本研究主要目的在探討出題與合作學習策略運用對精熟目標、趨向表現目標、逃避表現目標等三種不同目標導向，學習動機、認知與後設認知策略、學習成就以及學習滿意度、學力提昇、學習焦慮等學習經驗的影響，並進一步瞭解不同教學策略對三種不同目標導向、學習動機、認知與後設認知策略隨著時間而改變的情形。本研究採2（出題與不出題）X2（合作與獨立）X3（測量階段）三因子混合設計之準實驗研究法，以高雄市瑞祥國小六年級四個班為研究對象，有效樣本數為132人，利用一網路出題互評練習系統，進行為期四週的實驗教學。測驗工具包括：目標導向量表、學習動機量表、認知與後設認知學習策略量表、自然科學習成就測驗及學習經驗量表。除自然科成就測驗進行後測與延後測、學習經驗量表進行後測外，其餘量表皆進行前測、後測、與延後測以瞭解測量時間對此依變項之影響情形。主要研究發現：一、用網路出題互評練習系統學習時，在維持學生的精熟目標上，出題顯著高於不出題，合作學習顯著高於單獨學習；二、在趨向表現目標上，合作出題顯著高於單獨出題；三、在逃避表現目標上，各組之間並無差異，然延後測之得分顯著高於前測；四、在工作價值上，合作學習顯著高於單獨學習。然延後測之得分顯著低於前測。五、在自我效能與期望成功上，各組之間並無顯著差異；六、在認知策略上，出題組顯著高於不出題組，且具延宕效果。此外出題組在認知策略上顯著高於實驗前，且具延宕效果；七、在後設認知策略上，合作出題組顯著高於合作不出題組，且具延宕效果。此外合作出題組在後設認知策略上顯著高於實驗前，且具延宕效果；八、就學習成就而言，各組之間並無顯著差異。九、考量學生學習滿意度、學力提昇、與學習焦慮，採用合作出題、單獨出題、合作不出題三種方式比單獨不出題效果佳。最後，根據研究結果進行討論並提出教師教學、系統修改及未來研究的建議。

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of question-posing and cooperative learning strategies on students’ mastery goal, performance-approach goal, avoidance-performance goal orientation, motivation, cognitive strategies, meta-cognitive strategies, academic achievement, satisfaction, competency enhancement and anxiety within a web-based learning environment. Furthermore, the mediating effect of measuring time on different goal orientations, motivation, cognitive strategies and meta-cognitive strategies was examined. The study used 2 (question-posing v.s. no question-posing) x 2 (cooperative learning and individualistic learning) x 3(measure times) mixed experimental design. The subjects of this study were 132 sixth-graders from four classes from one elementary school in Kaohsiung City. A Web-based learning system that enables student to pose/peer review/view question as well as practice was used in the study for four consecutive weeks. A variety of measurement instrument with established reliability and validity was used in this study. The results were as follows:
1. Students participated in question-posing performed significantly better than those without question-posing activity in delayed test of mastery goal. Besides, students participated in the cooperative learning performed significantly better than those in individualistic learning in master goal.
2. Students participated in the cooperative learning performed significantly better than those in individualistic learning in performance-approach goal.
3. There were no statistically significant differences between the four treatments in avoidance-performance goal. But the delayed test was significantly superior than pretest.
4. Students participated in the cooperative learning performed significantly better than those in individualistic learning in task value. But the pretest was significantly superior than delayed test.
5. There were no statistically significant differences between the four treatments in self-efficacy beliefs and expectancy of success beliefs..
6. Students participated in question-posing performed significantly better than those without question-posing activity in posttest and delayed test of cognitive strategies. Besides, the posttest and delayed test in cognitive strategies of the students participated in question-posing was significantly superior than the pretest.
7.Students participated in cooperative question-posing performed significantly better than those in cooperative without question-posing activity in posttest and delayed test of meta-cognitive strategies. Besides, the posttest and delayed test in meta-cognitive strategies of the students participated in cooperative question-posing was significantly superior than the pretest.
8. There were no statistically significant differences between the four treatments in academic achievement.
9.Students participated in cooperative question-posing, individual question-posing and cooperative without question-posing activity performed significantly better than those in the individualistic learning without question-posing activity in learning satisfaction, learning ability and learning anxiety.
Finally, suggestions for teacher instruction, system enhancements and future research are proposed.

一、 中文部分
于富雲（民90）。從理論基礎探究合作學習的教學效益。教育資料與研究，38，22-28。
王裕德（民90）。多媒體電腦輔助教學環境中合作學習對技職院校學生程式設計學習成效影響之研究。彰化師範大學工業教育學系碩士論文。
艾忠智（民83）。合作學習法的意義與學習設計原則。花蓮文教，21，31-33。
吳宗立（民85）。閱讀理解教學後設認知策略。研習資訊，13（1），33-37。
李日順（民90）。國中地理科合作學習教學法實驗成效之研究─以台中縣立順天國中為例。彰化師範大學地理學系碩士論文。
李佳玲（民84）。國中理化試行合作學習之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
李明堂（民76）。常模參照回饋、自我參照回饋對國小學童成敗歸因、成就動機、測試焦慮影響之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
李明興（民90）。高職工科專業科目應用合作學習教學法之學習成效研究。彰化師範大學工業教育學系碩士論文。
李雯婷（民87）。國二數學科合作中配對教學法與傳統教學法在學習成效之比較研究。國立高雄師範大學數學系碩士班碩士論文。
李嘉祥（民88）。合作學習對國中學生生物學習動機之影響。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
卓旻怡（民88）。雲林縣國中生體育課學習滿意度調查研究。國立體育學院體育研究所碩士論文。
周立勳（民83）。國小班級分組合作學習之研究。國立台政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
周斯畏（民87）。電腦媒體的合作學習。資訊與電腦，7月號，116-119。
林世元（民85）。合作學習在國小數學低成就學生補救教學實施成效之研究。國立嘉義師範學院碩士論文。
林生傳（民88）。教育心理學。台北：五南。
林佩怡（民88）。二專餐飲管理科學生學習滿意度之研究。私立文化大學生活應用科學研究所碩士論文。
林佩璇（民81）。台灣省國立高級職業學校合作學習實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
林建隆（民90）。合作學習的類比學習環對國中學生壓力概念學習成效之研究。彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林美智（民89）。空中大學師生互動與學生學習滿意度之研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文。
林家弘（民89）。我國大學生網路學習滿意度之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
林清山譯（民86）。教育心理學－認知取向。台北：遠流。
邱美虹、林妙霙（民85）。合作學習對國三學生學習「地層地質事件」的影響。教育資訊研究，4(6)，108-128。
侯玫如（民90）。多重目標導向與測量時間對國中生認知、動機、情感、行為和學習表現之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文計畫。
施頂清（民88）。自我發問策略與合作學習(小組討論)對國中生國文閱讀理解的效果比較考驗。國立中山大學教育學系碩士論文。
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、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研究。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資訊素養與終生學習社會國際研討會」，台中。
孫春在（民84）。超媒體網路與遠距合作式電腦輔助學習。教學科技與媒體，21，29-37。
徐文鈺（民85）。擬題教學策略對國小兒童分數概念的解題能力、擬題能力之分析研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
張世忠、侯凱喨（民88）。網路在中學建構教學之應用。中等教育，50（2），90-95。
張芳全（民86）。教學法的新典範。國教月刊，44（3.4），7-16。
張春興（民85）。教育心理學。台北市：東華。
張清濱（民84）。合作學習的正用與誤用。研習資訊，12（4），1-7。
張獻中（民88）。後設認知策略在國小五年級社會科教學上應用之研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
探路者數位學園（民90）。國民中小學網路家庭聯絡簿應用手冊。台南：作者。
教育部（民90）。國中小九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北：作者。
莊智芳（民82）。焦慮處理課程對國一學生考試焦慮得處理效果之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文。
郭生玉（民83）。心理與教育測驗。台北：精華。
郭靜姿（民79）。學習動機、策略運用與後設認知能力之相關研究及其所建構而成之後設理解模式在資優教學上的運用(上)。資優教育季刊，37，1-8。
郭靜姿（民80）。學習動機、策略運用與後設認知能力相關探討及其所建構而成之後設理解模式在資優教學上的運用（下）。資優教育季刊，38，9-15。
郭麗玲（民83）。小學教師如何做閱讀指導。書苑季刊，21，19－25。
陳世澎（民83）。合作學習對國小學生數學科學習影響之實驗研究。國立台南師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
陳李綢（民77）。學習策略的研究與教學。資優教育季刊，29，15-24。
陳昱宏、黃台珠（民88）。以社會建構主義觀點看一個高中生物教室中的合作學習。中華民國第十五屆科學教育學術研討會研討會手冊。
陳英豪、吳裕益（民83）。測驗與評量。高雄：復文。
陳容芯（民89）。成人參與電腦第二專長教育學習滿意度之研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文。
陳密桃（民79）。後設認知的評估方法。教育文粹，20，196-209。
陳密桃（民81）。從認知心理學的觀點談閱讀理解。教育文粹，21，10-19。
傅明利（民89）。國民小學數學科合作學習之研究。彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
程炳林（民80）。國民中小學激勵的學習策略之相關研究。國立政治大學教育研究所碩士論文。
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。
黃文三（民89）。從認知心理學的立場談知識的角色與後設認知。教育研究，74，19-24。
黃建瑜（民88）。國中理化教師試行合作學習之行動研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
黃政傑、林佩璇（民85）。合作學習。台北：五南。
楊惠如（民89）。擬題活動融入國小三年級數學科教學之行動研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究碩士論文。
溫明正（民88）。電腦在未來教學評量上的應用。教師天地，99，54-60。
葉明達（民88）。高一學生數學合作解題與後設認知行為之研究。中學教育學報，6，159-204。
廖佳仁（民87）。國民小學自然科不同評量程序對五年級學生學習動機與策略之影響。國立台北師院國民教育研究碩士論文。
劉安倫（民89）。國中學生對職業試探與輔導活動課程學習滿意度之研究。國立台北科技大學技術及職業教育研究所碩士論文。
劉芳妃（民87）。合作擬題活動融入國一數學科教學之個案研究。高師大數研所碩士論文。
劉錫麒（民80）。合作反省思考數學解題教學模式及其實徵研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
蔡明雄（民88）。合作-建構整合教學模式對國小兒童學習簡單幾何問題效果之研究。國立台灣師範大學心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
蔡竺君（民89）。網路輔助自然科學習對國小學生學習成就及態度之影響。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究碩士論文。
蔡瑞琴（民87）。高中建構取向教學與學生參與情形之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭英耀（民74）。系統減敏感法與認知行為治療法對國中學生的焦慮、自我觀念與生活適應的效應研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文。
鄭麗玉（民80）。促進後設認知策略的閱讀教學。教師之友，33（3），14-17。
鄭麗玉（民80）。英文閱讀教學研究後設認知策略的應用。臺北：桂冠。
蕭安成（民87）。隔空與非隔空學習者自我導向學習傾向和學習滿意度之研究。國立高雄師範大學成人教育研究所碩士論文。
簡妙娟（民88）。高中公民合作學習教學實驗之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
龔春燕（民90，10月）。終生學習的關鍵：學會提問。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資訊素養與終生學習社會國際研討會」，台中。

二、英文部分
Andre, T. (1987). Process in reading comprehension and the teaching of comprehension. In J. A. Glover & R. R. Ronning (Eds.), Historical foundations of educational psychology. New York: Plenum.
Balajthy, E. (1984). Using student-constructed questions to encourage active reading. Journal of reading, 27(5), 408-411.
Brown, S. I. & Walter, M. I. (1983). The Art of Problem Posing. Philadelphia, PA: The Franklin Press.
Burron ,B.& James, M.L.& Ambrosio ,A.L.（1993）. The effect of cooperative learning in a physical science course for elementary/middle level preservice teachers ,Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 30（7）,167-181.
Donders, O., Eek, M., & Remmers, E. (1995). World Wide web and its potential for self-guided learning. Retrieved February 26, 2002, from http://www.to.utwente.nl/ism/online95/campus/library/online95/online95.htm.
Duin, A. H. (1984). Implementing cooperative learning groups in the writing curriculum: What research shows and what you can do? ERIC Document, ED251849.
Elliot, A. J. & Church, M. (1997).A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation . Jorunal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 218-232.
English, L. D. (1998). Problem solving and problem posing: Curriculum Partners. Manuscript under review for Teaching Children Mathematics.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The Nature of intelligence (pp.231-235). Hillsdale, N. J. : Erlbaum.
Graham,V. G. (1987).The effect of incorporating sequential steps and pupil constructed problem on performance and attitude in solving one-step verbal problems involving whole numbers. Doctoral dissertation. Catholic University of America.
Graves, T. (1991). The controversy over group rewards in cooperative classroom. Educational Leadership, 48(7), 77-79.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1988). Circles of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Toward a cooperative effort: A response to Slavin. Educational Leadership, 46(7), 80-81.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1990). Cooperative learning and achievement. In S. Sharan(ed.). Cooperative learning: Theory and research (pp.23-37). New York: Praeger.
Johnson, D. W. , Johnson, R. T. & Holubec, E. J. (1994). The new circles of learning: cooperation in the classroom and school. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Johnson, D. W. , Johnson, R. T. & Maruyama, G. (1983). Interdependence and interpersonal attraction among heterogeneous and homogeneous individuals: A theoretical formulation and a meta-analysis of research. Review of educational Research, 53(1), 5-54.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. & Stanne, M. B（1986）. Comparison of computer-assisted Cooperative .Cooperative ,and Individualistic Learning , American Educational Research Journal,23（3）,382-392.
Jonassen, D. H., Dyer, D., Peter, K., Robinson, Harver, D. King, M. & Loughner, P. (1997). Cognitive flexibility hypertexts on the web: engaging learners in meaning making. Web-based instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. p. 119-133.
Kearsley, G. (1996). The World Wide Web: Global access to education. Educational Technology Review, 5, 26-30.
Kearsley, G. (2000). Chapter 1: introduction, 1-12. Online education: learning and teaching in cyberspace. Wadsworth.
Kearsley, G. (2000). Chapter 6: Online Teaching, 77-92. Online education: learning and teaching in cyberspace. Wadsworth.
Keil, G. E. (1965). Writing and solving original problems as a means of improving verbal arithmetic problem solving ability. Doctoral Dissertation. Indiana University.
Khan, B. H. (1997). Web-based instruction(WBI): What is it and why is it? Web-based instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. 5-18.
Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Problem Formulating: Where Do Good Problems Come From? In A. H. Schoenfeld(Eds.), Cognitive Science and mathematics education(pp.123-147). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Leung, S. S. (1993). The relation of mathematical knowledge and creative thinking to the mathematical problem posing of prospective elementary school teachers on tasks differing in numerical information content. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Lonning, R.A. (1993). Effect of cooperative learning strategies on student verbal interactions and achievement during conceptual change instruction in 10th grade general science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(9), 1087-1101.
Marksberry, M. L. (1979). Student Questioning: An Instructional Strategy. Educational Horizons, 57(4), 190-195.
Mckeachie, W. J. , P. R. Printrich, Y. Lin & D. Smith (1987). Teaching and Learning in The College Classroom: A Review of The Research Literature, Ann Arbor, MI: Natioanl Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL), The University of Michigan, ERIC ED 314-999
Mevarech, Z. R. (1999). Effects of Metacognitive Training Embedded in Cooperative Settings on Mathematical Problem Solving. Journal of Education Research, 92, 195-205.
Palincsar, A. S. , & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of compregension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognitive and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
Panitz, T. (1999). The motivational benefits of cooperative learning. New Directions for teaching and learning, 78, 59-67.
Payne, B. D., & Manning B. H. (1992). Basal reader instruction : Effect as comprehension monitoring training on reading comprehension, strategy use and attitude. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(1), 29-38.
Perez, J. A. (1985). Effects of student-generated problem on problem solving performance. Unpublished doctoral Disseration Teachers College, Columbia University.
Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In C. Ames, & M. Maehr(Eds.). Advance in motivation and achievement: motivation enhancing environments. Vol. 6, p160-177. CT: JAI press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000a). Multiple goal, multiple pathways: The role of goal orientation in learning and achievement. Journal of Education Psychology, 92, 544-555.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000b).An achievement goal theory perspective on issue in motivation terminology , theory , and research. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 92-104.
Pintrich, P. R. , Smith, D. , Garcia, T. , & McKeachie, W. J. (1989). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Mich: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL). School of Education, The University of Michigan.
Relan, A. & Gillani, B. B. (1997). Web-based instruction and the traditional classroom: similarities and differences. Web-based instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. p. 41-46.
Shotsberger, P. B. (1997). Emerging roles for instructors and learners in the web-based instruction classroom. Web-based instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technoloty Publication. 101-106.
Silver, E. & Cai, J. (1996). An analysis of arithmetic problem posing by middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 521-539.
Silver, E. A. & Cai, J. (1993). Mathematical problem posing and problem solving by middle school students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education research association, Atlanta, GA.
Silver, E. A. & Mamona, J.(1989).Problem posing by middle school mathematics teachers. In C. A. Goldin & R. B. Davis (Eds), Proceedings of the Eleveneh Annual Meeting of the American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University. 263-269.
Silver, E. A. (1993). On mathematical problem posing. For the learning of mathematical, 14(1), 19-28.
Slavin, R. E. (1980). Effects of student teams and peer touring on academic achievement and time on-task. Journal of Experimental education, 48, 252-57.
Slavin, R. E. (1983). An introduction to cooperative learning. New York: Longman.
Slavin, R. E. (1984). Component building: A strategy for research-based instructional improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 84(3), 254-269.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory and research, and Practice（2th ed）. N. J. : Prentice Hall.
Starr, R, M. (1997). Delivering instruction on the World Wide Web: Overview and basic design principles. Educational Technology, 37(3), 7-15.
Stover, G. B. (1982). Structural variables affecting mathematical word problem difficulty in sixth grades. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 5050A.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wigfield, A. & Eccles, J. S. (2000).Expetancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 , 68-81.
Willis, B. & Dickinson, J. (1997). Distance Education and the World Wide Web. Web-based instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. 81-84.
Winograd, K. (1991, April). Writing, solving and sharing original math story problem: Case studies of fifth grade children’s cognitive behavior. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.