本研究旨在探討註記導航策略對國小五年級學生在線上資訊定位、線上資訊整合能力、線上閱讀後設認知覺察之影響。研究者根據概念圖註記導航、大綱註記導航以及自由註記三種閱讀策略設計發展數位輔助系統，並設計了一份問卷以了解各組學生的系統使用經驗。概念圖註記導航組及大綱註記導航組學生分別於系統中使用「概念圖式註記導航輔助策略」與「大綱式註記導航輔助策略」進行學習任務，自由註記組則透過閱讀線上文本與題組指引完成練習。
本研究採準實驗設計，邀請來自台北市及新北市180名國小五年級學生參與實驗，分別被分至概念圖註記導航組、大綱註記導航組、自由註記組，每組60人。單因子變異數分析及單因子多變量變異數分析的分析結果顯示，概念圖註記導航組的線上資訊定位能力與整合能力皆顯著優於其他兩組，而其中大綱註記導航組的兩種能力表現又顯著優於自由註記組。在線上閱讀後設認知覺察上，大綱註記導航組在資訊管理（Information Management）及評估（Evaluation）向度上的表現顯著優於概念圖註記導航組以及自由註記組；而在除錯（Debugging）及量表總分上，大綱註記導航組則顯著優於自由註記組。此外，大綱註記導航組的使用者經驗總分顯著高於自由註記組，與概念圖註記導航組之間則無明顯差異。
根據本研究結果，在未來設計線上閱讀文本時，可考量以概念圖及大綱註記導航策略為設計原則，並可透過詳細的步驟指引與即時回饋，引導、培養學生面對資訊量龐大的線上環境時，能具備快速有效地定位、整合關鍵資訊之能力，並能檢視、改善自我的後設認知覺察。

This research aims to examine the effects of note-navigation strategies on fifth graders’ online information positioning and integrating ability, and reading metacognitive awareness. “The Online Information Positioning, Integrating Abilities Instruction and Assessment System” was designed and developed to support the implementation of the reading strategies: the note-concept-mapping, the note-outlining, and the unrestrained note-browsing.
A quasi-experiment was employed for the purposes of this research. One hundred and eighty fifth graders from Taipei City and New Taipei City were invited to participate in the experiment and divided into three groups: NCM(in which students were assigned to use the note-concept-mapping strategy when reading onling), NO(in which students were assigned to use the note-outlining strategy when reading online), and UNB(in which students were assigned to use the unrestrained note-browsing strategy when reading online).User experience of participants was collected by a user questionnaire.
The data were analysed with ANOVA and MANOVA, and the results showed that note-navigation strategies can effectively enhance fifth graders’ abilities of positioning the information (NCM>NO>UNB). Similarly, the information integrating performance of group NCM is significantly better than that of group NO and group UNB. In online reading metacognitive awareness, group NO gained significant greater mean scores than group NCM and group UNB in dimension Information Management and Evaluation; group NO also got significant higher mean scores than group UNB in dimension Debugging and the overall score. Students in group NO, as to user experience, gave more positive feedback on the user experience than those who were in group UNB in overall, but not in each dimension.
This research may be of importance in exploring the potential of note-navigation reading strategies. It provides educators with a better understanding of how to facilitate learners to read more quickly and effectively on the Internet and to enhance their online reading metacognitive awareness.

中文部分
王子華（2002）。網際網路教學環境之後設認知策略設計對於大學學生學習效益之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。
江淑卿、郭生玉（1997）。不同學習過程的概念構圖策略對促進知識結構專家化與理解能力之效果研究。師大學報：教育類，42，1-16。
李正聖（2005）。不同型式的前導組體對國小六年級學童科學性文章閱讀理解之比較研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺中教育大學語文教育學系碩士班，臺中市。
吳宛真（2008）。不同形式的科學文本對國小學童閱讀理解之影響─以太陽能為例（未出版之碩士論文）。國立屏東教育大學應用化學暨生命科學系，屏東縣。
吳恩慈（2009）。後設認知鷹架輔助系統模組於線上探索學習之探討（未出版之碩士論文）。淡江大學，新北市。
林珊如（2010）。數位時代的閱讀：青少年網路閱讀的爭議與未來。圖書資訊學科，8（2），29-53。
胡永崇（1995）。後設認知策略教學對國小閱讀障礙學童閱讀理解成效之研究（未出版之博士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化市。
陳李綢（1992）。國小男女生後設認知能力與數學作業表現的關係研究。教育心理學報，25，97-109。
許良榮（1998）。科學史課文對於科學理論之閱讀學習的效果。中師數理學報，2（1）， 111-141。
張秀艷、賴阿福（2008）。電腦概念構圖軟體融入國小自然與生活科技領域教學之學習成效—以環保概念為例。科學教育研究與發展季刊，50，1-20。
莊雪芳（2003）。高三學生後設認知、生物科自我概念與生物能力之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立臺灣師範大學，台北市。
張貴琳（2012）。國中學生線上閱讀素養發展現況調查。教育研究與發展期刊，8（2），87-118。
國際教育成就評鑑協會（2009）。PIRLS 2006台灣報告書。取自http://lrn.ncu.edu.tw/Teacher%20web/hwawei/PIRLS%202006%20National%20Report%EF%BC%882nd%20Edition%EF%BC%89.pdf
曾育慧（2011）。超媒體模態對閱讀行為及理解的影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立政治大學，台北市。
鄒美華（2003）。閱讀學習策略教學對國小五年級兒童閱讀理解、後設認知及自我效能之影響（未出版之碩士論文）。國立屏東師範學院，屏東市。
黃萬居（1993）。國小學生的概念構圖和自然科學習成就之研究。臺北市立師範學院學報，24，47-66。
傅粹馨（1995）。變異數異質之探討。教育學刊，11，1-25。
傅粹馨（1996）。事後比較的方法。教育學刊，12，149-174。
葉辰楨、王國華、蔡明致 (2010)。後設認知鷹架策略融入科學探究教學之探討。科學教育研究與發展季刊，58，1-32。
謝進昌（2014）。教室內數位閱讀學習與評量。教育人力與專業發展，31（3），1-6。
蘇玉凰（1994）。高中生英文閱讀理解之後設認知策略使用量表之編制（未出版之碩士論文）。國立成功大學，台南市。
蘇宜芬、林清山（1992）。後設認知訓練課程對國小低閱讀能力學生的閱讀理解能力與後設認知能力之影響。教育心理學報，25，245-267。
英文部分
Amadieu, F., Tricot, A., & Mariné, C. (2009). Prior knowledge in learning from a nonlinear electronic document: Disorientation and coherence of the reading sequences. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 381-388. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.017
Anderson, N. J. (2003). Scrolling, clicking, and reading English: Online reading strategies in a second/foreign language. The Reading Matrix, 3(3), 1-33. Retrieved from http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/anderson/article.pdf
Andrade, H. G. (1999). Student self-assessment: At the intersection of metacognition and authentic assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Montreal, Quebec, Canada, April 19-23.)
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
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 (pp. 65-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown, G. J. (2002). Beyond print: Reading digitally. Library Hi Tech, 19(4), 390-399. doi: 0.1108/07378830110412456
Brown, G. T. L. (2003). Searching informational texts: Text and task characteristics that affect performance. Reading Online, 7(2). Retrieved from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/art_index.asp?HREF=brown/index.html
Brown, M. B., & Forsythe, A. B. (1974). Robust tests for equality of variances. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 69, 364-367. doi: 10.2307/2285659
Bryant, I. (2010). Digital reading environments as a teaching tool in the secondary classroom (master’s thesis). Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1803/4251
Cerd´an, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 209-222. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.209
Cohen, J. (1982). Set correlation as a general multivariate data-analytic method. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 17(3), 301-341. doi: 10.1207/s15327906mbr1703_2
Cohen, J. (Ed.). (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral science. Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum.
Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214-257. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.2.2
Collette, A. T., & Chiappetta, E. L. (Ed.). (2009). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools. NY: Pearson.
Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching readers about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 448-456. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.80.4.448
de Jong, T., & van der Hulst, A. (2002). The effects of graphical overviews on knowledge acquisition in hypertext. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(2), 219-231. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.00229.x
Dee-Lucas, D. (1996). Effects of overview structure on study strategies and text representations for instructional hypertext. In J.-F. Rouet, J. J. Levonen, A. Dillon, & R. J. Spiro (Eds.), Hypertext and cognition (pp. 73-107). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
DeStefano, D., & LeFevre, J.-A. (2007). Cognitive load in hypertext reading: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1616-1641. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2005.08.012
Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2013). An examination of the effects of argument mapping on students' memory and comprehension performance. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 8, 11-24. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.12.002
Dymock, S. (2005). Teaching expository text structure awareness. The Reading Teacher, 59(2), 177-181. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.2.7
Eagleton, M., Guinee, K., & Langlais, K. (2003). Teaching Internet literacy strategies: the hero inquiry project. College of Professional Studies Faculty Publications. Retrieved March 1, 2014 from http://iris.lib.neu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=cps_fac_pubs
Edmondson, K. M. (1999). Assessing Science Understanding through Concept Maps: A Human Constructivist View. New York: Academic Press.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring a new are of cognitive-Developmental inquiry. American Psychological, 34(10), 906-911. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Foltz, P. W. (1996). Comprehension, coherence, and strategies in hypertext and linear text. In J.-F. Rouet, J. J. Levonen, A. Dillon, & R. J. Spiro (Eds.), Hypertext and cognition (pp. 109-136). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Retrieved from http://psych.nmsu.edu/~pfoltz/reprints/Ht-Cognition.html
Gagne, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (Ed.). (1997). The cognitive psychology of school learning. NY: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon.
Graesser, A. C., McNamara D. S., & Louwerse M. M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text? NY: Guilford.
Henry, L. A. (2006). SEARCHing for an answer: The critical role of new literacies while reading on the Internet. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 614-627. doi: 10.1598/RT.59.7.1
Hofman, R., & Van Oostendorp, H. (1999). Cognitive effects of a structural overview in a hypertext. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30(2), 129-140. doi: 10.1111/1467-8535.00101
Huang, H. C., Chern, C. L., & Lin, C. C. (2009). EFL learners’ use of online reading strategies and comprehension of texts: An exploratory study. Computers & Education, 52(1), 13-26. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.003
Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82(3), 407-416. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199806)82:3<407::AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-G
IRA (2002). Integrating literacy and technology in the curriculum: A position statement. Newark, DE: Author. Retrieved from http://www.reading.org/downloads/positions/ps1048_technology.pdf
Internet World Stats (2012). World internet users and population stats. Retrieved from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children’s metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22(3-4), 257-278. doi: 10.1080/00461520.1987.9653052
Kame'enui, E. J., & Simmons, D. C. (1990). Designing instructional strategies: The prevention of academic learning problems. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing Company.
Keselman, A. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 898-921. doi: 10.1002/tea.10115
Kim, H. S., & Kamil, M. L. (2003). Reading Electronic and Multimedia Documents. In A. Sweet & C. Snow (Eds.). Rethinking Reading Comprehension (pp. 166-175). New York: Guilford.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental Design Procedures for the Behavior Sciences (3rd Ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Lennon, M., Kirsch, I., Von Davier, M., Wagner, M., & Yamamoto, K. (2003). Feasibility Study for the PISA ICT Literacy Assessment. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services
Leu, D. J. (2007). Expanding the reading literacy framework of PISA 2009 to include online reading comprehension. A working paper commissioned by the PISA 2009 reading expert group. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Services.
Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacy emerging from the Internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (Vol. 5). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Leu, D. J. et al. (2008). Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In C. C. Block, S. Paris, & P. Afflerbach. (Eds.), Comprehension Instruction: Research-based Best Practices (pp. 61-79). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Leu, D. J. et al. (2009). The new literacies of online reading comprehension and the irony of No Child Left Behind: Students who require our assistance the most, actually receive it the least. In Morrow, L. M., Rueda, R., & Lapp, D. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Literacy Instruction: Issues of Diversity, Policy, and Equity. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Madrid, R. I., Van Oostendorp, H., & Melguizo, M. C. P. (2009). The effects of the number of links and navigation support on cognitive load and learning with hypertext: The mediating role of reading order. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(1), 66–75. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2008.06.005
Mallow, S. V. (1991). Reading science. Journal of Reading, 34(5), 324-338.
Mayer, R. E. (1987). Educational psychology: A cognitive approach. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Company.
McCown, R., Dirscoll, M., & Roop, P. G. (1996). Educational psychology: A learning-centered approach to classroom practice. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
McCrudden, M. T., & Schraw, G. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing. Educational Psychology Review, 19(2), 113-139. doi: 10.1007/s10648-006-9010-7
Miholic, V. (1994). An inventory to pique students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Reading, 38(2), 84-86. Retrieve from http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/40032273?uid=3739216&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104368760077
Miller, L. M. S., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. L. (1998). Aging and the effects of knowledge on on-line reading strategies. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 53B(4), 223-233. Retrieved from http://psychsocgerontology.oxfordjournals.org/content/53B/4/P223.full.pdf
Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students’ metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.249
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge London: Cambridge University Press.
Oliver, K. (2009). An Investigation of Concept Mapping to Improve the Reading Comprehension of Science Texts. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(5), 402-414. doi: 10.1007/s10956-009-9157-3
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2010). PISA 2009 Assessment Framework: Key Competencies in Reading, Mathematics and Science. Paris, France: Author.
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2011). PISA 2009 Results: Students on Line: Digital Technologies and Performance (Vol. 6). Paris, France: Author.
Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom application of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89-101. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3602_4
Paris, S. G., & Wixson, K. K. (1987). The development of literacy: Access, acquisition, and instruction. In D. Bloome (Eds.), Literacy, language, and schooling. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Phakiti, A. (2003). A closer look at the relationship of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to EFL reading achievement test performance. Language Testing, 20(1), 26-56. doi: 10.1191/0265532203lt243oa
Potelle, H., & Rouet, J.-F. (2003). Effects of content representation and readers' prior knowledge on the comprehension of hypertext. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58(3), 327-345. doi: 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00016-8
Protopsaltis, A., & Bouki, V. (2005). Towards a hypertext reading/comprehension model. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 23rd annual international conference on Design of communication: documenting and designing for pervasive information.
Puntambekar, S., & Goldstein, J. (2007). Effect of visual representation of the conceptual structure of the domain on science learning and navigation in a hypertext environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(4), 429-459. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/21858/
Purpura, J. E. (1997). An analysis of the relationship between test takers’ cognitive and metacognitive strategy use and second language test performance. Language Learning, 47(2), 289-325. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.91997009
Rouet, J.-F. & Britt, M. A. (2011). Relevance processes in multiple document comprehension. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Text relevance and learning from text (pp. 19-52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Rouet, J.-F., & Coutelet, B. (2008). The acquisition of document search strategies in grade-school students. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(3), 389-406. doi: 10.1002/acp.1415
Salmerón, L., Baccino, T., Cañas, J. J., Madrid, R. I., & Fajardo, I. (2009). Do graphical overviews facilitate or hinder comprehension in hypertext? Computers & Education, 53(4), 1308-1319. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.013
Salmerón, L., Cañas, J. J., Kintsch, W., & Fajardo, I. (2005). Reading strategies and hypertext comprehension. Discourse Processes, 40(3), 171-191. Doi: 10.1207/s15326950dp4003_1
Salmerón, L., Kintsch, W., & Cañas, J. J. (2006). Reading strategies and prior knowledge in learning with hypertext. Memory and Cognition, 34(5), 1157-1171. doi: 10.3758/BF03193262
Salmerón, L., Kintsch, W., & Kintsch, E. (2010). Self-regulation and link selection strategies in hypertext. Discourse Processes, 47(3), 175-211. doi: : 10.1080/01638530902728280

Schraw, G., & Dennison, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognitive awareness. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19(4), 460-475. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
Schacter, J., Chung, G. K. W. K., & Dorr, A. (1998). Children’s Internet searching on complex problems: Performance and process analyses. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 49(9), 840-849. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199807)49:9<840::AID-ASI9>3.0.CO;2-D
Snow, C. & The RAND Reading Study Group (2002). Reading for understanding. Toward a R&D program for reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
Spiegel, G. F., & Barufaldi, J. P. (1994). The effects of a combination of text structure awareness and graphic postorganizers on recall and retention of science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 913-932. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660310907
Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., & Huang, J. S. (2008). Improving children’s reading comprehension and use of strategies through computer-based strategy training. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1552-1571. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.05.009
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296. Retrieve from http://www.davidlewisphd.com/courses/EDD8121/readings/1998-Sweller_et_al.pdf
Trochim, W. M. K. (1989). An instroduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning. 12(1), 1-12. doi: 10.1016/0149-7189(89)90016-5
van den Broek, P. (1997). Discovering the cements of the universe: The development of event comprehension from childhood to adulthood. In P. van den Broek & T. Bourg (Eds.), Developmental spans in event comprehension: Bridging fictional and actual events (pp. 321-342). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Vidal-Abarca, E., Salmer´on, S., & Ma˜n´a, A. (2011). Individual differences in task-oriented reading. In M. T. McCrudden, J. P. Magliano, & G. Schraw (Eds.), Relevance instructions and goal-focusing in text learning (pp. 267-293). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Welch, B. L. (1951). On the comparison of several mean values: An alternative approach. Biometrika, 38(3/4), 330-336. doi: 10.2307/2332579
Wellman, H. M. (1985). The origins of metacognition. In D.L. Forrest-Pressley, G.E. Mackinnon, & T. G. Waller (Eds.), Metacognition, cognition, and human performance (pp.1-31). Orlando, Florida: Academic Press, Inc.
Zwaan, R. A., Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 21(2), 386-397. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~dmiall/LiteraryReading/Readings/Zwann%20Magliano%20Graesser.pdf