(3.238.88.35) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/10 19:41
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:劉月智
研究生(外文):Liu, Yueh-Chih
論文名稱:以序列性POE探究大學生之科學解釋的研究—以「大氣壓力與表面張力」為例
論文名稱(外文):The Study of Exploring the College Students’ Scientific Explanation by Using the S-POE Strategies: An Example on “Atmospheric Pressure and Surface Tension”
指導教授:許良榮許良榮引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsu, Liang-Rong
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺中教育大學
系所名稱:科學應用與推廣學系科學教育碩士班
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:2007
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:223
中文關鍵詞:大氣壓力解釋融貫性科學解釋序列性POE表面張力解釋類型
外文關鍵詞:Atmospheric PressureExplanatory CoherenceScientific ExplanationSequential Predict-Observe-ExplainSurface TensionTypes of Explanation
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:15
  • 點閱點閱:391
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:67
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:5
本研究旨在運用「序列性POE」策略來探討大學理工與非理工背景學生對於自然現象的科學解釋能力與解釋類型,及其「解釋融貫性」的特徵。本研究採用質性研究,以大學理工與非理工背景的大三學生各二十名,合計四十名為研究對象。研究以個別晤談為主,並以觀察札記及文件蒐集方式來蒐集資料,再進行研究結果的歸納與分析。本研究主要的發現如下:
一、在POE實驗的預測結果正確率方面,除了第二個POE實驗少於30%外,其餘實驗均達70%的答對率;而預測錯誤的學生所持理由多為不恰當或不正確。另一方面,大學生對於「大氣壓力」與「表面張力」所提出的解釋多為描述現象,並非因果關係的解釋,以不完整、不恰當的解釋居多,因此,大學生的科學解釋能力不佳,有待加強。
二、理工背景學生運用科學術語來進行解釋,解釋不一定恰當且容易出現誤用科學概念的情形;而非理工背景學生則傾向使用日常生活用語來進行解釋,且觀察能力較差,僅能描述出整體概觀的現象。
三、依解釋理由而歸納出大學生之解釋類型包括:科學型、似科學型、生活經驗型、直覺型、擬人化的、類比的、實用的、溯源的、機械的以及其他類,共十項。
四、大學生對於不同實驗情境的解釋,容易忽略「表面張力」的因素,呈現出情境相依的情形,且具有「解釋融貫性」的人數未超過一半。
Abstract

With Sequential Predict-Observe-Explain strategy, this study aims to explore whether college students both with and without scientific backgrounds have the ability of giving scientific explanation of natural phenomenon, of analyzing the types of explanation, and of finding the characteristics of scientific explanatory coherence. The research adopts qualitative method, and the research sample concludes twenty junior college students with scientific background and the other twenty juniors without such a background, forty students in total. The approach is mainly based on individual interview along with observatory journal and document collection for conclusion and analysis. The content of the research is generalized as follows:
1.Except for the second POE which reaches less than thirty percent of prediction, other experiments reach seventy percent of correct predictions. On the other hand, as regard to atmospheric pressure and surface tension, college students only give descriptive explanations, instead of the cause-effect explanations expected by the POE experiment. Besides, most college students only offer incomplete and inappropriate explanations, and that proves the fact that college students lack the scientific explanation ability.
2.Students with scientific background are prone to use scientific terms to explain experimental phenomenon. Yet it is not necessarily adequate, and that normally results in the misuse of scientific concepts. On the contrary, those without scientific background are liable to explain with everyday words. Besides, their ability of observation is so poor that they can only depict general phenomenon.
3.According to the types of scientific explanation by college students, they can be generalized to ten: scientific, pseudo-scientific, life-experiencing, intuitive, anthropomorphic, analogical, practical, genetic, mechanical and other type.
4.College students are prone to neglect the “surface tension” factor among different experiments, which accordingly results in context-dependent explanations. In addition, there are less than fifty percent of students having the explanatory coherence ability.
第一章 緒論-----------------------------------------------------------1
第一節 研究背景與動機--------------------------------------------------1
第二節 研究目的與研究問題----------------------------------------------4
第三節 名詞定義-------------------------------------------------------5
第四節 研究範圍與限制--------------------------------------------------7
第二章 文獻探討-------------------------------------------------------9
第一節「解釋」與「科學解釋」的意涵---------------------------------------9
第二節 科學解釋的評量-------------------------------------------------15
第三節 解釋類型的相關研究---------------------------------------------18
第四節 解釋融貫性----------------------------------------------------26
第五節POE的理論基礎--------------------------------------------------30
第六節 POE的實徵研究-------------------------------------------------33
第三章 研究方法------------------------------------------------------37
第一節 採用質性研究法的原因--------------------------------------------37
第二節 研究設計------------------------------------------------------38
第三節 研究對象------------------------------------------------------41
第四節 研究工具------------------------------------------------------42
第五節 研究流程------------------------------------------------------44
第六節 資料處理與分析-------------------------------------------------46
第四章 研究結果與討論-------------------------------------------------48
第一節 S-POE預測結果正確之分析----------------------------------------48
第二節 S-POE預測階段理由之分析----------------------------------------52
第三節S-POE解釋階段理由之分析-----------------------------------------84
第四節 學生解釋類型之分析--------------------------------------------138
第五節 學生的科學解釋之解釋融貫性分析----------------------------------166
第五章 結論與建議---------------------------------------------------191
第一節 結論--------------------------------------------------------191
第二節 建議--------------------------------------------------------197
參考書目-----------------------------------------------------------200
中文部分-----------------------------------------------------------200
翻譯書部分---------------------------------------------------------202
英文部分-----------------------------------------------------------202
附錄--------------------------------------------------------------208 附錄一 初探研究結果-------------------------------------------------208
附錄二 晤談情境縮圖-------------------------------------------------211
附錄三 晤談逐字稿示例-----------------------------------------------212
附錄四 學生的紀錄舉例-----------------------------------------------220
王玉龍(2006)。以POE策略探究國小六年級學生之色光概念及概念改變歷程。國立台中教育大學自然科學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
王美芬(1991)。自然科錯誤概念之研究。台北市立師範學院學報,22,367-400。
王美芬(1993)。幼兒對於生命現象的解釋用語。第九屆科學教育學術研討會彙編,329-356
王美芬、熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北市:心理出版社。
王美芬、熊召弟(2005)。國小階段自然與生活科技教材教法。台北市:心理出版社。
李家銘(2001)。應用POE策略在國中低成就學生補救教學之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所物理組碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
李莘怡(2006)。溶解迷思概念之概念改變研究。國立台中教育大學自然科學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
吳穎沺、蔡今中(2005)。建構主義的科學學習活動對國小高年級學生認知結構之影響--以「電與磁」單元為例。科學教育學刊,13(4),387-411。
邱彥文(2000)。國中理化課試行POE教學之個案研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
林鼎富(民91)。國小學童靜磁概念之研究。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,屏東市。
邱鴻麟、梁惠玉(1997)。高中化學教師口語解釋之詮釋研究。科學與教育,1,211-234。
姜滿(1993)。國小學童地球科學概念之理解。台南師院學報,26,193-219。
段德智、尹大貽、金常政(譯)(1999)。Peter A. Angeles著。哲學辭典。台北:貓頭鷹出版社。
教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要—自然與生活科技學習領域。臺北市:教育部。
許良榮(2005)。序列性POE之特色與設計。國教輔導,45(2),6-12。
許良榮(2006)。以序列性POE探究學生的科學解釋能力。論文發表於第二十二屆科學教育學術研討會。台北市,台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
許良榮、蔣盈姿(2005)。以POE 策略探究中小學生對物質之「可燃性」的另有概念。科學教育研究與發展季學刊,38,17-30。
張宗義(2003)。POE教學對國小學生水溶液概念改變之研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
陳淮璋(2002)。國小學童對水溶液概念的認知與迷思概念之研究。台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
陸健體(1994)。關於世界的問答—科學說明。台北市:淑馨出版社。
陳雅麗(2003)。以POE教學策略探究國小五年級學童熱概念改變之研究。台北市立師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
張綺砡(2000)。兒童的科學解釋與科學解釋類型之研究。高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
黃雪錚(2004)。利用POE策略探究國小學童毛細現象之概念。國立臺中師範學院自然科學教育系碩士論文,未出版,臺中市。
曾舒平(2004)。探討高一學生對於「板塊構造運動」所持有之概念架構之解釋融貫性。台灣師範大學科學教育研究碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
黃瑞琴(1991)。質的教育研究法。台北市:心理出版社。
黃達三、賴玉春(1998)。國小教師於科學教學的口語解釋研究。科學教育學刊,6(3),285-302。
楊榮祥(1994)。由國際數理教育評鑑談我國科學教育。科學月刊,25(6),410-425。
葉辰楨(2000)。POE模式在國一生物科教學之運用。論文發表於第十六屆科學教育學術研討會。台北市,台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
葉淑華、江新合(2002)。應用POE策略式晤談探究高三學生迷思概念之個案研究--以鉛直簡諧運動為例。論文發表於第十八屆科學教育學術研討會。台北市,台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
熊同鑫(2000)。語言與自然科學教育。台北市:心理出版社。
蔣盈姿(2004)。以POE 策略探究中小學生對物質之「可燃性」的另有概念。國立台中師範學院自然科學教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台中市。
劉誠宗(2002)。學生對物種起源的解釋架構一貫性之探析。台灣師範大學科學教育研究碩士論文,未出版,台北市。

二、翻譯書部分
Patton, M. Q. (1995)。質的評鑑與研究。(吳芝儀、李奉儒譯)。台北市:桂冠。(原著出版年:1990)。
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2001)。質性教育研究:理論與方法。(李奉儒等譯)。嘉義市:濤石文化事業有限公司。(原著出版年:1998)。
Thagard, P. (2003)。概念革命。(邱美虹等譯)。台北市:紅葉文化。(原著出版年:1992)。

三、外文部分
Bass, J. E., & Maddux, C. D. (1982). Scientific explanations and Piagetian operational levels. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(7), 533-541.
Bateson, G. (1979). Mind in nature: A necessary unity. New York: E. P. Dutton.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An instruction to theory and methods (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Bruce, B. C. (2000). Benefits of P. O. E. [On-Line] http://www.lis.uiuc.edu/~chip/pubs/inquiry/POE/POEbenefits.shtml
Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., & Anderson, J. H. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1074-79.
Dagher, Z. R. (1991). Methodological decisions in interpretive research: The case of teacher explanations. In Gallagher, J. J. (Ed.), Interpretive Research in science Education, No. 4, (pp.61-82). Monograph, NARST Press.
Dagher, Z. R., & Cossman, G.. (1992). Verbal explanation given by science teacher: Their nature and implications. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4),
361-374.
diSessa, A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman and P. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age. (pp. 49-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (Eds.) (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University.
Edgington, J. R. (1997). What constitutes a scientific explanation? (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED406190)
Edgington, J. R., & Barufaldi, J. P. (1995). How research physicists and high-school physics teachers deal with the scientific explanation of a physical phenomenon. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. San Francisco, CA, April 22-25, 1995. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED381395).
Fekete, P., & Walker, P. (1997). Interactive teaching resources for thermal physics available on the web. Retrieved June 24, 2005, from http://science.uniserve.edu.au/newsletter/vol8/fekete.html
Finley, F. N. (1983). Science process. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(1), 47-54.
Friedman, M. (1988). Explanation and understanding. In. J. C. Pitt (Ed.), Theories of explanation. (pp. 180-198). New York: Oxford University Press.
Fuson, K. (1976). Piagetian stages in causality: Children’s answers to why? Elementary School Journal, 77(2), 150-157.
Gunstone, R. F. & White, R. T. (1981). Understanding gravity. Science Education, 65(3), 291-299.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Hempel, C. G. (1965). The logic of functional analysis. In C. G. Hempel (Ed.), Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. (pp. 297-330). New York: The Free Press; London: Collier-Macmillan.
Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. New Jersey: Prentice Hall/Englewood Cliffs.
Hempel, C. G., & Oppeheim, P. (1988). Studies in the logic of explanation. In. J. C. Pitt (Ed.), Theories of explanation. (pp. 9-50). New York: Oxford University Press.
Horwood, R. H. (1988). Explanation and description in science teaching. Science Education, 72(1), 41-49.
Kearney, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). An investigation of the classroom use of prediction-observation-explanation computer tasks designed to elicit and promote discussion of students’ conceptions of force and motion. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting. New Orleans, LA, April 28-31, 2000.
Kearney, M., Treagust, D. F., Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. G. (2001). Student and teacher perceptions of the use of multimedia supported predict-observe-explain tasks to probing understanding. Research in Science Education, 31(4), 589-615.
King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of
teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational
Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.
Kitcher, P. (1988). Explanatory unification. In. J. C. Pitt (Ed.), Theories of explanation. (pp. 167-178). New York: Oxford University Press.
Liew, C. W., & Treagust, D. F. (1995). A predict-observe-explain teaching sequence for learning about students’ understanding of heat and expansion of liquids. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 41(1), 68-71.
Liew, C. W., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). The effectiveness of predict-observe-explain tasks in diagnosing students’ understanding of science and in identifying their levels of achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Diego, April 13-17, 1998. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED420715)
Liption, P. (1993). Inference to the best explanation. New York: Routledge press.
Martin, J. R. (1970). Explaining, understanding and teaching. New York: McGraw Hill.
Methembu, Z. (2001). Using the predict-observe-explain technique to enhance the students’ understanding of chemical reactions (Short Report on pilot study). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education (2001). ISSN: 1324-9339.
Nakhleh, M. B., & Samarapungavan, A. (1999). Elementary school children’s beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 777-805.
Ohlsson, S. (1992). The cognitive skill theory of articulation: A neglected aspect of science education. Science and Education, 1(2), 181-192.
Pallrand, G. J. (1996). The relationship of assessment to knowledge development of science education. Phi Delta Kappan, 315-318.
Palmer, D. (1995). The POE in the primary school: An evaluation. Research in Science Education, 25(3), 323-332.
Piaget, J. (1972). Child’s conception of the world. Littlefieid, Adams & Co., New Jersey: Totowa.
Pitt, J. C. (Ed.) (1996). Theories of explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone,A. J. (2001). Beguile: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms’. Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sandoval. W. A. (2002). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific
explanations. The Journal of the Learning Science, 2 (1), 6-7.
Schulz, S. (1993). Structure and content of children’s explanations of physical events. Based on a poster presented at the AREA Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia.
Scriven, M. (1988). Explanations, predictions and laws. In J. C. Pitt (ed.), Theories of explanation. (pp. 51-74 ). New York: Oxford University Press.
Searle, P., & Gunstone, R. F. (1990). Conceptual change and physics instruction: A longitudinal study. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the America Education Research Association. Boston, MA, April 16-20, 1990. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED320767).
Smith, B. O, & Meux, M. O. (1970). A study of the logic of teaching. Urbana, Illinois: University Illinois Press.
Solomon, J. (1986). Children's explanations. Oxford Review of Education, 12(1), 41-51.
Stepans, J., & Kuehn, C. (1985). Children’s conceptions of weather. Science and Children, 23(1), 44-47.
Sutherland, L. M. (2002). Guidelines for explanation in scientific inquiry. UM and UPS teacher meetings (July).
Sutton, C. R. (1992). Word, science and learning. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Swift, L. (1961). Explanation. In B. O. Smith and R. H. Ennis, Language and concepts in education. Chicago: Rand McNally & Company.
Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. New Jersey: 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 explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 17(2), 255-269.
Unsworth, L. (2001). Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23(6), 585-609.
White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.
Wong, D. (1996). Students’ scientific explanation and the contexts in which they occur. The Elementary School Journal, 95, 495-509.
Zuzovsky, R., & Tamir, P. (1999). Growth patterns in students’ ability to supply scientific explanation: Findings from the third international mathematics and
science study in Israel. International Journal of Science Education, 21(10), 1101-1121.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔