近幾年，資訊科技正迅速發展，已與人類生活各方面事事交織習習相關。台灣現行課綱中，「資訊科技科」亦是以運算思維與邏輯思考為主軸，透過資訊科學相關知識與技能的學習，培養系統化思考、邏輯思考等運算思維，增進學生解決問題能力、團隊合作及創新思考能力。
程式編寫上，多數視覺化工具製作在感知方面頗為相似，具有直接性、明確性、具體性和即時視覺反饋等特徵，以及能在市面上多數手機、平板電腦上使用，讓程式編寫更為簡單、方便。而對於數位學習的研究，目前研究大多依舊是關注結果，較少探討學習工具感知與學習動機的相關研究。因此，本研究希望透過研究了解，教學上常見的視覺化程式語言學習工具感知，與學生學習動機的相關性。
結果顯示，曾使用過視覺化程式語言工具的台灣中學生，對於視覺化程式語言學習工具感知，在學習動機上多數呈現中度相關，且為正向結果。尤其以操作環境這項感知相關性最高，作品呈現次之，最後為程式編寫。

In recent years, information technology has developed rapidly and has become intertwined with all aspects of human life. In Taiwan's current syllabus, "Information Technology" also focuses on computational thinking and logical thinking, cultivating computational thinking such as systematic thinking and logical thinking through the learning of information science-related knowledge and skills, and enhancing students' problem-solving ability, teamwork and innovative thinking ability.
In terms of programming, most visual tools are quite similar in perception, with the characteristics of directness, clarity, specificity and real-time visual feedback, and can be used on most mobile phones and tablets on the market, making program writing simpler and more convenient. For the research on digital learning, most of the current research still focuses on results, and rarely discusses the related research of learning tool perception and learning motivation. Therefore, this study hopes to understand the correlation between the perception of visual programming learning tools commonly used in teaching and students' learning motivation.
The results showed that most of the Taiwanese middle school students who had used visual programming language tools were moderately correlated in their learning motivation and positive results for the perception of visual programming language learning tools. In particular, the operating environment, which is the most perceptually relevant, is the second most perceptive, followed by the presentation, and finally written for programming.

一、中文文獻
3C科技頻道（2014）。歐巴馬下海寫程式，第一句寫的是.....。自由時報。https://3c.ltn.com.tw/news/14949。
ALPHA Camp（2021）。什麼是程式設計（Programming）？認識程式與程式語言。ALPHA Camp。https://tw.alphacamp.co/blog/programming-for-beginner。
王文永（2008）。問卷調查及數據資料分析。中央民族大學出版社。
生物流（2020）。學習的類型（二）｜感知學習、動作學習和關係學習。知乎。https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/270896764。
伊旭塔·雷曼（2008）。學習動機（一版）。天下雜誌。
行銷資料科學（2019）。李克特量表（Likert Scale）的起源和使用。Marketing data science。https://medium.com/marketingdatascience/李克特量表-likert-scale-的起源和使用-8e1503ddd5db。
林思伶（1983）。激發學生學習動機的教學策略－約翰·凱勒（John. M. Keller）阿課斯（ARCS）橫式的應用。台北市：國立台灣師範大學。
林信良（2015）。視覺化程式語言的未來。Ithome。https://www.ithome.com.tw/voice/93114。
林奕華（2017）。彈指玩轉世界。新北市政府教育局。
金從軍（2019）。跟孩子一起玩編程：App Inventor趣味應用開發實例。北京 : 化學工業出版社。
林智恩（2016）。教育部推動運算思維培養資訊種子。教育部。https://eyeseenews.com/culture-education/26-education/1725-教育部推動運算思維-培養資訊種子。
施威銘研究室（2020）。計算機概論。旗立出版。
郝光中（2016）。數位教學遊戲設計與學習動機之研究-以國小數位教材為例。台北市：台北科技大學。
教育百科（無日期）。凱勒（J._Keller）ARCS動機模式。https://pedia.cloud.edu.tw/Entry/WikiContent?title=凱勒%28J._Keller%29ARCS動機模式&search=凱勒%28J._Keller%29ARCS動機模式#。
教育部（2016）。免費程式設計教學實施計畫。臺北市政府教育局。https://www.klps.tp.edu.tw/enable2007/uploads/6/107032602。
陳淑娟（2018）。提升高等教育國際競爭力之策略。國家教育研究院。https://epaper.naer.edu.tw/edm.php?edm_no=168&content_no=2966。
張紹勳（2001）。研究方法 （修訂版）。台中：滄海書局。
曹筱玥、江宛庭、吳可久（2020）。Steam課程初探：探討視覺與文字學習風格者在編程網頁平面繪圖課程之差異。臺灣教育評論月刊。http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/9-11/topic/06.pdf。
陳曉莉（2014）。Google發表Blockly Games，讓小學生邊玩邊學習程式設計概念。Ithome。https://www.ithome.com.tw/news/90212。
郭錦萍（2017）。科技國愛沙尼亞從小學程式接軌世界。聯合報。https://sdgs.udn.com/sdgs/story/120645/3973960。
黃亦筠（2017）。天下雜誌。https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5075021。
智庫百科學（無日期）。創造性思維。https://wiki.mbalib.com/zh-tw/%E5%88%9B%E9%80%A0%E6%80%A7%E6%80%9D%E7%BB%B4。
葉丙成（2016）。學程式者，能成麒麟之才。親子天下。https://topic.parenting.com.tw/issue/2016/coding/article-5.html。
楊俐容（2011）。6要點，引爆學習動機。親子天下雜誌30期。https://www.parenting.com.tw/article/5028485。
運算思維推動計畫（2016）。計畫緣起。https://compthinking.csie.ntnu.edu.tw/index.php/plan-start/。
賓靜蓀（2016）。教育下一波：程式設計開啟孩子的未來。親子天下雜誌76期。https://www.parenting.com.tw/article/5070130。
劉政宏、張景媛、許鼎延、張瓊文（2005）。國小學生學習動機成分之分析及其對學習行為之影響。教育心理學報，37卷，2期，173-196頁。https://doi.org/10.7108/PT.201009.0371。
劉政宏、黃博勝、陳學志、吳有城（2010）。「國中小學習動機量表」之編制及其信效度。測驗學刊, 57(3), 371-402。https://doi.org/10.7108/PT.201009.0371。
課程及教學研究中心（2016）。新課綱「程式設計」，學邏輯解問題。國家教育研究院。https://epaper.naer.edu.tw/edm.php?grp_no=2&edm_no=134&content_no=2672。
蕭文龍（2020）。統計分析。臺北市，碁峰資訊。
盧雪梅（2012）。積差相關。國家教育研究院辭書，教育百科。https://pedia.cloud.edu.tw/Entry/Detail/?title=%E7%A9%8D%E5%B7%AE%E7%9B%B8%E9%97%9C。
謝清俊（1987）。中文資訊的處理（二）中文資訊處理的科際關係。科學月刊。https://cdp.sinica.edu.tw/cchsieh/essay/hcc-essay2-14.pdf。
羅民諭（2016）。進擊的全民寫程式！你今天coding了嗎。科技大觀園。https://scitechvista.nat.gov.tw/Article/c000008/detail?ID=eccfe523-eaf7-424b-8759-e9ff34a28df2。
關鍵評論（2014）。歐巴馬呼籲美國年輕人學寫程式，台灣的教育鼓勵我們學什麼。The News Lens 關鍵評論。https://www.thenewslens.com/article/2393/fullpage。

二、英文文獻
Maria S. Abbasia, Naseer Ahmeda, Batool Sajjadb, Abdullah Alshahranic, Sumera Saeedd, Shaur Sarfaraze, Rana S. Alhamdanf, Fahim Vohrac, and Tariq Abduljabbarc. (2020). E-Learning perception and satisfaction among health sciences students amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Work, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 549-556.
Durak H. (2016). Design and development of an instructional program for teaching programming process to gifted students [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Gazi University, Ankara.
Hew. (2016). Promoting engagement in online courses: What strategies can we learn from three highly rated MOOCS. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47 (2) (2016), pp. 320-341. 10.1111/bjet.12235.
Howland, K., Good, J. (2015). Learning to communicate computationally with Flip: A bi-modal programming language for game creation. Computers & Education, 80, 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.014.
Hsu et al. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126(2018), pp. 296-310. 10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004. International Society for Technology in Education and the Computer Science.
Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M. and Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research. In Proceedings of the Challenges in Games AI Workshop, Nineteenth National Conference of Artificial Intelligence, p. 1, AAAI, San Jose, USA.
Jekins, T. (2001). The motivation of students of programming. In Proceedings of ITiCSE 2001: The 6th annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education (pp. 53–56).
Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational Design of Instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed. ), Instructional Design Ttheories and Models: An Overview of Ttheir Current Status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Kong. (2019). Components and methods of evaluating computational thinking for fostering creative problem-solvers in senior primary school education. Computational thinking education, Springer, Singapore (2019). 10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7_8.
Lai et al. (2021). Study on enhancing AIoT computational thinking skills by plot image-based VR. Interactive Learning Environments, 29 (3) (2021), pp. 482-495. 10.1080/10494820.2019.1580750.
Lindberg et al., (2019). Gamifying programming education in K-12: A review of programming curricula in seven countries and programming games. British Journal of Educational technology, 50 (3) (2019), pp. 1979-1995. 10.1111/bjet.12685.
Meerbaum-Salant, O., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (Moti). (2013). Learning computer science concepts with Scratch. Computer Science Education, 23(3), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2013.832022.
Mohaghegh, Mccauley. (2016). Computional thinking: The skill set of the 21st century. International. Journal of Computer Science and Information Technologies, 7 (3) (2016), pp. 1524-1530. 1524-1530.
Naps TL, Rössling G, Almstrum V, Dann W, Fleischer R, Hundhausen C, et al. (2002). Exploring the role of visualization and engagement in computer science education. In: ACM Sigcse Bulletin. In: ACM Sigcse Bulletin, 2002.
Ozmutlu et al. (2021). Collaboration and engagement based coding training to enhance children’s computational thinking self-efficacy. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 40 (1) (2021), p. 100833. 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100833.
Paechter, Maier & Macher. (2010). Students’ expectations of, and experiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements and course satisfaction. Computers & Education, 54 (1) (2010), pp. 222-229. 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.005.
Papert, s. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Rogers, C, Portsmore, M. (2004). Bringing engineering to elementary school. Journal of STEM Education, 5, 17-28.
Sáez-López, J.-M., Sevillano-García, M.-L., & Vazquez-Cano, E. (2019). The effect of programming on primary school students’ mathematical and scientific understanding: educational use of mBot. Educational Technology Research & Development, 67(6), 1405–1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09648-5.
Sudman, S. (1976). Applyied sampling. New York: Academic Press.
Tao Chen, Sobh, T., & Tibrewal, A. (2003). A Tool for Data Structure Visualization and User-defined Algorithm Animation. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 4(3/4), 1–9.
Teachers Association. (2011). Operational definition of computational thinking for K-12. International Society for Technology in Education and the Computer Science Teachers Association. http://csta.acm.org/Curriculum/sub/CurrFiles/CompThinkingFlyer.pdf.
Zhao, L., Liu, X., Wang, C., & Su, Y.-S. (2022). Effect of different mind mapping approaches on primary school students’ computational thinking skills during visual programming learning. Computers & Education, 181, N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104445.