神马文学网国家图书馆--全国博硕士论文资讯网:查询结果
来源：百度文库 编辑：神马文学网 时间：2024/04/29 03:19:44
本研究的目的在探讨结合电脑模拟的概念改变教学策略对儿童密度相关概念学习成就之影响，以及提升儿童密度相关概念的概念状态之可行性。 本研究以台北縣三重市厚德國小六年級共十三班的學生為研究對象，隨機抽取四班為研究樣本進行實驗教學，其中兩班接受十節課的概念增強式電腦模擬教學（實驗組），另兩班接受十節課的一般傳統教學（控制組）。本研究以台北县三重市厚德国小六年级共十三班的学生为研究对象，随机抽取四班为研究样本进行实验教学，其中两班接受十节课的概念增强式电脑模拟教学（实验组），另两班接受十节课的一般传统教学（控制组）。 為了比較實驗處理對不同自然科學習成就水準學生的影響，依學生五年級上、下學期的自然科學期成績平均，化為T-分數後，將實驗組與控制組各區分為高、中、低三個自然科學習成就水準。为了比较实验处理对不同自然科学习成就水准学生的影响，依学生五年级上、下学期的自然科学期成绩平均，化为T-分数后，将实验组与控制组各区分为高、中、低三个自然科学习成就水准。 兩組學生在實驗教學後，需接受「密度相關概念成就測驗」。两组学生在实验教学后，需接受「密度相关概念成就测验」。 另外，從實驗組與控制組的不同自然科學習成就水準學生中各抽取9名學生，共54名學生接受「密度相關概念狀態訪談問卷」的個別晤談。另外，从实验组与控制组的不同自然科学习成就水准学生中各抽取9名学生，共54名学生接受「密度相关概念状态访谈问卷」的个别晤谈。 資料分析分為兩個部分，第一部分是兩組學生在「密度相關概念成就測驗」的得分，以2（不同教學活動設計方式）×3（自然科學習成就水準）之二因子共變數（五年級上、下學期的自然科學期成績平均）分析進行統計考驗。资料分析分为两个部分，第一部分是两组学生在「密度相关概念成就测验」的得分，以2（不同教学活动设计方式）×3（自然科学习成就水准）之二因子共变数（五年级上、下学期的自然科学期成绩平均）分析进行统计考验。 第二部分是將「密度相關概念狀態訪談問卷」個別晤談的資料，以描述統計及卡方檢定的方式加以解釋。第二部分是将「密度相关概念状态访谈问卷」个别晤谈的资料，以描述统计及卡方检定的方式加以解释。 歸納資料分析結果，本研究發現：1、 接受不同教學活動設計的學生，在「密度相關概念成就測驗」的得分上，有顯著的差異。归纳资料分析结果，本研究发现：1、接受不同教学活动设计的学生，在「密度相关概念成就测验」的得分上，有显著的差异。 接受概念增強式電腦模擬教學的學生，在「密度相關概念成就測驗」的得分，顯著優於接受一般傳統教學的學生。接受概念增强式电脑模拟教学的学生，在「密度相关概念成就测验」的得分，显著优于接受一般传统教学的学生。 2、 學生在「密度相關概念成就測驗」分數的表現上，其教學活動設計方式與自然科學習成就水準之間沒有顯著的交互作用。 2、学生在「密度相关概念成就测验」分数的表现上，其教学活动设计方式与自然科学习成就水准之间没有显著的交互作用。 概念增強式電腦模擬教學活動設計，同樣適用於不同自然科學習成就水準的學生，學習密度相關概念成。概念增强式电脑模拟教学活动设计，同样适用于不同自然科学习成就水准的学生，学习密度相关概念成。 3、 由「密度相關概念狀態問卷」的訪談結果發現，接受概念增強式電腦模擬教學的學生，其密度相關概念的概念狀態均較接受一般傳統教學的學生提昇，尤其是對中、高自然科學習成就水準的學生，其概念狀態更有明顯的提昇。 3、由「密度相关概念状态问卷」的访谈结果发现，接受概念增强式电脑模拟教学的学生，其密度相关概念的概念状态均较接受一般传统教学的学生提升，尤其是对中、高自然科学习成就水准的学生，其概念状态更有明显的提升。 研究者並依據上述發現，對概念增強式電腦模擬教學活動設計與未來研究方向提出若干建議。研究者并依据上述发现，对概念增强式电脑模拟教学活动设计与未来研究方向提出若干建议。 [ 英文摘要 ] [ 英文摘要 ]
This study intends to investigate the impacts of using computer simulation strategies for fostering students conceptual change in the learning of density related concepts.Subjects were the sixth graders of Hou-De Elementary School of Sanchung in Taipei County of Taiwan. Four classes of sixth graders were randomly selected from thirteen classes. Two out of the four classes were randomly assigned as the experimental group. The remaining two classes were then assigned as the control group. The experimental group was treated with enhanced teaching strategies of computer simulation; while the control group was taught with traditional teaching strategies. The duration of treatment was ten class periods. Students were divided into three levels, namely high, medium, and low, in order to measure the impacts of using computer simulation upon all levels of students. The criteria for grouping the students was the T-score transformed from the student GPA (grade point of achievement) score in science for fifth grade. After the treatment, both experimental and control groups of students were administered an achievement test called “Test of Density Related Concepts” which is developed by researcher. In addition to the test, nine students were selected from each level of both groups for interview. Therefore, there were totally 54 students interviewed by researcher. The interview was proceeded in accordance with a questionnaire called “Questionnaire for Interview about Density Related Concepts”.Collected data from the test and the interview was analyzed differently. Student scores in “Test of Density Related Concepts” were analyzed by 2 (two teaching strategies) times 3 (three levels of students) two-way analysis of covariance (prior GPA score in science as covariate). The interview data was interpreted by descriptive statistical techniques and chi-square examination.According to the statistical procedure described above, conclusions of this study are reached and stated as below:The average score in “Test of Density Related Concepts” for students in the experimental group is significant higher than that in the control group.The interaction between the treatment of computer simulation and the student prior achievement in science as three levels was not identified. Such a result indicates that the enhanced teaching strategies using computer simulation can help all levels of students from low to high to foster their conceptual change and to improve their learning about density related concepts.From the results of interview, the conceptual status about density related concepts of the students in the experimental group, especially for those in the high and medium levels, is enhanced and strengthened significantly than that in the control group.Recommendations for using computer simulation to improve teaching and learning science are further discussed. Suggestions for further research are also provided. This study intends to investigate the impacts of using computer simulation strategies for fostering students conceptual change in the learning of density related concepts.Subjects were the sixth graders of Hou-De Elementary School of Sanchung in Taipei County of Taiwan. Four classes of sixth graders were randomly selected from thirteen classes. Two out of the four classes were randomly assigned as the experimental group. The remaining two classes were then assigned as the control group. The experimental group was treated with enhanced teaching strategies of computer simulation; while the control group was taught with traditional teaching strategies. The duration of treatment was ten class periods. Students were divided into three levels, namely high, medium, and low, in order to measure the impacts of using computer simulation upon all levels of students. The criteria for grouping the students was the T-score transformed from the student GPA (grade point of achievement) score in science for fifth grade. After the treatment, both experimental and control groups of students were administered an achievement test called “Test of Density Related Concepts” which is developed by researcher. In addition to the test, nine students were selected from each level of both groups for interview. Therefore, there were totally 54 students interviewed by researcher. The interview was proceeded in accordance with a questionnaire called “Questionnaire for Interview about Density Related Concepts”.Collected data from the test and the interview was analyzed differently. Student scores in “Test of Density Related Concepts” were analyzed by 2 (two teaching strategies) times 3 (three levels of students) two-way analysis of covariance (prior GPA score in science as covariate). The interview data was interpreted by descriptive statistical techniques and chi-square examination.According to the statistical procedure described above, conclusions of this study are reached and stated as below:The average score in “Test of Density Related Concepts” for students in the experimental group is significant higher than that in the control group.The interaction between the treatment of computer simulation and the student prior achievement in science as three levels was not identified. Such a result indicates that the enhanced teaching strategies using computer simulation can help all levels of students from low to high to foster their conceptual change and to improve their learning about density related concepts.From the results of interview, the conceptual status about density related concepts of the students in the experimental group , especially for those in the high and medium levels, is enhanced and strengthened significantly than that in the control group.Recommendations for using computer simulation to improve teaching and learning science are further discussed. Suggestions for further research are also provided.
[ 論文目次 ] [ 论文目次 ]
第一章緒論1第一節研究動機1第二節研究目的與問題4第三節名詞解釋5第四節研究範圍與限制7第二章文獻探討9第一節概念改變9第二節概念改變模型18第三節密度相關概念之迷思概念與教學研究23第四節概念增強式電腦模擬29第三章研究方法43第一節研究對象43第二節研究假設44第三節研究設計45第四節研究工具47第五節研究程序53第六節資料分析57第四章研究結果與討論61第一節不同教學活動設計方式、不同自然科學習成就水準學生在「密度相關概念之學習成就」之結果與討論61第二節「密度相關概念狀態訪談問卷」之結果與討論66第五章結論與建議87第一節結論88第二節建議89參考文獻93一、中文部分93二、英文部分95附錄103附錄一實驗組採用的概念增強式電腦模擬教學活動設計103附錄二控制組採用的一般傳統教學活動設計112附錄三密度相關概念成就測驗122附錄四密度相關概念狀態訪談問卷128附錄五個別晤談逐字稿130第一章绪论1第一节研究动机1第二节研究目的与问题4第三节名词解释5第四节研究范围与限制7第二章文献探讨9第一节概念改变9第二节概念改变模型18第三节密度相关概念之迷思概念与教学研究23第四节概念增强式电脑模拟29第三章研究方法43第一节研究对象43第二节研究假设44第三节研究设计45第四节研究工具47第五节研究程序53第六节资料分析57第四章研究结果与讨论61第一节不同教学活动设计方式、不同自然科学习成就水准学生在「密度相关概念之学习成就」之结果与讨论61第二节「密度相关概念状态访谈问卷」之结果与讨论66第五章结论与建议87第一节结论88第二节建议89参考文献93一、中文部分93二、英文部分95附录103附录一实验组采用的概念增强式电脑模拟教学活动设计103附录二控制组采用的一般传统教学活动设计112附录三密度相关概念成就测验122附录四密度相关概念状态访谈问卷128附录五个别晤谈逐字稿130
[ 參考文獻 ] [ 参考文献 ]
中文參考資料王美芬（民80）：自然科錯誤概念之研究。中文参考资料王美芬（民80）：自然科错误概念之研究。 台北市立師院學報，22期，367-369。台北市立师院学报，22期，367-369。 王美芬、熊召弟（民84）：國民小學自然科教材教法。王美芬、熊召弟（民84）：国民小学自然科教材教法。 台北市：心理出版社有限公司。台北市：心理出版社有限公司。 王龍錫（民80）：我國學生自然科概念發展與診斷教學之研究：（一）小學生浮力概念發展之結構圖研究。王龙锡（民80）：我国学生自然科概念发展与诊断教学之研究：（一）小学生浮力概念发展之结构图研究。 國科會專題研究成果報告（NSC79-0111-S-153-02-D）台北：行政院國家科學委員會。国科会专题研究成果报告（NSC79-0111-S-153-02-D）台北：行政院国家科学委员会。 台灣省教師研習會編印（民75）：國民小學學習成就標準測驗編製研究。台湾省教师研习会编印（民75）：国民小学学习成就标准测验编制研究。 板橋：台灣省國民教師研習會。板桥：台湾省国民教师研习会。 江新合、許榮富、林寶山（民80）：我國學生自然科概念發展與診斷教學之研究：（Ⅰ）中學生浮力相關概念發展及其相關迷思概念的分析研究。江新合、许荣富、林宝山（民80）：我国学生自然科概念发展与诊断教学之研究：（Ⅰ）中学生浮力相关概念发展及其相关迷思概念的分析研究。 國科會專題研究成果報告（NSC79-0111-S-017-07-D）台北：行政院國家科學委員會。国科会专题研究成果报告（NSC79-0111-S-017-07-D）台北：行政院国家科学委员会。 莊麗娟（民85）：國小六年級浮力概念動態評量的效益分析。庄丽娟（民85）：国小六年级浮力概念动态评量的效益分析。 國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文，47頁。国立高雄师范大学教育学系硕士论文，47页。 郭重吉（民81）：從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。郭重吉（民81）：从建构主义的观点探讨中小学数理教学的改进。 科學發展月刊，20（5），548-570。科学发展月刊，20（5），548-570。 陳世輝（民72）：兒童科學概念獲得之研究。陈世辉（民72）：儿童科学概念获得之研究。 花蓮師專學報，第14期，218-294。花莲师专学报，第14期，218-294。 陳啟明（民73）：國民小學自然科學教具自製、運用、管理改進之研究。陈启明（民73）：国民小学自然科学教具自制、运用、管理改进之研究。 台北師專學報，第11期，61-111。台北师专学报，第11期，61-111。 黃台珠（民73）：概念的研究及其意義。黄台珠（民73）：概念的研究及其意义。 科學教育月刊，第66期，44-56。科学教育月刊，第66期，44-56。 黃湘武，黃寶鈿（民75）：學生推理能力與概念發展之研究。黄湘武，黄宝钿（民75）：学生推理能力与概念发展之研究。 認知與學習研討會專集（第一次）。认知与学习研讨会专集（第一次）。 台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。台北市：行政院国家科学委员会。 劉伍貞（民85）：國小學生月相概念學習之研究。刘伍贞（民85）：国小学生月相概念学习之研究。 屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。屏东师范学院国民教育研究所硕士论文。 潘宏明（民83）：簡介建構主義及其對數學教育的影響。潘宏明（民83）：简介建构主义及其对数学教育的影响。 花師數理教育季刊，5期，46-50。花师数理教育季刊，5期，46-50。 英文參考資料Ausubel, D. (1968). Education psychology: a cognitive view. (1 St Ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Barton, RF (1970). Simulation and Gaming, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, p.6.Beeth, ME (1993). Dynamic aspects of conceptual change instruction. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Beeth, ME (1995). Conceptual change Instruction: some theoretical and pedagogical Issues. ED 407267.Biddulph, E. (1983). Students' views of floating and sinking. Learning in Science Project. Working Paper No.116.Waikato University Science Education Research Unit, Hamilton, New Zealand.Biddulph, F., &Osborne, R. (1984). Children''s questions and science teaching: An alternative approach. Floating and sinking: Some teaching suggestions. Learning in science project (Primary). Working Paper No.117 [February 1984 and November 1983 versions].Blake, J., &Grenetz, CS (1984). Measurements: Length, Mass, and Volume (educational software), Focus Media Inc., Garden City, New York.Blosser, PE (1987a). Science misconception research and some implications for the teaching of science to elementary school students. ERIC Document No. ED 282776.Blosser, PE (1987b). Secondary school students' comprehension of science concepts: Some findings from misconceptions research. ERIC Document No. ED 286757.Brown, FG (1976). Principles of educational and psychological testing. New York: Hlot, Rinehart and Winston.Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., Unger, C. (1989). An experiment is when you try it and see if and see if it works: A study of grade 7 Students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International journal of Science Education,11, 514-529.Cole, H., &Raven, R. (1969). Principle learning as a function of instruction on excluding irrelevant variables. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 234-241.Driver, R. (1989) Students'' conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481-490.Driver, R., &Erikson, G. (1983). Theories in action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students' conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education,10, 37-60.Driver, R., &Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.Duckworth, ED (1986). Inventing density. Grand Forks: University of North Dakota, Center for Teaching and Learning, North Dakota Study Group on Evaluation.Gallagher, J. (1987). A summary of research in science education —1985. Science Education, 71(3), 307-457.Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.Gentner, D., &Toupin, C. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277-300.Gilbert, JK, &Watts, MD (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conception: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10,61-98.Glynn, SM, &Muth, KD (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1057-1073.Glynn, SM, Duit, R., &Thiele, GB (1995). Teaching science with analogies: A strategy for constructing knowledge. In SM Glynn &R. Duit(Eds.),Learning Sceince in the Schools: Research Reforming practice(pp. 247-273). Mahwah, New Jersey.Goldhammer, A., &Isenberg, S. (1984). Operation: Frog (educational software), Scholastic, Inc., New York.Hashweh, MZ (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education 8(3), 229-249.Head J. (1986). Research into 'alternative framework': Promise and problems. Science &Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.Hennessey, MG, (1991). Analysis of conceptual change and status change in sixth-graders' concepts of force and motion. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison..Hewson, MG (1981). Science education in a society of mixed cultures. South African Journal of Sciences, 77, 197-200.Hewson, MG (1986). The acquisition of scientific knowledge: analysis and representation of student conceptions concerning density. Science Education, 70, 159-170.Hewson, MG A'B. (1981). Effects on instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Part I : Development, application and evaluation of instruction. Paper presented at annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Hewson, MG A'B., &Hamlyn, D. (1984). The influence of intellectual environment on conceptions of heat. European Journal of Science Education, 6(3), 245-262.Hewson, M., &Hewson, P. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.Hewson, MG &Hewson , PW (1983). Effects of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1-13.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72(5), 597-614.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1991). The status of students'' conceptions. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg &H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 59-73). Kiel, Germany: IPN.Hewson, PW, &Thorley, NR (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-553.Hewson, P.,&Hewson, MG A'B. (1992) The status of students' conceptions .In R. Duit, F. Goldberg and H. Neidderer(Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, Proceedings of an International Wrokshop held at the University of Bremen,March,1991(Kiel:IPN),59-73.Hewson, PW (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education, 3,383-396.Hewson, PW (1982). The case study of conceptual change in special relativity: The influence of prior knowledge in learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4, 61-78.Hewson, PW (1985). Diagnosis and remediation of an alternative conception of velocity using a microcomputer program. American Journal of Physics, 53(7), 684-690.Hewson, PW, &Hewson , MG (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597-614.Hoffman, RR (1980). Metaphor in science, In R, P. Honeck &R. P. Hoffman(Eds.), Cognition and figurative language (pp. 393-423). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Inhelder, B., & J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Book.Larkin, J. (1983). The role of problem representation In physics. In Gentner, D., and Stevens, AL(Eds.), Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 75-98.Lawson, AE (1986). Integration research on misconception, reasoning patterns and three types of learning cycles. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 278567.Nagel , E.(1961). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London:Routledge &Kegan Paul.Osborne, RJ, Bell, BF, &Gilbert, JK (1983). Science teaching and children's view of the world. European Journal of Science Education, 5(1), 1-14.Osborne, R., &Wittrock, MC (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489-508.Park, H. (1995). A study of students'' components of conceptual ecologies. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Piaget, J., &Inhelder, B. (1974). The child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.Posner, GJ, Strike, KA, Hewson, PW, &Gertzog, WA (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977a). Teaching about floating and sinking: an attempt to link cognitive psychology with classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 243-251.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977b). Teaching about floating and sinking: Further studies toward closing the gap between cognitive psychology and classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 527-540.Smith, C., Carey, S., &Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition, l21, 177-237.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1986). Promoting 6th graders' understanding of density, a computer modeling approach. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Educational, Harvard University Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1987). Teaching for conceptual change using a computer modeling approach: the case of weight/density differentiation. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1992). Using conceptual models to facilitate conceptual change: The case of weight-density differentiation. Cognition and Instruction, 9(3), 221-283Snir, J. (1991). Sink or float-what do the experts think?: the historical development of explanations for floatation. Science Education, 75(5), 595-609.Snir, J., Smith, C., &Grosslight, L. (1993). Conceptually enhanced simulations: A computer tool for science teaching, Journal of science education and technology, 2(2), 373-388.Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14,63-82.Stepans, JI, Beiswenger, RE, &Dyche, S. (1986). Misconceptions die hard, Science Teacher, 53(6), 65-69.Strauss, S., Globerson, T., & R. (1983). The influence of training for the atomistic schema on the development of the density concept among gifted and nongifted children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 4, 125-147.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1982). Conceptual change and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 231-240.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In LHT West and AL Pines (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change (pp. 211-231). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In RA Duschl &R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147-176). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Sutton, C., &West, L. (1982). Investigating children's existing ideas about science. Collected works-Conference proceedings.Thorley, NR (1990). The role of the conceptual change model in the interpretation of classroom interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Tobin, K. (1990). Social constructivist perspectives on the reform of science education. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 36(4),29-35.Treagust, DF, Harrison, AG, &Venville, GF (1996). Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 213-229.Wandersee, JH, Mintzes, JJ, &Arnaudin, MW (1987). Children's biology: A content analysis of conceptual development in the life science. In JDWellman, H. (1990). Children's Theories of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.White, BY, and Horwitz, P(1987). ThinkerTools: Enabling Children to Understand Physical Laws, BBN Rep. No.6470, Bolt, Berenak &Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., &Kipman, D. (1988). The Differentiation of Heat and Temperature: An evaluation of the Effect of Microcomputer Models on Students' Misconceptions, Tech. Rep. No TR88-20, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., Kipman,D., &Halkiadakis, L. (1988). Can Models Foster Conceptual Change? The Case of Heat and Temperature, Tech. Rep. No. TR88-7. Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Zietsman, AL, &Hewson, PW (1986). Effect instruction using microcomputer simulations and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Scinece Teaching, 23(1), 27-39.英文参考资料Ausubel, D. (1968). Education psychology: a cognitive view. (1 St Ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Barton, RF (1970). Simulation and Gaming, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, p.6.Beeth, ME (1993). Dynamic aspects of conceptual change instruction. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Beeth, ME (1995). Conceptual change Instruction: some theoretical and pedagogical Issues. ED 407267. Biddulph, E. (1983). Students' views of floating and sinking. Learning in Science Project. Working Paper No.116.Waikato University Science Education Research Unit, Hamilton, New Zealand.Biddulph, F., &Osborne, R. (1984 ). Children''s questions and science teaching: An alternative approach. Floating and sinking: Some teaching suggestions. Learning in science project (Primary). Working Paper No.117 [February 1984 and November 1983 versions].Blake, J., &Grenetz, CS (1984). Measurements: Length, Mass, and Volume (educational software), Focus Media Inc., Garden City, New York.Blosser, PE (1987a). Science misconception research and some implications for the teaching of science to elementary school students. ERIC Document No. ED 282776.Blosser, PE (1987b). Secondary school students' comprehension of science concepts: Some findings from misconceptions research. ERIC Document No. ED 286757.Brown, FG (1976). Principles of educational and psychological testing. New York: Hlot, Rinehart and Winston.Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., Unger, C. (1989). An experiment is when you try it and see if and see if it works: A study of grade 7 Students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International journal of Science Education,11, 514-529.Cole, H., &Raven, R. (1969). Principle learning as a function of instruction on excluding irrelevant variables. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 234-241.Driver, R. (1989) Students '' conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481-490.Driver, R., &Erikson, G. (1983). Theories in action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students' conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education,10, 37-60.Driver, R., &Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.Duckworth, ED (1986). Inventing density. Grand Forks: University of North Dakota, Center for Teaching and Learning, North Dakota Study Group on Evaluation.Gallagher, J. (1987). A summary of research in science education —1985. Science Education, 71(3), 307-457.Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.Gentner, D., &Toupin, C. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277-300.Gilbert, JK, &Watts, MD (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conception: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10,61- 98.Glynn, SM, &Muth, KD (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1057-1073.Glynn, SM, Duit, R., &Thiele, GB ( 1995). Teaching science with analogies: A strategy for constructing knowledge. In SM Glynn &R. Duit(Eds.),Learning Sceince in the Schools: Research Reforming practice(pp. 247-273). Mahwah, New Jersey.Goldhammer, A ., &Isenberg, S. (1984). Operation: Frog (educational software), Scholastic, Inc., New York.Hashweh, MZ (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education 8(3), 229-249.Head J. (1986). Research into 'alternative framework': Promise and problems. Science &Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.Hennessey, MG, (1991). Analysis of conceptual change and status change in sixth-graders' concepts of force and motion. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison..Hewson, MG (1981). Science education in a society of mixed cultures. South African Journal of Sciences, 77, 197-200.Hewson , MG (1986). The acquisition of scientific knowledge: analysis and representation of student conceptions concerning density. Science Education, 70, 159-170.Hewson, MG A'B. (1981). Effects on instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Part I : Development, application and evaluation of instruction. Paper presented at annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Hewson, MG A'B., &Hamlyn, D. (1984). The influence of intellectual environment on conceptions of heat. European Journal of Science Education, 6(3), 245-262.Hewson, M., &Hewson, P. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.Hewson, MG &Hewson , PW (1983). Effects of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20 , 731-743.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1-13.Hewson, PW, &Hewson , MG A''B. (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72(5), 597-614.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1991). The status of students'' conceptions. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg &H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 59-73). Kiel, Germany: IPN.Hewson, PW, &Thorley, NR (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-553.Hewson, P.,&Hewson, MG A'B. (1992) The status of students' conceptions .In R. Duit, F. Goldberg and H. Neidderer(Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, Proceedings of an International Wrokshop held at the University of Bremen,March,1991( Kiel:IPN),59-73.Hewson, PW (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education, 3,383-396.Hewson, PW (1982). The case study of conceptual change in special relativity : The influence of prior knowledge in learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4, 61-78.Hewson, PW (1985). Diagnosis and remediation of an alternative conception of velocity using a microcomputer program. American Journal of Physics, 53(7 ), 684-690.Hewson, PW, &Hewson , MG (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597-614.Hoffman, RR (1980). Metaphor in science, In R, P. Honeck &R. P. Hoffman(Eds.), Cognition and figurative language (pp. 393-423). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Inhelder, B., & J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Book.Larkin, J. (1983). The role of problem representation In physics. In Gentner, D., and Stevens, AL(Eds.), Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 75-98.Lawson, AE (1986). Integration research on misconception, reasoning patterns and three types of learning cycles. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 278567.Nagel , E.(1961 ). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London:Routledge &Kegan Paul.Osborne, RJ, Bell, BF, &Gilbert, JK (1983). Science teaching and children's view of the world. European Journal of Science Education , 5(1), 1-14.Osborne, R., &Wittrock, MC (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489-508.Park, H. (1995). A study of students '' components of conceptual ecologies. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Piaget, J., &Inhelder, B. (1974). The child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.Posner, GJ, Strike, KA, Hewson , PW, &Gertzog, WA (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977a). Teaching about floating and sinking: an attempt to link cognitive psychology with classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 243-251.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977b). Teaching about floating and sinking: Further studies toward closing the gap between cognitive psychology and classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 527-540.Smith, C., Carey, S., &Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition, l21, 177- 237.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1986). Promoting 6th graders' understanding of density, a computer modeling approach. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Educational, Harvard University Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1987). Teaching for conceptual change using a computer modeling approach: the case of weight/density differentiation. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Education , Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1992). Using conceptual models to facilitate conceptual change: The case of weight-density differentiation. Cognition and Instruction, 9(3) , 221-283Snir, J. (1991). Sink or float-what do the experts think?: the historical development of explanations for floatation. Science Education, 75(5), 595-609.Snir, J., Smith, C ., &Grosslight, L. (1993). Conceptually enhanced simulations: A computer tool for science teaching, Journal of science education and technology, 2(2), 373-388.Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14,63-82.Stepans, JI, Beiswenger, RE, &Dyche, S. (1986). Misconceptions die hard, Science Teacher, 53(6), 65-69. Strauss, S., Globerson, T., & R. (1983). The influence of training for the atomistic schema on the development of the density concept among gifted and nongifted children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 4, 125-147. Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1982). Conceptual change and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 231-240.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In LHT West and AL Pines (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change (pp. 211-231). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change . In RA Duschl &R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147-176). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Sutton, C., &West, L. (1982). Investigating children's existing ideas about science. Collected works-Conference proceedings.Thorley, NR (1990). The role of the conceptual change model in the interpretation of classroom interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin- Madison.Tobin, K. (1990). Social constructivist perspectives on the reform of science education. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 36(4),29-35.Treagust, DF, Harrison, AG, &Venville, GF (1996). Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 213-229.Wandersee, JH, Mintzes, JJ, &Arnaudin, MW (1987). Children's biology: A content analysis of conceptual development in the life science. In JDWellman, H. (1990). Children's Theories of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.White, BY, and Horwitz, P(1987). ThinkerTools: Enabling Children to Understand Physical Laws, BBN Rep. No. 6470, Bolt, Berenak &Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., &Kipman, D. (1988). The Differentiation of Heat and Temperature: An evaluation of the Effect of Microcomputer Models on Students' Misconceptions, Tech. Rep. No TR88 -20, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., Kipman,D., &Halkiadakis, L. (1988). Can Models Foster Conceptual Change? The Case of Heat and Temperature, Tech. Rep. No. TR88-7. Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Zietsman, AL, &Hewson, PW (1986). Effect instruction using microcomputer simulations and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Scinece Teaching, 23(1), 27-39.
This study intends to investigate the impacts of using computer simulation strategies for fostering students conceptual change in the learning of density related concepts.Subjects were the sixth graders of Hou-De Elementary School of Sanchung in Taipei County of Taiwan. Four classes of sixth graders were randomly selected from thirteen classes. Two out of the four classes were randomly assigned as the experimental group. The remaining two classes were then assigned as the control group. The experimental group was treated with enhanced teaching strategies of computer simulation; while the control group was taught with traditional teaching strategies. The duration of treatment was ten class periods. Students were divided into three levels, namely high, medium, and low, in order to measure the impacts of using computer simulation upon all levels of students. The criteria for grouping the students was the T-score transformed from the student GPA (grade point of achievement) score in science for fifth grade. After the treatment, both experimental and control groups of students were administered an achievement test called “Test of Density Related Concepts” which is developed by researcher. In addition to the test, nine students were selected from each level of both groups for interview. Therefore, there were totally 54 students interviewed by researcher. The interview was proceeded in accordance with a questionnaire called “Questionnaire for Interview about Density Related Concepts”.Collected data from the test and the interview was analyzed differently. Student scores in “Test of Density Related Concepts” were analyzed by 2 (two teaching strategies) times 3 (three levels of students) two-way analysis of covariance (prior GPA score in science as covariate). The interview data was interpreted by descriptive statistical techniques and chi-square examination.According to the statistical procedure described above, conclusions of this study are reached and stated as below:The average score in “Test of Density Related Concepts” for students in the experimental group is significant higher than that in the control group.The interaction between the treatment of computer simulation and the student prior achievement in science as three levels was not identified. Such a result indicates that the enhanced teaching strategies using computer simulation can help all levels of students from low to high to foster their conceptual change and to improve their learning about density related concepts.From the results of interview, the conceptual status about density related concepts of the students in the experimental group, especially for those in the high and medium levels, is enhanced and strengthened significantly than that in the control group.Recommendations for using computer simulation to improve teaching and learning science are further discussed. Suggestions for further research are also provided. This study intends to investigate the impacts of using computer simulation strategies for fostering students conceptual change in the learning of density related concepts.Subjects were the sixth graders of Hou-De Elementary School of Sanchung in Taipei County of Taiwan. Four classes of sixth graders were randomly selected from thirteen classes. Two out of the four classes were randomly assigned as the experimental group. The remaining two classes were then assigned as the control group. The experimental group was treated with enhanced teaching strategies of computer simulation; while the control group was taught with traditional teaching strategies. The duration of treatment was ten class periods. Students were divided into three levels, namely high, medium, and low, in order to measure the impacts of using computer simulation upon all levels of students. The criteria for grouping the students was the T-score transformed from the student GPA (grade point of achievement) score in science for fifth grade. After the treatment, both experimental and control groups of students were administered an achievement test called “Test of Density Related Concepts” which is developed by researcher. In addition to the test, nine students were selected from each level of both groups for interview. Therefore, there were totally 54 students interviewed by researcher. The interview was proceeded in accordance with a questionnaire called “Questionnaire for Interview about Density Related Concepts”.Collected data from the test and the interview was analyzed differently. Student scores in “Test of Density Related Concepts” were analyzed by 2 (two teaching strategies) times 3 (three levels of students) two-way analysis of covariance (prior GPA score in science as covariate). The interview data was interpreted by descriptive statistical techniques and chi-square examination.According to the statistical procedure described above, conclusions of this study are reached and stated as below:The average score in “Test of Density Related Concepts” for students in the experimental group is significant higher than that in the control group.The interaction between the treatment of computer simulation and the student prior achievement in science as three levels was not identified. Such a result indicates that the enhanced teaching strategies using computer simulation can help all levels of students from low to high to foster their conceptual change and to improve their learning about density related concepts.From the results of interview, the conceptual status about density related concepts of the students in the experimental group , especially for those in the high and medium levels, is enhanced and strengthened significantly than that in the control group.Recommendations for using computer simulation to improve teaching and learning science are further discussed. Suggestions for further research are also provided.
[ 論文目次 ] [ 论文目次 ]
第一章緒論1第一節研究動機1第二節研究目的與問題4第三節名詞解釋5第四節研究範圍與限制7第二章文獻探討9第一節概念改變9第二節概念改變模型18第三節密度相關概念之迷思概念與教學研究23第四節概念增強式電腦模擬29第三章研究方法43第一節研究對象43第二節研究假設44第三節研究設計45第四節研究工具47第五節研究程序53第六節資料分析57第四章研究結果與討論61第一節不同教學活動設計方式、不同自然科學習成就水準學生在「密度相關概念之學習成就」之結果與討論61第二節「密度相關概念狀態訪談問卷」之結果與討論66第五章結論與建議87第一節結論88第二節建議89參考文獻93一、中文部分93二、英文部分95附錄103附錄一實驗組採用的概念增強式電腦模擬教學活動設計103附錄二控制組採用的一般傳統教學活動設計112附錄三密度相關概念成就測驗122附錄四密度相關概念狀態訪談問卷128附錄五個別晤談逐字稿130第一章绪论1第一节研究动机1第二节研究目的与问题4第三节名词解释5第四节研究范围与限制7第二章文献探讨9第一节概念改变9第二节概念改变模型18第三节密度相关概念之迷思概念与教学研究23第四节概念增强式电脑模拟29第三章研究方法43第一节研究对象43第二节研究假设44第三节研究设计45第四节研究工具47第五节研究程序53第六节资料分析57第四章研究结果与讨论61第一节不同教学活动设计方式、不同自然科学习成就水准学生在「密度相关概念之学习成就」之结果与讨论61第二节「密度相关概念状态访谈问卷」之结果与讨论66第五章结论与建议87第一节结论88第二节建议89参考文献93一、中文部分93二、英文部分95附录103附录一实验组采用的概念增强式电脑模拟教学活动设计103附录二控制组采用的一般传统教学活动设计112附录三密度相关概念成就测验122附录四密度相关概念状态访谈问卷128附录五个别晤谈逐字稿130
[ 參考文獻 ] [ 参考文献 ]
中文參考資料王美芬（民80）：自然科錯誤概念之研究。中文参考资料王美芬（民80）：自然科错误概念之研究。 台北市立師院學報，22期，367-369。台北市立师院学报，22期，367-369。 王美芬、熊召弟（民84）：國民小學自然科教材教法。王美芬、熊召弟（民84）：国民小学自然科教材教法。 台北市：心理出版社有限公司。台北市：心理出版社有限公司。 王龍錫（民80）：我國學生自然科概念發展與診斷教學之研究：（一）小學生浮力概念發展之結構圖研究。王龙锡（民80）：我国学生自然科概念发展与诊断教学之研究：（一）小学生浮力概念发展之结构图研究。 國科會專題研究成果報告（NSC79-0111-S-153-02-D）台北：行政院國家科學委員會。国科会专题研究成果报告（NSC79-0111-S-153-02-D）台北：行政院国家科学委员会。 台灣省教師研習會編印（民75）：國民小學學習成就標準測驗編製研究。台湾省教师研习会编印（民75）：国民小学学习成就标准测验编制研究。 板橋：台灣省國民教師研習會。板桥：台湾省国民教师研习会。 江新合、許榮富、林寶山（民80）：我國學生自然科概念發展與診斷教學之研究：（Ⅰ）中學生浮力相關概念發展及其相關迷思概念的分析研究。江新合、许荣富、林宝山（民80）：我国学生自然科概念发展与诊断教学之研究：（Ⅰ）中学生浮力相关概念发展及其相关迷思概念的分析研究。 國科會專題研究成果報告（NSC79-0111-S-017-07-D）台北：行政院國家科學委員會。国科会专题研究成果报告（NSC79-0111-S-017-07-D）台北：行政院国家科学委员会。 莊麗娟（民85）：國小六年級浮力概念動態評量的效益分析。庄丽娟（民85）：国小六年级浮力概念动态评量的效益分析。 國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文，47頁。国立高雄师范大学教育学系硕士论文，47页。 郭重吉（民81）：從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。郭重吉（民81）：从建构主义的观点探讨中小学数理教学的改进。 科學發展月刊，20（5），548-570。科学发展月刊，20（5），548-570。 陳世輝（民72）：兒童科學概念獲得之研究。陈世辉（民72）：儿童科学概念获得之研究。 花蓮師專學報，第14期，218-294。花莲师专学报，第14期，218-294。 陳啟明（民73）：國民小學自然科學教具自製、運用、管理改進之研究。陈启明（民73）：国民小学自然科学教具自制、运用、管理改进之研究。 台北師專學報，第11期，61-111。台北师专学报，第11期，61-111。 黃台珠（民73）：概念的研究及其意義。黄台珠（民73）：概念的研究及其意义。 科學教育月刊，第66期，44-56。科学教育月刊，第66期，44-56。 黃湘武，黃寶鈿（民75）：學生推理能力與概念發展之研究。黄湘武，黄宝钿（民75）：学生推理能力与概念发展之研究。 認知與學習研討會專集（第一次）。认知与学习研讨会专集（第一次）。 台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。台北市：行政院国家科学委员会。 劉伍貞（民85）：國小學生月相概念學習之研究。刘伍贞（民85）：国小学生月相概念学习之研究。 屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。屏东师范学院国民教育研究所硕士论文。 潘宏明（民83）：簡介建構主義及其對數學教育的影響。潘宏明（民83）：简介建构主义及其对数学教育的影响。 花師數理教育季刊，5期，46-50。花师数理教育季刊，5期，46-50。 英文參考資料Ausubel, D. (1968). Education psychology: a cognitive view. (1 St Ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Barton, RF (1970). Simulation and Gaming, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, p.6.Beeth, ME (1993). Dynamic aspects of conceptual change instruction. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Beeth, ME (1995). Conceptual change Instruction: some theoretical and pedagogical Issues. ED 407267.Biddulph, E. (1983). Students' views of floating and sinking. Learning in Science Project. Working Paper No.116.Waikato University Science Education Research Unit, Hamilton, New Zealand.Biddulph, F., &Osborne, R. (1984). Children''s questions and science teaching: An alternative approach. Floating and sinking: Some teaching suggestions. Learning in science project (Primary). Working Paper No.117 [February 1984 and November 1983 versions].Blake, J., &Grenetz, CS (1984). Measurements: Length, Mass, and Volume (educational software), Focus Media Inc., Garden City, New York.Blosser, PE (1987a). Science misconception research and some implications for the teaching of science to elementary school students. ERIC Document No. ED 282776.Blosser, PE (1987b). Secondary school students' comprehension of science concepts: Some findings from misconceptions research. ERIC Document No. ED 286757.Brown, FG (1976). Principles of educational and psychological testing. New York: Hlot, Rinehart and Winston.Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., Unger, C. (1989). An experiment is when you try it and see if and see if it works: A study of grade 7 Students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International journal of Science Education,11, 514-529.Cole, H., &Raven, R. (1969). Principle learning as a function of instruction on excluding irrelevant variables. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 234-241.Driver, R. (1989) Students'' conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481-490.Driver, R., &Erikson, G. (1983). Theories in action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students' conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education,10, 37-60.Driver, R., &Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.Duckworth, ED (1986). Inventing density. Grand Forks: University of North Dakota, Center for Teaching and Learning, North Dakota Study Group on Evaluation.Gallagher, J. (1987). A summary of research in science education —1985. Science Education, 71(3), 307-457.Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.Gentner, D., &Toupin, C. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277-300.Gilbert, JK, &Watts, MD (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conception: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10,61-98.Glynn, SM, &Muth, KD (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1057-1073.Glynn, SM, Duit, R., &Thiele, GB (1995). Teaching science with analogies: A strategy for constructing knowledge. In SM Glynn &R. Duit(Eds.),Learning Sceince in the Schools: Research Reforming practice(pp. 247-273). Mahwah, New Jersey.Goldhammer, A., &Isenberg, S. (1984). Operation: Frog (educational software), Scholastic, Inc., New York.Hashweh, MZ (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education 8(3), 229-249.Head J. (1986). Research into 'alternative framework': Promise and problems. Science &Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.Hennessey, MG, (1991). Analysis of conceptual change and status change in sixth-graders' concepts of force and motion. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison..Hewson, MG (1981). Science education in a society of mixed cultures. South African Journal of Sciences, 77, 197-200.Hewson, MG (1986). The acquisition of scientific knowledge: analysis and representation of student conceptions concerning density. Science Education, 70, 159-170.Hewson, MG A'B. (1981). Effects on instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Part I : Development, application and evaluation of instruction. Paper presented at annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Hewson, MG A'B., &Hamlyn, D. (1984). The influence of intellectual environment on conceptions of heat. European Journal of Science Education, 6(3), 245-262.Hewson, M., &Hewson, P. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.Hewson, MG &Hewson , PW (1983). Effects of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1-13.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72(5), 597-614.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1991). The status of students'' conceptions. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg &H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 59-73). Kiel, Germany: IPN.Hewson, PW, &Thorley, NR (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-553.Hewson, P.,&Hewson, MG A'B. (1992) The status of students' conceptions .In R. Duit, F. Goldberg and H. Neidderer(Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, Proceedings of an International Wrokshop held at the University of Bremen,March,1991(Kiel:IPN),59-73.Hewson, PW (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education, 3,383-396.Hewson, PW (1982). The case study of conceptual change in special relativity: The influence of prior knowledge in learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4, 61-78.Hewson, PW (1985). Diagnosis and remediation of an alternative conception of velocity using a microcomputer program. American Journal of Physics, 53(7), 684-690.Hewson, PW, &Hewson , MG (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597-614.Hoffman, RR (1980). Metaphor in science, In R, P. Honeck &R. P. Hoffman(Eds.), Cognition and figurative language (pp. 393-423). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Inhelder, B., & J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Book.Larkin, J. (1983). The role of problem representation In physics. In Gentner, D., and Stevens, AL(Eds.), Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 75-98.Lawson, AE (1986). Integration research on misconception, reasoning patterns and three types of learning cycles. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 278567.Nagel , E.(1961). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London:Routledge &Kegan Paul.Osborne, RJ, Bell, BF, &Gilbert, JK (1983). Science teaching and children's view of the world. European Journal of Science Education, 5(1), 1-14.Osborne, R., &Wittrock, MC (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489-508.Park, H. (1995). A study of students'' components of conceptual ecologies. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Piaget, J., &Inhelder, B. (1974). The child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.Posner, GJ, Strike, KA, Hewson, PW, &Gertzog, WA (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977a). Teaching about floating and sinking: an attempt to link cognitive psychology with classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 243-251.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977b). Teaching about floating and sinking: Further studies toward closing the gap between cognitive psychology and classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 527-540.Smith, C., Carey, S., &Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition, l21, 177-237.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1986). Promoting 6th graders' understanding of density, a computer modeling approach. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Educational, Harvard University Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1987). Teaching for conceptual change using a computer modeling approach: the case of weight/density differentiation. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1992). Using conceptual models to facilitate conceptual change: The case of weight-density differentiation. Cognition and Instruction, 9(3), 221-283Snir, J. (1991). Sink or float-what do the experts think?: the historical development of explanations for floatation. Science Education, 75(5), 595-609.Snir, J., Smith, C., &Grosslight, L. (1993). Conceptually enhanced simulations: A computer tool for science teaching, Journal of science education and technology, 2(2), 373-388.Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14,63-82.Stepans, JI, Beiswenger, RE, &Dyche, S. (1986). Misconceptions die hard, Science Teacher, 53(6), 65-69.Strauss, S., Globerson, T., & R. (1983). The influence of training for the atomistic schema on the development of the density concept among gifted and nongifted children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 4, 125-147.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1982). Conceptual change and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 231-240.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In LHT West and AL Pines (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change (pp. 211-231). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In RA Duschl &R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147-176). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Sutton, C., &West, L. (1982). Investigating children's existing ideas about science. Collected works-Conference proceedings.Thorley, NR (1990). The role of the conceptual change model in the interpretation of classroom interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison.Tobin, K. (1990). Social constructivist perspectives on the reform of science education. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 36(4),29-35.Treagust, DF, Harrison, AG, &Venville, GF (1996). Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 213-229.Wandersee, JH, Mintzes, JJ, &Arnaudin, MW (1987). Children's biology: A content analysis of conceptual development in the life science. In JDWellman, H. (1990). Children's Theories of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.White, BY, and Horwitz, P(1987). ThinkerTools: Enabling Children to Understand Physical Laws, BBN Rep. No.6470, Bolt, Berenak &Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., &Kipman, D. (1988). The Differentiation of Heat and Temperature: An evaluation of the Effect of Microcomputer Models on Students' Misconceptions, Tech. Rep. No TR88-20, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., Kipman,D., &Halkiadakis, L. (1988). Can Models Foster Conceptual Change? The Case of Heat and Temperature, Tech. Rep. No. TR88-7. Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Zietsman, AL, &Hewson, PW (1986). Effect instruction using microcomputer simulations and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Scinece Teaching, 23(1), 27-39.英文参考资料Ausubel, D. (1968). Education psychology: a cognitive view. (1 St Ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Barton, RF (1970). Simulation and Gaming, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, p.6.Beeth, ME (1993). Dynamic aspects of conceptual change instruction. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Beeth, ME (1995). Conceptual change Instruction: some theoretical and pedagogical Issues. ED 407267. Biddulph, E. (1983). Students' views of floating and sinking. Learning in Science Project. Working Paper No.116.Waikato University Science Education Research Unit, Hamilton, New Zealand.Biddulph, F., &Osborne, R. (1984 ). Children''s questions and science teaching: An alternative approach. Floating and sinking: Some teaching suggestions. Learning in science project (Primary). Working Paper No.117 [February 1984 and November 1983 versions].Blake, J., &Grenetz, CS (1984). Measurements: Length, Mass, and Volume (educational software), Focus Media Inc., Garden City, New York.Blosser, PE (1987a). Science misconception research and some implications for the teaching of science to elementary school students. ERIC Document No. ED 282776.Blosser, PE (1987b). Secondary school students' comprehension of science concepts: Some findings from misconceptions research. ERIC Document No. ED 286757.Brown, FG (1976). Principles of educational and psychological testing. New York: Hlot, Rinehart and Winston.Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., Unger, C. (1989). An experiment is when you try it and see if and see if it works: A study of grade 7 Students' understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International journal of Science Education,11, 514-529.Cole, H., &Raven, R. (1969). Principle learning as a function of instruction on excluding irrelevant variables. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 234-241.Driver, R. (1989) Students '' conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481-490.Driver, R., &Erikson, G. (1983). Theories in action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students' conceptual frameworks in science. Studies in Science Education,10, 37-60.Driver, R., &Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.Duckworth, ED (1986). Inventing density. Grand Forks: University of North Dakota, Center for Teaching and Learning, North Dakota Study Group on Evaluation.Gallagher, J. (1987). A summary of research in science education —1985. Science Education, 71(3), 307-457.Gentner, D. (1983). Structure mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.Gentner, D., &Toupin, C. (1986). Systematicity and surface similarity in the development of analogy. Cognitive Science, 10, 277-300.Gilbert, JK, &Watts, MD (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conception: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10,61- 98.Glynn, SM, &Muth, KD (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1057-1073.Glynn, SM, Duit, R., &Thiele, GB ( 1995). Teaching science with analogies: A strategy for constructing knowledge. In SM Glynn &R. Duit(Eds.),Learning Sceince in the Schools: Research Reforming practice(pp. 247-273). Mahwah, New Jersey.Goldhammer, A ., &Isenberg, S. (1984). Operation: Frog (educational software), Scholastic, Inc., New York.Hashweh, MZ (1986). Toward an explanation of conceptual change. European Journal of Science Education 8(3), 229-249.Head J. (1986). Research into 'alternative framework': Promise and problems. Science &Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.Hennessey, MG, (1991). Analysis of conceptual change and status change in sixth-graders' concepts of force and motion. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison..Hewson, MG (1981). Science education in a society of mixed cultures. South African Journal of Sciences, 77, 197-200.Hewson , MG (1986). The acquisition of scientific knowledge: analysis and representation of student conceptions concerning density. Science Education, 70, 159-170.Hewson, MG A'B. (1981). Effects on instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Part I : Development, application and evaluation of instruction. Paper presented at annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.Hewson, MG A'B., &Hamlyn, D. (1984). The influence of intellectual environment on conceptions of heat. European Journal of Science Education, 6(3), 245-262.Hewson, M., &Hewson, P. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 731-743.Hewson, MG &Hewson , PW (1983). Effects of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20 , 731-743.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1-13.Hewson, PW, &Hewson , MG A''B. (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72(5), 597-614.Hewson, PW, &Hewson, MG A''B. (1991). The status of students'' conceptions. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg &H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 59-73). Kiel, Germany: IPN.Hewson, PW, &Thorley, NR (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-553.Hewson, P.,&Hewson, MG A'B. (1992) The status of students' conceptions .In R. Duit, F. Goldberg and H. Neidderer(Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, Proceedings of an International Wrokshop held at the University of Bremen,March,1991( Kiel:IPN),59-73.Hewson, PW (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education, 3,383-396.Hewson, PW (1982). The case study of conceptual change in special relativity : The influence of prior knowledge in learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4, 61-78.Hewson, PW (1985). Diagnosis and remediation of an alternative conception of velocity using a microcomputer program. American Journal of Physics, 53(7 ), 684-690.Hewson, PW, &Hewson , MG (1988). An appropriate conception of teaching science: A view from studies of science learning. Science Education, 72, 597-614.Hoffman, RR (1980). Metaphor in science, In R, P. Honeck &R. P. Hoffman(Eds.), Cognition and figurative language (pp. 393-423). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Inhelder, B., & J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. New York: Basic Book.Larkin, J. (1983). The role of problem representation In physics. In Gentner, D., and Stevens, AL(Eds.), Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 75-98.Lawson, AE (1986). Integration research on misconception, reasoning patterns and three types of learning cycles. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 278567.Nagel , E.(1961 ). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. London:Routledge &Kegan Paul.Osborne, RJ, Bell, BF, &Gilbert, JK (1983). Science teaching and children's view of the world. European Journal of Science Education , 5(1), 1-14.Osborne, R., &Wittrock, MC (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67, 489-508.Park, H. (1995). A study of students '' components of conceptual ecologies. Unpublished Dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Madison.Piaget, J., &Inhelder, B. (1974). The child's construction of quantities. London: Routledge &Kegan Paul.Posner, GJ, Strike, KA, Hewson , PW, &Gertzog, WA (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977a). Teaching about floating and sinking: an attempt to link cognitive psychology with classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 243-251.Rowell, JA, &Dawson, CJ (1977b). Teaching about floating and sinking: Further studies toward closing the gap between cognitive psychology and classroom practice. Science Education, 61, 527-540.Smith, C., Carey, S., &Wiser, M. (1985). On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density. Cognition, l21, 177- 237.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1986). Promoting 6th graders' understanding of density, a computer modeling approach. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Educational, Harvard University Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1987). Teaching for conceptual change using a computer modeling approach: the case of weight/density differentiation. Technical Report, The Educational Technology Center, Graduate School of Education , Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Smith, C., Snir, J., &Grosslight, L. (1992). Using conceptual models to facilitate conceptual change: The case of weight-density differentiation. Cognition and Instruction, 9(3) , 221-283Snir, J. (1991). Sink or float-what do the experts think?: the historical development of explanations for floatation. Science Education, 75(5), 595-609.Snir, J., Smith, C ., &Grosslight, L. (1993). Conceptually enhanced simulations: A computer tool for science teaching, Journal of science education and technology, 2(2), 373-388.Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14,63-82.Stepans, JI, Beiswenger, RE, &Dyche, S. (1986). Misconceptions die hard, Science Teacher, 53(6), 65-69. Strauss, S., Globerson, T., & R. (1983). The influence of training for the atomistic schema on the development of the density concept among gifted and nongifted children. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 4, 125-147. Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1982). Conceptual change and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 231-240.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In LHT West and AL Pines (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change (pp. 211-231). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Strike, KA, &Posner, GJ (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change . In RA Duschl &R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147-176). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Sutton, C., &West, L. (1982). Investigating children's existing ideas about science. Collected works-Conference proceedings.Thorley, NR (1990). The role of the conceptual change model in the interpretation of classroom interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Wisconsin- Madison.Tobin, K. (1990). Social constructivist perspectives on the reform of science education. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 36(4),29-35.Treagust, DF, Harrison, AG, &Venville, GF (1996). Using an analogical teaching approach to engender conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 213-229.Wandersee, JH, Mintzes, JJ, &Arnaudin, MW (1987). Children's biology: A content analysis of conceptual development in the life science. In JDWellman, H. (1990). Children's Theories of Mind. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.White, BY, and Horwitz, P(1987). ThinkerTools: Enabling Children to Understand Physical Laws, BBN Rep. No. 6470, Bolt, Berenak &Newman, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., &Kipman, D. (1988). The Differentiation of Heat and Temperature: An evaluation of the Effect of Microcomputer Models on Students' Misconceptions, Tech. Rep. No TR88 -20, Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Wiser, M., Kipman,D., &Halkiadakis, L. (1988). Can Models Foster Conceptual Change? The Case of Heat and Temperature, Tech. Rep. No. TR88-7. Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Zietsman, AL, &Hewson, PW (1986). Effect instruction using microcomputer simulations and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Scinece Teaching, 23(1), 27-39.