Translated Titles

The Influence of Student's Integrating Ability on Learning of Physics



Key Words

綜合統整能力 ; 物理學習 ; HASH(0xd6a8898) ; Learning of Physics ; Physical Learning ; Integrating Ability



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication


Academic Degree Category




Content Language


Chinese Abstract

本研究之研究目的為探討「綜合統整」能力與物理及其他學科學習間的相關關係,並以北市某市立高中二年級自然組的學生為研究對象。以受試者閱讀選定文章後的「摘要心得寫作」來進行相關研究,根據選定文章的「摘要心得寫作範本」與「綜合統整能力評量量表」批閱學生的作品,綜合統整能力的評量可分為以下四個向度:「代表性」、「簡約性」、「結構性」與「正確性」,並可分別對應四項綜合統整的子能力:「掌握要點」、「化繁為簡」、「表達陳述」及「正確理解」,評量後可獲得學生在各個向度上的得分,用以作為學生在綜合統整四項子能力上表現之依據。將摘要心得寫作所獲得的相關數據資料與各科學習成就指標進行統計分析,並從中獲得綜合統整能力與學科學習間的相關關係。 研究結果顯示:(1)「綜合統整能力」可解釋「物理學習」的總變異達五成以上,且高於其它所有的學科,即「綜合統整能力」對於「物理學習」有相當程度的正面影響,且影響的程度較其它學科顯著。(2)綜合統整的四項子能力對於「物理學習」的影響,以「化繁為簡」的能力最為重要,而後依次為「正確理解」的能力、「掌握要點」的能力,以及良好的「表達陳述」能力。

English Abstract

The purpose of this study is to probe into the relations between ‘integrating ability’ and ‘the learning of physics and the other subjects’, and the second grade science students of a municipal senior high school in Taipei are taken for subjects in this study. The subjects do ‘the summaries and thoughts (about what they has learned) writing’ after reading some assigned articles. The researcher appraises the writings of the students according to the ‘models of summaries and thoughts writing’ of the assigned articles and ‘the assessing table of integrating ability’. The integrating ability could be separated into four aspects: ‘representability’, ‘brevity’, ‘structure’, and ‘accuracy’, just corresponding to four subabilities of integrating ability: ‘able to grasp the key points’, ‘able to transform complexities into simplicities’, ‘able to express well’, ‘able to comprehend correctly’ in turn. After appraising the writings of the students, we can acquire the scores on each aspect of each student, standing for the performance of four subabilities of integrating ability of the students. We might obtain the relations between ‘integrating ability’ and ‘the learning of physics and the other subjects’ via statistically analyzing ‘the data derived from summaries and thoughts writing’ and ‘the norm of the learning achievement of each subject’. The result of this study shows : (1) Integrating ability could explain over half the total variance of physics learning, and it’s the maximum among all the subjects, that is to say, integrating ability affects physics learning considerably in the positive way, and the degree of influence of integrating ability on physics learning is more remarkable than all the other subjects. (2) The influence of ‘able to transform complexities into simplicities’ is the most significant one of the four subabilities of integrating ability, then ‘able to comprehend correctly’, ‘able to grasp the key points’, and ‘able to express well’ in sequence.

Topic Category 基礎與應用科學 > 物理
理學院 > 物理學系
  1. 簡順永(2000)。高二學生力觀念的運用調查分析。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
  2. 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。
  3. Anderson, J. R. & Bower, G. H. (1973). Human associative memory. Washington, DC: Winston.
  4. Anderson, J. R. (1985). Cognitive phychology and its implications (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Freeman.
  5. Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive Psychology (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Freeman.
  6. Anderson, J. R. (1990). Cognitive Psychology and Implication. New York:
  7. W. H. Freeman and Company.
  8. Applebee, A. N. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 577-596.
  9. Bower, G. H. (1970a). Organizational factors in memory. Cognitive Psychology, 1, 18-46.
  10. Bower, G. H., Clark, M. C., Lesgold, A. M., & Winzenz, D. (1969). Hierarchical retrieval schemes in recall of categorized word lists. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 323-343.
  11. Collins, A. M. & Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82, 407-428.
  12. Eileen Kintsch, David Steinhart, Gerry Stahl, & LSA Research Group. (2000). Developing Summarization Skills through the Use of LSA-Based Feedback. Interactive Learning Environments, 8(2), 87-109.
  13. Eileen Kintsch. (1990). Macroprocesses and Microprocesses in the Development of Summarization Skill. Cognition and Instruction, 7(3), 161-195.
  14. Fincher-kiefer, R. (1993). The role of productive inference in situation model construction. Discourse Processes, 16(1-2), 99-124.
  15. Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R. W., Markman, A. B., Levidow, B. B., Wolff, P., & Forbus, K. D. (1997). Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. The Journal of The Learning Science, 6(1), 3-40.
  16. Graesser, A. C. & Kreuz, R. I. (1993). A theory of inference generation during text comprehension. Discourse Processes, 16(1-2), 145-160.
  17. Holliday, W. G., Yore, L. D., & Alvermann. (1994). The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 877-893.
  18. Kintsch, W. & van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363–394.
  19. Kolodner, J.K. (1993). Case-Based Reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
  20. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  21. Kuhn, T. S. (1982). Commensurability, comparability, and communicability. PSA, 2, 669-688. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.
  22. Laurence Capus & Nicole Tourigny. (1998). Learning Sutmmarization by Using Similarities. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 11(5), 475-488.
  23. Maybury, M.T. (1995). Generating Summaries from event data. Information Processing & Management, 31(5), 735–751.
  24. Munby, A. H. (1976). Some implications of language in science education. Science Education, 60(1), 115-124.
  25. O'Toole, M. (1996). Science, school, children and books: Exploring the classroom interface between science and language. Studies in Science Education, 28, 113-143.
  26. Parker, K. (1992). How will I know what I think about till I see what I say?. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 38(4), 20-26.
  27. Pearce, D. J. & Davis, M. D. (1998). Teacher use of writing in the junior high Mathematics classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 88(1), 8-10.
  28. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
  29. Robert L. Solso. (1998). Cognitive psychology--5th ed.. MA:Allyn & Bacon.
  30. Sloman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3-22.
  31. Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J., & Rips, L. J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: A featural model for semantic decisions. Phychological Review, 1, 214-241.
  32. Solso, R. L. & Short, B. A. (1979). Color recognition. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 14, 275-277.
  33. Sowa, J. F. (1984) Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
  34. Sparck Jones, K. & Endres-Niggemeyer, B. (1995). Introduction: Automatic summarizing. Information Processing & Management, 31(5), 625–630.
  35. Stutton, C. R. (1996). Beliefs about science and beliefs about language. International Journal of Science Education, 18(1), 1-18.
  36. Swanson, H. Lee.,et al. (1990). An information processing analysis of expert and novice teachers' problem solving. American Educational Research Journal, 27, 533-556.
  37. van den Broek, P.& Lorch, RF, Jr. (1993). Network representation of casual relation in memory for narrative texts: Evidence from primed recognition. Discourse Processes, 16(1-2), 75-98.
  38. van Dijk, T. A. & Kintsch W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic.
  39. Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W. F. (1987). Theories of knowledge restructuring in development. Review of Educational Research.57, 51-67.
  40. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change [special issue]. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
  41. 中文文獻
  42. 李錫津(2000)。統整學習的基本構想與實施模式。建中學報,6,1-10。
  43. 林育猷(2001)。21世紀的新法寶—統整能力。南投文教,14,22-25。
  44. 鄭昭明(1993)。認知心理學:理論與實踐。台北,桂冠圖書股份有限公司。
  45. 鄭麗玉(1993)。認知心理學。台北,五南圖書出版有限公司。
  46. 吳玲玲(1998)譯,Solso 原著。認知心理學。台北,華泰書局。
  47. 魏明通(1997)。科學教育。台北,五南圖書出版有限公司。
  48. 張春興(2003)。心理學原理。台北,東華書局。
  49. 陳文典(2002)。自然與生活科技學習領域之學習成就—科學素養的評量。教學創新九年一貫課程—自然與生活科技學習領域研習手冊,33-106。教育部。
  50. 鄭春蕓、邱美虹(1994)。閱讀理解的推論形式與研究方法。嘉義師院學報,8,287-312。
  51. 邱美虹(1996)。學習策略與科學學習。科學教育月刊,191,2-15。
  52. 陳慧娟(1998)。科學寫作—有效促進概念改變的教學策略。中等教育,49(6),123-131。
  53. 英文文獻
  54. Aamodt, A. & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system. Artificial Intelligence Communications, 7(1), 39–59.
  55. Anderson, J. R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  56. Bower, G. H. (1970b). Analysis of a mnemonic device. American Scientist, 58, 496-510.
  57. Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York: Wiley.
  58. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
  59. Collins, A. M., Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 240-247.
  60. Dagstuhl Seminar Group, Editors: Endres-Niggemeyer, B., Hobbs, J., Sparck Jones, K. (1993). Summarizing Text for Intelligent Communication. Dagstuhl Seminar 9350, Seminar-Report-79, IBFI Schloss Dagstuhl, Wadern, Germany.
  61. Dalianis, H. (1996). Aggregation as a subtask of text planning. in J.H. Stewman (ed.) Proceedings of the 9th Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Symposium, May 20–2, 1–5. FLAIRS-96, Key West, Florida.
  62. Friedrich, H.F. (1993). Training of reductive text learning strategies. Summarizing Text for Intelligent Communication, Dagstuhl Seminar 9350, Seminar-Report-79, IBFI Schloss Dagstuhl, Wadern, Germany.
  63. Gagne, E. D. (1985). The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning. Boston: Little, Brown & Company.
  64. Goldby, G. (1975). Science as a process: a change in emphasis writing in science. London: Ward Lock Educational.
  65. Gopnik, A. & Wellman, H. M. (1994). The theory. In L. A. Hirschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture, 257-293. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  66. Keil, F. (1999). Conceptual change. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 179-182. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
  67. McComas,W.F. & Yager, R.E. (1989). The Iowa Assessment Package For Evaluation in Five Domains of Science Education. The University of Iowa Science Education.
  68. Quillian, M. R. (1968). Semantic memory. In M. Minsky (Eds.), Semantic Information Processing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  69. Roth, K. J. (1991). Reading science texts for conceptual change. In C. M. Santa & D. E. Alvermann (Eds.), Science Learning: Processes and Applications, 48-63. International Reading Association.
  70. Schank, R.C. (1982). Dynamic Memory: A Theory of Reminding and Learning in Computers and People. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  71. Strike, K. A. & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. H. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change, 211-231.
  72. Turner, A. A. & Greene, E. (1987). The construction and use of a propositional analysis system (Ms. No. 1713). JSAS Catalogue of Selected Documents in Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  73. Turner, A. A. (1987). The propositional analysis system (Tech. Rep. No. 87-2). Boulder: University of Colorado, Institute of Cognitive Science.
  74. Watson, I. (1997). Applying Case-Based Reasoning: Techniques for Enterprise Systems. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
  75. Wiser, M. & Carey, S. (1983). When heat and temperature were one. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mantal Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Times Cited
  1. 謝明勳(2015)。全人發展雲課程活動App對統整與應變能力之研究。中原大學資訊管理研究所學位論文。2015。1-68。 
  2. 吳紀蓉(2005)。「表達」在「抽象科學概念學習」上的教學功能。臺灣師範大學物理學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2005。1-101。
  3. 姜慧霖(2010)。課程與能力培養關聯性之研究-以中原大學會計系為例。中原大學會計研究所學位論文。2010。1-101。
  4. 強薇(2017)。應用具教導功能電子書融入翻轉學習教學設計與成效評估-以技職院校學習離散數學為例。虎尾科技大學資訊管理系碩士班學位論文。2017。1-46。