分析真實教室環境中多媒體教材之閱讀歷程

Abstract

由於多媒體工具與網際網路蓬勃發展，使得知識的擷取管道變得更為便利，不論是教師的教學教材或評量工具的選擇都更加多元化，然而，多數的多媒體學習研究於實驗室中進行，對於學生如何閱讀課室中多媒體圖文，是否與實驗室結果一致？且圖文閱讀歷程又如何與先備知識交互作用？這些問題仍有待進一步的釐清。 本研究主要是透過「眼球追蹤」方法，紀錄受試者在真實教室環境中，閱讀多媒體恐龍教學教材時的視覺注意歷程。研究方法主要是將恐龍投影片主要分為標題、文字、圖片三類區域，然後利用「眼球追蹤儀」紀錄學生於這些區域的視覺注意歷程，並進一步比較分析區域間的視覺注意力之分配情況，以及視覺注意力與學生背景之關係。眼動資料的分析指標包括：凝視整頁區域、標題區域、文字區域及圖片區域的「全凝視時間」(Total fixation duration)、「平均凝視時間」(Average fixation duration)、「區域內分配時間百分比」(Percent time spent in zone)等。本研究使用SPSS 19 軟體搭配依據理解測驗結果的分組，進行描述性統計、同質性檢定與單因子變異數分析（ANOVA）。 結果發現，地科相關背景學生在文字部份所花費的凝視時間普遍比圖片部份高。同時也具有較多的圖文交互閱讀次數。相較於地科背景學生，非地科背景學生置於圖片的視覺注意力較高，也較易受圖片線索的影響而增加閱讀注意力。

Because of the blooming multimedia and internet, teaching and learning materials have become more and more diverse. For educators, how students learn with and acquire from the multimedia materials is always a focue of discussion. However, most of the studies about multimedia learning have progressed under the laboratory environments not in the real classrooms. Consequently, to promote multimedia learning, weather the results of students’ learning with multimedia materials in the laboratory settings would be the same as in the real classroom needs to be examined thoroughly. This study employed the eye-tracking method to examine university students’ eye movement patterns when they were asked to view a multimedia presentation on the topic of “dinosaur” in a real classroom. The presentation projected on a big screen for the study consisted of 12 different text-picture PowerPoint (PPT) slides. To analyze students’ eye movement patterns, each PPT slide was further divided into three regions of interest (ROIs) including title, text, and picture ROIs. The eye movement data in these ROIs were recorded by the FaceLAB eye tracker. The eye movement measures examined in the study include: total fixation duration, average fixation duration, and percent time spent in zone. Statistc analyses, such as descriptive statistics, and one way ANOVA with homogeneity test were conducted. Correlations between subjects’ attention distribution and their background knowledge were also compared. The analyses on the eye movement data revealed the allocations of students’ visual attention distirbutions, the time needed to process various information, and differences in the reading of different PPT slides.