Title

以建構理論的觀點探討國中理化中密度與浮力的教學

Translated Titles

In view of constructivism,the discussion of density and buoyancy in junior high school which involves in “teaching and learning”

Authors

江陳富

Key Words

關鍵字:認知結構 ; 概念改變 ; 浮力。 ; 密度 ; 教學模式 ; P.O.E. ; STS課程設計 ; 建構 ; P.O.E. teaching mode ; concept alteration ; STS program design ; density ; Key words: Recognition Structure ; buoyancy. ; to structure (build up)

PublicationName

中原大學化學研究所學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2002年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

楊嘉喜

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

摘 要 國中階段的學生在學習浮力概念時常遭遇困難,甚至,理化教師也覺得難於施教。本研究的研究目的在探討受試學生在經過認知衝突的實驗活動後概念改變的情形。進一步提出教導學生學習浮力概念的教學模式並且以能夠完整而清楚建構學生的浮力概念為目的。 本研究對象包括國一、國二、國三學生,由研究者設計一連串且有系統與浮力有關的情境、引導出學習者的動機,受試者面對情境加以推理詮釋,產生受試者的認知衝突,施測者再以與情境主題有關的實驗活動建立學生正確的概念,研究者利用前測與後測,甚至唔談評量去瞭解學生的想法,進一步建構出正確的概念。 從研究的結果分析中發現,學生面對情境中有關浮力及物體浮沈的解釋當中顯示,國中學生對於浮沈現象的錯誤概念相當多是由於對「密度」概念的不了解,無法區分重量與密度的不同,而非均勻系物體的浮沈是國中課本甚少提到的,其中平均密度的改變(體積或質量的變化造成的浮沈變化)更是學生較難理解的。另外,學生無法理解浮力的另一個重要原因主要在對物體作用力的理解不夠,原因可能是未具備牛頓力學的認知基礎,對力的分析無法掌握,建議教師應多設計具體情境讓學生熟悉作用力的內涵,以補救學生學習的困難。 最後,如何引起學生學習浮力的動機,讓浮力概念的學習,不再是課本中傾向教條式的說明,食譜式的實驗,本研究試著採用 STS課程設計即科學(Science),技學(technology),及社會(society)的簡稱,愈是社會化的情境愈是能夠引起學生的學習動機,教學方面採取P.O.E.C教學模式P(Predict)預測、O(Observation)觀察、E(Explanation)解釋、C(Comparison)比較,希望學生更容易從觀察比較中去澄清自已的觀念,也提供多元教學中多一種參考。 關鍵字認知結構,概念改變,建構,STS課程設計,P.O.E.教學模式,密度,浮力。

English Abstract

Abstract Junior-high Students often come up with difficulty when it comes to learning buoyancy concept. Furthermore, Science teachers find it is difficult to teach the subject. This research is aimed at exploring the concept change when the students are confronted with the conflicts of their understanding of experiments. Furthermore, a teaching mode for buoyancy concept is given in the hope of helping student constructing a clear concept. The subject of this research contains junior-high students at every grade. A series of systematic situations relating to buoyancy are devised in a hope to provide motivations to the learners. The researchers can make assessments based on this program. They are able to know what the students think so as to build up accurate concepts. The findings of the research reveal that students are tremendously confused with the buoyancy and have difficulty in understanding of “density”. They cannot tell the difference between weight and density. The buoyancy of an inhomogeneous substance is seldom mentioned in the textbook. So the alteration of the average density (The alteration of volume or mass of a substance can cause a different buoyancy) is beyond comprehension of the students. On the other hand, students do not possess enough basic knowledge of Newton’s dynamics, so they are unable to grasp the force in action. In an end, students should be motivated to learn buoyancy, rather than learning from a textbook, doing experiments following a “cookbook”. This research is designed with a STS program, namely Science, Technology and Society. A situation designed to be more societal may attract students. The teaching is combined with P.O.E.C teaching mode, namely Predict, Observation, Explanation, and Comparison. It is hoped, by this, that students can clarify their concept by their observation more easily, and it also serve as a reference in diverse teachings. Key words: Recognition Structure, concept alteration, to structure (build up), STS program design, P.O.E. teaching mode, density, buoyancy.

Topic Category 基礎與應用科學 > 化學
理學院 > 化學研究所
Reference
  1. 6.教育部(1994),國民中學課程標準。台北:教育部
    連結:
  2. 1.Gennaro, E. D. (1966). Teaching density-A real problem. School Science and Mathematics, 66, PP. 559-560
    連結:
  3. 2.Hewson, M., & Hewson, P. (1983). Effect of instruction using students' prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. J.R.S.T., 20, PP. 731-743
    連結:
  4. 3.Amos, D., Ehud, J & Roint, E. (1990). Applying the "Cognitive Conflict" Stragegy for Conceptual Change ~ Some Implications, Difficulties, and Problems. Science Education, 47(5): pp555~569
    連結:
  5. 4.Clement, J. (1993). Using Bridging Analogies and Anchoring Intuitions to Deal with Students preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10)pp. 1241~1257
    連結:
  6. 參考文獻
  7. 中文部分
  8. 1.魏明通(1987),科學探究教學法。台北:大中國圖書公司
  9. 2.黃湘武.黃寶鈕(1987),學生推理能力與概念發展之研究。台北市:行政院國家科學委員會
  10. 3.郭重吉(1989),利用唔談方式探查國中學生對重要物理概念的另有架構。發表於科學教育學術研討會
  11. 4.王文科(1990),課程論。台北:五南圖書出版公司
  12. 5.江新合(1992),中學生浮力相關概念發展及其相關迷思概念的分析研究。高雄師大學報
  13. 7.王美芬.熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法,初版,台北市,心理
  14. 8.黃萬居(1998)。培養能提高國小學生的解決問題能力教師之研究,台北市立師範學院學報
  15. 9.教育部(1999),國民教育九年一貫課程綱要:自然與科技學習領域(草案)台北:教育部
  16. 10.湯偉軍.邱美虹(1999),創造性問題解決(CPS)模式的沿革與應用。科學教育月刊,223,p2-20
  17. 11.鍾聖校(1999),自然與科技課程教材教法,二版,台北市,五南
  18. 12.教育部(2000),國民中小學九年一貫課程網要。台北:教育部
  19. 13.黃達三(2000),科學課程的統整,台灣台東
  20. 14.黃萬居(2001),國小STS教學與創造力培養之兩個個案研究,科學教育研究,科學教育研究與發展季刊
  21. 英文部分
  22. 5.Yager, R.E. (1994). Science-Technology-Society as reform. Workshop on Science/ Technology / Society (STS) Approch in Science education. August, 1994, Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan
Times Cited
  1. 鄧裕馨(2006)。STS理念融入國中社會學習領域公民科教學之研究--以環境教育議題為例。臺灣師範大學公民教育與活動領導學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2006。1-175。