以多重類比探究兒童電流心智模式之改變

Using Multiple Analogies for Investigating Changes of Children's Mental Models of Electricity

10.6173/CJSE.2002.1002.01

邱美虹(Mei-Hung Chiu)；林靜雯(Jing-Wen Lin)

多重類比 ； 心智模式 ； 電流 ； Multiple Analogies ； Mental Model ； Electricity

科學教育學刊

10卷2期（2002 / 06 / 01）

109 - 134

繁體中文

由於電流概念的高度抽象性及複雜性，致使學生對此概念無法建立正確的心智模式。Spiro, Feltovich, Coulson 和Anderson (1989)認為欲教授如此複雜的新概念時，「多重類比」是一解決之道。據此，本研究選取國小四年級學生32名，隨機、平均分配至對照組、單一類比組、相似類比組及互補類比組，以探究多重類比教學過程中，學生心智模式改變的情形及其原因。研究結果顯示： 1．多重類比有助於學生電學概念的學習，且互補多重類比組於能量概念的學習上優於其他三組，而相似多重類比組於通路概念的學習成就上雖略高於其他類比組，但並未達顯著差異。 2．經晤談後，學生於簡單及串聯通路的電流心智模式共分六大類，而並聯則有五大類。 3．三類比實驗組的教材明顯較對照組易於提供具體表徵增進後設覺察，進而造成心智模式的轉變。但無論何種教學，學生對於電流經燈泡後衰減的概念仍難以克服。 4．影響學生電流心智模式的因素，主要為：(1)視電池為一儲存槽應發出固定電流或燈泡應獲得固定電流；(2)資源消耗模式；(3)分配電流的觀點；(4)順序推理模式；(5)節點的影響；(6)電路圖形的表徵；(7)封閉通路概念。這些因素顯示學生傾向於將電的世界視為一物質世界，並因而形成學習的預設。

Due to high abstractness of electric current and its ”mixed” role between matter and energy, students' understanding of this concept is always incomplete and incorrect. Spiro, Feltovich, Coulson and Anderson (1989) suggested that the use of multiple analogies might open an avenue for learning high complexity of science concepts. Thirty-two fourth graders were randomly assigned to a control group or there treatment groups (namely a group with one single analogy, a group with similar analogies, and a group with complementary analogies). The results of this study are as follows: First, it shows that multiple analogies are helpful to learning of concepts in electricity, in particular, the students in the complementary analogies group outperr form than the students in other groups in learning energy concepts in electricity. The students in similar analogies group outperform the other analogies group, but not reaching at significant level. Second, the researchers identify six mental models of series and simple circuits and five parallel ones. Third, although three experimental groups provide concrete analogies for students to link with abstract concepts, students still hardly overcome their incorrect mental model about current decreasing after through a bulb. Fourth, the main causes influencing students' mental models, are 1. treating battery as a tank, which supplies consistent electrical current, 2. source-consumer model, 3. the view of repartition current, 4. sequential-inference model, 5. the effect of nodes, 6. the representations of circuit diagram, and 7. the concepts of closed circuit. These causes indicate that students tend to treat the electric world as a matter concept, thus forming the presupposition of learning the concepts of electricity.

1. Arnold, M.,Millar, R.(1987).Being constructive: An alternative approach to the teaching of introductory ideas in electricity.International Journal of Science Education,9,553-563.
2. Black, D. E.,Solomon, J.(1987).Can pupils use taught analogies for electric current?.School Science Review,69,249-254.
3. Chi, M. T. H.,R. Giere (Ed.)(1992).Cognitive models of science.Minnesota Press.
4. Chi, M. T. H.,Slotta, J. D.,de Leeuw, N.(1994).From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts [special issue].Learning and Instruction,4,27-43.
5. Cohen, R.,R. Duit,W. Jung,C. von Rhoneck, (Eds.)(1984).Aspects of Under-standing Electricity,Proceedings of the International Workshop,10-14 September,Ludwigsburg(Schmidt and Klauning, Kiel,1985).IPN-Arbeitsberichte
6. Conver, W. J.(1999).Wiley series in probability and statistics: Applied probability and statistics section.New York:Willy.
7. Driver, R.,Sauires, A.,Rushworth, P.,Wood-Robinson, V.(1994).Making sense of secondary science: Research into children`s Ideas.London and New York:Routledge.
8. Dupin, J. J.,Johsua, S.(1984).Teaching electricity: interactive evolution of representations, models and experiments in a class situation.IPN-Arbeitsberichte,59,331-341.
9. Dupin, J. J.,Johsua, S.,R. Duit,W. Jung,C. von Rhoneck, (Eds.)(1985).Aspects of Understanding Electricity.Proceedings of the International Workshop.
10. Gentner, D.,A. L. Stevens, (Eds.)(1983).Mental models.New Jersey and London:Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Gick, M. L.,Holyoak, K. J.(1983).Schema induction and analogical transfer.Cognitive Psychology,15(1),1-38.
12. Gott, R.(1984).Electricity at Age 15: Science report for teachers, No 7.Assessment of Performance Unit, Department of Education and Science, HMSO London.
13. Holyoak, K.,Thagard, P.(1995).Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought.London:MIT.
14. Johnson-Laird P. N.,M. I. Posner (Ed.)(1989).From foundation of cognitive science.Cambridge, MA:The MIT Press.
15. 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.
16. Magnusson, S. J.,Boyle, R. A.,Templin, M.(1997).Dynamic science assessment: A new approach for investigating conceptual change.The Journal of the Learning Science,6(1),91-142.
17. Osborne, R.(1983).Towards modifying children`s ideas about ideas about electric current.Research in Science & Technological Education,1(1),73-82.
18. Osborne, R.,Freyberg, P.(1985).Learning in science: The implications of children`s science.Heinemann, Auckland and London:
19. Psillos, D.,Koumaras, P.,Tiberghien, A.(1988).Voltage presented as a primary concept on DC circuits.International Journal of Science Education,10(1),29-43.
20. Shepardson, D. P.,Moje, D. B.(1994).The nature of fourth graders` understandings of electric circuits.Science Education,78(5),489-514.
21. Shipstone, D. M.(1984).A study of children`s understanding of electricity in simple DC circuits.European Journal of Science Education,6(2),185-198.
22. Shipstone, D.,R. Driver,E. Guesne,A. Tiberghien, (Eds.)(1985).Children`s ideas in science.Milton Keynes:Open University Press.
23. Spiro, R. J.,Feltovich, P. J.,Coulson, R. L.,Anderson, D. K.,S. Vosniadou,A. Ortony (Eds.)(1989).Similarity and analogical reasoning.New York:Cambridge University Press.
24. Tenney, Y. J.(1984).What makes analogies accessible: experiments on the water-flow analogy for electricity.IPN-Arbeitsberichte,59,311-318.
25. Tenney, Y. J.,R. Duit,W. Jung,C. von Rhoneck, (Eds.)(1985).Aspects of understanding electricity.Proceedings of the International Workshop.
26. Thagard, P.(1992).Analogy, explanation and education.Journal of research in science teaching,29(6),537-544.
27. Von Rhoneck, C.(1984).The instruction of voltage as an independent variable-the importance of preconceptions, cognitive conflict and operating rules.IPN-Arbeitsberichte,59,275-286.
28. Von Rhoneck, C.(Eds.),Duit, R.,Jung, W.(1985).Aspects of Understanding Electricity.Proceedings of the International Workshop.
29. Vosniadou, S.(1994).Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change [special issue].Learning and Instruction,4,45-69.
30. Vosniadou, S.,Brewer, W. F.(1992).Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood.Cognitive Psychology,24,535-585.
31. Vosniadou, S.,Ioannides, C.(1998).From conceptual development to science education: a psychological point of view.International Journal of Science Education,20(10),1213-1230.
32. 林靜雯(2000)。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
33. 邱美虹(1996)。學習策略與科學學習。科學教育月刊，191，2-15。
34. 邱美虹(1996)。從STS和類比談科學學習。高中化學輔導團期刊，1-7。
35. 高淑芬(1997)。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
36. 國立編譯館(1997)。國民小學自然科學。台北市:國立編譯館。
37. 陳恆迪(1993)。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
38. 陳惠江、許遠光、黃國輝、鄺兆榮(1994)。香港新綜合科學。香港:雅集出版社。
39. 陳瓊森(1993)。高一學生直流電路概念結構之研究。彰化師範大學學報，4，511-542。

1. 許一珍(2019)。應用擴增實境於國小自然與生活科技教材之學習成效與動機研究。中科大學報，6(1)，105-115。
2. 林靜雯、吳育倫(2013)。應用診斷測驗結合答題信心探究跨年級學生簡單暨串聯電路之理解及影響來源。教育科學研究期刊，58(2)，25-56。
3. 邱美虹、林靜雯(2005)。整合類比與多重表徵研究取向探究多重類比設計對兒童電學概念學習之影響。科學教育學刊，13(3)，317-345。
4. 邱美虹、林靜雯(2006)。以述詞分析法探究多重類比對兒童電學概念改變之影響。科學教育學刊，14(1)，55-81。
5. 邱美虹、林靜雯(2009)。探究學生串聯電路認知特徵演化歷程之跨年級研究。教育科學研究期刊，54(4)，139-170。
6. 邱美虹、林靜雯(2009)。探究以學生心智模式為設計基礎之教—學序列對學生電學學習之影響。科學教育學刊，17(6)，481-507。
7. 邱美虹、林靜雯(2009)。探究以學生心智模式為設計基礎之教—學序列對學生電學學習之影響。科學教育學刊，17(6)，481-507。
8. 楊志強、洪振方、林日宗(2015)。運用不同電子元件教學探討電流方向心智模型之改變─以四年級學生補救教學為例。課程與教學，18(2)，169-200。
9. (2008)。跨年級學生電學心智模式一致性與課程進程之比較研究。教育與心理研究，31(3)，53-77。
10. (2011)。探究動態表徵結合即時回饋系統對診斷學生簡單暨串聯電路之另有概念的影響。教育與心理研究，34(1)，79-107。