台北：桂冠。
鄭英耀、黃正鵠（民85）批判思考量表之編製初步報告。測驗年刊，43期，213-225。
Costa, A. L., ＆ Kallick, P. (2000/2001). 李弘善（譯）。評量和記錄心智習性。台北：遠流。
Gardner, H. (2000/2000). Intelligence reframed. 李心瑩（譯）。再建多元智慧。台北：遠流。
Gredler, M. E. (1991/1994). Learning and Instrucction Theory into Practice. 吳幸宜（譯）：學習理論與教學應用。台北：心理。
Lazear, D. (1999/2000). Multiple Intelligence Approaches to Assessment.郭俊賢、陳淑惠（譯）。落實多元智慧教學評量。台北：遠流。

二、英文部分
Ammer, J. J. (1998). Peer evaluation model for enhancing writing performance of students with learning disabilities. Reading ＆ Writing Quarterly, 14(3), 263-276.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Boud, D., Cohen, R., ＆ Sampson, J. (1999). Peer learning and assessment. Assessment ＆ Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 413-426.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Brindley, C.,＆Scoffield, S. (1998). Peer assessment in undergraduate programmes. Tearching in Higher Education, 3(1), 79-90.
Davies, P. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37(4), 346-355.
Ennis, R. (1992). Critical thinking: what is it? Proceedings of the Forty-Eighth Annual Meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society Denver, Colorado, 27-30.
Fallows, S., ＆ Chandramohan, B. (2001). Multiple approaches to assessment: reflections on use of tutor, peer and self-assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 229-246.
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: development peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 32, 175-187.
Falchikov, N., ＆ Magin, D. (1997). Detecting gender bias in peer marking of students’ group process work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 385-396.
Falchikov, N., ＆ Goldfinch, J. (2000). Student peer assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis comparing peer and teacher marks. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 287-322.
Flavell, J. H., Miller, P. H., ＆ Miller, S. A. (1977). Cognitive development. Englewood Clifts, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Flavell, J. H. (1981). Cognitive monitoring. In W. Patrick Dickson, Children’s oral communication skills. New York: Academic Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp.21-29). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Forrester, M. A. (1992). The development of young children’s social-cognitive skill. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Gatfield, T. (1999). Examining student satisfaction with group projects and peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(4), 365-377.
Hanrahan, S. J., ＆ Isaacs, G. (2001). Assessing self- and peer-assessment: the students' views. Higher Education Research & Development, 20(1), 53-70.
Hargreaves, D. J. (1997). Student learning and assessment are inextricably linked. European Journal of Engineering Education, 22(4), 401-410.
Huitt, W. (1998). Critical Thinking. http：//Chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/cogsys/critthnk.html
Humphreys, P., Greenan, k., ＆ Mcllveen, H. (1997). Development work-based transferable skills in a university environment. Journal of European Industrial Training, 21(2), 63-69.
Lejk, M., ＆ Wyvill, M. (2001). The effect of inclusion of self assessment with peer assessment of contributions to a group project: A quantitative study of secret agreed assessments. Assessment ＆ Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(6), 551-561.
Liu, Z. F., Chiu, C. H., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Web-based peer review：The learner as both adapter and reviewer. Ieee Transaction on Education, 44(3), 246-251.
Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., ＆Yuan, S. M. (2001). Web-based peer assessment: feedback for students with various thinking-styles. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17(4), 420-433.
Lopez-Real, F., ＆ Chan, Y. R. (1999). Peer assessment of a group project in a primary mathematics education course. Assessment ＆ Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(1), 67-83.
Macpherson, K. (1999). The development of critical thinking skill in undergraduate supervisory management units: efficacy of student peer assessment. Assessment ＆ Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 273-284.
Maddux, J. E. (1995). Self-efficacy theory :An Introduction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-Efficacy, Adaptation, and Adjustment:Theory, research and application, (pp.3-33). New York: Plenum Press.
McConnell, D. (1999). Examining a collaborative assessment process in networked lifelong learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15, 232-243.
Norris, S. P., ＆Ennis, R. H. (1989). Evaluating critical thinking. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications.
Oldfield, K. A., ＆ Macalpine, M. K. (1995). Peer and self-assessment at tertiary level-an experimental. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20(1), 125-131.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., ＆ Reiling, K. (1996). The importance marking criteria in the use peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), 239-249.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., ＆ Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,. 25(1), 23-39.
Palincsar, A. S., ＆ Brown, A. N. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review. Psychol, 49, 345-375.
Pallant, J.(2001). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows(versions 10). Chicago:SPSS Inc.
Patri, M.(2002).The influence of peer feedback on self and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing,19(2),109-131
Perret-Clermont, A. N. (1980). Social interaction and cognitive development in childern. Lodon:Academic press.
Piaget, J. (1970). Extracts from Piaget’s theory. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Manual of child psychology（pp.703-732）. London:Wiley.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts ＆ P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp.451-502). San Diego, CA:Academic Press.
Purchase, H. C. (2000). Learning about interface design through peer assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 341-352.
Resnick, M. (1996). Distributed constructionism. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Science.
Riedl, R. (1989). Patterns in computer-mediated discussion. Mind-weave：Communication, Computers, and Distance Education. 215-220.
Sadler, D. R. (1987). Specifying and promulgating achievement standards. Oxford Review of Education, 13(2), 60-79.
Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and aadjustment: Theory, research, and application , (pp.281-303). New York: Plenum Press.
Searby, M., ＆ Ewers, T. (1997). An evaluation of the use of peer assessment in higher education: A case study in the school of music, Kingston University. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 371-384.
Segers, M., ＆ Dochy, F. (2001). New assessment forms in problem-based learning: the valued-added of the student’ perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), 327-343.
Sivan, A. (2000). The implementation of peer assessment: an action research approach. Assessment in Education, 7(2), 193-213.
Stefani, L. A. J. (1994). Peer, self and tutor assessment: relative reliabilities. Studies in Higher Education, 19(1), 69-76.
Stefani, L. A. J. (1998). Assessment in partnership with learners. Assessment ＆ Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(3), 289-305.
Sullivan, K., ＆ Hall, C. (1997). Introducing students to self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 371-384.
Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
Topping, K. J., ＆ Ehly, S. E. (2001). Peer.-assisted learning. Jounal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113-132.
Towler, L., ＆ Broadfoot, P. (1992). Self-assessment in the primary school. Education Review, 44(2), 137-151.
Yu, F. Y., Liu, Y. H., & Chan, T. W. (2002). The Efficacy of a Web-based Domain Independent Question-Posing and Peer Assessment Learning System. Proceedings of at ICCE2002, New Zealand, December, 3-6.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.