高中生物科環境教材概念分析與學生學與成果評量之研究

Conceptual Analysis on Environmental Teaching Material in Bidogical Text Books and an Evaluation on Achievements of Student Learning in Senior High School

10.6767/JSE.199304.0083

岳美群(Mei-Chun Yueh)；蔡長添

科學教育

4期（1993 / 04 / 01）

83 - 132

繁體中文

本研究旨在以Novak的概念圖技巧對高中生物科環境教材作概念分析，並依此分析架構編製環境教材的試卷，對中部高中一、二、三年級的學生進行評量，再以S-P表和IRS分析法來瞭解高中學生生物科環境教材的學習成果及狀況，其結果如下：1.本研究對高中一~三年級生物孝科書作概念分析，整理歸納出四個概念圖，即是A圖：環境影響生物。B圖：自然環境中的理化因素和生物因素。C圖：生態系。D圖：人類與自然。2.利用IRS分析法由學生的成就分析結果來看，學生所展現的概念架構與教材的概念架構相配合的情形，四個概念圖中，以生態學的部分（B圖與C圖）最好，人類與自然的部分（D圖）次之，環境影響生物的部分（A圖）則較差。3.使用S-P表注意係數分析學生的學習狀況，發現學習有效的百分比以三年級最多(46%)，一年級次之(36%)，二年級較差(29%)。4.各年級在學習環境教材之前，評量的結果是二、三年級比一年級要好，在學習之後情況卻發生改變，成爲三年級比一、三年級要好的情形。

This study was attempted to have an analysis on environmental teaching materials in biological textbooks and an evaluation on the achievement of student learning in senior high school using the Novak's concept mapping, with the IRS analysis and the S-P charts. The results were described in the followings. The environmental teaching materials in biological textbook of senior high school ere consisted of four parts which we could make completed concept mappings. Those are (A), environmental influence onorganisms, (B), Non-biotic and biotic factors in natural environments, (C), The ecosystem, (D), human beings and nature. As to the IRS analysis, the scores of the achievement' in ecology (B & C) was the best, that in the human beings and nature (D) was the second, and that in the environmental influence on organisn (A) was the last. From the analysis of S-P chart, the learning efficiency was 46% for the third grade students, 36% for the first grade students and 29% for, the second grade students. This result was attributed to the unbalanced distribution of environmental concepts in the tests of senior high school. As a matter of fact, there was much environmental concepts in the fundamental biology for the 1st grade and the 4th textbook of biology for the 3rd grade. Then there was only a few environmental concepts in the textbooks for the 2nd grade. So as after studying these biology textbooks, the 3rd grade students got better scores than the students of the other two grades did.

1. Ausubel, D. P.,Novak, J. D.,Hanesion, H. Y.(1978).Educational psychology: a congitive view.New York:Holt Rinehart an Winston.
2. Burrus-Bammel, L. L.,Bammel, G.,Kopitsky, K.(1988).Content analysis: a technique for measuring attitudes expressed in environmental education literature.Journal of enviromental education,19(4),32-37.
3. Davis, G. A.(1983).Educational psychology: theory and practice.New York:Random house inc.
4. Linskie, R.(1983).The learning process : theory and practice.Lanham:University press of America inc.
5. Novak, J. D.(1977).A theory of education.Cornell University press.
6. Novak, J. D.(1990).Concept mapping: a useful tool for science education.Journal of research science teaching,27(10),937-949.
7. Novak, J. D.(1988).Learning science and the science of Learning.Studies in science education,15,77-101.
8. Novak, J. D.,Gowin, D. B.(1989).Learning how to learn.Cambridge University Press.
9. Okebuloka, P. A.(1990).Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology: an xamination of the potency of the concept-mapping technique.Journal of research in science teaching,27(5),493-504.
10. Pankratius, W. J.(1990).Building an organized knowledge base: concept mapping and achievement in secondary school physics.Journal of research in science teaching,27(4),315-333.
11. Piaget, J.(1975).The origins of intelligence in children.New York:International Universities Press.
12. Schmid, R. F.(1990).Concept mapping as an instructional strategy for high school biology.Journal of educational research,84(2),78-85.
13. Wadsworth, B. J.(1989).Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development.New York:Longman inc.
14. Wallace, J. D.(1990).The concept map as a research tool: exploring conceptual change in Biology.Journal of research in science teaching,27(10),1033-1052.
15. 方泰山,廖焜熙(1991)。由命題的頭腦體操論化學概念分析。科學教育月刊，139，2-16。
16. 毛連塭,鄧天德,陳源在,陳淑卿(1990).台北縣、基隆市環境教育資源調查與研究.:台北市立師院.
17. 王鑫,呂光洋,周昌弘,晏涵文,郭允文,楊國賜(1987)。,國科會科教處。
18. 竹谷誠(1980)。IRSテスト構造リデフの構成法と活用。日本教育工學雜誌，5，93-103。
19. 余興全(1984)。台灣師大教育研究所。
20. 吳京一（譯）(1990)。日本國中學環境教育的現狀與問題。環境教育季刊，7，2-7。
21. 汪靜明(1990)。,行政院環境保護署。
22. 周昌弘（編）(1991)。台灣環境教育研究。中華民國第一屆環境教育學術研討會
23. 楊國樞,文祟一,吳聰賢,李亦園(1993).社會及行為科學研究法下冊.東華出版社.
24. 蔡長添,岳美群,蔡顯麞(1993)。科學教育研究計報告科學教育研究計報告,國科會。
25. 蔡瑞麟(1990)。彰師大科學教育研究所。

1. 許健將(2009)。化學概念學習之真實評量研究。教育科學期刊，8(2)，93-115。