由於傳統程式設計教學偏重語法，較少培養學生運用程式語法解決問題，因此學生常不知如何著手解決問題。Wood等學者在1976年提出的鷹架理論指出，「鷹架可以在初學者學習解決問題時提供必要的學習性支持」，因此具備鷹架概念的教材可以適時給予協助，幫助學生學會解決問題。因此本研究旨在將鷹架理論整合到教學活動，培養學生運用程式解決問題的能力，並提升學習成效。
本研究使用博課師平台進行教學，並使用互動式的教材，老師和學生可從平台了解自己的閱讀狀況，且學生可以透過教材直接進行提問，並根據解決問題的四個步驟：(1) 理解問題 (2) 擬定解題策略 (3) 按步解題 (4) 回顧解答，依序使用「概念鷹架」、「程序鷹架」、「後設認知鷹架」三種鷹架來設計教材，首先，概念鷹架幫助學生了解問題的核心概念，而程序鷹架提供明確的解題步驟，協助學生解題，後設認知鷹架則讓學生根據提示再次實作，進而反思所做過的練習。
本研究的研究對象為某大學資訊管理系學生共76人，實驗設計以課程的第一次小考為前測，在期中考後進行鷹架的實驗，讓學生閱讀鷹架教材，並以期末考作為後測，探討學生經由鷹架支持以及教材的閱讀時間，是否在成績上有較好的表現。本研究以成對樣本t檢定來比較前測和後測的PR值，由實驗結果發現：
(1) 前測成績PR值在75以下的學生，經過鷹架教材的學習後，後測平均PR值為52.90，優於前測的平均PR值40.29，後測成績相較於前測有顯著提升。
(2) 前測成績PR值在75以下的學生，閱讀時間和後測成績的相關係數均高於0.7，顯示學生在鷹架教材閱讀的時間越長，相對在後測也會有較好的成績。
(3) 前測分數很高的6位高先備知識學生，有5位鷹架閱讀時間低於平均，且這5位學生的後測成績呈現退步情形，顯示高先備知識學生雖然語法較一般學生熟悉，但對於鷹架教材如果缺乏閱讀和練習，也會較難運用語法解決問題。
(4) 學生普遍對於本研究的鷹架式教學有很高的學習滿意度。

Because traditional programming teaching emphasizes syntax and seldom trains students to use programming to solve problems, students often do not know how to solve problems. The scaffolding theory proposed by Wood and other scholars in 1976 pointed out that "Scaffolding can provide necessary learning support for beginners when they learn to solve problems", therefore, the purpose of this research is to integrate scaffolding theory into teaching activities, to help students to use programs to solve problems, and to improve their learning effectiveness.
This research uses the BOOCs platform for teaching, which uses interactive textbook. Teachers and students can get reading status from the platform, and students can directly ask questions through the textbook. This research use three scaffolds of "conceptual scaffolding", "procedural scaffolding" and "metacognitive scaffolding" to design textbook. The conceptual scaffolding helps students understand the problem, the procedural scaffolding help students to solve the problem step by step, and the metacognitive scaffolding helps students to reflect on the exercises they have done.
Participants were 76 students from the Department of Information Management of a university. The methodology is based on the first quiz of the course as the pre-test, and the scaffolding experiment is conducted after the mid-term exam. The final exam is used as a post-test to explore whether students have better performance through scaffolding and the time spent in reading textbooks. The paired sample t-test was used to compare the PR values of the pre-test and the post-test. The results revealed that :
(1) Students with PR value below 75 in the pre-test, after learning the textbook, the average PR value of the post-test is 52.90, which is better than the average PR value of 40.29 in the pre-test, and the post-test score is significantly higher than the pre-test.
(2) Students with PR value below 75 in the pre-test, the correlation coefficients between reading time and post-test scores were both higher than 0.7, so that the longer the students read in the textbooks, the better they would be in the post-test. score.
(3) Students who spend less time with reading textbook, usually regress in study.
(4) Students have high satisfaction with the scaffolding teaching in this course.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第二章 文獻探討 3
第一節 程式設計學習 3
第二節 數位學習 4
第三節 鷹架理論 5
第四節 無鷹架的教材和有鷹架的教材的比較 11
第五節 磨課師平台(MOOCs) 15
第六節 博課師平台(BOOCs) 16
第七節 鷹架理論、博課師平台和自主學習器的關係 18
第三章 研究方法 23
第一節 研究設計 23
第二節 研究對象 24
第三節 教學實驗流程 24
第四節 研究工具 25
第四章 實驗結果 40
第一節 學習表現分析 40
第五章 結論 53
參考文獻 55

Breslow, L., Pritchard, D. E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G. S., Ho, A. D., & Seaton, D. T. (2013). Studying learning in the worldwide classroom research into edX's first MOOC. Research & Practice in Assessment, 8, 13-25.
Burgess, J. R., & Russell, J. E. (2003). The effectiveness of distance learning initiatives in organizations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(2), 289-303.
Chen, C.-H., & Bradshaw, A. C. (2007). The effect of web-based question prompts on scaffolding knowledge integration and ill-structured problem solving. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 359-375.
Chou, C., Peng, H., & Chang, C.-Y. (2010). The technical framework of interactive functions for course-management systems: Students’ perceptions, uses, and evaluations. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1004-1017.
Cooke, N. J., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1988). Effects of computer programming experience on network representations of abstract programming concepts. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 29(4), 407-427.
Davis, E. A., & Miyake, N. (2018). Explorations of scaffolding in complex classroom systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences (pp. 265-272). Psychology Press.
Diez, D. M., Barr, C. D., & Cetinkaya-Rundel, M. (2012). OpenIntro statistics. OpenIntro Boston, MA, USA:.
Doolittle, P. E. (1997). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development as a Theoretical Foundation for Cooperative Learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 8(1), 83-103.
Doyle, W. (1990). Classroom knowledge as a foundation for teaching. Teachers college record, 91(3), 347-360.
Dyson, A. H. (1990). Weaving possibilities: Rethinking metaphors for early literacy development. The Reading Teacher, 44(3), 202-213.
Eckerdal, A. (2009). Novice programming students' learning of concepts and practise Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis].
Ekwunife-Orakwue, K. C., & Teng, T.-L. (2014). The impact of transactional distance dialogic interactions on student learning outcomes in online and blended environments. Computers & Education, 78, 414-427.
Fernaeus, Y., Kindborg, M., & Scholz, R. (2006). Rethinking children's programming with contextual signs. Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Interaction Design and Children.
Fincher, S., & Petre, M. (2005). Programming environments for novices. In Computer science education research (pp. 137-164). Taylor & Francis.
Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. Instructional-design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, 2, 115-140.
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2014). Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational research review, 12, 45-58.
Hill, J. R., & Hannafin, M. J. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 37-52.
Hoffman, B., & Spatariu, A. (2008). The influence of self-efficacy and metacognitive prompting on math problem-solving efficiency. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 875-893.
Hu, L.-L., Tseng, S.-S., & Lee, T.-J. (2013). Towards scaffolding problem-solving implementation process in undergraduate programming course. 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies.
Jacobsen, C. L., & Jadud, M. C. (2005). Towards Concrete Concurrency: occam-pi on the LEGO Mindstorms. Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education.
Johnson, R. A., & Wichern, D. W. (2002). Applied multivariate statistical analysis (Vol. 5). Prentice hall Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Kehoe, C., Stasko, J., & Taylor, A. (2001). Rethinking the evaluation of algorithm animations as learning aids: an observational study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(2), 265-284.
Mayer, R. E. (2013). Teaching and learning computer programming: Multiple research perspectives. Routledge.
McGill, T., Volet, S., & Hobbs, V. (1997). Studying computer programming externally: who succeeds? Distance Education, 18(2), 236-256.
Palincsar, A. S. (1986). Metacognitive strategy instruction. Exceptional children, 53(2), 118-124.
Papert, S. (1980). " Mindstorms" Children. Computers and powerful ideas.
Ping, C. (2001). Learner control and task-orientation in a hypermedia learning environment: A case study of two economics departments. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28(3), 271.
[Record #10 is using a reference type undefined in this output style.]
Putnam, R. T., Sleeman, D., Baxter, J. A., & Kuspa, L. K. (1986). A summary of misconceptions of high school Basic programmers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(4), 459-472.
Robins, A., Rountree, J., & Rountree, N. (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion. Computer science education, 13(2), 137-172.
Rosenberg, M. J. (2001). E-learning: Strategies for Delivering Knowledge in the Digital. Mcgraw-2001.
Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77-96.
Schollmeyer, M. (1996). Computer programming in high school vs. college. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 28(1), 378-382.
Sedig, K., Klawe, M., & Westrom, M. (2001). Role of interface manipulation style and scaffolding on cognition and concept learning in learnware. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 8(1), 34-59.
Shafto, S. A. (1986). Programming for learning in mathematics and science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 18(1), 296-302.
Sorva, J. (2008). A roles-based approach to variable-oriented programming. Human Technology: An Interdisciplinary Journal on Humans in ICT Environments.
Teo, Y. H., & Chai, C. S. (2009). Scaffolding online collaborative critiquing for educational video production.
UDN聯合新聞網. (2022). 檢自: https://udn.com/news/story/7323/6398226.
Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.
Wang, P.-Y. (2018). 磨課師課程影片形式對學習之影響. 教育資料與圖書館學, 55(3), 319-348.
Whelley, J. W. (1993). Weekend Report: A qualitative study of the scaffolding strategies used by a teacher of children with handicaps during a" sharing time" discourse event. University of Cincinnati.
Wilhelm, J. D., Baker, T. N., & Dube, J. (2001). Strategic Reading: Guiding Students to Lifelong Literacy, 6-12. ERIC.
Winslow, L. E. (1996). Programming pedagogy—a psychological overview. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 28(3), 17-22.
Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89—100.
王佩瑜. (2018). 磨課師課程影片形式對學習之影響. 教育資料與圖書館學, 55(3), 319-348.
王珮瑜. (2017). 磨課師教學影片之鏡頭角度與背景設計對學習記憶與心流經驗之影響.
余欣鴻. (2015). 整合情境學習與認知鷹架之歷史科戰略遊戲式測驗環境之發展與評估:接受度、心流、學習成效與歷程之分析.
吳正己, & 何榮桂. (1998). 高級中學新訂電腦課程的內涵與特色.
吳清山. (2013). 教育名詞 磨課師. 教育資料與研究(111), 267-268.
汪耀華, & 張基成. (2019). 大規模線上開放課程授課教師經驗, 經驗本質及反思. 科學教育學刊, 27(1), 25-47.
高瑜璟. (2006). 數位學習-學習的新趨勢. 高師大資訊教育研究所.[線上查詢] http://www.nhu.edu.tw/~society/ej/57/57-22.htm.
基峰資訊. (2020). Python初學特訓班(第四版).
陳定邦. (2004). 鷹架教學概念在成人學習歷程上應用之研究─ 以空大《 統計學》 課輔教學為例. 國立臺灣師範大學社會教育研究所博士論文.
黃靖勛. (2015). 應用鷹架理論於SQL語法教學之研究.
微軟Azure文字轉語音服務. https://azure.microsoft.com/zh-tw/services/cognitive-services/text-to-speech/#overview.
劉怡甫. (2013). 與全球十萬人作同學: 談 MOOC 現況及其發展. 評鑑雙月刊(42), 41-44.
蔡育亭. (2007). 學習支持與課室目標結構對大學生程式設計學習成效與自我調整策略之影響.
鄭峻委. (2020). 磨課師單元影片提問模式對學習之影響.
鮑志軒. (2013). 程式設計對初學者問題解決能力之影響-以機器車程式設計為例.
謝怡倫, & 李秀珠. (2008). 鷹架學習對學習成效之影響-以生活中的平面圖形為例.
韓宜娣. (2011). 鷹架支持與自我效能對國小學生程式設計學習表現與學習態度之影響.