臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

摘 要
本研究的目的在於建構一個可以促進學習統整的「概念統整教學模式」，並以「階層」概念為例，於國小進行實驗教學，以驗證教學模式之效果。過程中包括概念統整教學模式建構效度之建立，實驗教學活動設計、補充教材、學習單、評量工具等之編製，並探討實驗教學後，師生對概念統整教學模式的後設認知與理解。
本研究對象為國小五年級學生，從台南市某國小五年級常態班級中，抽取兩個班級做為受試，一班為實驗組；一班為控制組，人數分別為31人和30人。所採取的研究法為內容分析和準實驗研究設計，
依據理論的分析和實驗教學的結果，本研究的主要發現有：
一、所建構之「概念統整教學模式」，經專家鑑定，符合模式引用之課程統整、概念教學、訊息處理等理論觀點，是一跨學習領域的統整教學模式，具有結合基本能力指標於課程、教學與評量；明確的促進統整機制；以知識統整為目標等數項特性。
二、概念統整教學有助於促進社會和藝術與人文(美勞)兩個學習領域的學習成就。
三、概念統整教學在促進語文（國語）和數學兩個學習領域的學習成就未見顯著效果。
四、概念統整教學對學生個別學習領域內和不同學習領域間概念知識的統整有顯著效果。
五、學生對概念統整教學的後設認知：
在有關概念統整教學的知識方面，學生認為概念統整教學對各個學習領域的學習有正面的幫助，也有助於概念知識的統整、概念學習的遷移。在認知調整方面，學生認為初學概念時，不易理解概念的意義；概念圖、學習單不好寫（畫）；上、下位概念的關係不易釐清等，皆是所遭遇的學習困難，經由老師講解、和同學討論，及多次反覆練習後，多能迎刃而解。
六、教師對概念統整教學的理解：
參與實驗教學的老師認為概念統整教學既是一種統整教學，也是一種概念教學，整體而言，統整教學模式的確有助於概念知識的統整，但也指出概念的選取會影響統整教學的成敗，並建議一個統整教學計畫中，統整的科目不宜過多；教學的步調放緩，使學生有足夠的時間消化所學；增加教具的使用，變化教學，提昇學生學習動機。
對於概念統整教學模式的運用及未來研究的建議如下：
(一)應用概念統整教學模式之建議
1.逐步增加統整的學習領域。
2.妥當安排教學進度，使學生有充分的學習時間。
3.變化概念教學的方式。
(二) 對未來研究之建議
1.以國中學生作為研究對象，探究概念統整教學模式之適用性。
2.進行質性的研究，探究概念統整教學模式效果。
3.探討協同教學教師理解新教學模式的認知互動歷程。
4.探討學生獲得概念後的學習遷移情形。

A Study of the Concept-Based Integrated Teaching Model and its Effects for Integrated Learning Based on the Hierarchy Concept
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to construct a Concept-Based Integrated Teaching Model and assess its effects for integrated learning. The subjects’ metacognition and teachers’ reflection are also collected by the researcher in order to understand their opinions about the concept-based integrated teaching.
The Concept-Based Integrated Teaching Model bases on the theories of curriculum integration, information processing and concept teaching. It is an interdisciplinary integration model, emphasizing the importance of considering key competencies when making the decision of integration curriculum, designing instruction and evaluating student’s achievement. An efficient mechanism of integrated learning is also arranged in this model.
A quasi-experimental method and context analysis are employed in this study. Two elementary 5th grade classes are sampled to participate in this experiment, one is experimental group having 31 students to whom the Integrated Approach Concept Teaching System is implemented, the other one as controlled group constituted with 30 students, will follow the traditional instruction for comparison.
The findings of this study are:
1.The Concept-Based Integrated Teaching Model is confirmed its constructive validity with the theory of curriculum integration, concept teaching and the information processing.
2.The Concept-Based Integrated Teaching shows significant effects on subjective achievement both Social Studies and Arts and Humanities.
3.The Concept-Based Integrated Teaching doesn’t show significant effects on subjective achievement both Language and Mathematics.
4.The Concept-Based Integrated Teaching shows significant effects on the integrated learning both within a discipline and across disciplines.
5.The students recognize that the concept-based integrated teaching can facilitate the concepts learning within one disciplinary and the learning transferring to the similar context. They also think that the learning strategies of peer questioning and explaining rehearsal can help them to integrate the conceptual knowledge which they have learned.
6.The teachers who participated the experimental instruction consider that the effects for integration learning of the Concept-Based Integrated Teaching Model. The suggestions which they give for the practice of the integrated teaching are that focus just one concept in curriculum integration one time will promote the learning motivation of students.
The suggestions for the further researches are:
1.To verify the effects for integrated learning of the Concept-Based Integrated Teaching Model in the educational stage of secondary school.
2.To explore the students’ learning transfer about the concepts which they have learned.

目 錄
第一章 緒 ………………………………………………………………1
第一節 研究動機與目的…………………………………………………1
第二節 名詞釋義…………………………………………………………5
第三節 研究的限制………………………………………………………7
第二章 文獻探討 ………………………………………………………8
第一節 統整教學…………………………………………………………8
第二節 概念教學 ………………………………………………………27
第三節 促進學生學習統整之策略 ……………………………………36
第四節 後設認知 ………………………………………………………46
第五節 教師的反思與理解 ……………………………………………50
第六節 概念統整教學模式 ……………………………………………54
第三章 研究方法與程序………………………………………………66
第一節 研究設計 ………………………………………………………66
第二節 研究對象 ………………………………………………………69
第三節 以「階層」概念為核心之統整教學實施流程 ………………70
第四節 教學活動設計與補充教材的編寫 ……………………………73
第五節 研究工具 ………………………………………………………84
第六節 教師的訓練 ……………………………………………………89
第七節 實施程序 ………………………………………………………91
第八節 資料蒐集與分析 ………………………………………………95
第四章 結果與討論……………………………………………………96
第一節 概念統整教學對於個別學習領域學習成就的影響 …………96
第二節 概念統整教學對於促進學生概念知識統整的成效…………101
第三節 學生對統整教學的後設認知…………………………………123
第四節 教師對概念統整教學的反思與理解…………………………128
第五章 結論與建議 …………………………………………………140
第一節 結論……………………………………………………………140
第二節 建議……………………………………………………………143
參考書目…………………………………………………………………146
附錄
附錄一 各學習領域學習單 ……………………………………………159
1-1社會學習領域 ………………………………………………………159
1-2語文學習領域（國語） ……………………………………………162
1-3數學學習領域 ………………………………………………………163
1-4藝術與人為學習領域（美勞） ……………………………………165
附錄二 各學習領域補充教材 ………………………………………166
2-1社會學習領域 ………………………………………………………166
2-2 語文學習領域（國語） …………………………………………167
附錄三 概念統整測驗 ………………………………………………168
附錄四 各學習領域成就測驗…………………………………………171
4-1社會學習領域單元成就測驗 ………………………………………171
4-2語文學習領域（國語）單元成就測驗 ……………………………173
4-3數學學習領域單元成就測驗 ………………………………………174
附錄五 實作評量標準 ………………………………………………176
附錄六 「階層」概念的發展脈絡……………………………………177

參考書目
中文部分：
王秀雲、李惠銘（民88）。邁向課程新紀元。九年一貫課程研討會論文集（下），287-299。
尹曼莉（民91）。國小二年級自然科實施課程統整之研究。台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文。
王瑞芬（民91）。以螞蟻為主題之統整課程設計與實務教學之研究。國立台灣大學昆蟲學研究所碩士論文。
方德隆（民89）。九年一貫課程學習領域之統整。課程與教學季刊，3（1），1-18。
方德隆等譯（民90）。統整課程的設計：證實能增進學生學習的方法。高雄：麗文。
宋佩芬、周鳳美（民92）。教師應付九年一貫課程改革的態度與原因：試辦階段的觀察。課程與教學季刊，6（1），95-112。
何俊青（民89）。建構式概念教學在國民小學社會科的實驗研究。國立高雄師範大學教育系博士論文。
何縕琪（民89）。國小教師主題統整教學歷程之分析暨合作省思專業成長模式 之建構。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
吳志峰（民91）。國小實施「鄉土教育」及「自然與生活科技」統整課程之行動研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
余民寧、潘雅芳、林偉文（民85）。概念構圖法：合作學習抑個別學習。國立政治大學「教育與心理研究」，19，93-124。
吳和堂（民88）。國中實習教師教學反省的內容與層次分析。教育學刊，15，143-170。
吳雪菁（民91）。九十學年度國民中學推動九年一貫課程的辦理模式、成效評估與需求反應之研究。國立高雄師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
吳瓊誠（民90）。統整課程實施方式與評量之研究──以「圓柱與圓錐」為主題。台中師範學院教育測驗統計研究所碩士論文。
邱上真（民82）。認知學派的學習理論。載於李詠吟主編，學習輔導-學習心理學的應用。台北：心理出版社。
邱上真（民80）。發現式學習理論。輯於張壽山主編，學習理論與教學應用，75-93。台灣省政府教育廳。
邱美虹(民85a) 學習策略與科學學習。科學教育(師大)，191，2-15。
邱美虹(民85b)多媒體、網路教學、智慧型家教系統在科學教育上之應用。中等教育，47（3），43-56。
邱美虹（民82）類比與科學概念的學習。教育研究資訊，6，79-90。
邱美虹、林妙霙(民85)合作學習對國三學生學習「地層記錄地質事件」的影響。教育研究資訊，4（6），108-128。
林生傳（民85）。概念教學對概念發展的實驗效果--階次理論模式的概念教學實驗。教育學刊，12，31-70。
林建平（民86）。學習輔導─理論與實務。台北：心理出版社。
林靜芳（民88）。國中社會科統整課程的設計與發展。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
施惠（民81）。自然科學探討教學法。輯於李宜堅主編，學習與成長（第三冊），235-257。台灣省政府教育廳。
高敬文（民79）。批判的反省與師資培育計畫。初等教育研究，2期，35-71。
徐綺穗（民84）。概念教學模式之探討。初等教育學報，8，45-60。
徐靜嫻（民89）。課程統整的另類思維：談後設課程的統整。載於中華民國課程與教學學會主編：課程統整與教學，27-60。台北：揚智文化。
教育部（民89）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。台北：教育部。
郭金美(民85)。 Students'' Conceptual Change about Light。嘉義師院學報，10，407-453。
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。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文。
陳宗彥（民91）。國小三到六年級學生對有關速率概念認知之研究。台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳芙蓉（民89）。愛籽國小「主題活動」統整課程發展之研究。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文。
陳淨宜（民91）。環境教育融入生活課程模組開發之行動研究。台中師範學院自然科學教育學系碩士論文。
陳密桃（民79）。後設認知的評估方法。教育文粹，20，196-209。
陳麗華（民86）。教學反省。載於黃政傑主編：教學原理。台北：師大書苑。
張資兩（民91）。以STS教育理念發展統整課程之行動研究。台中師範學院自然科學教育學系碩士論文。
許慧玉（民90）。卷宗評量與紙筆測驗對國小四年級學生數學概念、數學溝通能力及數學學習態度之實驗研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文。
鈕文英（民81）。概念獲得的教學模式。高市鐸聲，31，53-55。
曾世君（民89）。主題式教學活動設計實施之個案研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
游家政（民89）。學校課程的統整及其教學。課程與教學季刊，3（1），19-38。
黃永和（民90）。科學典範的後現代轉向及其課程意涵之研究。國立政治大學教育學系博士論文。
黃明信（民91）。國小網路專題式教學模式之設計。淡江大學教育科技學系碩士論文。
黃坤謨（民90）。國民小學課程統整與教學實施之行動研究──以高雄市民權國小為對象。屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
黃政傑（民80）。課程設計。台北：東華書局。
黃炳煌（民88）。談課程統整：以九年一貫社會科課程為例。論文發表於國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所主辦「九年一貫課程研討會」。網址：http://s2.ntptc.edu.tw/。
黃韻潔（民91）。統整課程設計與實施歷程之個案研究──以竹塹國小為例。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
黃譯瑩（民87）。課程統整之意義探究與模式建構。國家科學委員會研究彙刊：人文及社會科學，8，616-633。
楊宗仁（民80）。後設認知的源起及其理論。資優教育，38，16-25。
楊雅玲（民89）。STS模式的教學對學生學習成效之影響。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
葉連祺（民89）。中小學發展統整課程之實務課題和對策。載於中華民國課程與教學學會主編：課程統整與教學，317-337。台北：揚智文化。
葉興華（民89）。我國國小推行課程統整之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
甄曉蘭（民90）。從課程組織的觀點檢討統整課程的設計與實施。課程與教學季刊，4（1），1-20。
劉宏文（民85）。概念及概念學習在學科教學上之應用──以弱酸的教學為例。科學教育月刊，192，2-9。
鄭明長（民89）。統整教學的意涵與模式。載於中華民國課程與教學學會主編，課程統整與教學，155-181。台北，揚智文化。
劉美娥、許翠華（民88）。邁向課程新紀元。九年一貫課程研討會論文集（下），275-286。
鄭麗玉（民82）。認知心理學─理論與應用。台北；五南圖書。
鄭淑慧（民89）。國民小學課程統整設計之個案研究──以華山國小為例。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
歐用生（民88a）。從「課程統整」的概念評九年一貫課程。教育研究資訊，7（1），22-32。
歐用生（民88b）。九年一貫課程之「潛在課程」評析。網址：http://edu.ntl.isst.edu.tw/item8.htm。
賴麗琴（民90）。以「地球系統」為統整主軸之多元教學模組的研發與實踐。國立台灣師範大學地球科學研究所碩士論文。
謝青龍（民84）。從「迷思概念」到「另有架構」的概念改變。科學教育月刊，180，23-29。
英文部分：
Armbruster, B. B. (1986). Schema theory and design of instructional text. Educational Psychologist, 51, 11.
Baker, L., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Metacognitive skills and reading. In P. D. Pearson (Ed.), Handbook of Reading Research. New York: Longman.
Beane, J. A. (1997）. Curriculum integration：Designing the core of democratic education. N.Y.：Teachers College Press.
Bernard, M. E. (1975). The effects of advance organizer and within-text questions on the learning of a taxonomy of concepts (Technical Report No.357). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Research and Development Center for Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED120625).
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26 (3/4), 369-398.
Brooks, S. R., Freiburger, S. M., & Grotheer, D. R. (1998). Improving elementary student engagement in the learning process through integrated thematic instruction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED421274).
Brophy, J., ＆ Alleman, J. (1991). A caveat: Curriculum integration isn''t always a good idea. Educational Leadership, 49 (2), 66-76.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., ＆ Duguid, P. (1986). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1) 32-42.
Burns, R. (1995). Dissolving the boundaries: Planning for curriculum integration in middle and secondary school. Charleston, WV: Appalachian Educational Laboratory.
Burns, R. C., & Sattes, B. D. (1995). Dissolving the boundaries: Planning for curriculum integration in middle and secondary schools [and] facilitator’s guide. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED384455).
Case, D. O. (1991). Conceptual organization and retrieval of text by historians: The role of memory and metaphor. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 42 (9), 657-668.
Chabonneau, M. P.(1995). The integrated elementary classroom： A development model of education for the twenty-first century. Needham Heights, MA：Allyn and Bacon.
Chall, J., & Feldman, S. (1966). First grade reading: Analysis of the interactions of professed methods, teacher implementation and child background. Reading Teacher, 19, 596-575.
Clark, B. (1986). Optimizing learning: The integrative education model in the classroom. Columbus, Ohio: A Bell and Howell Company.
Clarke, J. H., ＆ Ange, R. M. (1997). Interdisciplinary high school teaching：Strategies for integrated learning. Boston：Allyn ＆ Bacon.
Collins, A. (1994). Goal-based scenarios and the problem of situated learning: A commentary on Anersen Consutling’s design of goal-based scenarion, Educational Technology, 34 (9), 30-32.
Connor-Greene, P. A. (2000). Making connections: Evaluating the effectiveness of journal writing in enhancing student learning. Teaching of Psychology, 27 (1), 44-46.
Cross, K. P. (1999). Learning is about making connections. The Cross Papers Number 3. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED432314).
Diamond, M., & Hopson, J. (1998). Magic trees of the mind: How to nurture your child''s intelligence, creativity, and healthy emotions from birth through adolescence. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED448904).
Drake, S. M. (1993). Planning for integrated curriculum: The call to adventure.( ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 355660).
Drake, S. M. (1998). Creating integrated curriculum: Proven ways to increase student learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED426507).
Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education ,75, 649-672.
Dunn, C. S. (1983). The influence of instructional methods on concept learning. Science Education , 67, 647-656.
Eileen, W., ＆ Michael, P. (1990). Elaborative interrogation effects on children’s learning of factual content. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (4), 741-748.
Erickson, H. L. (1995). Stirring the head, heart, and soul: Redefining curriculum and instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Erickson, H. L. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED422278).
Erickson, H. L. (1998). Concept-based curriculum and instruction: Teaching beyond the facts. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (ed.), The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Fogarty, R. (1991). Ten ways to integrate curriculum. Educational Leadership, 49 (2) , 61-66.
Fogarty, R. (1995). Integrated curricula with multiple intelligences: Teams, themes, and threads (2nd ed.). Palatine, IL: IRI/Skylight Publishing, Inc.
Fredericks, A. D., Blake-Kline, B., & Kristo, J. V. (1996). Teaching the integrated language arts: Process and practice. NY: Longman.
Frykholm, J. A., ＆ Meyer, M. R. (2002). Integrated Instruction. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 7 (9), 502-508.
Gagne, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of school learning (2nd ed.). New York: HarperCollins.
Glazer, S. M. (2000). Making connections. Teaching PreK-8, 30 (4), 100-103.
Glynn, S. M. (1989). The teaching with analogies model. In K. D. Muth (Ed.), Children’s comprehension of text (pp. 185-204). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Inman, W. (1977). Classroom practices and basic skills: Kindergarten and third grade. Raleigh, NC: Division of Research, North Carolina State Department of Public Instruction.
Jacobs, H. H.(1989). Design options for an integrated curriculum. In H. H. Jacobs（ed.）, Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation, 13-24. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Joyce, B., ＆ Weil, M. (1996). Models of teaching (5th ed.). New Jersey：Prentice-Hall, Inc.
King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27 (1), 111-216.
King, A. (1990). Enhancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 664-687.
Klausmeier, H. J. (1985). Educational psychology (5th ed.) . NY: Harper & Row.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kovalik, S., ＆ Olsen, K. (1994). ITI：Integrated thematic instruction.（3rd ed.）. （ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED374894）.
LaBoskey, V. K. (1993) A conceptual framework for reflection in preservice teacher education. In Calderhead, J., ＆ Gates, P. (Eds) Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development. London: The Falmer Press.
Mager, R. F. (1962). Preparing instructional objectives. SF: Fearson.
Martin, V. L., & Pressley, M. (1991). Elaborative-interrogation effects depend on the nature of the question. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83 (1), 113-119.
Marzano, R. J. (1992). A different kind of classroom： Teaching with dimensions of learning. Alexandria, VA：Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R. J., & Hutchins, C. L. (1985) Thinking skills: A conceptual framework. A special issue of "Noteworthy." (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED266436).
Max, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. The Elementary School Journal, 97 (4), 341-358.
Mayer, R. E. (1975). Different problem-solving competencies established in learning computer programming with and without meaningful models. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 725-734.
McKeough, A. (1992). Program development criteria for curricula designed to teach central conceptual structures. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED348389).
Mckinney, C. W. (1983). The effectiveness of three methods of teaching social studies concepts to forth-grade students: An aptitude-treatment interaction study. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 663-670.
McMurray, N. E., Bernard, M. E., & Klausmeier, H. J. (1975). An instructional design for accelerating children’s concept learning.（Tech. Rep. No. 312）Wisconsin: university of Wisconsin, Wiscosin Research and Development Center for Cognitive Learning.
Medin, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist, 44, 1469-1481.
Merrill, M. ＆ Tennyson, R.（1977）. Teaching concepts：An instructional design guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ：Educational Technology Publications.
Meyer, D. K., Turner, J. C., & Spencer, C. A. (1997). Challenge in a mathematics classroom: Students'' motivation and strategies in project-based learning. Elementary School Journal, 97 (5), 501-521.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, London : Cambridge University Press.
Nuthall, G.. (1999). The way students learn：Acquiring knowledge from an integrated science and social studies unit. The Elementary School Journal, 99 (4), 303-341.
Ogle, D. (1986). The K-W-L：A teaching model that develop active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 564-576.
Park, O. (1984). Example comparison strategy versus attribute identification strategy in concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 145-162.
Pella, M. D. (1996). Concept learning in science. The Science Teacher, 33 (1), 31-34.
Pratt, D. (1994). Curriculum planning: A handbook for professionals . New York: Harcourt Brace & Company.
Rosch, E. H., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., ＆ Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382-439.
Sanchez, A. & Lopez, L. E. (1993). Making connection: An in-depth concept teaching technique. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED375091).
Schmid, R. F., & Telaro, G. (1990). Concept mapping as an instructional strategy for high school biology. Journal of Educational Research, 84 (2), 78-85.
Schramm, S. (1997). Related webs of meaning between the disciplines: Perceptions of secondary students who experienced an integrated curriculum. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED407258).
Schwalbach, E. M. (2000). Developing student understanding: Contextualizing calculus concepts. School Science & Mathematics, 100 (2), 90-98.
Shumway, R. J. (1971). Negative instances and mathematical concept formation：A preliminary study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, May, 197-211.
Stevenson, C., ＆ Carr, J. F. (1993). Integrated studies in the middle grades. NY：Teacher College Columbia University.
Tennyson, R. D., Chao, J. N., ＆Youngers, J. (1981). Concept learning effectiveness using prototype and skill development presentation forms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 326-334.
Tennyson, R. D. ＆ Coochiarela, M. J. (1986). An empirically based instructional design theory for teaching concepts. Review of Educational Research, 56（1）, 40-71.
Tennyson, R. D., Woolley, F. R., ＆ Merrill, M. D. (1972). Exemplar and nonexemplar variables which produce correct concept classification behavior and specified classification errors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 144-152.
Tessmer, M., Wilson, B., ＆ Driscoll, M. (1990). A new model of concept teaching and learning Educational Technology . Research and Development, 3 (1), 45-53.
Van Manen, M. J. (1977) Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6 (3), 205-228.
Weinstein, C. E., ＆ Mayer, R. E. （1986）. The teaching of learning strategies. In M. Wittrock (Eds.). Handbook of research on teaching, 315-327. N.Y.：Macmillian.
Willoughby, T., Porter, L., Belsito, L., ＆ Yearsley, T. (1999). Use of elaboration strategies by students in grades two, four, and six . The Elementary School Journal, 99 (3), 221-231.
Wood, E., & Pressley, M. (1990). Elaborative interrogation effects on children''s learning of factual content. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (4), 741-748.
Yarnall, L., & Yasmin K. (1996). Issues in project-based science activities: children''s constructions of ocean software games. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED395819)
Zeitoun, H. H. (1984). Teaching scientific analogies: A proposed model. Research in Science and Technological Education, 2 (2), 107-125.