跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.238.204.167) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/09 22:34
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:陳清河
研究生(外文):Chin-Her Chen
論文名稱:從建構式教學觀探究國小六年級學童對「族群與群落」概念之學習
論文名稱(外文):A Study of Constructivist Teaching for Sixth Graders Concerning the Concepts of〝Population and Community〞
指導教授:王盈丰王盈丰引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:臺中師範學院
系所名稱:自然科學教育學系
學門:教育學門
學類:普通科目教育學類
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:153
中文關鍵詞:族群群落建構式教學學習態度先前概念
外文關鍵詞:PopulationCommunityConstructivist TeachingLearning AttitudePerconception
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:13
  • 點閱點閱:331
  • 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:2
本研究應用Driver與Oldham所發展之建構主義教學模式,以學童之先前概念為教學起點,以自編之「族群與群落」概念問卷及「對自然科的態度量表」為測量工具,輔以教室觀察及半結構式晤談之質性研究,藉以比較此建構式教學與傳統式教學之差異情形。研究採「準實驗研究法」,以台灣中部某國小六年級四班共150位學童為研究對象,本研究中,兩班為接受此建構式教學的實驗組,另外兩班為接受傳統式教學的對照組,並由同一位教師參與兩組教學。
研究以48位學童,進行前測晤談瞭解學童之先前概念。再進行為期二十節的教學實驗,以「看天說地」單元實施八節的試驗性教學,讓師生適應教學模式,再以「族群與群落」單元進行十二節的教學實驗。教學前後,以自編之「族群與群落」概念問卷及「對自然科的態度量表」實施前後測,並以共變數分析(ANCOVA)統計概念學習情形,同時輔以晤談及教室觀察記錄之質性研究。
本研究發現,學童在「族群與群落」單元之先前概念,多數學童有描述的困難,也不夠完整,足見學生之瞭解是有限的。在「族群與群落」概念學習方面,「生物族群的變化」之概念表現上,實驗組優於對照組(F=3.996,P<.05)。在「生物族群」、「群落」、「群落中的生物族群之交互作用」及「族群與群落」概念表現,則兩組並無顯著差異。從晤談及教室觀察歸納,實驗組的學生較能以豐富的科學詞彙完整描述,舉例證支持自己的觀點。而對照組描述時則較為簡單明確,深入解釋較不足。
在自然科的學習態度方面,「對自然科的態度量表」之全量表(F=4.318,P<.05)及「學習自然科的信心」之分量表(F=10.109,P<.01)的表現上,實驗組皆優於對照組。在「學習自然科的價值」及「探究自然科的興趣」之分量表現上,兩組並無顯著差異。從教室觀察,實驗組比對照組的表現上,發問較踴躍且主動,討論熱烈且參與度較高,有較高的學習興趣和專注力,報告或發表時則充滿信心。
The major purpose of this research was to investigate the difference of student learning outcome between constructivist teaching and traditional teaching. A constructivist teaching model which was developed by Drs. Driver and Oldham were applied in this study. The instruments developed by the researcher were “Population and Community” and “Attitude towards Science” which were assisted with classroom observation and personal interview of the classroom teacher. One hundred and fifty sixth graders divided into two groups participated in this study. One was an experiment group and the other was a contrast group. The experiment group received constructivist teaching and the contrast group received traditional teaching.
Instructional materials including “Watching the Sky and Talking about the Ground” and “Population and Community” were used. Pre-test interviews were applied to understand pupils’ preconception. There were twenty sessions in this study. All the pupils filled out the questionnaires at the end of the study. The results were analyzed based on the data collected from interviews and classroom observations.
The findings from pre-test interviews indicated that pupils had few understandings of the concepts of “Population and Community”. The pupils in the experiment group performed better than the others in the contrast group concerning the perceptions of science concepts (F=3.996,P< .05). The pupils in experiment group described science phenomena much better than the pupils in the contrast group. The experiment group got higher grades than the contrast group on the scale of science confidence (F=10.109,P< .01) and the test on attitude towards science (F=4.318,P< .05). There was no difference between two groups performed on the scale of science value and on the scale of interest.
第一章緒論 ---------------------------------------1
第一節問題背景與研究動機 -------------------------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 -----------------------------5
第二章理論基礎與相關文獻探討 ---------------------7
第一節建構主義之主張及不同角度之知識建構 ---------7
第二節建構取向教學策略及其相關研究之探討 --------- 12
第三節國小階段有關「族群與群落」概念之探討 ------- 26
第三章研究方法 ----------------------------------- 33
第一節研究設計 ----------------------------------- 34
第二節研究對象 ----------------------------------- 36
第三節研究工具 ----------------------------------- 38
第四節資料處理與分析 ----------------------------- 42
第四章研究結果 ----------------------------------- 45
第一節建構式教學對學生概念學習之影響 ------------- 45
第二節建構式教學對學生學習自然科態度之影響 ------- 51
第三節學童在「族群與群落」學習前先前概念之分析 --- 56
第四節由後測晤談探討學生概念學習情形 ------------- 69
第五節教室觀察資料分析 --------------------------- 90
第五章討論 ---------------------------------------101
第六章結論與建議 ---------------------------------113
第一節結論 ---------------------------------------113
第二節建議 ---------------------------------------119
參考文獻 --------------------------------------------122
中文部分 ------------------------------------------122
英文部分 ------------------------------------------125
中文部分
尹基勉(民88)。「原子結構」概念之建構式教學研究。國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
王文科(民79)。教育研究法。台北:五南圖書公司。
王念慈(民88)。國小一、二、三年級學童液體量與重量守恆概念發展之教學效果的研究。國立台灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
王美芬、熊召弟(民84)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理出版社。83-85頁,157-184頁。
王美芬、賴阿福(民82)。國小一、二、三年級學生「生物構造配合功能」的概念發展研究(I)。國科會研究計畫成果報告,(NSC-81-0111-S-133-501-N)。
江新合(民81)。建構主義式教學策略在國小自然科教學的應用模式。國立屏東師院主辦「國小自然科學教育」學術研討會論文彙編。3-20頁。
自然與科技課程綱要研修小組(民88)。「自然與生活科技」課程綱要。國民教育九年一貫課程網要-「自然與生活科技」學習領域。
吳玉明(民86)。建構式教學策略中不同學習型態學生學習的探討。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
呂燿宗(民90)。國小六年級自然科學建構式教學之研究。國立中正大學教育研究所碩士論文。
邱美虹(民89)。概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊。8(1)。1-34頁。
林清山(民81)。心理與教育統計學。台北:東華書局。
武國華(民90)。國小六年級自然教室中全班討論與科學知識建構歷程之詮釋性研究。臺北市立師範學院自然科學教育研究所碩士論文。
南一書局(民90)。國民小學「自然」教科書。六上第十一冊。台南:南一書局。
南一書局(民90)。國民小學「自然」教學指引。六上第十一冊。台南:南一書局。
南一書局(民90)。國民小學「自然」習作。六上第十一冊。台南:南一書局。
段曉林(民83)。建構主義取向之自然科教學法。我國四十年來教學法,台北。師大書苑。
時德平(民90)。概念構圖教學策略與食譜式教學法對國小五年級學童「電與磁」的概念學習之比較性研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
教育部(民65)。國民小學課程標準。台北:教育部。
教育部(民82)。國民小學課程標準。台北:教育部。
教育部(民90)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北:教育部。361-387頁。
曹宗萍、周文忠編撰(民88)。國小數學態度量表編製之研究。八十七學年度教育學術論文研討會論文集(三)數理教育組。
郭重吉(民81)。從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。科學發展月刊,20(5),548-570頁。
郭重吉(民85)。從建構主義談數理師資培育的革新。科學發展月刊,27(7),555-562頁。
郭重吉、吳武雄(民78)。利用晤談方式探查國中學生對物理概念的另有架構之研究(I)。彰化市。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
郭重吉、許玫理(民81)。從科學哲學觀點的演變探討科學教育的過去與未來。彰化師範大學學報第三期。531-561頁。
陳玉玲(民89)。概念改變教學策略對地球運動概念之教學效果--以國小六年級學生為例。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文。
陳懿芬(民89)。建構式教學策略應用於國中理化課程之行動研究。國立高雄師範大學物理學系碩士論文。
曾育豐(民88)。國小六年級數學科建構式教學法與講授式教學法比較之研究。國立高雄師範大學數學系碩士論文。
黃達三、劉代瑜(民82)。國小學生分類能力發展初探。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,(NSC-81-0111-S-143-501-N)。
黃慧琳(民84)。學習環在國小自然科教學之研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
廖雯玲(民88)。建構主義取向教學法對國小六年級學生在「地球運動」單元學習之影響。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
熊召弟(民83a)。國小學童生物概念之內涵。台北:心理出版社。
熊召弟(民83b)。我國國小學生對生物現象概念意義化之研究(二):生態平衡。國科會研究計畫成果報告。(NSC-83-0111-S-152-006-N)。
熊召弟等人譯,S. M. Glynn R. H. Yeany著(民85)。科學學習心理學。台北:心理出版社。(原作出版於西元1991年)
樊雪春(民88)。學生科學迷思概念的法則分析與建構教學取向教學法之實驗效果研究。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文。
鄭如琳(民89)。國小教師實施「探究--建構教學模式」之行動研究--從「磁」的概念談起。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文。
謝真華(民88)。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。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
鍾聖校(民84)。國小自然科課程教學研究。台北:五南圖書公司。57-92頁。
顏弘志(民90)。建構主義取向教學的實踐─一位國小自然科教師教學信念與和科教學知識的改變。國立花蓮師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文。
魏明通(民86)。科學教育。台北:五南圖書公司。
蘇懿生(民83)。高雄市立高中實驗室氣氛與學生對科學態度之關係研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
英文部分
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York: Grune and Stratton.
Bell, B.F.(1981a). When is an animal, not an animal? . Journal of Biological Education, 15(3), pp.213-218.
Bell, B.F.(1981b). Teaching about animal, plant and living. Working paper No.31, Learning in Science Project. Hamilton, N.Z.;S.E.R.,University of Waikato.
Bell, B.F. & Barker, M. (1982). Towards a scientific concept of “animal” . Journal of Biological Education, 16(3), pp.197-200.
Bodner, G. M. (1986). Constructivism: A Theory of Knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education Volume 63, Nimber 10, 873-878.
Carin, A. A. & Sund, R. B. (1989). Teaching science through discovery. (6th ed.) London: Merrill Publishing Company.
Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Implications for learning and discovery in sciences. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science(pp. 129-186). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Chinn, C. A. & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of educational research, 63(1), 1-49.
Cleminson, A. (1990). Establishing an epistemological base for science teaching in the light of contemporary notions of the nature of how children learn science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 429-445.
Driver, R. (1982). Piaget and science education: A Stage of Decision. In S. Modgil and C. Modgil (Eds.), Jean Piaget: Consensus and Controversy. Praeger Special Studies.
Driver, R. & Oldham, V, (1986). A Constructivist Approach to Curriculum Development in Science, Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.
Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring Science Education: The role of theories and their mportance. New York: Teachers College Press.
Duschl, R. A. & Gitomer, D. H. (1991). Epistemological Perspectives on Conceptual Change: Implications for Educational Practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 839-858.
Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 19-40.
Karplus, R., & Their, H. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Kelly, G. A. (1963). A theory of personality: The psychology of personal constructs. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Lawson, A. E. , Abraham, M. R. , Renner, J. W. (1989). A theory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. NARST Monograph, no.1.
Lehman, J. D. , carter, Charlotte, & Kahle, Jane Butler (1985). Concept mapping, Vee mapping, and Achievement: Result of a field study with black high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 663-673.
Novak, J. D. (1980). Learning theory applied to the biology classroom. The American Biology Teacher, 42(5), 280-285.
Novak, J. D. (1988). Learning Science and the Science of Learning. Studies in Science Education, 15, 77-101.
Novak, J. D. , Gowin, D. B. ,(1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.
Novick, S.,& Nussbaum, J.(1981). Pupil's understanding of the particulate nature of matter:A cross-age study.Science Education, 65, 187-196.
Nussbaum, J. (1989). Classroom conceptual change: Philosophical Perspectives.International Journal of Science Education, 11, 530-540.
Okebukola, P. A. (1990). Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology: an examination of the potency of the concept-mapping technique. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5), 493-504.
Osborne, R. , & Freyberg, P. (Eds.) (1985). Learning in Science: The Implications of Children’s Science. London: Heinemann Press.
Pfundt, F. & Duit, R.(1991). Bibliography: Students’ alternative frameworks and science education. (3rded.). Keil, West Germany: IPN.
Pines, A. L. & West. L. H.T. (1986). Conceptual Understanding and Science Learning: An Interpretation of Research Within a Source-of-knowledge Framework, Science Education, 70(5), 583-604.
Pope, M. & Gilbert, J. (1983). Personal Experience and the Construction of Knowledge in Science. Science Education , 67(2), 193-203.
Pope, M. L. & Keen. T. R. (1981). Personal Construct Psychology and Education. London, Academic Press.
Posner, G. J. , Strike, K. A. ,Hewson, P. W. and Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-228.
Renner, J. et al. (1983) Sequencing language and activities in teaching high school physicis.Oklahoma:SMEAC Information reference center.
Ridley, D. R., & Novak, J. D. (1988). Assessing student learning in light of how students learn. Paper presented for the AAHE Assessment Forum, American Association for Higher Education.
Roth, K. J. (1991). Reading science texts for conceptual change. In C. M. Santa & D. E. Alvermann (Eds.), Science Learning: processes and applications, 48-63. International Reading Association.
Rumelhart, D. E. & Norman, D. A. (1981). Accretion, tuning and restructuring: Three modes of learning. In R. Klatsky & J.W. Cotton(Eds.), Semantic factors in cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Saunder, W. L. (1992). The constructivist perspective: Implications and teaching strategies for science. School Science and Mathematics, 92(3), 136-141.
Scott, P. In Association with Dyson, T. and Gater, S. (1987). A Constructivist View of Learning and Teaching in Science. Children’s Learning in Science Project, University of Leeds.
Staver, J. R.(1998). Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 501-520.
Stice, C. F., & Alvarez, M. C. (1986). Hierarchical concept mapping: Young children learning how to learn, Eric Reproduction Service No. n,(ED274946).
Stodart, T.(1991)Reconstructuring teacher candidates views of teaching and learning. Paper presented as the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Strike, K. A. & Posner G. J. (1982). Conceptual Change and Science Teaching. European Journal of science Education, 4(3), 231-240.
Strike, K. A. & Posner, G. J. (1985). A Conceptual Change View of Learning and Understanding In West, L. H. T. and Pines, A. L.(Eds), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. New York: Academic Press, 211-231.
Tobin, K. (1993). The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. Washington , D. C: the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Tobin, K. , Briscoe, C. & Holman, J. R. (1990). Overcoming c constraints to effective elementary science teaching. Science Education 74(4): 409-420.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). The construction of knowledge: Contributions to conceptual semantics. Seaside, CA: Intersystems Publications.
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
West. L. H. T. & Pines, A. L. (1985). Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change. New York: Academic Press.
Wheatley, G. H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75(1), 9-21.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top