本研究以鷹架理念為基礎，藉由在國小實施英語課程，設計圖文影音四種元素之教學引導策略，從中探討不同特性學習者與其適合之教學引導策略的交互作用關係，以及比較不同特性學習者與教學引導策略在英語數位說故事中的學習成效差異。本研究採因果比較研究方法進行，自變項為學習者特性類型及英語數位說故事教學引導策略，而依變項為英語數位說故事的學生學習成效。教學活動將於107學年度第一學期實施6週，參與學生為花蓮縣一所學校的六年級學生共108名。研究者將透過自編的調查問卷蒐集學習者特性與引導策略偏好的類別資料，並透過教師與同儕互評，蒐集學生學習表現的資料。所蒐集資料將進行二因子變異數分析，以瞭解學習者特性與教學引導策略之間是否存在交互作用關係，並進一步比較不同學習者特性與不同教學引導策略，對學生的學習表現是否有顯著差異存在。本研究所獲結論如下：一、個案學校學習者特性以外向型居多，且偏好語音引導策略人數比例最高；二、不同學習者特性與英語數位說故事的不同引導策略之間，並無顯著的交互作用存在；三、不同特性學生的英語數位說故事成效表現並沒有顯著差異；四、偏好語音引導策略的學生，其學習成效表現明顯高於偏好影音引導策略的學習者。最後，本研究提出相關建議供教學與相關研究者參考。

This study is based on the idea of scaffolding English classes in a primary school by implementing four different guided strategies—pictures, words, videos, and sounds. The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the interaction between each learner’s characteristics and their preferred guided strategy. The secondary purpose of this study is to compare the effects of both of the above elements on student learning in English digital storytelling lessons. Using causal-comparative research as the research method, there were two independent variables; one of the independent variables was the type of learners’ characteristics, and the other was the guided strategy in English digital storytelling lessons. The dependent variable in this study was the effects of each variable on student learning. The English digital storytelling project began in the first semester of the 2018-2019 school year, and the participants in this study were sixth grade students (n=108) from a primary school in Hualien County. The researcher collected the data of both the learners’ characteristics and the students’ preferred type of guided strategy through a questionnaire survey at the beginning of the study, and then during the study gathered the students’ learning performance data through peer assessments. The data was then analyzed using a two-way ANOVA analysis procedure to determine whether a relationship exists between learners’ characteristics and the guided strategies presented. Furthermore, the effects of the learners’ characteristics and guided strategies on student learning in a digital storytelling setting were compared to determine if there were any significant differences between them. After the analysis, the researcher proposed some conclusions as follows: (1) The relative majority exists in the extroverted-oriented participants and the total number of participants who prefer video guided strategy is higher than other types of guided strategies. (2) There is no significant interaction between learners’ different learning characteristics and four guided strategies. (3) There are no significant differences in the students’ learning performance of the English digital storytelling project among the different learner characteristics. (4) Compare to the participants who prefer video guided strategy, a significantly better learning performance appears in the participants who prefer audio guided strategy. Finally, this study provides some suggestions on teaching or related research for reference.

中文摘要 i
英文摘要 iii
目次 v
表次 vii
圖次 ix
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 4
第三節 名詞釋義 5
第四節 研究範圍與限制 7
第二章 文獻探討 9
第一節 學習者特性、教學引導策略與數位說故事之意涵與理念 9
第二節 學習者特性與英語教學引導策略之類型 29
第三節 學習者特性、教學引導策略與數位說故事之相關研究 42
第三章 研究方法與設計 59
第一節 研究架構 59
第二節 研究假設 60
第三節 研究對象 62
第四節 研究工具設計 64
第五節 英語數位說故事教學活動設計 66
第六節 資料蒐集與分析 66
第四章 研究結果與討論 69
第一節 學習者特性與偏好的教學引導策略現況分析 69
第二節 學習者特性與教學引導策略交互作用探討 72
第三節 不同特性學習者在英語數位說故事中學習成效差異分析 86
第四節 不同引導策略在英語數位說故事中的學習成效差異分析 97
第五章 研究結論與建議 .103
第一節 研究結論 .103
第二節 研究建議 105
參考文獻 109
壹、中文部分 109
貳、英文部分 113
附錄 123
附錄一 英語數位說故事教學活動設計教案 123
附錄二 學習者特性類型與其引導策略偏好調查問卷 131
附錄三 英語數位說故事的學習成效表現評分表 133

壹、中文部分

王文玳（2016）。苗栗縣國小學童知覺學習風格與英語學習策略之相關因素分析（未出版碩士論文）。大葉大學教育專業發展學習碩士班，彰化縣。
王繼斌（2009）。教學設計中的學習者特徵分析。黃岡職業技術學院學報，11（1）， 46 – 47。
吳欣怡（2007）。國民小學英語教師教學鷹架策略之個案研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立台中教育大學諮商與應用心理學系研究所，台中市。
李世忠、姜智庭、王翌任（2011）。運用數位說故事於訊息設計課程之個案研究–以蘋果電腦融入教學為例。2011年技職教育永續發展學術研討會論文集，2011年06月01日，國立臺北科技大學。
李佩璇、連韻文（2015）。發現交互作用困難嗎？—「探究目標」對於大學生發現變項間交互關係的影響。中華心理學刊，57（3），245-260。
李淑菁（2016）。混成學習對國中生英聽學習成效之研究：自我效能與學習風格之調節效果（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育學系碩士班，台北市。
李雪菱（2012）。電子書包遊戲式學習對不同學習風格的國一學生英語學習成效之影響（未出版碩士論文）。國立新竹教育大學教育學系碩士班，新竹市。
林元媛（2015）。桌遊應用在不同學習風格之國小低年級學童英語學習動機之研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北教育大學數位科技設計學系碩士班，台北市。
林玉珮（2011年4月19日）。為弱勢孩子填平學習落差的鴻溝。天下雜誌，311，取自https://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5010978。
林育伶（2013）。學習風格對適性字幕輔助行動英語聽力學習之有用性影響研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士班，台南市。
林美秀（2016）。閱讀認知策略鷹架對於國中生英語閱讀理解成效之影響研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立政治大學圖書資訊學數位碩士班，台北市。
邱于芩（2017）。數位遊戲對國小高年級不同人格特質學生社會科之學習研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士班，台南市。
邱育琳（2009）。過程式寫作在英文寫作準備階段之應用：鷹架理論的觀點（未出版碩士論文）。國立嘉義大學外國語文學習碩士班，嘉義市。
施玉惠（2002）。台灣九年一貫英語課程之特色以及實施後之省思。海峽兩岸新世紀小學課程與教材改革學術研討會論文集（頁193-222）。台北：國立台北教育大學。
胡彩宜（2007）。以老師及同儕之鷹架輔助閱讀策略之發展—以英語為外語之六年級生為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立嘉義大學外國語言學系研究所碩士班，嘉義市。
徐美桂（2013）。WebQuest融入英語文化課程對不同學習風格學生的學習動機與成效之研究（未出版博士論文）。淡江大學教育科技學系碩士在職專班，台北市。
泰利保羅（2013）。以鷹架輔助及自主學習改善台灣大一學生英文口語學習中之靜默現象（未出版博士論文）。國立高雄師範大學英語學系博士班，高雄市。
張閔惠（2016）。不一樣的閱讀課－淺談數位說故事在閱讀學上的運用。臺灣教育評論月刊，5（6），212–217。
張霄亭、吳則剛（1998）。教學媒體。台北市，五南圖書。
張瀞文(2015)。芬蘭教育贏在未來的能力。親子天下，73，120。
張瓅庭（2018）。擴增實境技術對學生英語學習動機之影響–以學生學習風格為調節變數（未出版碩士論文）。國立中興大學科技管理研究所，台中市。
教育部（2018）。中小學師資課程教學與評量協作中心。台北：教育部。取自https://depart.moe.edu.tw/ED7600/News_Content.aspx?n=DA6D9254E41A9FA3&sms=B28D149ACBC67EFB&s=F040861A69AC6B52
莊筱玉、傅敏芳、林怡倩（2008）。建構式英語教學之研究。美和技術學院學報，27（1），84。
許育嘉（2000）。國小學童學習風格與中英文學習成就之相關研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立台中教育大學語文教育研究所，台中市。
許雅惠（2014）。彰化縣國民小學六年級學生知覺學習風格偏好與英語學習策略之相關研究（未出版碩士論文）。康寧大學應用外語研究所，台南市。
許繼德（2002）。網路輔助教學對不同認知風格的國小學童在英語學習動機與成就之影響（未出版博士論文）。國立屏東師範學院教育科技研究所，屏東市。
連彥淇（2015）。應用鷹架策略提升國中生英語閱讀成效之行動研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺中教育大學教育學系課程與教學碩士班，台中市。
郭倬瑛（2017）。擴增實境結合3D列印技術融入國小昆蟲教學對不同學習風格學童學習成效之影響（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺北教育大學數位科技設計學系碩士班，台北市。
陳怡茜（2015）。運用數位說故事提升國中生英文口說能力、溝通表達能力與創意思考能力（未出版碩士論文）。國立成功大學教育研究所，台南市。
陳信助、陳寶山（2012）。教育學院中教師領導統御與學生學習風格之探討與應用。學校行政雙月刊，77，111。
陳淑嬌（2014）。全球化下的台灣英文教育：政策、教學及成果。教育人力與專業發展，31（2），7-20。
陳斐卿、林盈秀、蕭述三（2013）。教師合作設計課程的困難—活動理論觀點。教育實踐與研究，26（1），63-94。
彭文松（2005）。認知風格、學習風格與思考風格之區辨研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立新竹教育大學教育心理與諮商研究所，新竹市。
黃勝榮（2008）。數位故事創作在國小高年級課程上的應用與個案研究-以鄉土教學為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立嘉義大學教育科技研究所，嘉義市。
楊大鋒（2006）。網路多媒體呈現方式與學習風格對英語學習成就之研究（未出版碩士論文）。臺灣師範大學工業科技教育學系碩士班，台北市。
楊光、于瑤、駱越虹（2008）。基於學習風格的英語教學策略研究。哈爾濱金融高等專科學校學報，4，73-74。
楊沛穎（2018）。不同學習風格對學習動機與投入之探究–以數位說故事法融入專題導向跨領域課程為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺灣科技大學數位學習與教育碩士班，台北市。
楊偉琪（2016）。EFL學習者口說策略使用及鷹架輔助：個案研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立高雄應用科技大學應用外語系英語專業溝通與教學科技碩士班，高雄市。
楊詩萱（2009）。銀行人員實施多元教育訓練滿意度之研究─以臺灣土地銀行為例（未出版碩士論文）。中華大學行政管理學系研究所，新竹市。
萬世鼎、曾芬蘭、宋曜廷（2000）。國中基測英語科雙峰分配探索。測驗學刊，57(1)，107-137。
鄒文莉（2003）。說故事英語教學與英語學習。師大學報：人文與社會類，48(1)，53-67。
劉姍姍（2000）。數位說故事應用於成語反思學習（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺南大學數位學習科技學系碩士班，臺南市。
劉國平（2014）。運用Web2.0數位說故事方法，以提升小學生英語學習成就及動機（未出版碩士論文）。國立中央大學網路學習科技研究所，桃園市。
劉憶君（2015）。國小學生學習風格與英語學業成就之相關研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立嘉義大學教育學系研究所，嘉義市。
潘麗晴（2017）。運用合作數位說故事提升國小學童英語學習動機及表現之行動研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立臺中教育大學教師專業碩士班，台中市。
蔡淑瑛（2015）。數位說故事策略對於國小六年級學生後設認知與解說能力之影響—以社會學習領域課程為例（未出版碩士論文）。臺北市立大學數位學習碩士班，台北市。
鄭明敏（2017）。海洋數位說故事對科學想像力、科學學習態度與學習歷程之影響（未出版碩士論文）。國立中山大學教育研究所碩士班，高雄市。
鄭麗齡（2011）。運用數位說故事提升國小高年級學童語文表達能力之行動研究（未出版碩士論文）。國立台北教育大學教育學系碩士班，台北市。
黎瓊莉（2000）。國小學童英語學習動機、學習策略與學習成效之相關性研究：以屏東地區國小為例（未出版碩士論文）。國立屏東大學教育行政研究所，屏東市。
盧貞穎（2014）。國小英語科差異化教學理念與活動設計。國教新知，61（2），75-94。

貳、英文部分

Allen, D. & Tanner, K. (2006). Rubrics: Tools for making learning goals and education criteria explicit for both techers and learners. CBE Life Science Education, 5, 197-203.
Alzaghoul, A. (2012). The implication of the learning theories on implementing e-learning courses. The Research Bulletin of Jordan ACM, 2(2), 27-30.
Association for Progressive Communications (1990, May). Digital storytelling. Retrieved from https://www.apc.org/en/project/digital-storytelling.
Atman, N., Inceoğlu, M. M., & Aslan, B. G. (2009, June). Learning styles diagnosis based on learner behaviors in web based learning. In Proceedings of ICCSA 2009 (pp. 900-909). Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer.
Bozalek, V., Ng’ambi, D., Wood, D., Herrington, J., Hardman, J., & Amory, A. (Eds.). (2014). Activity theory, authentic learning and emerging technologies: Towards a transformative higher education pedagogy. English: Routledge.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. (1983) Child’s Talk. New York: Norton.
Chang, C. Y., & Shen, M. C. (2010). The effects of beliefs about language learning and learning strategy use of junior high school EFL learners in remote districts. Research in Higher Education Journal, 8, 1.
Cohen, A. D. & Weaver, S. J. (2006). Styles and strategies-based instruction: A teachers’ guide. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, University of Minnesota.
Cohen, A. D. (2003).The learner’s side of foreign language learning: Where do styles, strategies and tasks meet? IRAL, 41(4), 279-291.
Cohen, A. D. (2010). Focus on the language learner: Styles, strategies and motivation. In N. Schmitt (ed.), an Introduction to Applied Linguistics (pp. 161-178). London: Hodder Education.
Cornett, C. (1983). What you should know about teaching and learning styles. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
Coventry, M., & Oppermann, M. (2009). From Narrative to Database: Multimedia Inquiry in a Cross-Classroom Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Study. Academic Commons, Jan, 1-18.
Di Blas, N., Garzotto, F., Paolini, P., & Sabiescu, A. (2009, Dec). Digital storytelling as a whole-class learning activity: Lessons from a three years project. In Joint International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling (pp. 14-25). Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer.
Drachsler, H., & Kirschner, P. A. (2012). Learner characteristics. In Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 1743-1745). Boston, MA: Springer.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y.Engeström, R. Miettinen and R. L. Punamäki-Gitai (eds.), Perspectives on ActivityTheory (pp 19-38). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Erton, I. (2010). Relations between personality traits, language learning styles and success in foreign language achievement. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 38, 115-126.
Faculty Development and Instructional Design Center (2008). Instructional Scaffolding to Improve Learning. Northern Illinois University, IL. Retrieved fromhttps://www.niu.edu/facdev/_pdf/guide/strategies/instructional_scaffolding_to_improve_learning.pdf.
Felder, R. & Silverman, J. (1988). Learning and teaching style in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674-681.
Felder, R. (2002). Learning and teaching style in engineering education- Author’s Preface. Engr.Education, 78(7), 674–681.
Felder, R. M., & Henriques, E. R. (1995). Learning and teaching styles in foreign and second language education. Foreign Language Annals, 28, 21-31.
Feldman, S. (2003). Building scaffolds in your classroom. Teaching PreK-8, 34(2), 6.
Gardner, H. (1989). To open minds: Chinese clues to the dilemma of contemporary education. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gay, L. R., & Mills, G. E. (2015). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications, global edition: edition 11. London, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
Gilakjani, A. P. (2011). Visual, auditory, kinaesthetic learning styles and their impacts on English language teaching. Journal of Studies in Education, 2(1), 104-113.
Gubrium, A. (2009). Digital storytelling as a method for engaged scholarship in anthropology.Practicing Anthropology, 31(4), 5.
Harmon, S., & Jhala, A. (2015). Revisiting computational models of creative storytelling based on imaginative recall. In H. Schoenau-Fog, E. L. Bruni, S. Louchart & S. Baceviciute (Eds.), Interactive Storytelling: 8th International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling Proceedings (pp. 170-178), ICIDS 2015, Copenhagen, Denmark, November 30 - December 4, 2015. Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Hogan, K. & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (1997). Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Huang, E. Y., Lin, S. W., & Huang, T. K. (2012). What type of learning style leads to online participation in the mixed-mode e-learning environment? A study of software usage instruction. Computers & Education, 58(1), 338-349.
Ivala, E., Gachago, D., Condy, J., & Chigona, A. (2013). Enhancing student engagement with their studies: A digital storytelling approach. Creative Education, 4(10), 82-89.
Jafari Gohar, M. & Sadeghi, N. (2015). The impact of learning style preferences on foreign language achievement: A case study of Iranian EFL students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 171(2015), 754-764.
Johari, A. S., & Ahmad, A. (2016). The relationship between learning style and student achievement in history subject. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 21(7), 7-14.
Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (The collected works of C.G. Jung, Vol. 6, H. Read, M. Fordham, G. Adler, & W. McGuire, Eds., R.F.C. Hull, Trans.).Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress.
Kagan, J. (1965). Individual differences in the resolution of response uncertainty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(2), 154-160.
Kaliská, L. (2012). Felder’s learning style concept and its index of learning style questionnaire in the Slovak conditions. Grant Journal, 1, 52-56.
Karakoyun, F., & Kuzu, A. (2016). The investigation of preservice teachers' and primary school students' views about online digital storytelling. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 15(1), 51-64.
Karthigeyan, K., & Nirmala, K. (2013). Learning style preference of English language learners. Educationia Confab, 2(1), 134-140.
Kaufman, J. H. & Schunn, C. D. (2011). Students' perceptions about peer assessment for writing: Their origin and impact on revision work. Instructional Science, 39 (3), 387-406.
Kervin, L., & Mantei, J. (2016). Digital storytelling: Capturing children's participation in preschool activities. Issues in Educational Research, 26(2), 225-240.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Larkin, M. J. (2001). Providing support for student independence through scaffolded instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(1), 30-34.
Liu, C. H., & Matthews, R. (2005). Vygotsky's philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal, 6(3), 386-399.
Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
Meadows, D. (2003). Digital storytelling: Reserch-based practice in new media. Visual Communication, 2(2), 189-193.
Meyer, D. K., & Turner, J. C. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 17-25.
Nelson, M. (2006). Mode, meaning, and synaesthesia in multimedia L2 writing. Language Learning & Technology, 10(2), 56-76.
Novick, L. R., & Cheng, P. W. (2004). Assessing interactive causal influence. Psychological Review, 111, 455-485.
Ohler, J. B. (2013). Digital storytelling in the classroom: New media pathways to literacy, learning, and creativity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Pentimonti, J. M., & Justice, L. M. (2010). Teachers’ use of scaffolding strategies during read alouds in the preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(4), 241-248.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. MCB University Press, 9(5), 1-6.
Prensky, M. (2005). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8-13.
Psychology Notes HQ. (2018, May). Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory of Cognitive Development. Retrieved from https://www.psychologynoteshq.com/vygotsky-theory/
Puntambekar, S. & Hübscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.
Read, S. (2011).A model for scaffolding writing instruction: IMSCI. The Reading Teacher, 64(1), 47-52.
Reid, J. (1995). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Robin, B. R. (2008). Digital storytelling: A powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory into Practice, 47, 220–228.
Roehler, R. L. & Cantlon, D. C. (1997). Scaffolding: A powerful tool in social constructivist classrooms. In K. Hogan, & M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffolding Student Learning: Instructional Approaches and Issues (pp.17-30). Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Sadik, A. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for student learning. Educational Techonology Research and Development, 56, 287-506.
Safadi, E., & Rababah, G. (2012). The effect of scaffolding instruction on reading comprehension skills. International Journal of Language Studies, 6(2), 1-38.
Scarcella, R. & Oxdord, R. (1992).The tapestry of language learning: The individual in the communication classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Seidel, L. E., & England, E. M. (1997). Gregorc's Cognitive Styles: Preferences for Instructional and Assessment Techniques in College Students. Poster presented at Proceedings ofthe Annual Convention of the American Psychological Society (p.32). Washington, DC, 1997.
Shih, C.-C., & Gamon, J. (2001). Web-based learning: Relationships among student motivation, attitudes, learning styles, and achievement. Journal of Agricultural Education, 42(4), 12-20.
Silver, H., Strong, R., & Perini, M. (1997). Integrating learning styles and multiple intelligences. Educational Leadership, 55, 22-27.
Smeda, N., Dakich, E., & Sharda, N. (2014). The effectiveness of digital storytelling in the classrooms: A comprehensive study. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 6.
Sorden, S. D. (2005). A cognitive approach to instructional design for multimedia learning. Informing Science Journal, 8, 263-279.
Staley, B., & Freeman, L. A. (2017). Digital storytelling as student-centred pedagogy: Empowering high school students to frame their futures. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 21.
Story Center (2018). Listen deeply, tell stories. Retrieved from https://www.storycenter.org/
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of educational Research, 68(3), 249-276.
Vaseghi, R., Ramezani, A. E., & Gholami, R. (2012). Language learning style preferences: A theoretical and empirical study. Advances in Asian Social Science, 2(2), 441-451.
Verdugo, D., & Belmonte, I. (2007). Using digital stories to improve listening comprehension with Spanish young learners of English. Language Learning & Technology, 11(1), 87-101.
Verenikina, I. (2010, June). Vygotsky in twenty-first-century research. In EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology (pp. 16-25). Waynesville, NC: AACE.
Vorrasi, M. B. (1999). The association between learning styles and academic difficulty (Unpublished Master's Theses).The Department of Education and Human Development, State University of New York, Brockport, New York.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. (Edited by M. Cole., V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner., & E. Souberman Cambridge). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walqui, A. (2006). Scaffolding instruction for English language learners: A conceptual framework. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 9(2), 159-180.
Witkin, H. A., & Goodenough, D. R. (1977). Field dependence and interpersonal behavior. Psychological bulletin, 84(4), 661.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
Yamaç, A., & Ulusoy, M. (2017). The effect of digital storytelling in improving the third graders' writing skills. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(1), 59-86.
Yang, Y. T. C., & Wu, W. C. I. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental study. Computers & Education, 59(2), 339-352.
Yu, F. Y. & Wu, C. P. (2013). Predictive effects of online peer feedback types on performance quality. Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 332-341.