本研究旨在探討線上同儕評量及績效回饋、改正回饋對國中學生簡報製作技能學習成效的影響。研究樣本為國民中學二年級兩班62位學生。在教學實驗中，依評量方式及回饋方式，分為同儕評量-績效回饋組、同儕評量-改正回饋組、教師評量-績效回饋組及教師評量-改正回饋組等四組。研究結果發現(1)評量方式對國中學生簡報製作技能學習成效沒有顯著影響；(2)評量方式與回饋方式之交互作用對國中學生簡報製作技能學習成效沒有顯著影響；(3)回饋方式對國中學生簡報製作技能學習成效有顯著影響-改正回饋優於績效回饋；(4)大多數的學生可以接受同儕評量；(5)大多數的學生認為同儕評量是公平的，但有部份人但仍懷疑同儕評量的公平性及同儕評量可以評得和老師評量一樣好；(6)同儕評量在評分上範圍比較小。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of on-line peer assessment and feedback (performance feedback vs. corrected feedback) on junior high students’ PowerPoint learning performance and attitudes. The samples of this study are 62 studennts in two classes. The subject were assigned to one of the four experiment groups: peer assessment - performance feedback group, peer assessment - corrected feedback group, staff assessment - performance feedback group, staff assessment - corrected feedback group.The result show that: (1)there was no significantly difference between the peer assessment and staff assessment on learning PowerPoint is not signal, (2) there was no significantly difference among the corelation between various assessment and various feedback on learning PowerPoint , (3) there was significantly difference between the corrected feedback and performance feedback, the corrected feedback group was significantly better than performance feedback group, (4)the method of peer assessment is acceptable by students, (5)peer can assess fairly, but someone doubts the fariness (6)the students gave a narrower range of marks than the teacher.

參考文獻
〔中文文獻〕
台灣婦女網路論壇。老師何處去—合作思考與認知發展。[Online]. Available:http://forum.yam.org.tw/women/backinfo/story/data/data1.htm(2002.04.04)。
池勝源(1998)。社會學習論在教育上的啟示與應用。竹縣文教，17，14-16。
李長燦(1997)。後皮亞傑學派對國小 思考教學的啟示。教育資料與研究，16，50-56。[Online]. Available:http://www.nmh.gov.tw/edu/basis3/16/gj13.htm(2002.04.04)。
班杜拉(Albert Bandura)著、周曉虹譯(1995)。社會學習論(Social Learning Theory by Albert Bandura)。台北：桂冠。
陳明印(2001)。九年一貫課程國民中小學學生成績評量準則探究。研習資訊，18(2)。
郭重吉(2001)。漫談建構主義在數理教學上的應用。建構與教學，16。[Online]. Available:http://pei.cjjh.tc.edu.tw/sci-edu/edu_3_17.htm(2002.08.01)。
教育部(2001)。國民中小學學生成績評量準則。[Online]. Available: http://www.eces.tpc.edu.tw/9y1b/new_page_2.htm(2002.04.01)。
袁賢銘、林珊如、劉旨峰、邱繼宏(1999)。交大的網路教學與學習經驗－從W3CC到互評系統。友聲雜誌:遠距教學在交大。[Online]. Available:http://totem.cte.nctu.edu.tw/etrd/papers/webinstruction.pdf(2002.01.14)。
涂維聖(2000)。數理科測驗與評量-我思我見，最後修訂日期2000.11.29。 [Online]. Available:http://www.sljhs.ylc.edu.tw/bandit/Measure1.htm(2002.04.04)。
徐雍智、蔡今中、陳明璋(2002)。數學創意類比與同儕評量及其網路案例設計之初探。師大學報：科學教育類，47(1)，1-14。
徐椿樑(2001)。鷹架學習理論在專業技術教學的成效分析之研究。國立臺灣師範大學工業教育研究所博士論文。
張靜嚳(1995)。建構教學問題與評量。建構與教學，8。[Online]. Available:http://pck.bio.ncue.edu.tw/pckweb/c&t/issue1-8/v8-1.htm(2002.01.12)。
張靜嚳(1994)。何謂建構教學。建構與教學，3。[Online]. Available:http://pck.bio.ncue.edu.tw/pckweb/c&t/issue1-8/v3-1.htm(2002.01.12)。
張景媛(1998)。新學習時代的來臨—建構學習的理論與實務。教育研究資訊，6(1)， 42-64。
張春興(1994)。教育心理學---三化取向。台北：東華。
黃光雄、簡茂發(1990)。教育概論。台北：師大書苑。
黃光雄、洪志成(1995)。教育導論。台北：師大書苑。
曾育豐(1999)。國小六年級數學科建構式教學法與講授式教學法比較之研究。國立高雄師範大學數學研究所碩士論文。
楊龍立(2001)。建構主義。[Online]. Available:http://www.webcation.com.tw/grow/con2/index900401.shtml(2002.08.01)。
楊國鑫(2001)。推廣網路同儕互評系統於高級工業職業學校教學課程之研究。國立交通大學資訊科學研究所碩士論文。
詹志禹(1996)。認識與知識：建構論vs.接受論。教育研究雙月刊，49，25-38。
甄曉蘭、曾志華(2002)。建構教學理念的興起與應用。[Online]. Available: http://paper.nt1.isst.edu.tw/不分類/建構教學理念R00109.html (2002.08.01)
鄭明俊、劉旨峰、林珊如、袁賢銘(2001)。網路研討會式教學法的學生學習成效之質化研究。Proceeding of The Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education / International Conference on Computer-Assisted Instruction 2001。63-70。
鄭淵全(2000)。學校教學評量的迷與思。國教世紀，191。
劉旨峰、林珊如、袁賢銘(2001)。以網路同儕互評系統支援設計科學活動：實例探討。Proceeding of The Global Chinese Conference on Computers in Education / International Conference on Computer-Assisted Instruction 2001。44-62。
〔英文文獻〕
Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (1989). Quantitative studies of student self-assessment in higher education: A critical analysis of findings. Higher Education, 18, 529-549.
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Sluijsmans, D., (1999). The use of self-, peer and co-assessment in Higher education: A view. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 331-350.
Falchikov, N. (1986). Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, 146-166.
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking-Deceloping peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Traning International, 32, 175-187.
Forrester D., Jantzie N. (1996). Learning Theories. [Online]. Available: http://www.ucalgary.ca/~gnjantzi/learning_theories.htm(民91.01.12)
Freeman, M.(1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289-300.
Fry, S. A. (1990). Implementation and evaluation of peer marking in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 15, 177-189.
Gatfield, T. (1999). Examining student satisfaction with group projects and peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in High Education, 24(4), 365-377.
Glasersfeld, V. E. (1991). Constructivism in education. The International Encyclopedia of Curriculum, 32-33.
Hughes, I. E. (1995). Peer assessment. Capability, 1, 39-43.
Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Lehn, V., Baggett C., & Murray R. C. (1995). Progress report: Towards a theory of learning during tutoring. Pittsburgh, PA: Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
MacAlpine, J. M. K. (1999). Improving and encouraging peer assessment of student presentations. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(1), 15-25.
Macpherson, K. (1999). The development of critical thinking skills in undergraduate supervisory management units: Efficacy of student peer assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 24(3), 273-284.
MacKenzie, L. (2000). Occupational therapy students as peer assessors in viva examinations. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), 135-147.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S. & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1), 23-38.
Phil, D. (2000). Computerized peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Training International, 37( 3), 346.
Resnick, M. (1997). Distribute Constructionism. Proceedings of the International Conference on the Learning Science.
Schunk D. H. (1996). Learning theory: an education perspective. Second edition. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Strachan, I. B. & Wilcox, S. (1996). Peer and self-assessment of group work: developing an effective response to increased enrolment in a third-year course in microclimatology. Journal Geography in Higher Education. 20,343-353
Topping, K. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 239-276.
Topping, K., Smith, E. F., Swanson, I. & Elliot, A. (2000). Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students. Assessment and Evaluation in High Education, 25(2), 149.
University of Colorado at Denver school of education. (2002). Constructivism related pages. http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/constructivism.html(民91.07.12)
Wu, A. S., Farrel, R., & Singley, M. K.(.2002) Scaffolding group Learning in a collaborative networked environment. Proceeding of Computer Support for collaborative Learning: Foundations for A CSCL Community. 245-254.
Yong, Z. (1998). The effects of anonymity on computer-mediated peer review. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 3, 311-334.
Liu, Z. E., Chiu, C., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. (1999). Student participation in computer science course via the Networked Peer Assessment System (NetPeas). [Online]. Available: http://totem.cte.nctu.edu.tw/etrd/papers/netpeas.pdf (民91.08.12).