跨年級中學生認知地圖之分析研究：以粒子行為試題為例

A Secondary Analysis Study of Student Conceptions on the Behavior of Gas Particles by Utilizing the Cognitive Map Approach

邱美虹(Mei-Hung Chiu)；鐘建坪(Jing-Ping Jong)；張志康(Chih-Kang Chang)；白勝安(Sheng-An Bai)

次級資料分析 ； 概念調查 ； 認知地圖 ； 雙層診斷測驗 ； secondary analysis ； concept survey ； cognitive maps ； two-tier diagnostic instrument

教育科學研究期刊

56卷2期（2011 / 06 / 01）

207 - 240

繁體中文

本研究針對全國概念調查的結果進行次級資料分析（secondary data analysis），目的在探索中學生的認知地圖及其形成的相關限制因素。研究的分析架構是以Hempel（1958）描述現象觀察的理論解釋與Wellman（1994）和其他學者（Chaib-draa & Desharnais, 1998; Pena, Sossa, & Gutierrez, 2008）詮釋因果推論的認知地圖為基礎。首先，研究者依據全國概念調查雙層診斷測驗試題內容（Chiu, 2007），找出特定概念間的相互關係；其次，透過雙層試題的語意連結，形成不同試題選項之認知地圖的質性描述；最後，分析跨年級中學生認知地圖的分布情形，藉以瞭解學生在概念發展上的差異。本研究結果指出：一、跨年級中學生正確連結理論系統與經驗觀察的人數比例，雖然隨年級增加而提高，但是比例仍然偏低。二、在相似情境試題中，跨年級中學生受到壓力、重量以及隨機性等不同限制因素的影響，會形成不同類型的認知地圖。本研究所確認的概念限制因素可解釋認知地圖在概念圖像化的因果推論關係，而以認知地圖作為次級資料分析的研究方法所產生的限制與對研究的意涵將在文末一併討論。

The purpose of this secondary data analysis study is to explore the cognitive maps (CMs) held by the students and their constraints of conceptions while forming their qualitative inferences regarding the behaviors of gas particles. The data used in this study was derived from the National Science Concept Learning Study via the use of two-tier diagnostic instruments proposed by Treagust (1988, 1995). Unlike other studies only comparing student performance, the analytical method of this study adapted a model of scientific explanations proposed by Hempel (1958), and cognitive maps by Wellman (1994) and others (Chaib-draa & Desharnais, 1998; Pena, Sossa, & Gutierrez, 2008). The results are as follows: (1) although the performances of 11th graders were superior to those of 8th and 9th graders, the percentages of correct answers were still relatively low; (2) in similar contexts, due to the constraints (gravity, pressure, and randomness of motions) of factors, the students held various CMs of gas particles and causal inferences. The identified CMs of gas particles provide information regarding the constraints that students held in their mental representations. This study presents a discussion of the educational implications for designing two-tier diagnostic instruments, and the limitations of CMs.

1. 李賢哲、樊琳、張蘭友(2005)。國小學童「電池」概念之診斷－以兩段式選題為例。科學教育學刊，13(3)，263-288。
   連結：
2. 林靜雯、邱美虹(2009)。探究學生串聯電路認知特徵演化歷程之跨年級研究。教育科學研究期刊，54(4)，139-170。
   連結：
3. 張容君、張惠博(2007)。國中學生「燃燒」概念診斷之研究。科學教育學刊，15(6)，671-701。
   連結：
4. 邱美虹、鐘建坪、張志康、白勝安（2011）。跨年級中學生認知地圖一致性分析。手稿製作中。【Chiu, M. H., Jong, J. P., Chang, C. K., & Bai, S. A. (2011). A comparison of the consistency of cross grade students' cognitive maps. Manuscript in preparation.】。
5. Adbo, K.,Taber, K. S.(2009).Learners' mental models of the particle nature of matter: A study of 16-year-old Swedish science students.International Journal of Science Education,31(6),757-786.
6. Andersson, B.(1990).Pupils' conceptions of matter and its transformations (age 12-16).Studies in Science Education,18(1),53-85.
7. Buzan, T.,Buzan, B.(1993).The mind map book: How to use radiant thinking to maximize your brain's untapped potential.New York:Plume.
8. Carey, S.(1985).Conceptual change in childhood.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
9. Chaib-draa, B.(2002).Causal maps: Theory, implementation, and practical applications in multiagent environments.IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering,14(6),1201-1217.
10. Chaib-draa, B.,Desharnais, J.(1998).A relational model of cognitive maps.International Journal Human-Computer Studies,49(2),181-200.
11. Chiu, M.-H.(2007).A national survey of students' conceptions of chemistry in Taiwan.International Journal of Science Education,29(4),421-452.
12. diSessa, A. A.(1993).Towards an epistemology of physics.Cognition and Instruction,10(2&3),105-225.
13. diSessa, A. A.,Sherin, B. L.(1998).What changes in conceptual change?.International Journal of Science Education,20(10),1155-1192.
14. Driver, R.(ed.),Guesne, E.(ed.),Tiberghien, A.(ed.)(1985).Children' s ideas in science.Milton Keynes, UK:Open University Press.
15. Driver, R.,Easley, J.(1978).Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students.Studies in Science Education,5,61-84.
16. Duit, R.(2009).Bibliography STCSE: Students' and teachers' conceptions and science education.Kiel, Germany:IPN-Leibniz Institute for Science Education.
17. Eden, C. J.,Sims, D.(1979).Thinking in organizations.London:Macmillan.
18. Fraser, B. J.(ed.),Walberg, H. J.(ed.)(1995).Improving science education.Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press.
19. Gentner, D.(ed.),Stevens, A. L.(ed.)(1983).Mental meanings.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Gilbert, J. K.(ed.),Jong, O. D.(ed.),Justi, R.(ed.),Treagust, D. F.(ed.),Driel, J. H. V.(ed.)(2002).Chemical education: Towards research-based practice.Dordrecht, the Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
21. Helm, H.(1980).Misconception in physics among South Africa students.Physics Education,15(2),92-105.
22. Hempel, C. G.(1958).The theoretician's dilemma: A study in logic theory construction.Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science,2,37-95.
23. Ioannides, C.,Vosniadou, C.(2002).The changing meanings of force.Cognitive Science Quarterly,2(1),5-61.
24. Johnson, P.(1998).Progression in children's understanding of a basic particle theory: A longitudinal study.International Journal of Science Education,20(4),393-412.
25. Kautz, C. H.,Heron, P. R. L.,Loverude, M. E.,McDermott, L. C.(2005).Student understanding of the ideal gas law, Part I: A macroscopic perspective.Am. J. Phys.,73(11),1055-1063.
26. Klein, J. L.,Cooper, D. F.(1982).Cognitive maps of decision markers in a complex game.Journal of the Operational Research Society,33(1),63-71.
27. Leboutet-Barrell, L.(1976).Concepts of mechanics among young people.Physics Education,11(7),462-466.
28. Margel, H.,Eylon, B. S.,Scherz, Z.(2008).A longitudinal study of junior high school students' conceptions of the structure of materials.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,45(1),132-152.
29. Millar, R.(1990).Making sense: What use are particle ideas to children?.Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles: A central problem in secondary science education,Utrecht, the Netherlands:
30. Nobes, G.,Martin, A. E.,Panagiotaki, G.(2005).The development of scientific knowledge of the earth.British Journal of Developmental Psychology,23(1),47-64.
31. Novak, J. D.,Gowin, D. B.(1984).Learning how to learn.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
32. Novick, S.,Nassbaum, J.(1978).Junior high school pupils' understanding of the particulate nature of matter: An interview study.Science Education,62(3),273-281.
33. Peña, A.,Sossa, H.,Gutiérrez, A.(2008).Causal knowledge and reasoning by cognitive maps: Pursuing a holistic approach.Expert Systems with Applications,35(1&2),2-18.
34. Pozo, J. I.,Gómez-Crespo, M.(2005).The embodied nature of implicit theories: The consistency of ideas about the nature of matter.Cognition and Instruction,23(3),351-387.
35. Sloman, S. A.(1996).The empirical case for two systems of reasoning.Psychological Bulletin,119(1),3-22.
36. Stavy, R.(1988).Children' s conception of gas.International Journal of Science Education,10(5),553-560.
37. Suppe, F.(1977).The search for philosophic understanding of scientific theories.The structure of scientific theories second edition,Urbana, IL:
38. Talanquer, V.(2009).On cognitive constraints and learning progressions: The case of "structure of matter".International Journal of Science Education,31(15),2123-2136.
39. Tam, H.-P.,Li, L.-A.(2007).Sampling and data collection procedures for the national science concept learning study.International Journal of Science Education,29(4),405-420.
40. Treagust, D. F.(1995).Diagnostic assessment of students' science knowledge.Learning science in the schools: Research reforming practice,Mahwah, NJ:
41. Treagust, D. F.(1988).Development and use of diagnostic test to evaluate students' misconceptions in science.International Journal of Science Education,10(2),159-169.
42. Treagust, D. F.(ed.),Chiu, M.-H.(ed.),Guo, C.-J.(ed.)(2007).Taiwan's national science concept learning study: A large scale assessment project using two-tier diagnostic tests.International Journal of Science Education,29(4)
43. Treagust, D. F.,Chandrasegaran, A. L.(2007).The Taiwan national science concept learning study in an international perspective.International Journal of Science Education,29(4),391-403.
44. Treagust, D. F.,Chandrasegaran, A. L.,Crowley, J.,Yung, B. H. W.,Cheong, I. P. A.,Othman, J.(2010).Evaluating students' understanding of kinetic pariticle theory concepts relating to the states of matter, changes of state and diffusion: A cross-national study.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,8(1),141-164.
45. Trundle, K. C.,Atwood, R. K.,Christopher, J. E.(2007).A longitudinal study of conceptual change: Preserviece elementary teachers' conceptions of moon phases.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44(2),303-326.
46. Vosniadou, S.(1994).Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change.Learning & Instruction,4(1),45-69.
47. Vosniadou, S.,Brewer, W. F.(1992).Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood.Cognitive Psychology,24(4),535-585.
48. Vosniadou, S.,Ioannides, C.(1998).From conceptual development to science education: A psychological point of view.International Journal of Science Education,20(10),1213-1230.
49. Wellman, M.(1994).Inference in cognitive maps.Matematics and Computers in Simulation,36(2),137-148.
50. 林正弘(1988)。伽利略．波柏．科學說明。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:東大圖書=Dongda。
51. 張芳全(2009)。家長教育程度與科學成就之關係：文化資本、補習時間與學習興趣為中介的分析。教育研究與發展期刊，5(4)，39-76。
52. 陳正昌(2006)。教育基礎研究的兩個量化基礎－資料庫及統計。「教育專業發展：教育研究理論與實務之整合」學術研討會，高雄市=Kaohsiung, Taiwan:
53. 曾建銘、陳清溪(2007)。2007 年臺灣學生學習成就評量結果之分析。教育研究與發展期刊，5(4)，1-38。

1. 歐陽誾、陳明鈺(2017)。資訊科技融入5E 探究教學對七年級學生生物科學習成就與學習態度之影響─以「血液循環系統」為例。教育學誌，38，125-176。
2. 鐘建坪(2013)。初探凱利方格技術診斷力概念之心智模型。中等教育，64(1)，103-132。