臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究的目的，在探討概念構圖應用於閱讀科技期刊論文的學習成效與學習態度。本研究以必修科目「文獻選讀與寫作」為學習科目，對46名屏東科技大學機械系三年級的學生，建構一套教學模組，全班皆為實驗組，以閱讀專業期刊論文為標的，進行一學期的實驗教學，閱讀六篇期刊論文，幫助學生對期刊論文的閱讀理解能力增加，並以前測成績將學生分為高低兩組，比較高低兩組的學習成效。實驗結果顯示：1.實施概念構圖教學策略，需讓學生經過一段時間的適應與練習，才能讓概念構圖發揮對知識的建構；本研究中，學生從第三單元的概念構圖繪製技巧已有一定程度的提升。2.參與文獻選讀與寫作課程的學生，經一學期使用概念構圖教學策略後，對期刊論文閱讀理解的能力有明顯的提升。3.學生對課程使用概念構圖教學策略給予正向肯定態度4.經分析後，證實課堂上進行概念構圖繪製對閱讀理解能力有所幫助。5.低分組學生對概念構圖教學策略有較正向的學習態度，且也有較大的進步空間。

The purpose of this study is using the concept mapping as a reading journal paper learning strategy and discuss students’ learning effect and attitude. In this study, we chose to study the subject - literary criticism include 6 articles of journal. A semester of experiments are performed in which 46 National Pingtung University of Science and Technology Department of Mechanical Engineering, third-year students. For the research information. Students were assigned to high and low ability groups according to their scores in the pre-test. The experimental results showed that: 1. after a 18-week semester, students showed significant improvement on their journal reading ability, students needed at least four weeks to mastered the concept mapping techniques; 2. students needed at least four weeks to mastered the concept mapping techniques; 3. At the end an 18-week experimental teaching session, students' skill of using concept maps is significant progress; 4. students generally accepted the use of concept mapping strategy, and most of the concept mapping have a positive learning attitude; 5. low ability students improved more then high ability students because they depended more on the concept mapping strategy.

目錄
摘 要............................................I
Abstrac.........................................II
謝誌............................................III
目錄..............................................V
圖目錄.........................................VIII
表目錄...........................................IX
第1章 前言........................................1
1.1研究背景.......................................1
1.2研究目的.......................................2
1.3待答問題.......................................2
1.4名詞釋義.......................................3
1.4.1概念構圖.....................................3
1.4.2期刊論文閱讀理解能力...........................3
1.4.3學習態度.....................................3
1.5研究範圍與限制..................................3
第2章 文獻探討.....................................4
2.1閱讀理解的理論..................................4
2.1.1閱讀理解的意義................................4
2.1.1.1將閱讀理解視為技巧的運用.....................4
2.1.1.2將閱讀理解視為複雜的心理歷程..................5
2.1.2 閱讀理解模式...............................5
2.1.3影響閱讀理解的因素.............................7
2.2概念構圖的相關理論...............................8
2.2.1概念構圖的意涵.................................8
2.2.2概念構圖的理論基礎............................11
第3章 研究方法.....................................18
3.1研究假設.......................................18
3.2研究對象.......................................18
3.3研究設計.......................................18
3.4研究架構.......................................19
3.4.1自變項.......................................19
3.4.2控制變項.....................................19
3.4.3依變項.......................................20
3.5研究工具........................................21
3.5.1繪製概念構圖測驗...............................21
3.5.2期刊文章閱讀理解能力測驗........................21
3.5.3學習態度問卷..................................21
3.6實驗設計........................................22
3.6.1準備教學......................................22
3.6.2前測階段......................................23
3.6.3實施教學階段..................................23
3.7研究分析........................................25
3.7.1平均數與標準差.................................26
3.7.2兩組相依樣本t檢定..............................26
3.7.3獨立樣本t檢定..................................26
3.7.4相依樣本單因子變異數分析........................26
3.7.5獨立樣本單因子共變數分析........................26
3.8論文撰寫階段.....................................26
第4章 研究結果與討論.................................28
4.1概念構圖策略對學習成效之影響.......................28
4.1.1各項學習測驗之平均數與標準差.....................28
4.1.2學生在前後測之學習成效...........................29
4.1.3概念構圖教學策略對閱讀理解的影響..................29
4.1.4整學期概念構圖成就之差異.........................30
4.1.5學生高分組與低分組在學習成效上的差異...............32
4.2概念構圖教學策略對學習態度之影響....................33
4.2.1各單元之學習態度分析.............................33
4.2.2學生高分組與低分組在學習態度上的差異...............34
4.3實驗結果之討論....................................35
4.3.1實驗前與實驗後..................................35
4.3.2概念構圖成就分析.................................35
4.3.3學習態度之分析...................................36
第5章 結論與建議......................................38
5.1結論..............................................38
5.2建議..............................................38
參考文獻.............................................40
附錄一 期刊構造與摘要之概念圖...........................43
附錄二 前測閱讀試卷....................................45
附錄三 閱讀理解能力測驗雙向細目表...................................................48
附錄四 學習態度問卷....................................49

1.余民寧、陳嘉成、潘雅芳（1996）。概念構圖法在測驗教學上的應用。中國測驗學會測驗年刊，43，195-212。
2.余民寧(1997)。有意義的學習—概念構圖之研究。台北市：商鼎。
3.林清山(1991)。教育心理學：認知取向。台北：遠流。
4.柯華葳(2007)。教出寫作力。親子天下專刊。台北市：天下文化。153-154頁。
5.郭生玉(1999)。心理與教育測驗。台北市：精華書局，194頁。
6.郭生玉(2001)。心理與教育研究法。台北市：精華書局，327頁。
7.楊智雯(2007) 。故事結構教學對國小一年級學生閱讀理解能力之影響。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
8.張春興(1989)。張氏心理學辭典。台北：東華。
9.張秀鳳(2004)。國小五年級學童在概念構圖融入數學教學活動的解題表現之研究。屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
10.鄭毓霖(2003)。國小高年級學童閱讀理解能力與批判思考表現之關係。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
11.蔡慈清(2003)。利用概念構圖教學策略探討國三學生經濟概念的學習─以「政府的收入」概念為例。國立台北師範學院社會科教育學系碩士論文。
12.Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Education Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
13.Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
14.Besterfield-Sacre, M., Gerchak, J., Lyons, M. R., Shuman, L. J., & Wolfe, H. (2004). Scoring Concept Maps: An Integrated Rubric for Assessing Engineering Education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 105-115.
15.Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 240-247.
16.Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1988). Teaching reading about the structure of scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 610-619.
17.Dole, J. A., Duffy, G. G., Roehler, L. R., & Pearson, P. D. (1991). Moving from the old to the new: research on reading comprehension instruction. Review of Educational Research,61, 239-264.
18.Flood, J. (1986). The text, the student, and the teacher: Learning from exposition in middle school. Reading Teacher, 39, 784-791.
19.Gough, P. B. (1976). One second of reading. In E. Kavangh & I. G. Mattingly (eds.). Language by ear and by eye (pp. 331-358). Cambridge : MIT Press.
20.Goodman, K. S. (1986) What's whole in whole language. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann educational Book, Inc.
21.Hegarty-Hazel, E, & Prosser, M. (1991a). Relationship between student conceptual knowledge and study strategies –PratI:Student leaning in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 303-312.
22.Hegarty-Hazel, E, & Prosser, M. (1991b). Relationship between student conceptual knowledge and study strategies –PratII: Student leaning in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 412-429.
23.Hiebert, E. H., & Raphael T. E. (1996). Psychological Perspectives on Literacy and Extensions to Educational Practice. In Berliner, D. C., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.), Hanbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 550-602). New York: Simon &schuster Macmillan.
24.Lindsay, P. H., & Norman, D. A. (1977). Human information processing: An introduction to psychology. New York: Academic Press.
25.Lerner, J. W. (1988). Theories for intervention in reading. In C. N. Hedley, & J. S. Hicks (Eds.), Reading and the special learner (pp.7-20). Norwood: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
26.Mayer, R. E. (1981). The promise of cognitive psychology. New York: Freeman.
27.Novak, J. D. (1979a). Applying psychology and philosophy to the improvement of laboratory teaching. The American Biology Teacher, 41, 466-470.
28.Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how learn. New York: Gambridge, University Press.
29.Novak, J. D. (1988). Learning science and the science of leaning. Studies in Science Education, 15, 77-101
30.Novar, J. D.(1990a). Concept maps and vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful learning. Instructional Science, 19, 29-52.
31.Novak, J. D., & Musonda, D. (1991). A twelve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 117-153.
32.Prosser, M. (1987). Is prior knowledge of subject matter important to the development and use of meaningful leaning skills？Programmed Learning and Education Technology, 24, 280-285.
33.Pressley, M. (2000). What should comprehension instruction be the instruction of? In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr, (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research Volume Ⅲ (pp.545-561). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34.Rumelhart, D. E. (1977). Toward an interactive model of reading. In S. Dornic(Ed.), Interactive process in reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35.Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1985). Representation of knowledge. In A. M. Aitkenhear & J. M. Slack (Eds.), Issues in cognitive modeling ( 15-62). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
36.Smith, F. (1982). Understanding reading (3nd ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart & winston.
37.Spodek, B. (1985) .Teaching in early years. N. J.:Prentuce-Hall, Inc.Walker, J. M. T., & King, P.H. (2003). Concept Mapping as a Form of Student Assessment and Instruction in the Domain of Bioengineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(2), 167-178.
38.Swaby, Barbara E. R(1989). Diagnosis and Correction of Reading Difficulties. Boston: Alln and Bacon.
39.Solso, R. L. (1995). Cognitive psychology (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
40.Van den Broek, P., & Kremer, K. E. (2000). The Mind in Action: What It Means to Comprehension During Reading. In B. M. Taylor, M. F. Graves & P. van den broek (Eds.), Reading for Meaning: Fostering Comprhension in The Middle Grade (pp. 1-31). NY: Teachers College.
41.Walker, J. M. T., & King, P.H. (2003). Concept Mapping as a Form of Student Assessment and Instruction in the Domain of Bioengineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 92(2), 167-178.
42.Yore, L. D., & Shymansky, J. A. (1991). Reading in science: Developing and aperational conception to guide instruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2(2), 29-36.