認知風格、認知策略、遺傳學知識與遺傳學解題之研究

Study on the Cognitive Style, Cognitive Strategies, Knowledge of Genetics and Genetics Problem Solving

10.6173/CJSE.199809_6(3).0003

楊坤原(Kun-Yuan Yang)；鄭湧涇(Yeong-Jing Cheng)

高級中學 ； 認知風格 ； 認知策略 ； 遺傳學知識 ； 遺傳學解題 ； Senior High Students ； Cognitive Style ； Cognitive Strategies ； Knowledge of Genetics ； Genetics Problem Solving

科學教育學刊

6卷3期（1998 / 09 / 01）

271 - 284

繁體中文;英文

本研究依台北地區395名高一學生在「認知策略調查表」、「藏圖測驗」與「遺傳學學習成就測驗」的評測結果，從中選出10位具不同認知風格、認知策略與遺傳學成就的學生，採放聲思考並配合晤談的方式進行「遺傳學解題測驗」，以探討上述三變項與遺傳學解題之間的關係。研究結果顯示，解題者的遺傳學解題成就和所使用的解題策略會因認知風格、認知策略和遺傳學成就（遺傳學知識）的不同而異。由於解題者的遺傳學解題成就和所使用的解題策略均與其所具備之遺傳學知識有直接的關係，故在三個變項中，以遺傳學知識對遺傳學解題表現與解題策略的影響最為明顯。而「認知風格」及「認知策略」則因尚須透過遺傳學知識的作用，是以其等對遺傳學解題成就和解題策略的影響程度，均不如「遺傳學知識」所產生者。

Utilizing the results of three tests--Inventory of Cognitive Strategies, Hidden Figure Test, and Test of Learning Achievement of Genetics, ten students with different cognitive style, cognitive strategies, and achievement in Genetics were selected from 395 Grade 10 students in the Taipei area. All ten students voluntarily took part in the Problem Solving Test of Genetics using a thinking-aloud and interview protocol. The protocol analysis of the ten students documented their achievement and problem solving strategies in Genetics and explored the relationships among congnitive style, cognitive strategies, knowledge of Genetics, and problem solving in Genetics. The results indicated that the problem-solvers with different cognitive style, cognitive strategies, and achievement in Genetics demonstrated different problem solving achievement and strategies. Achievement in genetics (prior knowledge) was the strongest predictor of problem-solving performance and strategy use.

1. 楊坤原,鄭湧涇(1997)。高一學生遺傳學解題表現與解題策略之研究。科學教育學刊，5(4)，529-555。
   連結：
2. Biggs, J. B.(1978).Individual and group differences in study.British Journal of Educational Psychology,48,266-279.
3. Chi, M.T.H.,Ceci, S. J.(1987).Content knowledge: Its role, representa tion, and restructuring in memory development.Advances in Child Devel opment and Behavior,20,91-141.
4. Chi, M.T.H.,Feltovich, P. L.,Glaser, R.(1981).Categorization and representation of physics problems by expert and novices.Cognitive Science,5,121-152.
5. Davis, J. K.,Cochran, K. F.(1982).,未出版
6. Driver, R.,Bell, B.(1986).Students' thinking and the learning of science: A constructivist view.School Science and Mathematics,86(3),443-456.
7. Finley, F. N.,Stewart, J. H.,Yarroch, W. L.(1982).Teachers' perceptions of important and difficult. science content.Science Education,66,531-538.
8. Gabel, D. L.(Ed.)(1994).Handbook of research on science teaching and learning.New York:Macmillan Publishing Company.
9. Gagne, E. D.,Yekovich, C. W.,Yekovich, F. R.(1993).The cognitive psychology of school learning.Harper Collins College Publishers.
10. Gagne, R. M.(1985).The conditions of learning.New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
11. Gagne, R. M.,Briggs, L. J.,Wager, W. W.(1988).Principles of instructional design.Orlando:Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc..
12. Guildford, J. P.(1980).Cognitive styles: What are they ?.Educational and sychological Measurement,40,715-735.
13. Hackling, M. W.(1994).Application of genetics knowledge to the solution of pedigree problems.25th Annual Conference of the Australian Science Education Conference,Holsait Tasmonia:
14. Hayes, J. R.(1989).The complete problem solver.Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Horak, V. M.(1990).,未出版
16. Husen, T.(Ed.),Postlethwaite, T. N.(Ed.)(1985).The interna tional encyclopedia of education.New York:Pergamon Press.
17. Kindfield, A. C. H.(1994).Under standing a basic biological process: Expert and novice model of meiosis.Science Education,78(3),255-283.
18. Mertens, T. R.,Hendrix, J. R.(1990).The popular press, scientific in human genetics, and bioethliteracyical decision-making.School Science and Mathematics,90(4),317-322.
19. Messick, S.(1984).The nature of cognitive styles: Problems and promise in educational practices.Educational Psychologist,19(2),59-74.
20. Messick, S.(1994).The matter of style: Manifestation of personality in cognition, learning, and teaching.Educational Psychologist,29(3),121-136.
21. Miller, A.(1991).Personality types, learning styles and educational goals.Educational Psychology,11(3-4),217-238.
22. Niaz, M.(1989).The role of cognitive style and its influence on proportional reasoning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,26(3),221-235.
23. Pearsall, M. K.(Ed.)(1992).Scope, sequence, and coordination of secondary school science.Washington, D. C.:The National Science Teachers Association.
24. Prawat, R. S.(1989).Promoting access to knowledge, strategy, and disposition in students: A research synthesis.Review of Educational Research,59(1),1-41.
25. Rohwer, W. D.,Thomas, J. W.(1989).Domain-specific knowledge, meta-cognition, and the promise of instructional reform.Cognitive strategy research: From basic research to educational applications,New York:
26. Ronning, R. R.,Mccurdy, D.,Ballinger, R.(1984).Individual differences: A third component in problemsolving instruction.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,21(1),71-82.
27. Satterly, D. J.(1980).Cognitive styles, spatial ability, and school achievement.Journal of Educational Psychology,68(1),36-42.
28. Schmeck, R.(Ed.)(1988).Learning strategies and learning styles.New York:Plenum Press.
29. Schneider, W.(Ed.),Weinert, F. E.(Ed.)(1990).Interactions among aptitudes, strategies, and knowledge in cognitive performance.New York:Springer-Verlag.
30. Schragen, J. M.(1993).How experts solve a novel problem in experimental design.Cognitive Science,17,285-309.
31. Shavelson, R. J.,Carey, N. B.,Webb, N. M.(1990).Indicators of science achievement: Options for a powerful policy instrument.Phi Delta Kappan,71(9),692-697.
32. Smith, M.(1983).The Florida State University.
33. Smith, M. U.(1988).Successful and unsuccessful problem solving in classical genetic pedigrees.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,25(6),411-433.
34. Smith, M. U.(1991).Toward a unified theory of problem solving.Hillsdale, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Smith, M. U.,Good, R.(1984).Problem solving and classical genetics: Successful versus unsuccessful perfor mance.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,21(9),895-912.
36. Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.)(1985).Human abilities. An information - processing approach.New York:W. H. Freeman and Company.
37. Stewart, J.,Kirk, J. V.(1990).Understanding and problem-solving in classical genetics.International Journal of Science Education,12(5),575-588.
38. Tiedemann, J.(1989).Measures of cognitive styles: A critical review.Educational Psychologist,24(3),261-275.
39. Uno, G. E.,Bybee, R. W.(1994).Understanding the dimensions of biology literacy.BioScience,44(8),553-557.
40. Weinstein, C. E.,Meyer, D. K.(1991).Implications of cognitive psychology for testing: Contributions from work in learning strategies.Testing and cognition,New Jersey:
41. Witkin, H. A.,Moore, C. A.,Goodenough, D. R.,Cox, P. W.(1977).Field - dependent and field - independent cognitive styles and their educational implications.Review of Educational Research,47(1),1-46.
42. Wittrock, M. C.(Ed.)(1986).Handbook of research on teaching.New York:Macmillan Publishing Company.
43. 行政院國家科學委員會生物教育學門資源整合規劃小組(1993).學門資源整合規劃資料─生物教育.台北市:行政院國家科學委員會.
44. 吳靜吉(1974).藏圖測驗.臺北市:國立政治大學教育系.
45. 邱上真(1991)。學習策略教學的理論與實際。特殊教育與復健學報，1，1-50。
46. 黃台珠(1990)。中學生遺傳相關概念錯誤類型的探討。科學教育月刊，133，34-53。
47. 楊坤原,鄭湧涇(1996)。高一學生認知風格、認知策略與遺傳學學習成就的關係。科學教育學刊，4(2)，135-159。