臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究目的是藉由大學一年級學生使用本研究所發展之科學解釋能力數位學習內容，探討三種線上實驗媒材的呈現模式(動態影像文字、靜態並列圖文、序列呈現圖文)學習對其科學概念、科學解釋能力和眼動行為的表現影響。在本研究所發展的三種線上實驗媒材理化學習課程，包括十個有關國中理化章節「力與壓力」、「溫度與熱」的相關科學解釋數位學習內容中，讓學生進行預測、觀察與解釋的流程。
研究結果顯示，科學概念測驗學習成效分析結果發現三組後測的表現結果達顯著差異，其中動態影像文字組學生的表現結果比序列呈現圖文組學生好；在科學解釋能力成效也顯示三組後測科學解釋能力的表現結果達顯著差異，動態影像文字組學生的科學解釋能力優於序列呈現圖文組學生；眼動變化模式分析上，三組比較結果達統計上的顯著水準，顯示動態影像文字組的眼動資料的平均凝視時間和平均回視時間也較其他兩組久。這些結果顯示動態影像文字組的平均凝視時間較久，表示訊息處理的過程較久，學生亦能獲得較佳的學習效果。

This study investigate the effects of three different multimedia presentations (dynamic video-text, static graphics-text, serial graphics-text) on students’ performance of physics concepts, on-line scientific explanations and their eye movement behaviors. Ten physics learning events involving the topic of "Force and Pressure" and "Temperature and Heat" were developed for three different multimedia presenations online learning materials.
The results showed that the effects of learning scientific concepts test of three groups reached statistically significant difference level, wheres the dynamic video-text group’s student ioutperofrmed than to the serial graphics-text group’s students. For the results of scientific explanation, it also reveals the similar pattern that the dynamic video-text group of students outperformed than to the serial graphics-text group students. Regarding to the pattens of students’ eye movement, results of total duration on whole picture, and area of interest and total regression duration all indicated that the dynamic video-text group allocated greater attention than tot the other two groups. In short, this study demonstrated the mean of fixation duration of dynamic video-text group’s students allocated greater attention which resulted in better performance of scientific reasoning.

目錄
中文摘要 i
英文摘要 ii
誌謝 iv
表目錄 viii
圖目錄 xi
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的 2
第三節 研究問題與研究假設 3
第四節 研究範圍與限制 3
第五節 重要名詞釋義 4
第二章 文獻探討 5
第一節 科學解釋能力 5
第二節 多媒體媒材的呈現形式 6
第三節 眼動與科學學習 10
第三章 研究方法 13
第一節 研究對象 13
第二節 研究設計 13
第三節 研究流程 15
第四節 研究工具 17
第五節 科學解釋數位學習內容設計 19
第六節 資料蒐集與分析 21
第四章 研究結果與討論 21
第一節 不同形式的多媒體媒材之科學解釋數位學習內容，對學生進行科學解釋數位學習內容後，其前測與後測表現成效之差異探討 21
第二節 不同形式的多媒體媒材之科學解釋數位學習內容，對學生的科學解釋能力表現之分析 23
第三節 不同形式的多媒體媒材之科學解釋數位學習內容，對學生之眼動行為模式歷程與科學解釋能力表現之分析 21
第五章 結論與建議 49
第一節 結論 49
第二節 建議 53
參考文獻 55
附錄一 科學概念紙筆測驗的前-後測(Pre-posttest)題目卷 61
附錄二 線上科學解釋數位學習內容之科學概念分析 62
附錄三 線上科學解釋數位學習內容之科學概念判準 63
附錄四 線上科學解釋數位學習內容之科學解釋評分標準表 64

參考文獻
陳彙芳、范懿文（2000）。認知負荷對多媒體電腦輔助學習成效之影響研究。資訊管理研究，2(2)，45-59。
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, D.C.[ 1
Baddeley, A. D. (2000). The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.
Baddeley, A. D. (2002). Is working memory still working? European Psychologist, 7(2), 85-97.
Baddeley, A. D. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. [10.1038/nrn1201]. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(10), 829-839.
Baddeley, A. D., &; Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. The psychology of learning and motivation, 8, 47-89.
Chen, Hsiao, She (2015) CHB , static versus dynamic 3D representations on 10th grade students’ atomic orbital mental model construction: Evidence from eye movement behaviors. Computers in Human Behavior, 53(169-180).
Chen &; She(2014). Eye movement predict computer based assessment performance of physics concepts in different presentation modalities. Computers &; Education, 74(61-72).
Craik, F. I. M., &; Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684. doi: Doi: 10.1016/s0022-5371(72)80001-x
Driver, R., Newton, P., &; Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientificargumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287–312.
Hempel, G. G. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: The Free Press.
Just, M. A., &; Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87(4), 329-354.
Just, M. A., &; Carpenter, P. A. (1984). Using eye fixations to study reading comprehension. New methods in reading comprehension research, 151-182.
Juhasz, B. J., &; Rayner, K. (2003). Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation durations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(6), 1312-1318. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.6.1312
Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., &; O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. New York: Academic Press.
Kuhn, L., &; Reiser, B. (2004). Students constructing and defending evidence-based scientific explanations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallax, TX.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University press.
Mayer, R. E., &; Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 390-397.
Mayer, R. E., &; Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
Mayer, R. E., &; Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words?: Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389-401.
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., &; Krajcik, J. (2005). Identifying teacher practices that support students' explanations in science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Moss, D. M., Abrams, E. D., &; Robb, J. (2001). Examining student conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 771–790. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Moreno, R. (2007). Optimising learning from animations by minimizing cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signalling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 765-781.
Paivio, A. (1975). Perceptual comparisons through the mind's eye. Memory &; Cognition, 3(6), 635-647.
Paivio, A., &; Csapo, K. (1969). Concrete image and verbal memory codes. Journal of Experimental psychology, 80(2p1), 279.
Palva, S., &; Palva, J. M. (2007). New vistas for α-frequency band oscillations. Trends in Neurosciences, 30(4), 150-158.
Pollock, E., Chandler, P., &; Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 61-86.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 372.
Rayner, K. (2001). Eye Movements in Reading. In J. S. Neil &; B. B. Paul (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social &; Behavioral Sciences (pp. 5210-5214). Oxford: Pergamon.
Rayner, K., Rotello, C. M., Stewart, A. J., Keir, J., &; Duffy, S. A. (2001). Integrating text and pictorial information: Eye movements when looking at print advertisements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7(3), 219-226.
Sandoval, W. A. (2002). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanation. The Journal of Learning Science, 2(1), 6-7.
Sandoval, W. A., &; Reiser, B. J. (2002). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic supports for scientific inquiry. Unpublished manuscript.
Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and theur influence on learning throught inquiry. Science Education, 89, 634-656.
Sandoval, W. A., &; Millwood, K. A. (2003). High school students' ideas about theories and theory change after a biological inquiry unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,40(4), 369-392.
Sandoval, W. A., &; Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
She, H.-C., &; Chen, Y.-Z. (2009). The impact of multimedia effect on science learning: Evidence from eye movements. Computers &; Education, 53(4), 1297-1307. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.06.012
Small, M. Y., &; Morton, M. E. (1983). Research in college science teaching: Spatial visualization training improves performance in Organic Chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 13(1), 41-43.
Songer, N. B., &; Ho, P. S. (2005). Guiding the "explain": A modified learning cycle approach towards evidence on the development of scientific explanations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Staver, J. R., &; Jacks, T. (1988). The influence of cognitive reasoning level, cognitive restructuring ability, disembedding ability, working memory capacity, and prior knowledge on students' performance on balancing equations by inspection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(9), 763-775.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285. doi: Doi: 10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7.
Sweller, J. (1989). Cognitive technology: Some procedures for facilitating learning and problem solving in mathematics and science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 457 – 466.
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction, 4(4), 295-312. doi: Doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
Sweller, J., &; Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and instruction, 12(3), 185 – 233.
Sweller, J., Van Merriënboer, J. J. G., &; Paas, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251 – 296.
Tatler, B. W., Baddeley, R. J., &; Vincent, B. T. (2006). The long and the short of it: spatial statistics at fixation vary with saccade amplitude and task. Vision Research, 46(12),1857–1862.
Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Touger, J. S., Dufresne, R. J., Gerace, W. J., Hardiman, P. T. &; Mestre, J. P. (1995). How novice physics students deal with explanation. International Journal of Science Education, 17(2), 255-269.
Williams, R., &; Morris, R. (2004). Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1), 312 - 339.
Zuzovsky, R. &; Tamir, P. (1999). Growth patterns in students’ ability to supply scientific explanations: findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study in Israel. International Journal of Science Education, 21(10), 1101-1121.