運用不同電子元件教學探討電流方向心智模型之改變－以四年級學生補救教學為例

Using Electronic Devices with Different Characteristics to Change the Mental Model of Electric Current Direction-Taking Fourth Graders' Remedial Instruction as an Example

10.6384/CIQ.201504_18(2).0007

楊志強(Chih-Chiang Yang)；洪振方(Jeng-Fung Hung)；林日宗(Jih-Tsung Lin)

補救教學 ； 電流方向 ； 心智模型 ； remedial instruction ； electric current direction ； mental model

課程與教學

18卷2期（2015 / 04 / 01）

169 - 200

繁體中文

本研究主要運用不同特性之電子元件，探討電流方向心智模型建立之補救教學成效。藉由電流模型的評測工具以及晤談診斷，確定91位四年級國小學生的心智模型類別後，選出18位補救教學對象，隨機分成三組，提供學生不同性質的電子元件，包括傳統燈泡、馬達、LED燈泡，透過實際操作的過程以及類比說明的方式，引導學生建立電流方向心智模型。以卡方檢定分析三組學生的學習成效差異，結果顯示LED燈泡組以及馬達組的效果優於傳統燈泡組，研究者推論是由於LED及馬達的電子元件特性，可以顯現出電流的方向性，進而提升學生對於電流方向性的理解。最後，本研究提出對電流心智模型教學的反思及建議。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the progress and effects of remedial instruction of mental model built by electric current direction through the use of different electronic devices. 91 4th graders participated in a diagnostic instrument and later were asked about the electric current direction. Then 18 of them were assigned randomly into three groups for a remedial instruction. The three groups were offered with electronic devices with different characteristics. For the mental model built by electric current direction, students were encouraged to operate the objects with analogy illustrated. The results showed that the performances of the LED group and the motor group were better than the traditional group. This could be that the characteristics of the LED and motor show better for the electric current direction which promotes a clear understanding for students about the electric current direction. A further review and some suggestions are also addressed.

1. 林靜雯、邱美虹(2005)。整合類比與多重表徵研究取向探究多重類比設計對兒童電學概念學習之影響。科學教育學刊，13(3)，317-345。
   連結：
2. 邱美虹、林靜雯(2002)。以多重類比探究兒童電流心智模式之改變。科學教育學刊，10(2)，109-134。
   連結：
3. 洪振方、莊敏雄、宋國城(2011)。建模教學對國小學生的模型認知及地質概念理解之影響。科學教育學刊，19(4)，309-333。
   連結：
4. 徐偉民、林潔慧(2010)。利用教學模組進行國小四年級四則運算兩步驟文字題補救教學之行動研究。屏東教育大學學報─教育類，34，211-242。
   連結：
5. Adúriz-Bravo, A.,Bonan, L.,Galli, L. G.,Chion, A. R.,Meinardi, E.(2005).Scientific argumentation in pre-service biology teacher education.Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education,1(1),76-83.
6. Arnold, M.,Millar, R.(1987).Being constructive: An alternative approach to the teaching of introductory ideas in electricity.International Journal of Science Education,9,553-563.
7. Baroody, A. J.(1987).Children's mathematical thinking: A developmental framework for preschool, primary, and special education teachers.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
8. Behrendt, H.(Ed.)(2001).Research in science education - Past, present, and future.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer.
9. Clement, J.(2000).Model based learning as a key research area for science education.International Journal of Science Education,22(9),1041-1053.
10. Clement, J. J.,Steinberg, M. S.(2002).Step-wise evolution of mental models of electric circuits: A "learning-aloud" case study.Journal of the Learning Sciences,11(4),389-452.
11. Dagher, Z.(1995).Analysis of analogies used by science teachers.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,32(3),259-270.
12. Duit, R.(1991).The role of analogies and metaphors in learning science.Science Education,75(6),649-672.
13. Empson, S. B.(2003).Low-performing students and teaching fractions for understanding: An interactional analysis.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,34(4),305-343.
14. Fensham, P.(Ed.)(1988).Development and dilemmas in science education.London:Falmer.
15. Gentner, D.(Ed.),Stevens, A. L.(Ed.)(1983).Mental models.New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum.
16. Gilbert, J. K.(Ed.),Boulter, C. J.(Ed.)(2000).Developing models in science education.Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
17. Glynn, S.(Ed.),Yeanny, R.(Ed.),Britton, B.(Ed.)(1991).The psychology of learning science.New Jersey:Erlbaum.
18. Guerra-Ramos, M. T.(2011).Analogies as tools for meaning making in elementary science education: How do they work in classroom settings?.Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education,7(1),29-39.
19. Harrison, A. G.,Treagust, D. F.(2000).A typology of school science models.International Journal of Science Education,22(9),1011-1026.
20. James, M.,Scharmann, L.(2007).Using analogies to improve the teaching performance of preservice teachers.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44(4),565-585.
21. Johnson-Laird, P. N.(1983).Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
22. Justi, R. S.,Gilbert, J. K.(2002).Modeling teachers' views on the nature of modelling and implications for the education of modellers.International Journal of Science Education,24(4),369-387.
23. Lester, F.(Ed.)(2007).Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning.Greenwich, CT:Information Age Publishing.
24. Magnusson, S. J.,Boyle, R. A.,Templin, M.(1997).Dynamic science assessment: A new approach for investigating conceptual change.The Journal of the Learning Science,6(1),91-142.
25. McLaughlin, T. F.,Vacha, E. F.(1992).The at-risk student: A proposal for action.Journal of Instructional Psychology,19,66-68.
26. Niedderer, H.,Goldberg, F.(1996).Learning processes in electric circuits.NARST Annual Meeting,St. Louis, Missouri:
27. Osborne, R.,Freyberg, P.(1985).Learning in science: The implications of children's science.Auckland:Heinemann.
28. Ross, R.,Kurtz, R.(1993).Making manipulatives work: A strategy for success.Arithmetic Teacher,40(5),254-257.
29. Schwarz, C. V.,Reiser, B. J.,Davis, E. A.,Kenyon, L. O.,Acher, A.,Fortus, D.,Hug, B.,Krajcik, J.(2009).Developing a learning progression of scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners.The Journal of Research in Science Teaching,46(6),632-654.
30. Schwedes, H.,Dudeck, W.-G.(1996).Teaching electricity by help of a water analogy: How to cope with the need for conceptual change.Research in science education in Europe: Current issues and themes,London:
31. Slavin, R. E.(Ed.),Karweit, N. L.(Ed.)(1989).Effective programs for students at-risks.Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
32. Stein, M. K.,Smith, M. S.,Henningsen, M. A.,Silver, E. A.(2000).Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development.New York, NY:Teachers College Press.
33. White, B. Y.,Frederiksen, J. R.(1986).Intelligent tutoring systems based upon qualitative model evolutions.Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania:
34. 全中平(1996)。以教材發展形成性評量的觀點探討國民小學二年級學生學習自然科有關簡單電路之通路及電流概念。國教學報，8(11)，165-175。
35. 李燕文(2011)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。臺北，臺北市立教育大學科學教育碩士學位學程。
36. 周秋香(2005)。自然科學與生活科技概論。臺北:心理。
37. 林清山(1992)。心理與教育統計學。臺北:東華。
38. 邱上真(1992)。學習障礙兒童的教育評量－認知取向。特殊教育季刊，43，1-6。
39. 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。
40. 張志康、林靜雯、邱美虹(2009)。跨年級中學生串並聯電路心智模式的研究。科學教育月刊，317，2-17。
41. 張新仁(2001)。實施補救教學之課程與教學設計。國立高雄師範大學教育學系教育學刊，17，85-106。
42. 教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北:教育部。
43. 陳正昌(2004)。行為及社會科學統計學。臺北:巨流圖書公司。
44. 陳啟明、陳瓊森(1992)。發展紙筆測驗以探究高一學生對直流電路的迷思概念。科學教育（彰師大），3，21-73。
45. 陳龍川(1992)。花蓮師院學生簡單直流電路迷思概念類型及其分佈調查。花師數理教育學報，1，65-80。
46. 陳瓊森(1993)。高一學生直流電路概念結構之研究。彰化師範大學學報，4，511-542。
47. 曾耀霆(1999)。國科會專題研究成果報告國科會專題研究成果報告,國科會。
48. 黃朝琴(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。嘉義，國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所。
49. 楊文金(1993)。多重現實與電學概念理解研究。科學教育學刊，1(2)，135-160。
50. 楊文金(1995)。常識興電學概念的理解。師大學報，40，549-582。
51. 楊志強、洪振方(2011)。運用概念改變理論於兒童方位概念建模教學。中華民國第28 屆科學教育學術研討會，高雄:
52. 楊德清、洪素敏(2008)。分數補救教學之歷程的研究。教育研究與發展期刊，4(2)，85-118。