以動態評量探究國中學生浮力概念的心智模式及概念改變之歷程

劉家成

指導教授 ： 邱美虹博士

國立臺灣師範大學/理學院/科學教育研究所/碩士(2002年)

摘要

本研究是依據Vygotsky(1978) 所提出的近側發展區的主張，參考Campione和Brown(1985)的漸進提示評量模式，透過「前測-學習-遷移-後測」的實施程序，探討八年級學生學習浮力概念歷程中心智模式的轉變情形，以浮力概念前測試卷來偵測96位學生迷思概念類型並將40位學生分為對照組和實驗組，二組受試者除了接受前後測和晤談外，對照組學生並接受浮力概念學習題的教學，實驗組則接受實作活動階段及概念教導階段的動態評量。
本研究提出四個研究目的：一、經由評量工具的測驗及對學生的晤談結果，探究國二學生在有關浮力的概念內容中，所具有的迷思概念類型。二、藉著評量工具及對學生進行晤談，由評量結果及訪談資料探究國二學生對於浮力概念所具有的心智模式類型。三、探討學生對於浮力內容所呈現的迷思概念及心智模式在動態評量中的變化情形。四、探討學生在非動態評量中及動態評量中是否發生概念改變及其發生的機制為何。
本研究的研究結果為：經過迷思概念偵測前測卷測試的結果，可以將學生的概念類型分為體積、密度、混合及科學概念類型，而經過動態評量與非動態評量後，二組全部的學生在測驗三的成績達到顯著差異；在體積內容的作答情形上，二組整體學生在測驗三的成績達到顯著差異；在物質題及過程題的表現上二組達到顯著差異；在理解及應用層次的表現上，二組在測驗三達到顯著差異。
對體積模式的學生而言，實驗組在經過動態評量之後，其心智模式會轉變成密度模式；非動態評量使對照組學生產生混合及密度模式。對密度模式學生而言，實驗組及對照組經教學後皆使學生產生混合模式。對混合模式學生而言，實驗組及對照組學生最終的心智狀態呈現密度或混合模式。
綜合以上所述，動態評量可以使學生的測驗成績表現較佳，而在心智模式部分，動態評量則使學生產生較一致的心智模式，而非動態評量則會使學生呈現較為混雜變動的心智模式。

關鍵字

動態評量 ； 浮力 ； 概念改變 ； 心智模式

並列摘要

Based on the Vygotsky’s principle: zone of proximal development, according to Campione & Brown’s graduated prompting procedure, through the implement of pretest-learning-transfer-posttest, investigated 8th students’ conceptual change mechanism and mental models on buoyancy, developed a pretest to probe ninety six students’ misconception of buoyancy, and divided forty students into contrast and experiment group. These forty students all accepted pretest-posttest and interviews, the students of contrast group accepted the teaching of buoyancy exercises, the students of experiment group accepted hands-on activity and dynamic assessment of buoyancy.
The research hands in 4 research purposes: (1) According to the results of tests and interviews, we can probe students’ misconception of buoyancy. (2) By assessing and interviewing students, investigated 8th students’ mental models on buoyancy. (3) Probing the variances of students’ misconception and mental models of buoyancy at dynamic assessment. (4) Studying the effect of non-dynamic assessment and dynamic assessment, which teaching method would promote students’ conceptual change and what mechanism is occurred.
The results of this study revealed: by analyzing the results of pretest, we can divide students into volume, density, and complex conception types. Pass through dynamic assessment and non-dynamic assessment, the experimental group showed significant higher scores in test-3 and in volume content of test-3. The experimental group also showed significant higher scores in matter and process content of test-3. In understanding and applied level questions of test-3, the experimental group is significant better than contrast group.
To the students of volume conception type, passing dynamic assessment and non-dynamic assessment, students’ mental models of experimental group turn to become density type, students’ mental models of contrast group become density or complex types. To the students of density conception type, experimental and contrast students become complex type. To the students of complex conception type, all students become density or complex types.
In summary, dynamic assessment can promote students’ test scores. Referring mental models, dynamic assessment would enable students to become coincident mental models, non-dynamic assessment make students become intermix models.

參考文獻

邱美虹(2000)：概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊, 8(1), 1-34。

郭重吉（1989）利用晤談方式探查國中學生對重要物理概念的另有架構。發表於第五屆科學教育學術研討會。

林清山（1994）：心理與教育統計學。台北市：東華。

陳嘉成（民90）：以動態評量AMS模式探究國小學童光合作用概念之改變。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。

余淑君（民91）：以動態評量探究五年級學童酸鹼概念的概念改變機制。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。