淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-2906200914552200
中文論文名稱 視覺設計課程對學習者視覺素養影響之個案研究
英文論文名稱 A case study of the influence of visual design course on students’ visual literacy
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 教育科技學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Educational Technology
學年度 97
學期 2
出版年 98
研究生中文姓名 陳芝穎
研究生英文姓名 Chih-Ying Chen
學號 696730349
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2009-06-16
論文頁數 99頁
口試委員 指導教授-鄭宜佳
委員-李佳玲
委員-李世忠
中文關鍵字 視覺素養  視覺設計 
英文關鍵字 visual design  visual literacy 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學教育學
中文摘要 視覺素養的提升可幫助對訊息意義的解讀,且視覺素養的重要性已逐漸被國內外所接受,並被認為是可訓練、培養的一種能力。本研究旨在了解透過視覺設計課程對大學生視覺素養的影響,以個案大學教育科技系學生為研究對象,採測驗的方式,瞭解研究對象在視覺設計課程前後,其視覺認知是否提升,並透過問卷調查了解研究對象對於視覺設計原則運用自評的情形。視覺設計課程以Lohr (2008)提出之PAT理論為授課主要內容,測驗部份對應課程內容進行編制,以測量視覺設計課程前後研究對象認知變化,並以自評問卷蒐集資料,了解學習者自評對視覺設計原則的運用能力。
測驗研究結果顯示在視覺設計課程後,整體分數上升,並達到顯著差異,顯示學習者的視覺素養的提升。在原則、活動構面整體上升,達到顯著差異,且構面下各項目分數皆提升,且達到顯著差異,顯示學習者在視覺設計課程後,對原則及活動認知程度的提升。惟工具構面在視覺設計課程後,整體分數雖上升,但前後測未達顯著差異,構面下之項目包括排版、深度,在實驗處理後,分數提高,達到顯著差異;在色彩及空間,實驗處理後,分數微幅增加,但未達顯著差異;而圖形工具在實驗處理後,分數下降,並達顯著差異。
問卷結果各題項平均分數皆達4分以上,顯示學習者皆認同對於運用視覺設計原則能力。90.46%研究對象認為課程是有助學習的,而針對課程意見66.66%研究對象認為課程內容無須改進,其它意見則為可提供更多範例、講解速度稍快、部分內容講解不夠清楚、講解課程時間稍短、課程內容可再有趣一些、講者可再活潑一點並管理秩序、學過了沒太大吸引力、課程另人想睡覺等。
比較測驗與問卷結果,發現部分項目有不一致現象,包括測驗分數高自評分數低、測驗分數低自評分數高。教師教學過程中,可幫助學習者了解自己程度,藉由在課程中提供圖像使學習者進行合作學習,並使學習者共同討論分析,以了解並發現自己所能與不能,藉此增進對視覺設計原則的認知並提升視覺素養。在課程內容部份,可增加範例,並針對學習者測驗分數較低的部份進行加強,另外亦可提供實作課程,以增強對視覺設計原則的應用。對未來研究,研究工具可利用其他視覺思考軟體,以協助課程或測驗。對於不同研究對象,可利用Christophen(1997)對各學系視覺素養課程重要性及精熟程度的調查,以設計符合程度之課程。就視覺設計課程內容而言,可根據研究對象的起點能力,參考其他視覺設計原則,規劃適合的視覺設計課程。
英文摘要 Improving visual literacy becomes more and more important nowadays because it can enhance interpretation of graphics. While visual literacy can be improved by training, the purpose of this study was to explore the influence of visual design principles on students’ visual literacy. The content of the visual deign principle lesson and the visual design principle test were developed based on Lohr’s (2008) visual design framework. In addition, a self-rated survey was created to determine how participants perceive their visual design abilities.
Findings in this study revealed that there was significant difference between pre-test and post-test on the visual design principle test. Students’ visual literacy was enhanced through the visual design principle lesson. For the aspects of principle and activity, significant differences were also found between pre- and post-tests. For the aspect of tool, no significant difference was found. On the contrary, students performed significantly worse on shape after the lesson.
The average ratings for each item in the self-rated survey were over 4, indicating that participants perceived that they possess visual design abilities. Responses in the open-ended questions suggested that over 90% of participants felt that the lesson was really helpful to them and 66.66% of participants stated that there is no need to revise the lesson. Other opinions included provide more examples, speed up the lecture, explain the concepts in more details, lengthen the lecture time, arouse participants’ interests, and so forth.
When comparing test scores to ratings in the self-rated survey, it was discovered that the results were not consistent. For example, students high in test scores might rate themselves low in the self-rated survey, and vice versa. To improve students perceiving their ability of visual desing, instructors can conduct cooperative learning to facilitate reciprocal teaching and tutoring. Furthermore, hands-on activities should be utilized to give students more opportunities to apply the visual design principles.
For future studies, researchers can use other visual thinking software to deliver the lesson or test. As for the test, further research should increase the number of question items and subjects to improve reliability. In terms of designing lessons for participants in different fields, refer to Christophen’s (1997) study which explored the importance of visual literacy in different disciplines. With regard to the structure of the lesson, future research can organize appropriate content base on students’ prior knowledge.
論文目次 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與待答問題 3
第三節 名詞解釋 4
第四節 研究範圍與限制 6
第五節 預期貢獻 7
第二章 文獻探討 8
第一節 視覺素養 8
第二節 視覺素養與學習 13
第三節 視覺素養與教育 18
第四節 視覺設計課程要素 20
第五節 視覺素養之相關研究 35
第三章 研究方法 43
第一節 研究設計 43
第二節 研究對象 44
第三節 研究工具 44
第四節 研究流程 51
第五節 資料分析與處理 54
第四章 研究結果 56
第一節 視覺設計測驗前後測資料分析 56
第二節 問卷結果分析 64
第五章 結論與建議 72
第一節 研究結論 72
第二節 研究建議 76
參考文獻 79
附錄一 視覺設計課程簡報 86
附錄二 視覺設計認知測驗題項及批改標準 91
附錄三 視覺設計認知問卷 96

表目錄
表2-1- 1視覺素養定義 10
表2-5- 1視覺設計原則與實務 40
表2-5- 2大學院校視覺設計相關之通識課程 42
表2-5- 3教育科技領域視覺設計相關課程 42
表3-3- 1專家名單-測驗 46
表3-3- 2問卷內容架構表 46
表3-3- 3專家名單-問卷 50
表3-4- 1研究時程 54
表4-1- 1整體平均成績 57
表4-1- 2原則構面成績 58
表4-1- 3活動構面成績 58
表4-1- 4工具構面成績 59
表4-1- 5各題項成績平均數及標準差 60
表4-1- 6整體成績成對樣本t檢定輸出結果 62
表4-1- 7各構面成對樣本t檢定結果輸出 63
表4-2- 1整體問卷結果 64
表4-2- 2各原則、活動、工具之問卷結果 65
表4-2- 3原則構面下各題項問卷結果 66
表4-2- 4活動構面下各題項問卷結果 67
表4-2- 5工具構面下各題項問卷結果 69
表4-2- 6問卷開放式問題結果分析—題1 70
表4-2- 7問卷開放式問題結果分析—題2 71

圖目錄
圖2-1- 1視覺素養內涵 12
圖2-2- 1訊息處理過程 15
圖2-2- 2雙碼理論 18
圖2-4- 1面積小的成為圖 21
圖2-4- 2水平、垂直方向成為圖 21
圖2-4- 3下方突出成為圖 21
圖2-4- 4等寬度比成為圖 22
圖2-4- 5被包圍的成為圖 22
圖2-4- 6對稱圖形凸型成為圖 22
圖2-4- 7欄的比較 23
圖2-4- 8列的比較 23
圖2-4- 9欄位順序 24
圖2-4- 10未整理之資料 24
圖2-4- 11同性質資料排列整理 24
圖2-4- 12聚焦重點 25
圖2-4- 13模糊重點 25
圖2-4- 14重疊區域呈現 25
圖2-4- 15連續狀態 26
圖2-4- 16比較 26
圖2-4- 17閉合 27
圖2-4- 18相似 27
圖2-4- 19連續 28
圖2-4- 20接近 28
圖2-4- 21對比 29
圖2-4- 22對齊 29
圖2-4- 23重複 29
圖2-4- 24接近 29
圖2-4- 25 Roman 字型 30
圖2-4- 26 Black Letter字型 30
圖2-4- 27 serif 31
圖2-4- 28 sans serif 31
圖2-4- 29規模 33
圖2-4- 30範圍 33
圖2-4- 31深度 34
圖2-4- 32空間編排1 34
圖2-4- 33空間編排2 34
圖3-3- 1課程簡報 45
圖3-3- 2課程簡報 45
圖3-4- 1研究流程圖 53

參考文獻 王文科、王志弘 (2007)。教育研究法。台北:五南。
王秀如 (1996)。國小高年級國語教科書編排設計之研究。國立雲林技術學院研究所碩士論文,未出版,雲林。
王俊岦 (1999)。均衡視覺素養多媒體教材雛形系統之研發。淡江大學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
朱則剛 (1990)。教育傳播與科技。台北:師大書苑。
吳明隆(2006)。SPSS統計應用學習實務:問卷分析與應用統計。台北:知城。
吳統雄(1985)。態度與行為研究的信度與效度:理論、反應、反省,民意測驗月刊,夏季號,頁29-53。
李進福 (2005)。數學教材設計之研究─以視覺設計理論為基礎。國立交通大學研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹。
林品章 (1991)。平面構成。台北:六合出版社。
邱皓政 (2000)。量化研究與統計分析。台北:五南。
徐佳士 (1987)。大眾傳播理論。台北︰正中。
高淑芬、邱美虹 (1998)。類比的檢索與對應。科學教育學刊,6 (1),63-80。
張春興 (1996)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。台北:東華。
張春興 (2002)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。台北:東華。
張春興 (2007)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐。台北:東華。
張霄亭、楊美雪 (2003)。P. M. Lester著。視覺傳播。台北:雙葉書廊。
大學校院學科標準分類查詢。教育部統計處 (2008)。2008年10月2日,取自http://www.edu.tw/statistics/index.aspx
認識淡江。淡江大學 (2008)。2008年8月4日,取自http://www.tku.edu.tw.
淡江大學教育科技系系所簡介。淡江大學教育科技系(2008)。2008年8月4日,取自http://www.et.tku.edu.tw.
陳俊宏、楊東民 (1998)。視覺傳達設計概論。台北:全華科技圖書股份有限公司。
曾啟雄 (1996)。談視覺傳達設計。設計,69,60-64。
楊清田 (1992)。造形藝術的圖、地關係研究。藝術學報,50,47-62。
楊靜宜 (2003)。數位環境影響下台灣視覺設計教育之變遷─朝倉直巳教授之教學理念傳承。中原大學研究所碩士論文,桃園。
董基宏 (1993)。國小教科書橫排之字體、種類、字句及行距設計之研究。文化大學造紙印刷研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
資訊工業策進會 (2005)。九十四年度資訊專業人員能力鑑定國際合作暨推廣計畫。2008年7月31日,取自:http://www.itest.org.tw/2005/PDF/e-2.pdf.
鄭世宏、張銘勳 (1994)。中文筆畫數及字形於VDT顯示幕之閱讀識認性研究,國科會成果報告。
Aanstoos, J. (2003). Visual literacy: An overview. Computer Society, 189-193.
AECT. (1977). The definition of educational technology. Washington DC: AECT.
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S, R. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development. MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking. Berkeley: University of California.
Association for educational communications and technology (AECT) definition and terminology committee. (2004). The definition of educational technology. Unpublished manuscript.
Atkinson, R. L., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence, & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motication: Advances in research and theory. NY: Academic Press.
Ausburn, L., & Ausburn, F. (1978). Visual literacy: Background, theory and practice. Programmed Learning & Educational Technology, 15 (4), 291-297.
Averinou, M. & Ericson, J. (1997) A review of the concept of visual literacy. British Journal of Educational Technology, 28(4) 280-291.
About. Com. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.about.com/
Bloomer, S. (1993): Real projects don't need user interface designers: Overcoming the barriers to HCI in the real world. In: Proceedings of OZCHI93, the CHISIG Annual Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 1993. pp. 94-108.
Boling, E., Eccarius, M., Frick, T., & Smith, K. (2004). Instructional illustrations: Intended meanings and learner interpretations. Journal of Visual Literacy, 24(2), 185-204.
Braden, R. A. (1996). Visual literacy. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Brown, R., & McNeill, D. (1966). The “tip of the tongue” phenomenon. Journal of Verbal and Verbal Behavior, 5, 325-337.
Burbank, L., & Pett D. W. (1983). Visual literacy: an overview of theory and practice. In L. Burbank & D. W. Pett (Eds.), Contributions to the Study of Visual Literacy. USA: IVLA Inc.
Cassidy, M. F., & Knowlton, J. Q. (1983). Visual literacy: A failed metaphor? Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 31 (2), 67–90.
Chanlin, L.(1998). Animation to teach students of different knowledge levels. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 25(3), 166-175.
Christophen, J.T. (1997). The growing need for visual literacy at the university. In R.E. Griffin, J.M. Hunter, C. B. Schiffman, & W.J. Gibbs (Eds.), Vision quest: Journeys toward visual literacy.
Cihak, D.F. (2007). Teaching students with autism to read pictures. Research in autism spectrum disorders, 1, 318-329.
Classic graphic design. Web design for instruction. Retrieved May 22, 2009, from http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/skaalid/theory/cgdt/designtheory.htm
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and brain sciences, 24, 1.
Curtiss, D. C. (1987) Introduction to Visual Literacy. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
Debes, J. (1969). The loom of visual literacy: An overview. Audiovisual Instruction, 14 (8) 25–27.
Ellis, W. (1938). A source book of Gestalt psychology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
Fleming, M., & Levie, W. H. (1993). Instructional message design: principles from the behavioural and cognitive sciences. NJ: Englewood Cliffs.
Fontco. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.fontco.com/.
Gardner, C., & Martinson, B.(2005). Exploring binding in color and object memory. Journal of Visual Literacy, 25 (2), 249-257.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Graham, M., Hannigan, K., & Curran, P. (2005). Imagine: Visual design in first-year composition. Journal of Visual Literacy, 25(1), 21-40.
Hansen, M. (1999). Visualization tools for thinking, planning, and problem solving. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hartley, J. (1985). Designing instructional text. New York: Nichols.
Hartley, J. (2004). Text design. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Herring, R.D. (1980). Visual strategies in problem solving: An aspect of visual literacy. Syracuse, NY: ERIC Clearinghouse on Information Resources.
Hodes, C.L. (1993). The effect of visual mental imagery on speed and accuracy of information. In R.A. Braden, J.C. Baca & D.G.. Beauchamp (Eds.), Art, science and visual Literacy (pp. 252-259).Blacksburg, VA: IVLA
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1994). Museums and their visitors. US: Routledge.
Hortin, J. (1983). Visual literacy and visual thinking. In L. Burbank, & D. Pett (eds.), Contributions to the Study of Visual Literacy. VA: International Visual Literacy Asscociation.
Identifont. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://www.identifont.com/index.html
Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (2008). Educational technology: A definition with commentary. US: Routledge.
Johnson, B.D. (1977). Visual literacy, media literacy, and mass communications for English instruction. Doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38, 6581A. (University Microfilms No. 78- 5287.)
Kellner, D. (1998). Multiple literacies and critical pedagogy in a multicultural society. Educational Theory, 48(1), 103-122.
Kennedy, L.D. (1971). Textbook usage in the intermediate-upper grades. The Reading Teacher, 24, 723-729.
Kleinman, E. B., & Dwyer, F. M. (1999). Analysis of computerized visual skills: Relationships to intellectual skills and achievement. International Journal of Instructional Media,26(1), 53-69.
Kogan, N. (1971). Educational implications of cognitive styles. In G.S. Lesser (ed.), Psychology and educational practice (pp. 242-292). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Languge and culture, 103-114.
Levie, W.H. (1978). A prospectus for instructional research on visual literacy. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 26 (1), 25—36.
Levie, W.H. (1978). Research on pictures: a guide to the literature. In D.M. Willows & H.A. Houghton (eds.), The psychology of illustration, 1. New York, Berlin, Heidelberg, London, Paris, Tokyo: Springer.
Lohr, L. (2008). Retrieved August 4, 2008, www.coe.unco.edu/LindaLohr.
Lohr, L. L. (2008). Creating graphics for learning and performance: Lessons in visual literacy. NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
Lynch, P.J. (1994). Visual design for the user interface. Journal of Biocommunications, 21 (1), 22-30.
Matusitz, J. (2005). The current condition of visual communication in colleges and universities of the United States. Journal of Visual Literacy, 25(1), 97-112.
Mautone, P.D., & Mayer, R.E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 377-389.
Mautone, P.D., & Mayer, R.E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 377-389.
Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge, England: University Press.
McInnish, W.T., & Wright, V. H. (2005). Learning visual literacy through on-line discussions. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 4, 2-13.
McIntyre, W.A. (1983). The psychology of visual perception and learning from line drawings: A survey of the research literature. Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 230 901.
McKim, R. H. (1980). Experiences in visual thinking. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Messaris, P. (1994). Visual literacy: image, mind, and reality. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Miller, P.H. (1983). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limit on our capacity to process information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-87.
Misanchuk, E., Schwier, R., & Boling, E. (2000). CD-ROM, Visual design for instructional multimedia. Self-published.
Misanchuk, E.R. (1992). Preparing instructional text: Document design using desktop publishing. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
NCTE. (1997). On viewing and visually representing as forms of literacy. Kairos, 2 (1).
Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Parhar, M., & Mishra, S. (2000). Competencies for web based instructional designers. Retrieved August 4, 2008, from http://members.rediff.com/missan/Comp_Web_Inst_Designers.htm
Patterson,O. (1962). Special Tools for Communication. Chicago, IL: Industrial Audiovisual Association.
Pavio, A. (1965). Abstractness, imagery, and meaningfulness in paired-associate learning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4, 32-38.
Pavio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Pavio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach (2nd ed.). NY: Oxford University Press.
Pettersson, R. (1993). Visual Information. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
Pettersson, R. (2004). Gearing communications to the cognitive needs of students: Findings from visual literacy research. Journal of Visual Literacy, 24(2), 129-154.
Randhawa, B. S. (1978). Visual trinity: An overview. In B.S. Randhawa, & W. E. Coffman (Eds.), Visual learning, thinking and communication. New York: Academic Press.
Reis, A., Faísca, L., Ingvar, M., & Petersson, K.M. (2006). Color makes a difference: Two-dimensional object naming in literate and illiterate subjects. Brain and Cognition, 60, 49-54.
Rieber, L.P. (1994).Computers, graphics, and learning. Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark.
Rigg, R. (1971). L’ Audiovisuel au service de la formation Enterprise Moderne d’ Edition, Paris.
Rimar, G. I. (1996). Message design guidelines for screen-based programs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 12, 245-246.
Rivlin, C., Lewis, R., & Davies-Cooper, R. (1990). Guidelines for screen design. Oxford, England: Blackwell Scientific Publications.
Sadoski, M., & Paivio, A. (2001). Imagery and test: A dual coding theory of reading and writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc.
Seels, B. (1994). Visual literacy: The definition problem. In D.M. Moore,& F.M. Dwyer (Eds.), Visual literacy: A spectrum of visual learning, educational technology publications., NJ: Englewood Cliffs.
Seidman, S.A. (2004). Teaching students visual-design skills by having them study and design posters. Journal of Visual Literacy, 24(2), 155-164.
Semali, L.M. (2001). Defining new literacies in curricular practice. Retrieved September 4, 2008, from http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/semali1/
Sinatra, R. (1986). Visual literacy connections to thinking, reading, and writing. IL: Springfield.
Sless, D. (1984). Visual literacy: A failed opportunity. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 32 (4), 224–228.
Smaldino, S. E., Russell, J. D., Heinich, R., & Molenda, M. (2005). Instructional Media and Technologies for Learning (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Spencer, K. (1991). The Psychology of Educational Technology and Instructional Media(2nd ed.). UWP, Liverpool.
Stokes, S. (2002). Visual literacy in teaching and learning: A literature perspective. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 1(1), 10-19.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science,12, 257-285.
Tinker, M. A. (1963). Legibility of print. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Townsend, M., Sylva, K., Martin, A., Metz, D., & Wooten-Swanson, P. (2008). Improving readability of an evaluation tool for low-income clients using visual information processing theories. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 40, 181-186.
Tulving, E. (1972). Episodic and semantic memory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory. New York: Academic Press.
Webb, J., Davis, T.C., Bernadella, P., Clayman, M.L., Parker, P.M., Adler,D., & Wolf, M.S.(2008). Patient-centered approach for improving prescription drug warning labels. Patient Education and Counseling, 72, 443-449.
West, T. G. (1997). In the mind’s eye. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
Wileman, R. E. (1993). Visual communicating. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Educational Technology Publications.
Williams, R. (1994). The non-designer’s design book: Design and typographic principles for the visual novice. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.
Williams, R. (2008). The non-designer’s design book: design and typographic principles for the visual novice (3rd ed.). Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.
Yeh, H.T. (2008). Visual literacy: An investigation of how pre-service teachers interpret and analyze instructional visual materials. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Northern Colorado.
Yeh, H.T., & Cheng, Y.C. (2008). Promoting visual literacy: Teaching visual design principles to pre-service teachers. Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education (SITE) International Conference, USA.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2009-06-30公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2009-06-30起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信