職前化學教師自發性類比之探討

The Investigation of Self-generated Analogies for Pre-service Chemistry Teachers

10.6173/CJSE.2007.1503.04

陳雅君(Ya-Chun Chun)

反思能力 ； 自發性類比 ； 概念圖 ； 職前化學教師 ； Concept Map ； Pre-service Teacher ； Reflective Thinking ； Self-generated Analogies

科學教育學刊

15卷3期（2007 / 06 / 01）

265 - 294

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討不同學習成就的職前化學教師自發性類比品質之差異，及其在小組討論前後自發性類比修正之情形。自發性類比測驗卷內容共分為六個開放式問答題，分為「電化電池」及「濃差電池」兩個主題，「電化電池」部分包含(1)鹽橋功能(2)內部各種離子移動路徑(3)電子流的流動方向等三個子題；「濃差電池」部分則包含(1)整個系統反應方向及電子流的流動方向(2)內部各種離子移動路徑(3)反應前、後熵(entropy)的變化等三個子題。研究結果顯示：（一）目標概念的複雜程度及受試者的先備知識可能是造成不同學習成就的職前化學教師自發性類比品質差異之原因。（二）透過小組討論有助於職前化學教師發現舊類比缺點、增進對目標概念的了解及促進類比物精緻化，進而提昇其自發性類比之品質。（三）透過反思有助於職前化學教師省察到舊類比的缺失，進而促進自發性類比品質的改進。（四）職前化學教師自發性類比品質與概念圖的得分呈現顯著的相關，顯示擁有較複雜、整合知識架構者，較能產生有效的類比遷移，其自發性類比品質較佳。

The purposes of this study were to investigate the quality differences of self-generated analogies among pre-service chemistry teachers with different academic achievement. The content of self-generated analogies were induced from six open-ended questions classified as two parts, ”Electrochemical Cells” and ”Concentration Cells”. The questions in ”Electrochemical Cells” were ”functions of salt bridges”, ”ions' movement paths”, and ”electron movement path”, and the questions in the second part were ”reaction direction and electron movement path”, ”ions' movement paths”, and ”the change of entropy before and after reaction”. The test results of thirty-four pre-service chemistry teachers uncovered the following findings: 1. The differences of quality of self-generated analogies might resulted from complexities of target concepts, prior knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge of participants. 2. The quality of self-generated analogies could be promoted by group discussion, because it served as scaffold for pre-service chemistry teachers to aware the deficiencies of his own analogies, understand more about target concepts, and elaborate upon analogies. 3. There was a significant relationship between the pre-service teachers' reflective ability and the quality of self-generated analogy. It indicated that reflection could scout the deficiencies of analogies and then upgrade the qualities of self-generated analogies. 4. There was a significant relationship among the scores of concept maps and the qualities of self-generated analogies. It indicated that pre-service chemistry teachers with completed and integrated knowledge structures had more effective analogical mapping.

1. Clement, J.(1988).Observed methods for generating analogies in scientific problem solving.Cognitive Science,12,563-586.
2. Duit, R.(1991).On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science.Science Education,75(6),649-672.
3. Gayle, N.,Joseph, F.,Mary, Nakhleh(2001).An investigation of the value of using concept maps in general chemistry.Journal of Chemical Education,78(8),1111-1116.
4. Gil, A.,Riggs, E.(1999).Observations class reflections: changes in my instructional practice.
5. Glynn, S.,Duit, R.,Thiele, R.,S. M. Glynn,Duit (Eds.)(1995).Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice.Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
6. Goswami, U.(1992).Analogical reasoning: What develops? A review of research and theory.Child Development,62,1-22.
7. Guastello, E. F.(2000).Concept mapping effects on science content comprehension of low-achieving inner-city seventh graders.Remedial & Special Education,21(6),356-365.
8. Halpern, D. F.,Hansen, C.,Riefer, D.(1990).Analogies as an aid to understanding and memory.Journal of Educational Psychology,82(2),298-305.
9. Holyoak, K. J.,Thagard, P.(1997).The analogical mind.American Psychologist,52(1),57-66.
10. Kaufman, D. R.,Patel, V. L.,Magder, S. A.(1996).The explanatory role of spontaneously generated analogies in reasoning about physiological concepts.International Journal of Science Education,18(3),369-386.
11. Markow, P. G.,Lonning, R. A.(1998).Usefulness of concept maps in college chemistry laboratories: students` perceptions and effects on achievement.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,35(9),1015-1029.
12. Marshall, S. P.(1995).Schemas in problem solving.Australia:Cambridge University Press.
13. Martin, G.,Elena, M.(1998).Reflection and the preservice teacher.
14. Mason, L.(1998).Discussing the greenhouse effect: children`s collaborative discourse reasoning and conceptual change.Environmental Education Research,4(1),69-85.
15. Mason, L.(1995).Collaborative reasoning on self-generated analogies: conceptual growth in understanding scientific phenomena.
16. Mastrilli, T. M.(1997).Instructional analogies used by biology teachers: implications for practice and teacher preparation.Journal of Science Teacher Education,8(3),187-204.
17. Middleton, J. L.(1991).Student-generated analogies in biology.The American Biology Teacher,53(1),42-46.
18. Mintzes, J. J.,Wandersee, J. H.,Novak, J. D.(2001).Assessing understanding in biology.Journal of Biological Education,35(3),118-124.
19. National Research Council(1996).National Science Education Standards.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
20. Electronic Journal of Science Education
21. Novak, J. D.(Eds.),J. J. Mintzes,J. H. Wandersee(1998).Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view.Califorma:Academic Press.
22. Novak, J. D.,D. F. Treagust,R. Duit,B. J. Fraser (Eds.)(1996).Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics.New York:Teachers College Press.
23. Pittman, K. M.(1999).Students` generated analogies: another way of knowing?.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,36(1),1-22.
24. Plotnick, E.(1997).Concept mapping: A graphical system for understanding the relationship between concepts.ERIC Document Reproduction Service.
25. Steve, S.,Jonathan, O.(1997).Learning processes and collaborative concept mapping.International Journal of Science Education,19(10),1117-1135.
26. Thagard, P.(1992).Analogy, explanation, and education.Journal of Research Science Teaching,29(6),537-544.
27. Thiele, R. B.,Treagust, D. F.(1991).Using analogies in secondary chemistry teaching.The Australian Science Teachers Journal,37(2),10-14.
28. Thiele, R. B.,Treagust, D. F.(1994).An interpretive examination of high school chemistry teachers` analogical.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,31(3),227-242.
29. Treagust, D. F.,Harrison, A. G.,Venville, G. J.(1998).Teaching science effectively with analogies: an approach for preservice and inservice teacher education.Journal of Science Teacher Education,9(2),85-101.
30. Treagust, D., F.,Duit, R.,Joslin, P.,Lindauer, I.(1992).Science teachers` use of analogies: observations from classroom practice.International Journal of Science Education,14(4),413-422.
31. Treagust, D.,Harrison, A.,Venville, G.,Dagher, Z.(1996).Using an analogical teaching apporoach to engender conceptual change.International Journal of Science Education,18,213-229.
32. Venville, G. J.,Treagust, D. F.(1996).The role of analogies in promoting conceptual change in biology.Instructional Science,24,295-320.
33. Wong, E. D.(1993).Self-Generated analogies as a tool for constructing and evaluating explanations of scientific phenomena.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,30(4),367-380.
34. Wong, E. D.(1993).Understanding the generative capacity of analogies as a tool for explanation.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,30(4),1259-1272.
35. Zook, K. B.,Roller, T.(1996).Effects of age, expertise, and schema induction on the generation and interpretation of instructional analogies.Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,New York, New York:
36. 余民寧(1997)。有意義的學習：概念構圖之研究。台北市:商鼎文化。
37. 邱美虹(1993)。類比與科學概念的學習。教育研究資訊，1(6)，79-90。
38. 曹靖纓(2000)。高雄市，國立高雄師範大學。
39. 郭金美(1997)。小學職前教師類比教學策略的運用研究。嘉義師院學報，11，259-272。
40. 陳信劼(2001)。彰化市，國立彰化師範大學。

1. 蕭淳浩、黃耀萱、曾一偵、莊秋蘭、李文瑜(2018)。以建模導向課程促進海洋永續觀點發展之初探。環境教育研究，14(1)，117-158。