以概念演化樹探討跨年級學生演化概念之發展

Using a Conceptual Evolution Tree to Investigate the Development of Understanding of Evolution across Grade Levels

10.6173/CJSE.2010.1802.03

辛怡瑩(Yi-Ying Hsin)；邱美虹(Mei-Hung Chiu)

演化 ； 概念改變 ； 概念演化樹 ； Evolution ； Conceptual Change ； Conceptual Evolution Tree

科學教育學刊

18卷2期（2010 / 04 / 01）

131 - 153

繁體中文

本研究以問卷調查跨年級學生演化概念之發展，對象有小六、國一、國二、高一、高二及大一，有效問卷共747份。演化概念分為四個主概念和六個次概念，結果顯示小學六年級學生易使用外在特徵解釋，經國一教學後比例下降。學生在選擇題與開放題的答題表現是中相關，開放題得分較選擇題低，與學生寫作表達能力有關。由概念演化樹可看出科學概念出現順序為主概念三「不同的存活率」、主概念一「個別變異」、主概念二「遺傳決定」，最後主概念四「累積世代的改變」。整體而言，跨年級學生發展逐年增長，但國一到國二有下降情況，主因為國二沒有演化課程，其餘階段皆有與演化相關課程，直到大一階段學生仍尚未建立完整的主概念四「累積世代的改變」。

The purpose of this study was to investigate, across age levels, students' conceptions about evolution. The participants were from different grades, namely, 6(superscript th), 7(superscript th), 8(superscript th), 10(superscript th), 11(superscript th), and freshmen majoring in Life Science at several universities. Seven hundred forty-seven participants were involved in the study. Four major concepts of evolution were identified and then divided into six sub-conceptions of evolution respectively. The authors adopted the software PAUP(superscript *) 4.0 of phylogenetic systematics to find the goodness of fit of the conceptual evolutionary tree of students' conceptions about evolution. The results were as follows: First, most of the 6th graders tended to use external characteristics of the organism to explain the process of evolution. After instruction, the percentages of incorrect conceptions were lower than before. Second, the scores between multiple choice and open-ended questions were highly correlated. The students' scores on open-ended questions were lower than their performance on multiple choice questions. Third, the fittest conceptual evolutionary tree represented the developmental sequence of the students' conceptions of evolution: such as ”differential survival rates”, ”individual variation”, ”genetic determination”, and ”accumulation of changes over many generations.” In summary, the development of students' conceptions of evolution is a gradual process. ”Accumulation of changes over many generations” was not learned by the students until the first year at the university level.

1. Huxley, J. S. (1942). Evolution. New York and London: Harper and Brothers
2. Anderson, D. L.,Fisher, K. M.,Norman, G. J.(2002).Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39(10),952-978.
3. Bishop, B. A.,Anderson, C. W.(1990).Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,27,415-427.
4. Brumby, M. N.(1984).Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection by medical biology students.Science Education,68(4),493-503.
5. Campbell, N. A.,Reece, J. B.(2002).Biology.San Francisco, CA:Benjamin Cummings.
6. Chi, M. T. H.(2005).Commonsense conceptions of emergent process: Why some misconceptions are robust.The Journal of the Learning Science,14(2),161-199.
7. Chi, M. T. H.,Slotta, J. D.,de Leeuw, N.(1994).From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts.Learning and Instruction,4,27-43.
8. Downie, J. R.,Barron, N. J.(2000).Evolution and religion: Attitudes of scottish first year biology and medical students to the teaching of evolutionary biology.Journal of Biological Education,34,139-146.
9. Driver, R.,Leach, J.,Scott, P.,Wood-Robinson, C.(1994).Young people's understanding of science concepts: Implications of crossage studies for curriculum planning.Studies in Science Education,24,75-100.
10. Evans, E. M.(2000).The emergence of beliefs about the origins of species in school-age children.Merrill-Palmer Quarterly,46(2),221-254.
11. Evans, E. M.(2006).Everyday intuition: How children develop their concepts of evolution.Bimonthly News Journal of the Association of Science Technology Centers,11-13.
12. Ferrari, M.,Chi, M. T. H.(1998).The nature of naïve explanation of natural selection.International Journal of Science Education,20(10),1231-1256.
13. Geraedts, G. L.,Boersma K. Th.(2006).Reinventing natural selection.International Journal of Science Education,28(8),843-870.
14. Giere, R.(Ed.)(1992).Cognitive models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science.Minneapolis, M.N.:University of Minnesota Press.
15. Kuhn, T. S.(1962).The structure of scientific revolutions.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
16. Mader, S. S.(1997).Inquiry into life.Dubuque IA:Wm. C. Brown Publishers.
17. Mayr, E.(1982).The growth of biological thought.Cambridge:The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
18. Mayr, E.,William B. P.(1998).The evolutionary synthesis: Perspectives on the unification of biology.Harvard University Press.
19. Mintzes, J. J.(Ed.),Wandersee, J. H.(Ed.),Novak, J.(Ed.)(1998).Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view.San Diego, CA:Academic Press.
20. Mooreead, A.(1971).Darwin and the Beagle.Ringwood. Vic:Penguin Books.
21. Ohlsson, S.(1991).Learning Research and Development Center in Technical reportLearning Research and Development Center in Technical report,PA.:University of Pittsburgh.
22. Settlage, J.(1994).Conceptions of natural selection: A snapshot of the sense-making process.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,31(5),449-457.
23. Shtulman, A.(2006).Qualitative differences between naïve and scientific theories of evolution.Cognitive Psychology,52(2),170-194.
24. Slotta, J. D.,Chi, M. T. H.(2006).Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training.Cognition and Instruction,24(2),261-289.
25. Stern, L.(2004).Effective assessment: Probing students' understanding of natural selection.Journal of Biological Education,39,12-17.
26. Swofford, D. L.(1985).Phylogenetic analysis U using parsimony.Champaign, Ill:Illinois Natural History Survey.
27. Toulmin, S.(1972).The uses of argument.Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.
28. Vosniadou, S.(1994).Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change.Learning and Instruction,4,45-69.
29. Wiley, E. O.,Siegel-Causey, D.,Brooks, D. R.,Funk, V. A.(1993).The complete cladist: A primer of phylogenetic procedures.Lawrence:Museum of Natural History.
30. 吳美芬(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。新竹市，國立新竹教育大學數理研究所。
31. 林靜雯(2005)。博士論文(博士論文)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
32. 林靜雯、邱美虹(2007)。以概念演化觀點分析我國電學教科書之教─學序列。國立編譯館館刊，35(2)，3-14。
33. 邱美虹(2000)。概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊，8(1)，1-34。
34. 陳藍萍。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
35. 湯偉君(2008)。博士論文(博士論文)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
36. 劉誠宗(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。

1. 林靜雯、吳育倫(2013)。兒童地球形狀概念演化樹之跨年級調查驗證。教育科學研究期刊，58(4)，133-163。
2. 鍾曉蘭、邱美虹、李雪碧、吳文龍(2013)。以概念演化樹探討跨年級學生理想氣體心智模式之發展歷程。科學教育學刊，21(2)，135-162。