本研究的目的在探討電腦化思考工具對國小學生學習成效之影響，採準實驗研究法，研究參與者為國小三年級三個班級的82名學生，以班為單位分派為思考工具組、分組討論組以及大班討論組。自變項為學生在課堂上是否使用電腦化思考工具進行討論，依變項為學生的學習成就與高層次思考能力。

研究結果發現：（1）學生應用電腦化思考工具進行學習與否對學習成就沒有影響；（2）學生應用電腦化思考工具進行學習能提升創造層次的思考表現；（3）學生認為電腦化思考工具對學習有幫助且願意繼續使用。未來建議教師應用電腦化思考工具進行學習活動時，應讓學生有充分的時間利用工具進行探索。後續研究可延長教學實驗的時間或採用不同的評量方式，以深入瞭解工具對學生學習成效的影響。

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of using computerized thinking tools to enhance elementary school students’ higher order thinking skills. We conducted a quasi-experimental design in the study. Three classes with a total of 82 third graders participated in the study. One class was assigned as the thinking tools group, and the other two classes served as the control groups and were further assigned as the team discussion group and the whole-class discussion group respectively. The independent variable is the use of computerized thinking tools, namely Visual Ranking and Seeing Reason of Intel Teach program, during class discussion. The dependent variables are students’ learning achievement and higher order thinking skills. The findings revealed that there were no significant differences in learning achievement among the groups, but the creative thinking dimension of the experimental group was enhanced by using computerized thinking tools. Students of the thinking tools group considered the computerized thinking tools helpful and would like to use them again in their future classes. It was suggested that education practitioners could integrate computerized thinking tools into instruction, providing that students were given sufficient time to explore the tools. Further research should explore the learning effects of using computerized thinking tools with longer period of experiment and different assessment methodology.

英特爾創新思考教育計畫（2011）。教育部創新思考教育課程簡介。取自http://twt.csie.ntnu.edu.tw/syllabus/intro.php
國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育研究所（編譯）（2007）。英特爾創新思考教育計畫（二版）。臺北：英特爾公司。(Intel Corporation, 2007).
教育部（2010)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要（二版）。臺北：作者。
葉玉珠（2002）。高層次思考教學設計的要素分析。中山大學通識教育學報，創刊號，75-101。
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R.,…Wittrock, M. C. (Eds.). (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Complete Edition). New York: Longman.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay.
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to Assess Higher-Order Thinking Skills in Your Classroom. VA: ASCD.
Culp, K. M., Pasnik, S., Wexler, D., & Meade, T. (2005). Formative Evaluation of the Intel Teach to the Future Workshop on Teaching Thinking with Technology (U.S.) 2005 Report. Retrieved from http://download.intel.com/education/EvidenceOfImpact/Report-IntelWorkshops2005.pdf
Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32(3), 179–186. doi:10.1080/00405849309543594
Higgins, S., Hall, E., Baumfield, V., & Moseley, D. (2005). A meta-analysis of the impact of the implementation of thinking skills approaches on pupils. In: Research Evidence in Education Library. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
International Society for Technology in Education. (2007). NETS for Students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-students/nets-student-standards-2007.aspx
Iiyoshi, T., Hannafin, M. J., & Wang, F. (2005). Cognitive tools and student-centered learning: Rethinking tools, functions, and applications. Educational Media International, 42(4), 281-296. doi:10.1080/09523980500161346
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools in schools: Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. C. (1996). Learning with technology: using computers as cognitive tools. In D. H. Jonassen, ed., Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. (pp. 693–719). Macmillan: New York.
King, F. J., Goodson, L., & Rohani, F. (1998). Higher Order Thinking Skills. Center for Advancement of Learning and Assessment, Florida State University.
Kim, B., & Reeves, T. (2007). Reframing research on learning with technology: in search of the meaning of cognitive tools. Instructional Science, 35(3), 207-256. doi:10.1007/s11251-006-9005-2
Kong, S. C. (2008). The development of a cognitive tool for teaching and learning fractions in the mathematics classroom: A design-based study. Computers & Education, 51(2), 886-899. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.007
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212-219. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Lajoie, S. P. (1993). Computer environments as cognitive tools for enhancing learning. In Lajoie, S. P. & Derry, S. J. (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools. (pp. 261-288). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining higher order thinking. Theory into practice, 32(3), 131-137. doi:10.1080/00405849309543588
Liu, C. C., Chen, H. S. L., Shih, J. L., Huang, G. T., & Liu, B. J. (2011). An enhanced concept map approach to improving children's storytelling ability. Computers & Education, 56(3), 873-884. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.029
Liu, M., & Bera, S. (2005). An analysis of cognitive tool use patterns in a hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 5-21. doi:10.1007/bf02504854
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). Trends Shaping Education 2010. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Partnership for the 21st Century Skills (2009). P21 Framework Definitions. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/documents/P21_Framework_Definitions.pdf
Pea, R. D. (1985). Beyond amplification: using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 167-82. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2004_2
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. National Academy Press.
Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2-9. doi:10.3102/0013189X020003002
Teach For America. (2010). Learning Theory. Retrieved from http://teachingasleadership.org/sites/default/files/Related-Readings/LT_2011.pdf