本研究旨在探討非同步網路合作學習對家電實習與電儀表實驗學習成效之影響。研究對象選擇技專校院五專部三年級學生，包括控制組51人，實驗組48人，分別施予傳統與非同步網路合作學習教學。最後再根據認知成就測驗、實作檢定與實習實驗報告成績比較實驗組與控制組的學習成效是否有差異？此外，並依先備知能進行差異性比較。同時探討學習風格是否影響學習成效？繼則探究電腦素養與實習實驗學習成效間相關聯的程度。最後再進行教學診斷，開立教學處方。研究結果經平均數、標準差、單因子共變數分析、薛費氏法、二因子變異數分析、積差相關等統計方法處理分析，得到的研究結論如下：
一、非同步網路合作學習對家電實習與電儀表實驗的學習影響很大。實驗組學生除了在量化學習成效明顯優於控制組外，還可發現原本在傳統教學中須花很多時間才能釐清的難題，透過非同步網路合作學習，在短時間內即可迎刃而解。此外亦發現，實驗組學生的人文氣質也很明顯的提升許多。
二、非同步網路合作學習教學，可以緩和因學習風格之不同所造成的學習成效差異現象。另外亦可看出發散者對家電實習與電儀表實驗的學習成效很明顯的比其他類型的學習者差。
三、除了電儀表實作檢定外，學習風格不同者大部分不會因教學法之不同，而使其在家電實習與電儀表實驗課程的學習成效上產生明顯的差異現象。
四、先備知能不同的高、中、低分組學生，其家電實習與電儀表實驗的學習成效，大部分都會因接受不同的教學法而產生顯著性之差異。然而高分組學生在家電認知、電儀表實作檢定；低分組學生在家電實習與電儀表實驗認知成就表現上，均不會因教學法之不同而產生顯著性之差異。
五、學習者的電腦素養與家電實習及電儀表實驗的學習成效具有極為顯著的正相關係數；家電實習與電儀表實驗的學習成效間也呈現極為顯著的關聯程度；此外在實習實驗的認知成就、實作檢定、實習實驗報告成績間的正相關係數也達到極為顯著的水準。
六、在非同步網路合作學習的歷程中可以發現，學生在下列的知能與技巧有顯著的進步。包括：打字速度與網路使用技巧、口語發表與書面寫作、團隊紀律與合作默契、環保意識、溝通協調、與他人共事及達成任務、了解群我倫理與人際關係、耐心傾聽與尊重別人、寬容他人與自我檢討、邏輯思維、勤於閱讀與尋求真理、追根究柢與洞察真相、解難與下決策、理論與實務結合的融通能力、與外在世界聯繫的技巧、操作儀器設備及檢修家電的知能等等。
根據研究結果，提出下列建議供教育當局、學界與後續研究之參考：
一、可結合工業設計、企業管理、機械與電機工程科系的師生進行跨科系的大型專題製作計畫，量身訂做，開發符合各科系學生需求的教學網站與網路課程。
二、建議教育當局或相關單位能製作網路合作學習歷程的教學影片，供觀摩運用。
三、應加強校園區域網路與國家整體網路建設，並做好校園網路管理工作，有效解決網路塞車與中毒現象，始能改善網路教學品質，提昇學習成效。
四、教育當局宜指定相關之大專校院，每年輪流舉辦合作學習教學研討會或工作坊，讓專家、學者、教師齊聚一堂交換教學新知，並分享合作學習教學經驗與心得。
五、利用非同步網路合作學習教學為自變項，邏輯數學、視覺空間與肢體動覺能力為中介變項，分別探討其對實習實驗學習成效之影響。
六、選定特殊研究對象，如實作檢定表現很傑出，認知成就與實驗報告寫作均乏善可陳的學生，以質化研究為主軸，分別以個案或俗民誌法，探討其學習特質、智能結構及學習歷程的反應速度與互動狀況，同時深入研究其更深一層的合作學習行為。

The study aims at researching the impacts of asynchronous network collaborative learning on learning effects of electric home appliances practice and electronic instrumentation and measurement experiments. The objects of study are selected from the third grade students of junior colleges from different technical colleges and polytechnic universities, including 51 students in the control group and 48 students in the experimental group. They were given traditional teaching method and asynchronous network collaborative learning education, respectively. Subsequently, both experimental and control groups were given cognitive achievement tests and lab skill accreditation; their test results and practical experimental reports were provided for comparison to see if the learning effects of both groups differ from each other. In addition, both groups were carried out the comparison of their prior knowledge. The study simultaneously researches if the factor of learning style has the influence on learning effect. Moreover, the study researches the relation between the computer literacy and the learning effects of practice and experiments. In the end, the study made teaching diagnosis and provided suggestions for teaching. The study applied various statistics methods, including mean, standard deviation, one-way ANCOVA, Scheff’e method, two-way ANOVA and product-moment correlation to come out the following results,
A. Asynchronous network collaborative learning has a great influence on electric home appliances practice and experiments on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques. We found that the students in the experimental group have better performance than students in the control group with regard to quantitative results of the learning effect. In addition, some difficult problems that need a lot of time to clarify and solve under the traditional teaching method can be readily solved in a short time under asynchronous network collaborative learning. The study also found that cultural quality and temperament of the students in the experimental group are obviously heightened.
B. Asynchronous network cooperative learning education can alleviate the learning effect differences resulting from different learning styles. In addition, it is obvious that the learning effects of divergers on electric home appliances practice and experiments on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques are poor than other types of learners.
C. Excepting for lab skill accreditation on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques, most of the students with different learning styles do not have obvious and different learning effects on electric home appliances practice and experiments on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques owing to different teaching methods.
D. Students were divided into groups of high, average and low degrees based on their prior knowledge; their learning effects of electric home appliances practice and experiments on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques are respectively and apparently different under different teaching method. However, students in high prior knowledge group have no obvious performance difference with regard to electric home appliances cognition and lab skill accreditation on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques by applying different teaching methods. Students in low prior knowledge group have no obvious performance difference with regard to electric home appliances practice and experimental cognitive achievement of electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques.
E. A learner’s computer literacy and the learning effect of electric home appliances practice and experiments on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques indicated significantly positive correlation; the learning effects between electric home appliances practice and experiments on electronic instrumentation and measurement techniques also indicated significantly positive correlation; moreover, the results of cognitive achievement lab skill accreditation, student reports of practical experiments indicated significantly positive correlation.
F. The study also found that students under asynchronous network collaborative learning education have apparent progress towards the following knowledge and skills, including typing speed, internet browsing skill, spoken and written expression, team disciplines and tacit agreement of collaborative, environmental consciousness, communication and coordination, team work, mission achievement, humanism ethics, interpersonal relationship, listening, esteem, tolerance, self-review, logic thinking, reading, truth seeking, thorough inquiry, insight ability, problem-solving, decision-making, ability in integrating theory and practical affairs, liaison, equipment operations and troubleshooting of electric home appliances, etc.
According to the study results, we propose the following suggestions as reference for relevant education authorities, the academic circle and follow-up researches:
1. Combining teachers and students at departments of industrial design, business administration, machinery and electrical engineering to carry out large-scale and tailor-made collaborative project(s) on teaching websites and network courses in conformity with requirements of students at different departments.
2. Providing suggestions for relevant education authorities or units to make videos of network collaborative learning process for emulation and application.
3. Reinforcing campus local network and national comprehensive network constructions, carrying out campus network administration and effectively solving traffic jam on the net and virus problems to improve the learning effects of students on web-based teaching quality.
4. The education authorities should assign relevant colleges and universities to carry out annual collaborative learning and teaching seminar in turn, so as to provide opportunities for specialists, scholars and teachers to gather together for exchanging teaching information and sharing experience in collaborative learning and teaching.
5. Using asynchronous network cooperative learning education as independent variable, adding to the factors of logical-mathematic, visual space and bodily-kinesthetic intelligence as intervening variables, to respectively research their influences on the learning effect of practical experiments.
6. Researching the learning characteristics, intelligent structure and response speed and interaction of learning process of special students, who have good performance of lab skill accreditation with unusual results of cognitive achievement and experimental reports, based on qualitative study by applying case study or ethnographic study; studying their collaborative learning behaviors.

中文部分
于富雲(2001)。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。
王千倖(1999)。「合作學習」和「問題導向學習」—培養教師及學生的科學創作力。教育資料與研究，28，31-39。
王永昌、張永宗(2002)。創造雙贏的教學策略：合作學習。生活科技教育，35(3)，1-11。
王宗斌(1999)。訓練方式、電腦自我效能及學習型態對學習績效的影響—網頁設計實地研究。中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
王秋華(2001)。網路教學之學生學習行為與學習滿意度及學習績效的關係。大葉大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
王凱平、梁偉明(2003，4月)。普通化學網路學習之成效研究。第11屆國際電腦輔助教學研討會ICCAI2003論文集，台北市。
王智玄(2000)。新的學習策略—網路合作式學習之探討。資訊與教育，78，42-50。
王裕方(1998)。電腦態度與學習績效的影響因素探討—中學生網頁製作教學的實地研究。國立中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
王曉璿(1998)。網路環境與教學應用。教師之友，39(1)，7-13。
王曉璿(2003)。網路同儕互評學習模式在師院生電腦動畫課程學習效益之探究。第11屆國際電腦輔助教學研討會ICCAI2003論文集，台北市。
石鴻珍(2003)。海外中文電腦教學與網路教學實例探討。第三屆全球華文網路教育研討會，台北市。
朱湘吉(1992)。新觀念、新挑戰—建構主義的教學系統。教學科技與媒體，2，15-20。
朱耀明(1999)。融入式的網路教學運用：以「電腦在教育上運用」課程為例之研究。教育學報，26，287-318。
巫靜宜(2000)。比較網路教學與傳統教學對學習效果之研究－以word 2000之教學為例。淡江大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
吳玉明(1997)。建構式教學策略中不同學習型態學生學習的探討。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
吳明隆(1998)。以網路為主的教學環境(Web-Based Instruction)內涵及規劃原則。教育部電子計算機中心簡訊，8712，22-38。
吳慧珍(2000)。探討學生透過網際網路進行合作學習對其科學過程技能的影響。國立台灣師範大學地球科學研究所碩士論文。
李金泉(2001)。非同步式網路輔助教學之研究—以技職校院工業安全課程為例。彰化師範大學工業教育學系博士論文。
李進寶(1991)。日本中小學校使用電腦的概況介紹。載於資訊與教育雜誌(主編)，資訊教育與教學（頁93-99）。台中：資訊與教育雜誌社。
李進寶(2003，4月)。成功的數位學習發展策略。第11屆國際電腦輔助教學研討會ICCAI2003論文集，台北市。
李錫津(1990)。合作學習與應用。教師天地，47，48-54。
邱貴發(1996)。情境學習理念與電腦輔助學習：學習社群理念探討。台北：師大書苑。
林生傳(1993)。群育取向的創新教學。論文發表於：群育教學與輔導學術研討會。
林秀玉(2003)。小組合作學習在醫學校院大一生物科教學實施之成效。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
林佩璇(1992)。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。
林奇賢(1997)。網住改革---電腦網路與教育改革。國教之友，49(1)，5-12。
林奇賢(1999)。電腦網路與教育改革。教育部電子計算機中心簡訊，8806，1-11。
林振盈(2001)。高級工業職業學校電腦素養之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育研究所碩士論文。
林達森(2001)。合作建構教學與認知風格對國中生物能量概論學習之影響。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
林錫昭(1987，11月)。提昇五專電機科家庭電器修護實習教學品質之研究。明志工業專科學校技術與教學研討會論文集，台北縣。
林錫昭(1990，11月)。電儀表學課程設計與教學策略之研究。明志工業專科學校技術與教學研討會論文集，台北縣
林錫昭(1998，10月26日)。研編科技教材，刻不容緩。中央日報，9版。
周文忠(2000)。全球資訊網建構教學理論與設計模式。八十八學年度師範學院教育學術論文發表會論文集。
高希均(2004，8月23日)。人文情懷—科技腦、人文心、中華情、世界觀。聯合報，E7版。
徐善慧(1998)。以學習類型理論來設計台灣現階段大學的工程教育。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC88-2511-S-005-001）。台中市：國立中興大學化學工程學系。
張祖忻、朱純、胡頌華（1995）。教學設計：基本理念與方法。台北：五南。
張春興（1996）。教育心理學。台北市：東華。
張春興（1987）。心理學概要。台北：東華。
張雅芳、謝佩翰、張景豪、楊昭儀（1996）。合作學習與個別學習對於兩種不同認知層次的CAI學習成效影響之研究。第六屆中華民國電腦輔助學習研討會論文。
張惠博(1993)：邁向科技探究的實驗教學。教師天地，62。
連育仁、蕭顯盛、游光昭(2003，4月)。網路學習社群學教室學習之混合式教學策略研究。第11屆國際電腦輔助教學研討會ICCAI2003論文集，台北市。
郭文耀（2000）。英文網路教學初探。國立空中大學共同科學報，2，093-106。
郭生玉(1998)。心理與教育測驗。台北：精華書局。
郭重吉(1992)。從建構主義的觀點中探討中小學數理教學的改進。科學發展月刊，20(5)，548-570。
郭重吉(1987)。評介學習風格之有關研究。資優教育季刊，23，7-16。
郭進隆（譯）（1994）。P.Senge著，第五項修煉：學習型組織的藝術與實務。台北市：天下文化。
陳明溥、桌俊辰、劉有德(2000)。體育課程遠距教學專案規劃研究。教育部委託國立台灣師範大學體育研究與發展中心專題研究計劃。
陳盈潔(2001)。網路合作學習環境之成效探討-實地實驗研究。國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
陳淑敏(1996)。從社會互動看皮亞傑與維高斯基的理論及對幼教之啟示。發表於台北市立師範學院主辦：皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話研討會。
游光昭、李大偉(2003)。網路化教育訓練概論。台北：師大書苑。
游光昭、李大偉（1997）。教師在電腦網路中學中角色之探析。中學工藝教育，30(11)，12-16。
黃政傑等(1995)。台灣省國民小學合作學習實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究中心。
黃政傑、林佩璇(2000)。合作學習。台北：五南。
黃淑玲(2000)。網際網路合作學習環境中學習互動型態與認知風格對學習效果之影響—以二次函數之教學為例。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
葉淑真(1993)。高中音樂科合作學習實驗研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
趙全婷(1999)。專題導向式電腦輔助學習策略在國小自然科教學上的應用。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
廖奕豪(2003)。遠距教學與傳統教學學生學習成效差異之研究。國立中央大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。
劉信雄(1992)。國小學生認知風格、學習策略、自我效能與學業成就關係之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
謝麗菁(1994)。認知特質與訓練型態對資訊系統使用者學習績效之影響─以文書處理系統為例。淡江大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
戴建耘(1991)。中美兩國國民中學實施資訊教育之現況。載於資訊與教育雜誌社(主編)，資訊教育與教學(70-88頁)。台中：資訊與教育雜誌社。
鍾樹橡、林菁(1994)。問題引導式電腦合作學習在槓桿學習成就上之研究。嘉義師院學報，8，57-92。
鍾樹橡(1996)。國小學生電腦合作學習之研究─小組友誼、獎勵結構和學生因素之探討。第六屆中華民國電腦輔助學習研討會論文。
簡綜男(1999)。互動式多媒體輔助教材在電腦教學之學習成效之影響研究。中央大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
魏明通(1997)。科學教育。台北：五南。
蘇蘅、吳淑俊(1999)。電腦網路問卷調查可行性及回覆者特質的研究。新聞學研究，(53)，75-100。
西文部份
Anderson, R. E., Hanson, T. P., Johnson, D. C., & Kiasson, D. L. (1979). Minnesota computer literacy and awareness assessment, Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium. St. Paul, Minnesota.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology : A cognitive view. New York: Holt. Rinehart and Winston.
Bell, P., Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (1995). The knowledge integration environment: Theory and design. Paper presented at the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 1995 Conference.
Baloche L. A. (1998). The cooperative classroom: Empowering learning. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Best,D., Carrol,J., Gilsenan,F., Hoyt,W., Hulse,M., Jacksier,B.H.,
Johns, S.B.,et al. (1996). New fix-it-yourself manual. New York:The Reader’s Digest Association, Inc., Pleasantville, New York/Montreal.
Blosser, P. E. (1993). Using cooperative learning in science education. ERIC clearinghouse for science, mathematics, and environmental education, Columbus, Ohio. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED351207)
Bostrom, R. P., Olfman, L. and Sein, M. K. (1990). The importance of learning style in end-user training. MIS Quarterly, 101-119.
Bozionelos N. (1996). Cognitive spontaneity and learning style. Perceptual and Motor Skills,83, 43-48.
Bull, K. S., Kimball, S. L., & Stansberry, S. (1998). Developing interaction in computer mediated learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 373 721).
Carrier, C. A., & Sales, G. C. (1987). Pair versus individual work on the acquisition of concepts in a computer-based instructional lesson. Journal of Computer-based Instruction, 14, 11-17.
Casey,C. (1996).Incorporating cognitive apprenticeship in multimedia.Educational Technology Research &Development, 44(1),71-84.
Chase, C. I. (1978). Measurement for educational evaluation.(2nd ed.). Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
Chou, H. W., & Wang, T. B. (2000). The influence of learning style and training method of self-efficacy and learning performance in WWW homepage design training. International Journal of Information management, 20, 455-472.
Christine, L.,Maureen, N., & George,M.(1997), Cooperative Learning in the Thinking Classroom: Research and Theoretical Perspectives. Retrieved September 10,2003,from:
http://www.geocities.com/1650/coopthk.html.
Clarina, R.B., & Smith, L. (1988). Learning style shifts in computer-assisted instructional settings. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED295796).
Coggins, C. C.(1988) Preferred learning styles and their impact on completion of external degree programs. The American Journal of Distance Education, 2(1), 25-37.
Cooper, M. M.(1995) Cooperative learning: laboratories Journal of Chemical Education, 71,307.
Cosden, M. A., English, J. P. (1987). The effects of grouping, self esteem, and locus of control on microcomputer performance and help seeking by mildly handicapped students, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3, 443-460.
Cosey, C. (1986). Incorporating cognitive apprenticeship in multi-media. Educational Technology Research & Development, 44(1), 71-84.
Cuseo, J. (1992). Cooperative learning vs. small-group discussions and group projects: The critical difference. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 2(3), pp. 4-9.
Dalton, D. W., Hannafin, M. J., & Hooper, S. (1989). Effects of individual and cooperative computer-assisted instruction on student performance and attitudes. Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(2), 15-24.
Damon, W. (1984). Peer Education: The Untapped Potential. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5, 331-343.
Denis, M. S. LEE, Nava, P., & Beverly, K. (1994). The Relationship Between Performance in a Computer Literacy Course and Student’s Prior Achievement and Knowledge: Education Computing Research, 10(1), 63-77.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1996). The systematic design of instruction. NY: Harper Collins.
Ebel, R.L.(1975). Essentials of educational measurement. (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall.
Edelson, D., Pea, R., & Gomez, L. (1996). Constructivism in the Collaboratory. In B. G. Wilson(Ed.), Constructivism leabrning environments: Case Studies in instructional design (pp. 151-164). England Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publication.
Ellerman, H., Huisman, W.H.T., Schellekens, A.M.H.C.G.., Zwaneveld, R., & Berns, M. (1992). An experimental network-mediated study support system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,8,186-192.
Felder, R. M. & Brent, M. (1994). Cooperative learning in technical courses: Procedure, pitfalls, and payoffs. Retrieved May 5,2001,fromhttp://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/papers/coopreport.html.
Forman E. A. (1989). The Role of Peer Interaction in the Social Construction of Mathematical Knowledge. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 55-70.
Gardner, H.(1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
Gardener, B. S., & Korth, S. J. (1997). A framework for learning to work in teams. Journal of Education for Business,74(1),28-33.
Geelan, D. R. (1997). Epistemological Anarchy and the Many Forms of Constructivism. Science and Education, 6, 15-28.
Graddol, D. (1989). Some CMC discourse properties and their educational significance. In R. Mason & A Kaye (Eds.), Mind weave (pp. 236-241). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Ground, N, E., & Linn (1990). Measurement and evaluation in Teaching.(3rd ed.).N.Y.: Macmillan.
Guskey, T. R. (1990). Cooperative mastery learning strategies. The Elementary School Journal, 91(1), 33-42.
Haley, W. S., & Resnick, L. S. (1997). Collaborative vs Individual and the role of explanations. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED409339).
Harasim,L.M. (1989).Online education：A new domain.In R.Mason & A Kaye (Eds.),Mind weave(pp.236-241).Oxford：Pergamon Press.
Hiltz, S. R., & Barry, W. (1994). Asynchronous learning networks as a virtual classroom. Communication of the ACM, 40, 14-19
Hiltz, S. R. (1995). The virtual classroom: Learning without limits via computer networks. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Hooper, S., & Hannafin, M. J. (1988). Cooperative CBI: The effects of heterogeneous versus homogeneous grouping on the learning of progressively complex concept. Journal of educational Computing Research, 4, 413-424.
Jehng, J. C. (1997). The psycho-social processes and cognitive effects of peer-based collaborative interactions with computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(1), 19-46.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. (1985). The internal dynamics of cooperative learning groups. In R. Slavin, et al. (Eds.) Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. 103-124.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. (1987). Structuring cooperative learning: learning together: The 1987 handbook of lessons plans for teacher. Edina, MN: internation Book company.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1988). Circles of learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Johnson, D. & Johnson, R. (1993). Cooperative Learning: Where we have been, where we are going. Cooperative Learning and College Teaching, 3(2). pp. 6-9.
Johnson, D. W. et al. (1993). Circles of learning cooperation in the classroom. Minnesota Interaction Book Company.
Johnson, D. W. et al. (1994). The new circles of learning cooperation in the classroom and school. ASCD.
Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and Individualistic Learning.
Jonassen, D. H. (Ed.). (1996).Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. NY: Macmillan.
Kagan, S. (1992). Cooperative learning. C. A.：Resources for Teachers,Inc.
Keefe, J. W. (1988). Profiling and Utilizing learning style. Reston, Va:NASSP.
Keeler, C. M. & Anson, R. (1995). An assessment of cooperative learning used for basic computer skills instruction in the college classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 10(4). 379-393.
KIE (1997). Knowledge Integration Environment. Retrieved October 20, 2003, from http://www.kie.berkeley.edu.
Kolb, D, A., & wolfe, D.M. (1981). Professional education and career development: A cross sectional study of adaptive competencies in experimental learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED209493).
Kolb, D, A, (1985). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Lazarowitz, R., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R & Baird, H. (1994). Learning science in cooperative setting : achievement and affective outcomes. Jounal of Research in Science Teaching,31(10),1121-1131
Linn, M. (1999). The designed curriculum: Using cognitive research to create effective technology-enhanced instruction. The 8th international conference on computer-assisted instrucion.
McManus, T. H. (1998). Deliver instruction on the World Wide Web. Retrieved April 21, 2003, from http://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~mcmanus/wbi.html.
Mevarech, Z. R. (1993). Who benefits from cooperative computer-assisted instruction? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 9(4), 451-464.
Negroponte, Resnick, M. & Cassell (1966). Creating a Learning Revolution. Retrieved May 12, 2003, from http://www.media.mit.edu/groups/el/elpapers.html.
Nijhot, W., & Kommers, P. (1985). A analysis of cooperation in relation to cognitive controversy. In R. E. Slavin et al. (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn. NewYork：Plenum Press.
Okada, T. (1997). Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 109-146.
Okebukola, P. A. (1986). Cooperative learning and student’s attitudes to laboratory work. School Science and Mathematics, 86, 582-589.
Oliver, R., Omari, A., & Herrington, J. (1998). Exploring student interactions in collaborative World Wide Web computer-based learning environments. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(2/3), 263-287.
Ornstein, A. C. & Hunkins, F. P. (1993). Curriculum: foundations, Principles, and issues (2nd Ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Overbaugh R. C. (1994). Research-based guidelines for computer-based instruction development, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, Vol.27, No.1, Fall, 29-47.
Parker, B. C.& McGregor, J. d. (1995). A goal-oriented approach to laboratory development and implementation. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 26(1), 92-96.
Parker, R. E. (1985). Small-group cooperative learning improving academic social gains in the classroom. NASS Bulletin, 69(479), 48-57.
Perkins, D. N. (1992). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage? In T. M. Duffy et al. (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Piaget, J. (1978). Success and understanding. London: Poutledge Kegan.
Putnam, J. W. (1993). Cooperative learning and strategies for inclusion: Celebrating diversity in the classroom. Baltimore, MD: P. H. Brookes.
Rasmussen, K. L., & Davidson-Shivers, G.. V.(1998).Hypermedia and learning Style: Can performance be influence ?.Journal of Education Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(4), 291-308.
Relan, A.,& Gillani, B. B.(1997). Web-based information on the traditional classroom: Similarities and Differences. In Khan, B. H., (Ed.), Web-based Instruction. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Resnick, L. B. (1983). Mathematics and science learning: A new conception. Science, 220, 477-478.
Riel, M. M. (1989). Four models of educational telecommunications: Connections to the future Education & Computing, 5(3), 261-274.
Rocklin, T., O’Donnell, A., Dansereau, D. F., Lambiottee, J. G., Hythecker, V., & Larson, C. (1985). Training learning strategies with computer-aided cooperative learning. Computers in Education, 9(1), 67-71.
Romberg, T. A. & Carpenter, T. P. (1986). Research on teaching and learning mathematics: Two disciplines of scientific inguiry. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. (3rd ed.) N. Y.: Macmillan.
Scoisher, K. (1994). American Indian learning styles survey: An assessment of teachers knowledge. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students, 13, 59-77.
Sein, M. K., & Robey, D. (1991). Learning style and the efficacy of computer training methods. Perceptual and Motor Skills.
Sharan, S.& Sharan, Y.(1976). Small-group teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Singapore MOE (1996). Master plan for IT in education. Ministry of Education, Singapore.
Slavin, R. E. (1983). When does cooperative learning increase student achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 94(3), 429-445.
Slavin, R. E. (1988a). Cooperative learning and student achievement. Education Leadership, 46(20), 31-33.
Slavin, R. E. (1988b). Student team learning: An overview and practical guide. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED295910)
Slavin, R. E. (1990a). Comprehensive cooperative learning models: Embedding cooperative learning in the curriculum and the school. In Sharan, S. (Ed.) Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 261-284). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Slavin, R. E. (1990b). Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learning. New York: Plenum.
Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning.Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71-82.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research,and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Swing, S. & Peterson, P. L. (1982). The relationship of student ability and small group interaction to student achievement. American Education Research Journal, 19, 259-274.
Swisher,k. (1994). American Indian learning styles surveys：An assessment of teachers knowledge. The Journal of Educational Issues of Language Minority Students,13,59-77.
Thach, L. & Murphy, K. L. (1994). Collaborative in distance education: From local to international perspective. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(3), 5-21.
Tombari, M. L. & Borich, G. D. (1999). Authentic assessment in the classroom: applications and practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Trowbridge, D., & Durnim, R. (1984). Results from an investigation of groups working at the computer. Washington, DC: The National Science Foundation.
U.S. Department of Education (1997). President Clinton’s Call to Activate American Education in the 21st Century. Retrieved May15, 2003, from
http://www.ed.gov/updates/PresEdplan/partII.html.
Vermette, P. J. (1998). Making cooperative learning work: Student teams in K-12 classrooms. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. (M. Cole, B. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds and Trans.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wadsworth, B. J. (1971). Piajet’s Theory of Cognitive Development. N. Y.: David McKay Company, Inc.
Watson, S. B. (1991). Cooperative learning and group education modules: Effects on cognitive achievement of high school biology students. Journal of research in science teaching, 28(2), 141-146.
Webb, N. M. (1980). A process-outcome analysis of learning in group and individual settings. Educational Psychologist, 15, 69-83
Webb, N. M. (1982a). Peer interaction and learning in small cooperative groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(5), 642-655.
Webb, N. M. (1982b).Student interaction and learning in small groups.Review of educational research.52(3),421-425.
Webb, C. (1985). Cooperative learning in mathematics and science. In R. Slavin, et al. (Eds.), Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 173-176). New York: Plenum.
Webb, N. M. (1985). Student interaction and learning in small groups: A research summary. In R. Slavin, et al. (Eds.) Learning to cooperate, cooperating to learn (pp. 147-172). New York: Plenum.
Webb, N. M., Ender, P. & Lewis, W. S. (1988). Problem-solving strategies and group processes in small groups learning computer programming. American Educational Research Journal, 23(2), 243-261.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548-573.
Wells. J. B., Layne, B. H., & Allen, D. (1991) Management development training and learning styles, Public Productivity & Management, 14(4), 415-428.
Wheatly, G. H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75, 9-21.
Whithead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education. New York: MacMillan.
Wolcott, J. r., & Robertson, J. E. (1997). The world wide web as an environment for collaborative research: An experiment in graduate education. International Journal of Educational Telecommunication, 3(2/3), 219-236.
Yerion, K. A. & Rinehart, J. A. (1995). Guidelines for collaborative learning in computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 27(4), 29-34.
Yeuh, J., & Alessi, S. M. (1988). The effects of reward structure and group ability composition on cooperative computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15, 18-22.