五年級資優生與專家使用圖形化程式（NXT-G）之心智模式及建模歷程

Fifth Grade Gifted Students' and Experts' Mental Models and Modeling Processes in NXT-G

10.6173/CJSE.2015.2303.04

林靜雯(Jing-Wen Lin)；林怡瑾(Yi-Chin Lin)

心智模式 ； 建模歷程 ； 專家 ； 資優生 ； 圖形化程式（NXT-G） ； Mental Model ； Modeling Process ； Expert ； Gifted Students ； Graphical Program (NXT-G)

科學教育學刊

23卷3期（2015 / 09 / 01）

293 - 319

繁體中文

本研究意欲比較五年級資優生與專家對行動機器人Lego Mindstorms圖形化程式（NXT-G）中「迴圈」與「分岔」兩程式進行概念理解與設計時，可能產生的心智模式與建模歷程。資優生可視為學習之起點，專家則為可能的學習典範，藉此比較，希望對資優生行動機器人程式之教學提出建議。研究以個案研究方式選擇六位初學NXT-G之五年級資優生及兩位專家，透過螢幕攝影及放聲思考，收集其進行「程式概念檢測題」之過程，並輔以「程式概念理解測驗」與晤談之結果進行歸納與推論。結果發現：一、在心智模式方面，資優生於迴圈程式中具有「loop」及「step」模式，而分岔程式則為「singleswitch」、「multi-switch」及「odd」模式；專家在迴圈程式中呈現「variable loop」及「nested loops」模式，而分岔程式則為「multi-switch」模式。二、在建模歷程方面，資優生的建模歷程通常依賴上課經驗選擇模型，且選定後，需執行實驗方能驗證模型，若未能達到目的，便多以試誤方式微調參數或拒絕模型而無法修正；專家則具備豐富解題經驗與資源，形成策略模組，並多運用思考實驗驗證所選之模型，解題快速。研究者建議運用variable loop、nested loops等專家策略模組形成版型加強學生基本概念及使用程式模組經驗，並多運用「預測－執行－分享」鼓勵學生思考實驗以比較各種模型的範圍與限制。

This study explores fifth grade gifted students' and experts' mental models and modeling process, in the development of conceptual understanding and design of ＂loop＂ and ＂switch＂ programs in NXT-G. The students' performance could be seen as a starting point, and experts' performance could be seen as the role model. Suggestions for gifted students learning mobile robotics were proposed by comparing these two target groups. This study adopted the case study research method. Six fifth grade gifted students and two experts were purposely selected. Participants' experiences in completing the ＂Programming Concepts Test＂ were collected through the think aloud method and screen video capture. Additional evidence was gathered from the ＂Test of Understanding in Programming Concepts＂ and interviews. The results showed: 1. The ＂loop＂ and ＂step＂ models were adopted by the gifted students when they understood the ＂loop＂ program, while ＂single-switch,＂ ＂multi-switch＂ and ＂odd＂ models were adopted in students' understanding of the ＂switch＂ program; however, ＂variable loop＂ and ＂nested loops＂ models were adopted by the experts when they performed the ＂loop＂ program, while the ＂multi-switch＂ model was adopted in experts' performance of the ＂switch＂ program. 2. The gifted students relied on class experience to select a model, and needed to verify their model via implementing the program. If they could not achieve the goal, they usually used trial and error to modify arguments or rejected their original model rather than revising it. However, the experts had abundant problem solving resources and experiences to form strategies. They usually verified their selected model via thought experiments and solved problems rapidly. We suggest adopting experts' strategy models (e.g., variable loop, nested loops) as templates to enhance students' basic understanding of programming and their experience of using programming models. Moreover, ＂prediction-implementation-sharing＂ could be used to encourage students' thinking experimentations and to compare different models' scopes and limitations.

1. 張志康、邱美虹(2009)。建模能力分析指標的發展與應用─以電化學為例。科學教育學刊，17(4)，319-342。
   連結：
2. World Robot Olympiad. (2011)。WRO 2011國際奧林匹克機器人大賽：校際盃比賽規則（通用參考版）。查詢日期：2011年5月6日，檢自http://www.cjshs.tn.edu.tw/UploadImgF ile/2011-6-17-9-3-23-968.pdf。
3. World Robot Olympiad. (2009)。WRO2009國際奧林匹克機器人大賽：校際盃比賽規則(通用版)。查詢日期：2011年1月16日，檢自http://teacher.hlc.edu.tw/file_upload/20090228- 112750f1-1082.pdf。
4. Campbell, R. L.,Brown, N. R.,Dibello, L. A.(1992).The programmer's burden: Developing expertise in programming.The psychology of expertise: Cognitive research and empirical AI,New York:
5. Caspersen, M. E.,Bennedsen, J.(2007).Instructional design of a programming course: A learning theoretic approach.Proceedings of the third international workshop on computing education research,New York:
6. Dagdilelis, V.,Sartatzemi, M.,Kagani, K.(2005).Teaching (with) robots in secondary schools: Some new and not-so-new pedagogical problems.Proceedings of fifth IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies,Washington, DC:
7. Gacovski, Z.(Ed.)(2011).Mobile robots: Current trends.Rijeka, Croatia:InTech.
8. Gilbert, J. K.(Ed.),Boulter, C. J.(Ed.)(2000).Developing models in science education.Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
9. Gilbert, S. W.(1991).Model building and a definition of science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,28(1),73-79.
10. Götschi, T.,Sanders, I.,Galpin, V.(2003).Mental models of recursion.ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,35(1),346-350.
11. Griffin, T.(2010).The art of Lego Mindstorms NXT-G programing..San Francisco, CA:William Pollock.
12. Halloun, I.(1996).Schematic modeling for meaningful learning of physics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,33(9),1019-1041.
13. Johnson-Laird, P. N.(1983).Mental model.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
14. Justi, R. S.,Gilbert, J. K.(2002).Modeling, teachers' views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modelers.International Journal of Science Education,24(4),369-387.
15. Justi, R. S.,van Driel, J.(2005).A case study of the development of a beginning chemistry teacher's knowledge about models and modeling.Research in Science Education,35(2-3),197-219.
16. Kurland, M. D.,Pea, R. D.(1985).Children's mental models of recursive logo programs.Journal Educational Computing Research,1(2),235-243.
17. Linn, M. C.,Clancy, M. J.(1992).The case for case studies of programming problems.Communications of the ACM,35(3),121-132.
18. Panoutsopoulos, B.(2011).Introducing science technology engineering and mathematics in robotics outreach programs.Technology Interface International Journal,12(1),47-53.
19. Ramalingam, V.,LaBelle, D.,Wiedenbeck, S.(2004).Self-efficacy and mental models in learning to program.ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,36(3),171-175.
20. Robins, A.,Rountree, J.,Rountree, N.(2003).Learning and teaching programming: A review and discussion.Computer Science Education,13(2),137-172.
21. Sanders, I.,Galpin, V.,Götschi, T.(2006).Mental models of recursion revisited.ACM SIGCSE Bulletin,38(3),138-142.
22. Sins, P. H. M.,Savelsbergh, E. R.,van Joolingen, W. R. V.(2005).The difficult process of scientific modeling: An analysis of novices' reasoning during computer-based modelling.International Journal of Science Education,27(14),1695-1721.
23. Valente, J. A.(1995).Logo as a window into the mind.Logo Update,4(1),1-4.
24. Vosniadou, S.(Ed.)(2008).Handbook of research on conceptual change.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. 何致億(2007)。Lego Mindstorms NXT智慧型樂高機器人與Java程式開發。臺北市:精誠資訊。
26. 林振欽、洪振方(2010)。學生建模歷程分析與類型之個案研究：以電腦模擬單擺實驗為。高雄師大學報：自然科學與科技類，28(3)，25-48。
27. 邱美虹(2008)。模型與建模能力之理論架構。科學教育月刊，306，2-9。
28. 邱美虹、劉俊庚(2008)。從科學學習的觀點探討模型與建模能力。科學教育月刊，314，2-20。
29. 洪維恩(2004)。C語言教學手冊。新北市:博碩文化。
30. 劉俊庚、邱美虹(2010)。從建模觀點分析高中化學教科書中原子理論之建模歷程及其意涵。科學教育研究與發展季刊，59，23-54。

1. 曾茂仁,邱美虹(2021)。透過建模教學提升學生在化學電池概念和建模能力上的表現。科學教育學刊，29(2)，137-165。