跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(44.201.97.0) 您好!臺灣時間:2024/04/17 23:25
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:鄭子善
研究生(外文):Tzu-Shan Cheng
論文名稱:錨定於歷史的教學對職前教師科學概念、科學本質觀與教學態度影響之研究
論文名稱(外文):The Influences of the AIH (Anchored in History) Instruction on the Scientific Concepts, Nature of Science and Attitudes Toward Teaching Science for the Preservice Teachers
指導教授:張惠博張惠博引用關係
指導教授(外文):Huey-Por Chang
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立彰化師範大學
系所名稱:科學教育研究所
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:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:174
中文關鍵詞:錨定歷史教學探究性實驗伽利略月相盈虧
外文關鍵詞:videoinquiry experimentheliocentric theoryhistory of scienceGalileo
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:365
  • 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:3
科學史教學的研發一直是科教界重要的研究議題。近年來,學者們提出可嘗試結合科學史影片及探究性實驗,以使科學史教學能益趨完善。本研究乃依據前述論點,提出「錨定歷史」(Anchored in History, 〔AIH〕)教學模式,並藉此教學模式的實施,探討其對於職前教師的學習成效。
本研究先依據AIH教學模式設計出「伽利略對話錄」教學活動;接著,對27位職前教師進行該活動的教學,教學現場的錄影,以及,蒐集其完成的學習單與天文模型。在教學前後亦分別對這些職前教師進行月相盈虧概念量表、科學本質與科學教育信念量表的施測,以及,半結構式晤談。最後,透過前述量化與質性資料的分析,探討AIH教學對職前教師探究歷程,科學概念,科學本質觀與科學本質教學信念,及其學習感受的影響。
研究結果顯示:職前教師在「伽利略對話錄」課程的探究歷程裡,共同發展出模擬月球與金星相位變化的扭蛋模型,且歷經「發現一己概念的不完整」,「從二度空間到三度空間的概念建構」,「建構越趨豐富的科學概念」等數個關鍵性改變;在科學概念的學習成效上,亦顯示職前教師在月相盈虧概念的現象、成因、週期,以及,日地月相對運動等四個議題的概念,均獲得顯著改進;但在科學本質觀及科學本質教學信念的改善則不顯著。整體而言,AIH教學確實具有部份科學史教學的功能,但亦呼應部份文獻的論點,職前教師們的對科學本質與科學本質教學信念確實較難改變,亟思採取更有效的教學策略,才能獲致前述所欲達到的效果。
Research on the teaching of History of Science (HOS) has been one of the crucial issues in the field of science education. Recently, some scholars have pointed out that the teaching method of HOS can be more effective by incorporating HOS videos and inquiry experiments. Based upon these concepts, the present study aims to construct an instruction model of Anchored in History (AIH) and to investigate the effect of the instruction on preservice teachers.
According to the AIH instruction model, we designed the course of “Galileo's Dialogue". Twenty-seven preservice teachers took part in the teaching activities. During the teaching periods, we videoed the whole teaching process and collected their learning sheets and the products of their astronomical models. Before and after the course, we employed questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to evaluate the changes of the participants after HOS teaching. Through quantitative and qualitative data, we analyzed the effect of AIH instruction on perservice teachers’ inquiry process, scientific concepts, beliefs in nature of science, and perception of HOS teaching.
The results indicated that in the inquiry process of the course, “Galileo’s Dialogue”, the preservice teachers collaboratively constructed a capsule-egg model as the moon and Venus phases, and they experienced some key changing process, including “Finding their own concepts incomplete by self-reflection”, “Transforming their concepts from 2-D model to 3-D model”, and “Constructing more elaborative scientific concepts”. As to the learning impact, the results showed significant differences and improvements in participants’ concepts of the lunar phenomenon, cause, period, and the sun-earth-moon relative motion. However, no significant change in their views of NOS and teaching beliefs was found. As a whole, we concluded that the AIH instruction had some function in HOS education, and this study supported previous studies that preservice teachers’ views of NOS and teaching beliefs were resistant to change. More effective instruction strategy should be applied, if the change of preservice teachers’ belief in NOS is concerned.
第壹章 緒論 13
第一節 研究問題背景 13
一、科學史教學的成效有限 14
二、科學史教學欠缺吸引力與教師欠缺相關的教學能力 15
第二節 研究目的與待答問題 16
第三節 名詞解釋 17
一、AIH教學 17
二、職前教師 18
三、科學本質 18
四、科學本質教學態度 19
五、教學感受 19
第貳章 文獻探討 21
第一節 AIH教學模式的理論基礎 21
一、錨定歷史 21
二、歷史中的探究(Inquiry in History) 26
三、科學家幻化(Eka-Scientist) 30
第二節科學史的教學模式 21
一、影片式教學模式 32
二、探究式教學模式 37
三、AIH教學模式 38
第三節 科學教育與科學本質 43
一、科學本質的定義 43
二、科學本質評量既存的問題 45
第四節 教師與科學史教學 47
一、教師的天文概念 47
二、教師對月相盈虧概念的探究歷程 48
三、小學教師的科學本質觀及科學本質教學態度 52
四、教師對科學史教學的想法與感受 53
第參章 研究方法 55
第一節 研究設計 55
第二節 研究流程 56
第三節 研究情境與對象 57
第四節 課程設計 60
一、影片抉擇 60
二、教學內容 60
三、伽利略對話錄課程的科學本質觀與科學本質教學態度 61
第五節 資料收集與分析 64
一、資料收集 64
二、資料分析 68
第肆章 結果 73
第一節 職前教師對日、地、金、月間運行軌道的探究歷程 73
一、各組發展天文模型的歷程 73
二、職前教師的關鍵性改變歷程 79
第二節 職前教師月相盈虧概念的轉變 86
一、月相盈虧的現象 86
二、月相盈虧的成因 90
三、月相盈虧的週期 91
四、日地月相對運動 93
第三節 AIH教學對職前教師科學本質觀與科學本質教學態度的影響 95
一、職前教師對科學發展具革命性的立場轉趨於保守,且認同應將 科學知識的暫時性質傳授給學 99
二、職前教師傾向科學理論具主觀性 99
三、職前教師傾向科學理論或學說是科學家的發現,及應教學生一 致性的科學方法 100
四、職前教師傾向大眾會採直覺判斷理論優劣,且應教學生科學理 論會受到社會影響 101
第四節 職前教師對AIH教學的感受 103
一、AIH教學前,不熟悉科學史內容為職前教師推行科學史教學的 主要窒礙 103
二、AIH教學後,職前教師認為此教學模式的實驗階段最具吸引力 106
三、AIH教學後,職前教師認為情境化功能為此教學模式的最大優點 107
四、AIH教學後,職前教師認為影片資源取得是落實此教學的關鍵 110
第伍章 結論與討論 114

第一節 結論 114
一、AIH教學協助職前教師的天文概念益趨科學性與完整 114
二、AIH教學能增進職前教師的科學概念 114
三、AIH教學對改善職前教師的科學本質觀與科學本質教學態度有限 115
四、職前教師肯定AIH教學的成效 116
第二節 討論 116
一、AIH教學對科學本質觀與科學本質教學態度的影響問題 116
二、結合影片策略的教學模式有助於科學史情境的呈現 117
三、科學史教學須結合探究理念 118
四、探究科學史的必要性 119
五、未來研究建議 120
參考文獻 122
一、中文部份 122
二、英文部份 124
圖表目錄
表次 9
表 2-1:MindWorks課程內容例舉 36
表 3-1:小組資料檢述 59
表 3-2:伽俐略對話錄的教學內容 63
表 3-3:伽俐略對話錄課程之科學本質觀立場說明 64
表 3-4:待答問題與資料收集的對照表 68
表 3-5:主題的編擬 69
表 3-6:本研究涉及的主題、類別及組型 71
表 4-1:各組模型的實驗程序與器材 75
表 4-2:月相盈虧概念的作答情形 88
表 4-3:月相盈虧概念的前後測結果 88
表 4-4:職前教師於前後測呈現的迷思概念 89
表 4-5:職前教師科學本質觀的前後測差異 97
表 4-6:職前教師科學本質教學態度的前後測差異 98
表 4-7:職前教師對暫時性議題的前後測差異 99
表 4-8:職前教師對觀察本質議題的前後測差異 100
表 4-9:理論與定律前後測結果 101
表 4-10:影響職前教師推行科學史教學的原因 103
表 4-11:AIH教學的優點 107
表 4-12:AIH教學的缺點 110
表 7-1:市售科普影片的比較 133

圖次 10
圖 2-1:Jasper冒險系列的影片內容 23
圖 2-2:小珍的抉擇之影碟 23
圖 2-3:AIH教學模式之理論基礎、理念與教學階段的關係圖 33
圖 2-4:影片式教學模式 35
圖 2-5:探究式教學模式 39
圖 2-6:AIH教學模式之建構示意 42
圖 2-7:AIH教學模式 43
圖 2-8:日動儀 49
圖 2-9:太陽系軌道圖 49
圖 3-1:研究流程圖 58
圖 3-2:依AIH教學模式設計的伽俐略對話錄課程 62
圖 4-1:伽俐略紀錄的木星及其衛星的資料 73
圖 4-2:伽俐略觀測的金星相位圖 73
圖 4-3:伽俐略觀測的月亮相位圖 73
圖 4-4:第一組繪製的軌道模型 74
圖 4-5:第三組繪製的軌道模型 74
圖 4-6:教科書裡的月相圖 76
圖 4-7:第二組手繪的月相圖 76
圖 4-8:扭蛋設計的月球公轉軌道 76
圖 4-9:扭蛋設計的金星公轉軌道 76
圖 4-10:利用扭蛋呈現的立體月相(正拍) 77
圖 4-11:利用扭蛋呈現的立體月相(側拍) 77
圖 4-12:職前教師的探究歷程 78
圖 4-13:白道面與黃道面存有5.2度夾角 80
圖 4-14:職前教師提出的月球/地球的公轉軌道方向 81
圖 4-15:ST15將第二組的月相圖繪上補助線與地球 83
圖 4-16:ST15說明新月成因的示意圖 83
圖 4-17:職前教師科學本質觀的前後測結果比較 97
圖 4-18:職前教師科學本質教學態度的前後測結果比較 98
圖 4-19:影響職前教師推行科學史教學的原因(教學前) 103
圖 4-20:AIH教學的優點 107
圖 4-21:AIH教學的缺點 110
附錄次 12
附錄一:影片抉擇標準 132
附錄二:教師指引 134
附錄三:學習單 137
附錄四:學生閱讀資料 139
附錄五:月相盈虧量表 146
附錄六:VOSE問卷 155
附錄七:「伽俐略對話錄」影片內容 161
一、 中文部份
丁邦平(2002):HPS教育與科學課程改革。2003年11月4日,取自:http://www.pep.com.cn/200305/ca213847.htm。
米高梅,馬文雷羅(1943):居禮夫人(Madame Curie)。(沙鷗國際多媒體,臺北市)。
李漢林(1987):科學社會學。北平,中國社會科學出版社。
林文淇(1997):電影的社會實踐。臺北市:遠流。
表江(2006,2月20日):每個人心中都有一座「斷背山」。新京報,1版。
邱美虹與陳英嫻(1995):月相盈虧之概念改變。師大學報,40,509-548。
南一國小自然與生活科技編撰委員會(2004):國小自然與生活領域教師指引(四上、五上、五下)。臺南:南一。
南一國中自然與生活科技編撰委員會(2004):國小自然與生活領域教師指引(七上、九上)。臺南:南一。
徐新逸(1995a):「錨式情境教學法」教材設計、發展與應用。視聽教育,31(1),14-24。
徐新逸(1995b):CAI光碟『生活數學系列之一: 安可的假期』。淡江大學教育科技學系。(教育部好學專輯發行)。
徐新逸(1995c):CAI光碟『生活數學系列之二: 小珍的抉擇』。淡江大學教育科技學系。(教育部好學專輯發行)。
莊奇勳(2005):自然與科技領域教材教法。臺北市:學富。
陳素芬(2004):科學教育與科學本質問卷發展。中華民國第二十屆科學教育研討會手冊,7。
黃佩貞與許良榮(2001):臺北市國中科學教師對於科學史融入教學之態度。中華民國第十七屆科學教育學術研討會,國立高雄師範大學。
黃俊儒(2005):學生與媒體對於新聞議題批判思考能力之比較研究。中華民國第二十一屆科學教育學術研討會,國立彰化師範大學。
鄭子善(2000):科學故事課程設計之行動研究--以燃燒現象發展史為例。國立花蓮師範學院國小科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,花蓮市。
鄭子善與張惠博(2004):錨定歷史的先導研究。中華民國第二十屆科學教育研討會手冊,29。

二、 英文部份
Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R.L., & Lederman, N.G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417-436.
Albanesea, A., Danhoni Neves, M. C. & Vicentini, M. (1997). Models in science and in education : A critical review of research on students’ ideas about the earth and its places in the. Science and Education, 6, 573-590.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Project 2061: Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. Oxford university Press, New York, N. Y.
Appelget, J., Matthews, C. E., Hildreth, D. P., & Daniel, M. L.(2002). Teaching the history of science to students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(5), 298-303.
Becker, B. J. (2000). MindWorks : Making scientific concepts come alive. Science and Education, 9 (3), 269-278.
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a goal of instruction. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (361-392). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Brito, A., Rodriguez, M., & Niaz, M. (2005). A reconstruction of development of the periodic table based on history and philosophy of science and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in ScienceTteaching, 42 (1), 84-111.
Bybee, R.W. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. New York, NY: American Association for the Advancement of Science Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching Science, 20-46.
Carey, S. (1985). Are children fundamentally different kinds of thinkers and learners than adult? Thinking and Learning Skills, 2. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Chen, S. F. (2006).Development of an instrument to assess views on nature of science and attitudes toward teaching science. Science Education, 90, 5, 803-819.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27,291-315.
Conant, J. B. (1951). Science and common sense. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Cunningham, C. M., & Helms, J. V. (1998). Sociology of science as a means to a more Authentic, inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching ,3 (5).,483-99 .
Dede, C. (2005). The mechanism of vision:Conceptual similarities between history models and children’s representations. Science & Education, 14, 699-712.
Discovery channel. Galileo’s dialogue. Retrieved November 8, 2005, from http://school.discovery.com/lessonplans/programs/greatbooks-galileosdialogue.
Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring Science Education: The importance of theories and their development. New York:Teachers College Press.
Flick, L.B., & Lederman, N.G. (Eds) (2004). Scientific inquiry and nature of science : Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education . Boston: KluwerAcademic Publishers.
Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. G. (1998). International Handbook of Science Education. London: Kluwer.
Garrison, J. W., & Lawwill, R.S. (1993). Democratic science teaching:A role for the history of science. Interchange, 24(1 & 2). 23-39.
Georghiades, P. (2000). Beyond conceptual change learning in science education: Focusing on transfer, durability and metacognition. Educational Research, 42(2), 119-139.
Grauwe, S. D. (2000). The cognitivist approach to film in the light of systemic-functional theory: a changing of the guards? Retrieved November 8, 2006, from http://www.imageandnarrative.be/mediumtheory/sofiedegrauwe.htm.
Halkia, K., & Botouropoulou, I. (2005). Cultural and educational dimension reflected in book popularizing scientific knowledge-A case study:The sky, a 19th Century book popularizing astronomy. Science & Education, 14, 631-647.
Hanuscin, D., Akerson, V. L., & Phillipson-Mower, T. (2006). Integrating nature of science instruction into a physical science content course for preservice elementary teacher:NOS views of teaching assistants. Science Education, 90, 5, 912-935.
Irwin, A. R. (2002). History case studies:Teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 8 (1), 5-26.
Jenkins, E. W. (1994). HPS and school science education remediation or reconstruction. International Journal of Science ducation,16(6) ,613-623.
Johnston, A., Southerland, A. S., & Sowell, S. (2006). Dissatisfied with the fruitfulness of“learning ecologies”. Science Education, 90, (5), 907-911.
Kang, S., Scharmann, L. C., & Noh, T. (2005). Examining students’ views on nature of science:Results from Korean 6th, 8th and 10th graders. Science Education, 89(2), 314-334.
Klopfer, L. E., & Waston, F. (1957). Historical materials and high school science teaching. The Science Teacher, 264-293.
Knain, (2006). Achieving science literacy through transformation of multimodal textual resources. Science Education, 90, 4, 656-659.
Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Lacan, J. (1949). The mirror stage as formative of the function of the I. London:Trvistock.
Laugsksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71-94.
Lin, H. S. (1998). The effectiveness of teaching chemistry through the history of science. Journal of Chemical Education, 75(10), 1326-1330 .
Lin, H. S., Hung, J. Y., & Hung, S. C. (2002). Using the history of Science to Promote students' problem-solving ability. International Journal of Science Education, 24 (5) , 5, 453-464.
Lin, H.S., & Chen, C. C. (2002). Promoting preservice chemistry teachers' understanding about the nature of science through history. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39 (9), 773-792.
Lunsford, E., Melear, C. T., Roth, W. M., Perkins, M., & Hickok, L. G. (2007). Proliferation of inscriptions and transformations among preservice science teachers engaged in authentic science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (4), 538 - 564.
Malone, A. (2002). Great books V- Galileo’s dialogue。Maryland:Discovery channel。
Mäntylä, T. & Koponen, I. T. (2007). Understanding the role of measurement in creating physical quantities: A case study of learning to quantify temperature in physical teacher education. Science and Education, 16(3-5), 269-278.
Mathews, M. R. (1992). History, philosophy, and science teaching: The present approchement. Science and Education, 1 (1), 11-47.
Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routedge, 1994.
McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (1989). Research in education:A conceptual introduction. Glenview, Illinois:Scott, Foreman and Company.
Mesmer, K. (2003). Hire a scientist. Science Scope, 26 (6), 42-44.
Metz, D., Klassen, S., Mcmillan, B., Clough, M., & Olson, J. (2007). Building a foundation for the use of historical narratives. Science and Education, 16(3), 313-334.
Metz, S. R. (2006). Science literacy:Then and now. Science Teacher, 73 (2), 8.
Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literature:A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29-48.
Monk, M., & Osborne, J. (1997). Placing the history and philosophy of science on the curriculum: A model for the development of pedagogy. Science and Education,81 (4) , 405-424.
Myerw, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 1-35.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
New Standards. (1977). Performance standard. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Ojala, J. (1992). “The third planet”. International Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 191-200.
Oldroyd, D. R. (1977). Teaching the History of Chemistry in New South Wales SecondarySchools. The Australia Science Teaching Journal 23 (2), 9-22.
Parkinson, J., & Adendoff, R. (2004). The use of popular science articles in teaching science literacy. English for Specific purposes, 23, 379-396.
PBS & NOVA. (12005). Galileo’s Battle for the Heavens. Retrieved November 8, 2005, from http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/galileo.
Pilot A., Westbroek H., Bulte A., & Jong O. D. (2005, November). Chemistry education using authentic practices as contexts. In Y.S. Lin 2005 Authentic science and mathematics education:Holland and Taiwan, National Hsinchu University of Education.
Pozzer-Adrenghi, L., & Roth, W. M. (2005). Making sense of photographs. Science Education, 89(2), 219-241.
Roach, L. E., & Wandersee, J. H. (1993). Short story science. Using historical vignettes as a teaching tool. Science Teacher, 60(6), 18-21.
Rutherford, F. J. (2001). Fostering the history of science in American science education. Science and Education,10(6), 569-80.
Schwab, J. J. (1963). Biology Teacher’s Handbook. Wiley, New York.
Seroglou, F., Koumaras, P., & Tselfes, V. (1998). History of science and instructional design: The case of electromagnetism. Science and Education, 7(3), 261-280.
Shen, J., & Confrey, J. (2007). From Conceptual Change to Transformative Modeling: A Case Study of an Elementary Teacher in Learning Astronomy. Science Education, 91(6), 948-966.
Smith, J. P., diSessa, A., & Roschelle, J. (2007). Misconceptions reconceived: a constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.
Smith, M. U., & Siegel, H. (2004). Knowing, believing, and understanding:What goal for science education? Science & Education, 13, 553-558.
Sobel, D. (1999) . Galileo’s Daughter. London: Fourht Estate.
Solomon, J., & Duveen, J. (1994). The Great Evolution Trial: Use of Role-Play in the Classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5), 575-582.
Solomon, J., Duveen, J., & Scot. L. (1992). Teaching about the nature of science through history: Action research in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teachin , 29(4)4, 409-421.
Spiliotoulou-Papantoniou. (2007). Model of universe: Children’s experiences and evidence from the history of science. Science and Education,16, 801-833.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Suzuki, M. (2003). “Consersationsabout the moon with prospective teachers in Japan”. Science Education, 87(6), 892-910.
Targan, D. (1988). The assimilation and accommodation of concepts in astronomy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
The Sloan, A. P. Foundation, GlaxoSmithKline, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Channel 4 Television, & The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (2000). DNA:The secret of life. Carolina:North Carolina Chapel Hill.
Trumbull, D. J., Grudens-Schuck, N., & Bonney, R. (2005). Developing materials to promote inquiry: Lessons learned. Science Education, 89(6), 879-900.
Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., & Christopher, J. E. (2007). A longitudinal study of conceptual change: Preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (2), 303-326
Turner, G. (1993). Film as social practice. New York : Routledge.
Tytler, R. (1998). Children’s conceptions of air pressure: Exploring the naure of conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 929-958.
Wang, H. A., & Marsh, D. D. (2002). Science instruction with a humanistic twist: Teachers' perception and practice in using the history of science in their classrooms. Science and Education, 11(2), 169-189.
Yin, R. K. (2002). Applications of case study research (2nd ed. ) London: Sage.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top