學生思考過程之探究－以實務推理為例

Studying Students' Thinking Processes: Practical Reasoning as an Example

10.6173/CJSE.2007.1504.02

馬秀蘭(Hsiu-Lan Ma)

思考 ； 捷思 ； 提問 ； 實務推理 ； Thinking ； Heuristics ； Question ； Practical Reasoning

科學教育學刊

15卷4期（2007 / 08 / 01）

387 - 416

繁體中文

本文目的在觀察小五學生透過網路所進行的實務推理，藉以探究教師引導對學生產生推理之成效以及學生在推理過程中捷思的表現與涉及到之思考層次。本文發現如下：1.教師須適時給予學生實務推理之引導，其中可透過提問去引導學生在相關之問題情境中發展五段式推理捷思之思考。而教師之引導能幫助學生創造實務推理之經驗。2.五段式捷思是可用的，學生在推理中會發展這些思考過程，但其所涉及到之捷思是不同的；其中每一段並非必要發生，亦可能重複出現，故呈現的捷思可能是跳躍式或來回移動的。學生思考過程相關到「分析」的子技能較多，其反應學生大多習慣作「基本的思考」。好的推理者發表次數較多，亦傾向作「證實」之「批判性思考」及「反射」之「創造性思考」。而學生在非數學思考過程中之推理大多傾向個人對問題之價值觀。3.驗證推理中基本的、批判性與創造性三種思考層次存在的關係與階級；為了表示此三種思考的領域大小、各自獨立、互相含涉以及層次的階級關係，研究者修正了文獻中有關推理內涵的圖形。

The purpose of this paper was to observe fifth graders' practical reasoning which was executed under teacher's guidance through internet context. The effect of teachers' guidance was investigated when students were working on reasoning. Especially, students' heuristics and thinking levels were analyzed at the very instance of students' practical reasoning. The findings were follows. 1. The timely guidance of the teachers was necessary for students. Through question strategy the teachers could guide students to develop five-step reasoning heuristics in related situation. Teachers' guidance could create the students' experience of practical reasoning. 2. The five-step heuristic model was workable. The students could develop these thinking processes, but the involved heuristics components were different. Each step could be not to take place or could occur repeatedly. Thus heuristics students showed could skip some or shuttle back and forth among five categories. The students were used to acting on basic thinking because the subskills of ”analyzing” took place more. The good reasoners were apt to ”validate” about critical thinking and to ”reflect” about creative thinking. The students' reasoning was mostly inclined to individuals' value for problems when their thinking processes confronted non-mathematics. 3. It was proved that there were the relation and hierarchy of three kinds of thinking contained in reasoning. The researcher revised the figure in the reasoning literature to indicate the fields, independence, intersection, and hierarchy among basic, critical, and creative thinking.

1. 馬秀蘭(2004)。數學乘除問題情境發展之研究－以BBS為管道。科學教育學刊，12(1)，53-81。
   連結：
2. 馬秀蘭(2001)。透過電腦網路來發展數學加減法問題之研究。科學教育學刊，9(4)，375-399。
   連結：
3. Ailzt, A. F.(2002).Becoming a reflective mathematics teacher.London:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4. Ainley, J.(1987).Telling question.Mathematics Teaching,118,24-26.
5. Angell, R. B.(1964).Reasoning and logic.New York:Meredith Publishing Company.
6. Audi, R.(1991).Practical reasoning.London:Routledge.
7. Ausubel, D. E.(1968).Educational psychology: A cognitive view.New York:Holt Rinehart & Winston.
8. Brissenden, T.(1988).Talking about mathematics.Oxford, England:Basil Black-well.
9. Chang, C. Y.,Barufaldi, J. P.(1999).The use of a problem-solving-based instructional model in iniating change in students` achievement and alternative frameworks.International Journal of Science Education,21(4),373-388.
10. Coles, M. J.,Robinson, W. D. (Eds.)(1989).Teaching thinking.Bristol:The Bristol Press.
11. English, L. D.(1998).Reasoning by analogies in solving comparison problems.Mathematical Cognition,4(2),125-149.
12. English, L. D.(1997).Promoting a problem posing classroom.Teaching Children Mathematics,4(3),172-179.
13. Gardner, H.(1983).Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.New York:Basic Books.
14. Gartenhaus, A. R.(1984).Museums and critical thinking skills for students.ERIC Document Reproduction Service.
15. Guilford, J. P.(1977).Way beyond the IQ.Buffalo, NY:Creative Education Foundation Inc.
16. Hyman, R. T.(1979).Strategic questioning.NJ:Prentice-Hall.
17. Korsgaard, C.(1996).The Sources of normatively.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
18. Krulik, S.,Rudnick, J. A.(1993).Reasoning and problem solving: A handbook for elementary school teachers.Needham Heights, Mass:Allyn and Bacon, Inc..
19. Krulik, S.,Rudnick, S. A.,L. V. Stiff,F. R. Curcio (Eds.)(1999).Developing mathematical reasoning in grades k-l2.National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
20. Lamon, J.(1993).Ratio and proportion: Connecting content and children`s thinking.Journal for Research Mathematics Education,24(1),41-61.
21. Langrall, C. W.,Swafford, J.(2000).Three balloons for two dollars: developing proportional reasoning.Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School,6(4),254-261.
22. Lesh, R.,Behr, M.,Post, T.,J. Hiebert,M. Behr (Eds.)(1988).Number concepts and operations in the middle grades.Reston, VA:NCTM.
23. Ma, H. L.(2005).Bulletin board systems: Aanother supporting channel for helping students work on mathematics.Paper presented at International Conference on Education, Redesigning Pedagogy: Research, Policy, Practice,Singapore:
24. Ma, H. L.,H. L. Chick,J. L. Vincent (Eds.)(2005).A study of developing practical reasoning.Proc. 29th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education,Melbourne, Australia:
25. Ma, H. L.,Wu, D. B.,Ana Breda,Rui Duarte,Manuel Martins (Eds.)(2006).Thinking processes on practical reasoning.Proceedings of the international conference in mathematics, sciences and science education,Aveiro, Portugal:
26. Marzano, R. J.(1988).Dimensions of thinking.Alexandria:ASCD.
27. Mason, J.(2000).Asking mathematical questions mathematically.International Journal of Mathematical Educational in Science and Technology,31(1),97-111.
28. Murdoch, I.(1970).The sovereignty of good london.Routledge/Ark.
29. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(2000).Principles and standards for school mathematics.Reston, VA:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(1997).A framework for constructing a vision of algebra: A discussion document.Reston, VA:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
31. Novick, L. R.(1995).Same determinants of successful analogical transfer in the solution of algebra word problems.Thinking and Reasoning,1,5-30.
32. Orlich, D. C.(1998).Teaching strategies: A guide to better instruction.Boston:Houghton Mifflin Co..
33. Osborn, A. F.(1957).Applied imagination.New York:Charles Scribiner`s Sons.
34. Polya, G.(1957).How to salve it.New York:Doubleday.
35. Rosser, R.(1994).Cognitive development: Psychological and biological perspectives.Massachusetts:Allyn and Bacon.
36. Rudnitsky, A.,Etheredge, S.,Freeman, J. M.,Gilbert, T.(1995).Learning to solve addition and subtraction word problems through a structure-plus-writing approach.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,26(5),467-486.
37. Russell, S. J.,L. V. Stiff,F. R. Curcio (Eds.)(1999).Developing mathematical reasoning in grades k-12.Reston, Virginia:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
38. Sander, N. M.(1966).Classroom question: What kind?.New York:Harper and Row.
39. Schoenfeld, A. H.(1985).Mathematical problem solving.New York:Academic.
40. Sternberg, R. J.(1997).Successful Intelligence.New York:Penguin, Plume.
41. Sternberg, R. J.(1999).Cognitive psychology.Orlando:Harcourt College.
42. Torrance, E. P.,Orlow, E. B.(1986).Torrance tests of creative thinking streamlined (revised) manual.Bensenville, IL:Scholastic testing Service.
43. Treffinger, D. J.,Isaksen, S. G.(1992).Creative Problem Solving: An introduction.Sarasota, FL:Center for Creative Learning, Inc..
44. Vygotsky, L. S.(1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
45. Wood, K. D.(1982).Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Georgia.
46. 毛連溫、吳清山、陳麗華(1992)。康乃爾批判思考測驗修訂報告。初等教育學刊，11-28。
47. 王文科(2001)。教育研究法。台北市:五南圖書出版公司。
48. 李丹主編(1989)。兒童發展。台北:五南圖書出版公司。
49. 李宗薇、黃政傑主編(1997)。教學原理。台北市:師大書苑。
50. 林碧珍、蔡文煥(2003)。我國國小四年級學生在國際教育成就2003試測的數學成就表現。九＋二學年度師範學院教育學術論文發表會論文集，台南市:
51. 林福來、國科會科教處主編(1987)。比例推理能力的研究。認知與學習研討會專輯，1，23-45。
52. 林福來、郭份派、林光賢(1985)。比例推理的錯誤診斷與補救。七十四年科教學術研討會論文彙編
53. 洪文東(2000)。從問題解決的過程培養學生的科學創造力。屏師科學教育，11，52-62。
54. 馬秀蘭(2005)。多重式比例問題的解決分析：相等比值或相等比率。科學教育研究與發展季刊，41，95-108。
55. 馬秀蘭(2005)。解題推理中協商交談之探究。科學教育研究與發展季刊，39，1-15。
56. 張玉成(1998)。思考技巧與教學。台北市:心理出版社。
57. 張玉成(1999)。教師發問技巧。台北市:心理出版社。
58. 張春興(1992)。張氏心理學辭典。台北市:東華書局。
59. 張春興(1995)。教育心理學。台北市:東華書局。
60. 張美玉、吳玉明(1999)。不同學習型態學生學習表現的探討－解釋推理及問題解決能力。科學教育學刊，7(3)，255-280。
61. 張麗芬(1993)。台北市，國立政治大學。
62. 教育部(2000)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要－數學學習領域。教育部。
63. 郭有遹(1994)。創造性的問題解決法。台北:心理出版社。
64. 郭重吉(1997)。迎接二十一世紀的科學教育。教學科技與媒體，33，3-11。
65. 陳李綢(1991)。台北市，國立臺灣師範大學。
66. 陳龍安(1998)。創造思考教學的理論與實際。台北市:心理出版社。
67. 黃幸美(2000)。兒童問答討論解決類比推理問題之探討。臺北市立師範學院學報，31，49-72。
68. 賈馥茗(1976)。英才教育。台北:開南書局。
69. 劉福增譯(1997)。邏輯新論。台北市:心理出版社。
70. 潘淑滿(2003)。質性研究：理論與應用。台北市:心理出版社。
71. 鄭昭明(1993)。認知心理學：理論與實踐。台北市:桂冠圖書出版公司。

1. 陳姿良、許天維、馬秀蘭、吳德邦(2011)。臺灣中部地區國小高年級學生幾何推理層次的分布情形。測驗統計年刊，19(下)，51-71。
2. 黃佩岑、單維彰、陳斐卿、張鐵懷、江家瑋(2015)。數學自由擬題之設計與評量―一個合作的取徑。科學教育學刊，23(2)，185-211。