跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(54.224.117.125) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/01/28 20:38
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:張庭翊
研究生(外文):Chang Ting Yi
論文名稱:運用合作式概念構圖於國一學生生物概念學習之個案研究
論文名稱(外文):The Application of Collaborative Concept Mapping to Concept Learning in Biology of First Grade Students of Junior High School─A Case Study
指導教授:黃世傑黃世傑引用關係林素華林素華引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立彰化師範大學
系所名稱:生物學系
學門:生命科學學門
學類:生物學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:145
中文關鍵詞:概念圖概念構圖合作式概念構圖合作學習
外文關鍵詞:concept mapconcept mappingcollaborative concept mappingcooperative learning
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:42
  • 點閱點閱:860
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
運用合作式概念構圖於國一學生生物概念學習之個案研究
摘 要
本研究旨在探索:國一學生運用合作式概念構圖學習策略對生物概念學習發展之面貌。本研究以質性研究之方法,針對個案教師及兩個班級中各選一個合作學習小組,進行一個學期的課室觀察,並輔以錄影、錄音,藉以瞭解在個案教師營造的合作學習情境中,學生如何進行概念構圖的活動,其內容包括:學生如何討論磋商、小組概念圖如何發展、及學生生物概念學習之情形。此外,亦經由個案教師和學生訪談,與收集工作單、概念圖等文件資料,以做為詮釋資料時之參考。
本研究將多方的資料經三角校正與持續性比較分析,結果發現:在個案教師安排的合作式概念構圖活動中,參與研究的國一學生不但能夠有效率且積極參與構圖任務之分工合作與磋商,而且隨著同儕間生物知識架構之異同,學生會產生合作建構、對立互換和形成暫時性聯盟的磋商互動模式,進而使小組概念圖之發展呈現同化、調適與平衡的動態變化。此外,經由構圖活動,學生可充分進行概念歸類與概念排序的學習,並透過小組概念圖提供磋商時思考空間之共享與思考之視覺支持,學生更易於產生認知同化或調適之歷程。另外,透過構圖活動之觀摩或磋商,學生亦可再精緻化個人概念圖之結構與內容,並進行後設學習,使學習成為有意義的活動。
綜合本研究發現,建議在教學上,教師可運用概念構圖於學習日誌中,以追蹤或瞭解學生概念學習之動態發展,及學生參與合作式概念構圖活動之磋商基礎。此外,教師提供充足的知識基模,可幫助國一學生在構圖活動中達成有效的後設學習,並且以概念圖為合作學習的磋商工具,可以提供國一學生使用科學語言溝通之機會,及對磋商內容視覺架構之支持。
關鍵詞:概念圖、概念構圖、合作式概念構圖、合作學習
The Application of Collaborative Concept Mapping to Concept Learning in Biology of First Grade Students of Junior High School─A Case Study
Abstract
The research is to explore the aspects of application of collaborative concept mapping, a learning strategy, to the learning and development of concepts in biology of first grade students in junior high school. The research was conducted with qualitative research methods. One cooperative learning squad was respectively picked from two classes to be observed in the classroom for one semester. The observation, with assistance of video and tape recording, was designed to understand how the students proceeded with concept mapping in the cooperative learning situation constructed by the teacher of the case. The contents included: the discussion and negotiation of the students, the development of concept maps, and the biological concepts learning of the students. Besides, interviews of teachers with students, and collection of documents like worksheets and concept maps, were employed as references when interpreting the data.
The plenty data were analyzed with triangulation and constant comparison, and it was found that, in the activity of collaborative concept mapping arranged by the teachers, the first grade students participating in the research could not only effectively and actively take part in the labor division and negotiation of mapping, but also resulted in different negotiation and interaction modes, like collaborative construction, adversarial exchanges and formation of temporary alliances, with the similarities and dissimilarities of the biological knowledge constructs of the peers, which then produced dynamic changes like assimilation, accommodation and equilibrium in the development of concept maps of the squads. Besides, with the activity of concept mapping, students could adequately learn concept clustering and concept ordering. The concept map of the squad provided a shared room and visual aids for thinking in their negotiation, which enabled the students to come to the process of cognition assimilation or accommodation. Furthermore, through observation and negotiation of mapping activity, the students could also elaborate the structure and content of their personal concept maps and perform meta-learning, to make learning a meaningful activity.
Summing up the findings of the research, it is suggested that, in their instruction, teachers can employ concept mapping in their diaries of learning to trace or understand the dynamic development of the concept learning of students and negotiation basis of students’ participation in collaborative concept mapping. Besides, the provision of sufficient knowledge schema by teachers enables students to achieve effective meta-learning. Concept maps, used as the negotiation instrument of cooperative learning, provide students an opportunity to communicate in scientific language, and a visual aid to the contents of negotiation.
Keywords: concept map; concept mapping; collaborative concept mapping; cooperative learning.
目 次
中文摘要………………………………………………………Ⅰ
英文摘要………………………………………………………Ⅱ
目次……………………………………………………………Ⅳ
表次……………………………………………………………Ⅵ
圖次……………………………………………………………Ⅶ
附錄次…………………………………………………………Ⅷ
第壹章 緒論
第一節 問題背景與研究動機………………………………… 1
第二節 研究目的與研究問題………………………………… 7
第三節 名詞解釋……………………………………………… 8
第貳章 文獻探討
第一節 概念構圖的理論基礎………………………………… 9
第二節 合作學習的理論基礎…………………………………23
第三節 合作式概念構圖的相關研究…………………………30
第四節 總結……………………………………………………36
第參章 研究方法
第一節 研究對象………………………………………………39
第二節 研究設計………………………………………………41
第三節 資料蒐集………………………………………………44
第四節 資料分析………………………………………………47
第五節 研究情境………………………………………………49
第肆章 研究結果
第一節 個案教師營造的合作式概念構圖活動………………51
第二節 合作建構概念圖之小組互動歷程……………………72
第三節 小組概念圖發展之同化、調適歷程…………………84
第四節 學生生物概念的學習與發展…………………………98
第伍章 討論、結論與建議
第一節 討論與結論 …………………………………………109
第二節 建議 …………………………………………………117
參考文獻………………………………………………………121
表 次
表2-1 合作、競爭、個別學習之比較…………………………………25
表3-1 概念構圖策略實施階段表………………………………………42
表3-2 合作式概念構圖活動實施之日程表……………………………44
表3-3 小組與個人概念圖主題一覽表…………………………………46
圖 次
圖2-1 人類大腦訊息處理模式…………………………………………15
圖2-2 Maslow需求層次圖……………………………………………29
圖3-1 研究流程…………………………………………………………48
圖4-1 個案教師合作學習教學流程模式………………………………55
圖4-2 小組概念圖之發展………………………………………………91
圖4-3 同化歷程後之初步小組概念圖…………………………………93
圖4-4 調適歷程中之部分小組概念圖…………………………………94
圖4-5 調適歷程後之小組概念圖………………………………………94
圖4-6 個案小組第三次構圖活動之小組概念圖………………………95
圖4-7 個案小組表達的概念群組之階層關係 ………………………100
圖4-8 對個案小組表達的概念群組之階層關係之修正 ……………100
圖4-9 學生S3活動前個人概念圖 ………………………………… 102
圖4-10 學生S3活動後個人概念圖………………………………… 103
圖4-11 學生S5活動前個人概念圖………………………………… 106
圖4-12 學生S5活動後個人概念圖………………………………… 107
附錄次
附錄一 學生資料卡與個人學習檔案互評表…………………………127
附錄二 學習工作單CH3-1……………………………………………128
附錄三 學生學習日誌…………………………………………………130
附錄四 第一次合作式概念構圖活動工作單…………………………132
附錄五 個案小組第一次構圖活動之小組概念圖……………………133
附錄六 個案小組第二次構圖活動之小組概念圖……………………134
附錄七 個案小組第四次構圖活動之小組概念圖……………………135
附錄八 學生S1活動前個人概念圖………………………………… 136
附錄九 學生S1活動後個人概念圖………………………………… 137
附錄十 學生S2活動前個人概念圖………………………………… 138
附錄十一 學生S2活動後個人概念圖……………………………… 139
附錄十二 學生S4活動前個人概念圖……………………………… 140
附錄十三 學生S4活動後個人概念圖……………………………… 141
附錄十四 學生S6活動前個人概念圖……………………………… 142
附錄十五 學生S6活動後個人概念圖……………………………… 143
附錄十六 學生S7活動前個人概念圖……………………………… 144
附錄十七 學生S7活動後個人概念圖……………………………… 145
參考文獻
一、中文部分:
王薌茹 (1994)。概念圖教學在國中生物學習之成效。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
全中平 (1996)。國民小學五年學生對學習力與運動概念之分析研究。台北師院學報,9,405-426。
江淑卿、郭生玉 (1997)。不同學習過程的概念構圖策略對促進知識結構專家化與理解能力之效果研究。師大學報,42,1-16。
余民寧、陳嘉成 (1996)。概念構圖:另一種評量方法。政大學報,73,161-200。
余民寧、潘雅芳、林偉文 (1996)。概念構圖法:合作學習抑個別學習。政大教育與心理研究,19,93-124。
余民寧 (1997)。有意義的學習:概念構圖之研究。台北:商鼎。
吳幸宜 (1994)。學習理論與教學應用。台北:心理。
邱上真 (1989)。知識結構的評量:概念構圖的發展與試用。特殊教育學報,4,215-254。
林清山 (1991)。教育心理學:認知取向。台北:遠流。
張春興 (1995)。教育心理學。台北:東華。
張靜嚳 (1995)。何謂建構主義。建構與教學,3。
陳嘉成 (1998)。合作學習式概念構圖在國小自然科教學成效研究。教育與心理研究,21,107-128。
陳嘉成、余民寧 (1997)。以概念構圖為學習策略之教學對自然科學習的促進效果之研究。政大學報,77,201-235。
黃台珠 (1994)。概念圖在國中生物教學上的成效研究。國科會專題計畫成果報告。
黃政傑、林佩璇 (1996)。合作學習。台北:五南。
黃萬居 (1993)。國小學生的概念構圖和自然科學學習成就之研究。台北市立師範學院學報,24,47-66。
黃瑞琴 (1997)。質的教育研究法(第二版)。台北:心理。
湯清二 (1993)。我國學生生物細胞概念發展研究:迷思概念之晤談與概念構圖。彰化師範大學學報,4,141-170。
楊榮祥 (1993)。詮釋性研究法在科學教育上的應用。1993年國際詮釋性研究研討會講議。台北:國立師範大學。
熊召弟、王美芬、段曉林、熊同鑫譯 (1996)。科學習習心理學。台北:心理。
謝真華 (1999)。概念構圖教學對國小四年級學童在自然科學習成效之研究。台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
二、英文部分:
Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
Ausubel, D. P. (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Brown, A. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp.65-116). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Carla, V. B., Jos, V. L., & Gellof K. (1997). Collaborative construction of conceptual understanding: Interaction processes and learning outcomes emerging form a concept mapping and a poster task. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 8, 341-361.
Elhelou, M. W. A. (1997). The use concept mapping in learning science subjects by Arab students. Education Research, 39(3), 311-317.
Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. In F. E. Weinert, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation and understanding (pp.21-29). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gagn’e, E. D. (1985). The Cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
Jegede, O. J., Alaiyemola, F. F., & Okebukola, P. A. O. (1990). The effect of concept mapping on students'''''''' anxiety and achievement in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 951-960.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: langusge, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Markow, P. G., & Lonning, R. A. (1998). Usefulness of concept maps in college college chemistry laboratories: Students’ perceptions and effects on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1015-1029.
McClure, J., Sonak, B., & Suen, H. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning: Reliability, validity and logistical practicality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(4), 475-492.
McDonald, J., & Czerniak, C. (1994). Developing interdisciplinary units: Strategies and example. School Science and Mathematics, 94, 5-10.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A usefull tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937-949.
Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept mapping as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, London: Cambridge University Press.
Okebukola, P. A. (1992). Concept mapping with a cooperative learning flavor. The American Biology Teacher, 54, 218-221.
Osisioma, U. I. N. (1997). Remediation of gender inequity in science in a developing country: An experiment with cooperative concept mapping. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED406169)
Paris, S. G., & Winograd, P. (1990). How metacognition can promote academic learning and instruction. In B. F. Jones & Idol, L. (Eds.), Dimensions of Thinking and Cognitive Instruction(pp.15-52). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Peter G.M., & Robert A.L. (1998). Usefulness of concept maps in chemistry laboratories: Students’ perception and effect on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1015-1029.
Ross, B., & Munby, H. (1991). Concept mapping and misconceptions: A study of high-school student’ understandings of acid and bases. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 11-23.
Roth, W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1992). The social construction of scientific concepts or the concept map as conscription device and tool for social thinking in high school science. Science Education, 76(5), 531-557.
Roth, W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The concept map as tool for the collabrotive construction of knowledge: Amicroanalysis of high school physics students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 503-534.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1985). Representation of knowledge. In A. M. Aitkenhear & J. M. Slack (Eds.), Issues in Cognitivive Modeling (pp.15-62). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Shavelson, R. J. (1974). Methodes for examining respresentation of subject-matter structure in a student’s memory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11, 231-249.
Slotte, V., & Lonka, K. (1999). Spontaneous concept maps aiding the understanding of scientific concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 515-531.
Starr, M. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (1990). Concept maps as a heuristic for science curriculum develomment: Towards improvement in process and product. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 987-1000.
Stensvold, M. S., & Wilson, J. T. (1990). The interaction of verbal ability with concept mapping in learning from a chemistry laboratory activity. Science Education, 74(4), 474-480.
Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Combridge University Press.
Stewart, J. (1980). Techniques for assessing and represnting information in cognitive structure. Science Education, 64(2), 223-235.
Wallace, J. D., & Mintzes, J. J. (1990). The concept map as a research tool: Exploring conceptual change in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1033-1052.
Wandersee, J. H. (1990). Concept mapping and the cartography of cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 923-936.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top