Translated Titles




Key Words

酸鹼鹽 ; 迷思概念 ; acid-baes-salt ; misconception



Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication


Academic Degree Category




Content Language


Chinese Abstract

本研究探究高三學生酸鹼鹽的迷思概念。參與研究的學生為南部兩所公立高中及北部一所公立高中的高三學生共335名,研究工具為研究者自行設計含24題多項式選擇題之測驗,此測驗經過三位高中教師審查,信度為α=.75。所得資料求其描述性統計及皮爾遜積差相關。研究發現最重要的迷思概念有:1)學生直接由Ka取對數決定弱酸溶液的pH值;2)不瞭解解離度和Ka值之關係;3)對於兩弱酸混合時沒有競爭反應的概念:4)不清楚Na2CO3的酸鹼性的判斷。本研究建議在教學方面加強:1)Ka值的計算;2) 競爭反應的概念;3) 緩衝溶液。在研究方面建議進一步探討:1)Na2CO3 水溶液的水解;2)在酸鹼中和時,對於不同的溶液,使用相同的滴定液,學生為何會認為滴定達到當量點時,各溶液酸鹼性相等。

English Abstract

Investigated were the misconceptions of acid-base-salt of the 12th grades’ students. Three hundreds and thirty-five students who had studied acid-base-salt participated in the study. Twenty-four multiple-choose test was developed by the researcher. The test was validated by three high school teachers , the reliability (α) of the test is 0.75. Data was analyzed through descriptive statistics and Pearson product-moment correlations . Major findings are : 1)students judged the pH value of weak acid solutions by using Ka value directly; 2)students didn’t understand the relationship about Ka and strength of acid; 3)when two weak acids were mixed together students counted the concentration of hydrogen ion of the solution without the concept of competition in the reaction;4)students were confused with the solution of Na2CO3 about how they hydrolysis with water, and how come they will be acidic or basic. The study recommended more emphasis on teaching the calculation of Ka , concept of competition and buffer solutions . Further studies related to hydrolylsis of Na2CO3 and the reasons why students thought using same titer in different solutions result in the same pH while neutralization are suggested.

Topic Category 理學院 > 科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班
社會科學 > 教育學
  1. 宋志雄(1992):探究國三學生酸與鹼的迷思概念並應用以發展教學診斷工具。彰化:國立彰化師範大學育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  2. 李世峰(2002):高中學生應用勒沙特列原理判斷非勻相系化學平衡的迷思概念探討。台北:國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  3. 李詩閔(2000):以微量實驗裝置的教學活動探討學生對酸鹼概念的學習狀況。台北:國立台灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  4. 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。
  5. 邱喚文(2001):利用概念圖探究國三學生酸與鹼的概念學習。台北:國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  6. 姚錦棟(2002):我國國中及高中學生對酸鹼鹽迷思概念。台北:國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  7. 許健將(1991):利用兩段式測驗以探查高三學生有關共價鍵分子及分子結構之迷思概念。彰化:國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  8. 楊其安、郭重吉(1990):利用臨床晤談探究國中學生對力學概念的另有架構。物理教育,14-18。
  9. 楊文金(1993):實驗活動之設計對於學童電學概念之獲得與改變之效應研究(1),國立台北師範學院學報。
  10. 陳啟明(1991):發展紙筆測驗以探究高一學生對直流電路的迷思概念。彰師科學教育,3。
  11. 蔡玟錦(1992):發展紙筆測驗以探究高三學生對化學平衡的迷思概念並應用以發展教學診斷工具。國立彰化師範大學學報,12,149-174。
  12. 劉俊庚(2002):高中學生應用勒沙特列原理判斷非勻相系化學平衡的迷思概念探討。台北:國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  13. Anderson, B. (1986). Pupils Explanations of some Aspects of Chemical Reaction. Science Education, 70(5), 549-563.
  14. Appleton, K. (1997). Analysis and description of students' learning during science classes using a constructivist-based model. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(3), 303-318.
  15. Arnone, V.C. (1971) The nature of concepts: A point of view, theory into practice, 10(2), 101-108.
  16. Ausubel, D. P. (1968). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning.New York: Grune and Stratton.
  17. Ausubel, D. P. ,Novak, J. D. & Hanesian, H.(1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. 2 nd Ed. Journal of Resear in Science Teaching, 34(3), 303-318.
  18. Banerjee, A. C.(1991). Misconceptions of students and teachers in chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 487-494 .
  19. Braund, M. (1991) .Children’s ideas in classifying animals. Journal of Biological Education , 25(2), 103-110.
  20. Bruner, J. S.(1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
  21. Cohen, R., Eylon, B., & Gamel, U. (1983) Potential Difference and Current in Simple Electrical Circuits: A study of students concepts. American Journal of Physics, 51 (5), p. 407-412.
  22. Cros, D., Maurice, M., Amouroux, R., Chastrette, M., Leber, J., & Fayol, M.(1986). Conceptions of first-year university students of the constituents of matter and the notions of acids and bases. International Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 305-313 .
  23. Cros, D., Chastrette, M., & Fayol, M.(1988). Conceptions of second-year university students of some fundamental notions in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 331-336 .
  24. diSessa, A. (1982). Knowledge in pieces. A study of knowledge –based learning, Cognitive Science, 6, 37.
  25. Driver, R. (1981). Pupils’ alternative frameworks in science. European Journalof Science Education, 3(1), 93-101.
  26. Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(1),53-62.
  27. Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. J. & Fensham, P.J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633.
  28. Glynn, S. M. & Duit, R. (1995). Learning Science in the Schools: Research Reforming Practice. LEA publishers.
  29. Halloun I. A. & Hestenes, D. (1985).The initial knowledge state of college physics students.American Journal of Physics , 53, 1043-1055.
  30. Head, J.(1986)Research into “altrernative framework”:promise and problems. Research in Science and Technological Education, 4(2),203-221.
  31. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as Argument: Implications for Teaching and Learning Scientific Thinking. Science Education; 77(3), p319-37.
  32. Lawson, A.E. & Renner, J.W.(1975)Piagetian theory and biology teaching.American Biology Teacher,37(6), 336-343.
  33. Linn, M. C.( 1987). Establishing a Research Base for Science Education:Challenges Trends and Recommendations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(2), 191-217.
  34. Mintzes, J.J., Wandersee, H. & Novak, J.D. ,(2000)Teaching Science for Understanding—A Human Constructivist View. San Diego: Academic Press.
  35. Marshall, C.(1989)Design qualitative research . California:SAGE Publications,Inc, 9-31.
  36. Maija A. htee, Irma, V.(1998)Students’ understanding of chemical reaction. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 305-316.
  37. Nakhleh, M. B. & Krajcik, J. S.(1993). A Protocol Analysis of the Influence of Technology on Students’ Actions, Verbal Commentary, and Thought Processes During the Performance of Acid-Base Titrations. Journal of Rearch in Science teaching, 30(9),1149-1168 .
  38. Nakhleh, M. B. & Krajcik, J. S.(1994). Influence on levels of information as presented by different technologies on students' understanding of acid, base, and pH concepts. Journal of Rearch in Science teaching, 31(10), 1077-1096.
  39. Osborne, R., & Gilbert, J. (1980). A technique for exploring students’ views of the world. Physics Education, 50(6), 376-379.
  40. Ponser, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception:Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Educationn, 66.
  41. Reif, F. (1987) Interpretation of scientific or mathematical concepts: Cognitive issues and instructional implications. Cognitive Science, 11, 395-416.
  42. Rosch, E H., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W.D. Johnson, D.M., & Boyes-Braem, P.(1976) Basic objects in natural catergories. Cognitive Psychology, 8 , 382-439.
  43. Ross,H.B.& Munby,H.(1991).Concept mapping and misconception : a study of high-school students’ understandings of acids and bases. International Journal of Science Education, 13(1), 11-23.
  44. Ross, H. B. & West, L. H. T.(1986). Concept ional understanding and science learning:An interpretation of research within a source of knowledge framework. Science Education, 70(5), 583-564.
  45. Saouma B. B.(1992)The relationship between students’ learning strategies and the change in their misunderstanding during a high school chemistry course. Journal of research in Science teaching, 29(7), 687-699.
  46. Schmidt, H. J(1991). A label as a hidden persuader;Chemists’ neutralization concept. International Journal of Science Education, 13(4), 459-472.
  47. Schmidt, H. J.(1997). Students' misconceptions - looking for a pattern. Science Education, 81(2), 123-135.
  48. Treagust, D.F.(1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students’ misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science Education, 63, 459-72.
  49. Uri Zoller(1996)The use of examinations for revealing and distinguishing between students’ musconception,misunderstanding and “no conceptions” in college chemistry. Research in Science teaching, 26(3),317-326.
  50. Yates, G.C.R., & Chandler, M.(1991). The cognitive psychology of knowledge : Basic research findings and educational implications. Australian Journal of Education, 35(2), 131-153.
  51. 參考文獻
  52. 一、 中文部分
  53. 林生傳 (1994):概念學習與發展的階次理論模式研究—概念發展水準及其相關因素之探討。國立高雄師範大學。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究報告,NSC 82-0301-H-017-005。
  54. 王美芬、熊召弟(1995)︰國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理。
  55. 林振霖(1992):我國學生分子概念發展與診斷教學的研究。彰師學報,3,407- 478。
  56. 林清山(1990):教育心理學---認知取向。台北:遠流。
  57. 林淑芳、郭重吉、陳錦章(2000):台灣中區公立高二學生力學的迷思概念之研究。第十六屆科學教育學術研討會論文集。台北:國立台灣師範大學。
  58. 洪志明(1992):蒸餾實驗技能之概念學習模式。台北:國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文(未出版)。
  59. 施朱娟(1998):國中酸鹼概念教學之研究。台北:國立台灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  60. 許榮富(1991):科學概念發展與診斷教學合作計畫芻議 。科學發展月刊,18(2)。台北:國科會。
  61. 翁雪琴(1994):探討國三學生對於「晝夜及四季」成因之心智模式及其概念改變之歷程。台北:國立台灣師範大學碩士論文(未出版)。
  62. 郭重吉(1988):從認知觀點探討自然科學的學習。教育學院學報,13,351-378。
  63. 郭重吉(1990):學生科學知識認知結構的評估與描述。國立彰化師大學報,1,279-319。
  64. 郭重吉(1992):從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。科學發展月刊,20(5),548-570。
  65. 郭重吉 (1995):建構主義與科學教育的革新。科學教育學刊,7(3),p213-224 。
  66. 郭重吉 (2001):漫談建構主義在數理教學上的應用。建構與教學,16。http://pei.cjjh.tc.edu.tw/sci-edu/edu_3_17.htm(2002,5,28)。
  67. 楊純珠(1998):「溶液」多媒體CAL之概念學習研究。台北:國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  68. 陳姍姍(1992):我國國三學生酸鹼概念之研究。台北:國立台灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  69. 陳昭錦(1992):高三資優學生『水溶液中的化學平衡』解題個案研究。台北:國立台灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  70. 陳瓊森(2001):從建構主義觀點談概念形成及概念轉變。http://p1.ncue.edu.tw/cn/bk1/constuct.html(2001,8,9)。
  71. 教育部(1995):高級中學課程標準。台北:教育部。
  72. 教育部(2003):九年一貫課程綱要-自然與生活科技學習領域。台北:教育部。
  73. 黃台珠等譯(Mintzes, J. J. , Wandersee,H., Novak, J.D著)(2002):促進理解之科學教學 : 人本建構取向觀點 。臺北 : 心理。
  74. 黃萬居(1994):國小學生酸鹼概念發展之研究。台北:國科會專題研究成果報告(NSC83-0111-S133-007)。
  75. 黃達三(1998):概念圖應用於國中生物教材分析與評論。科學教育月刊,213,p15。
  76. 張賴妙理、鄭湧涇(2000):運用診斷測驗探究國一學生對光合作用的另有概念。第十六屆科學教育學術研討會論文集。台北:國立台灣師範大學。
  77. 葉連祺(2000):教師自編紙筆式測驗試題類型之探討。研習資訊,17(4)。台北:國立教育研究院。
  78. 歐陽鍾仁(1988):科學教育概論。台北:五南。
  79. 鍾聖校(1990):認知心理學。台北:心理。
  80. 鄭昭明(1993):認知心理學。301-327。台北:桂冠。
  81. 鄭麗玉 (1993 ):認知心理學。台北:五南。
  82. 鄭麗玉 (1998 ):如何改變學生迷思概念。教師之友,39(5),28-36。
  83. 二、 英文部分
  84. Bradley, J.D.& Mosimege, M.D.(1998). Misconceptions in acids and bases: a comparative study of student teachers with different chemistry backgrounds. South African Journal of Chemistry, 51(3),137-9.
  85. Driver, R. (1985). Beyond apperance:the conversation of matter under physical and chemical transformation. In R. Driver & E. Guesns & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children’s ideas in science. Philadelphia PA: Open University Press.
  86. Duit, R. & Treagust, D. F. (1995). Students' conceptions and constructivist teaching approaches. In B.J. Fraser & H.J. Walberg, (Eds.). Improving Science Education, 46-69. Chicago, Illinois :The University of Chicago Press.
  87. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The condition of learning and theory of instruction. New York: Holt, Rinehert & Winston.
  88. Goh, Ngoh–Khang(1993)Some misconceptions in chemistry .A cross-cultural comparison, and implications for teaching.Autralian Science teachers Journal, 39(3), 65-68.
  89. Green, B. F. , McClosky, M. , & Caramazza, A.(1985). The relation of knowledge to problem solving, with examples from kinematics. thinking and learning skills, 2, Hillsdale, NJ.
  90. Harlen(2001). Taking childrens’ idea seriously- inflence and trends.Primary Science review,67,14-17.
  91. Helm, H. & Novak, J. D. (1983).Proceedings of The International Seminar on Misconceptions of Science and Mathematics. Ithaca,N.Y.:Department of Education , Cornell university.
  92. Jantz, R. (1988). Concept Teaching. In Arends,R.L., Learning to teach. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. 262-263.
  93. Klausmeier, H. J.(1974). Conceptual Learning and Development. .New York:Academic Press.
  94. Kuhn, T. S.(1970):The structure of scientific revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  95. Novak, J. D. & Gowin, D. B.(1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  96. Nussbaum, J., & Novick, S. (1981). Creating cognitive dissonance between students’preconceptions to encourage in individual cognitive accommodation and a group cooperative construction of a scientific model. Paper presented at AERA Annual Convention, Los Angeles ,CA.
  97. Overby, J.(2000)Is it a weak acid or a weakly acidic solution?School Science review, 81(81), 89-91.
  98. Pella, M. D.(1966). Concept learning in science. The Science Teacher, 33(1), 31-34.
  99. Pfundt, H.,& Duit, R.(1991).Bibliograph: Students’ alternative frameworks and science education.(3rd ed.). Kiel, West Germany: Ipn.
  100. Showalter,V.M.(1974). A model for the structure of science. Education Research Council of America ERC Papers in science education.
  101. Sutton, C. & West, L. (1982). Investigating children’s existing ideas about science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 230424.)
  102. Toplis, R(1998)Ideas about acids and alkalis . School Science Review,1998,80(291),67-69.
  103. Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  104. Treagust, D.F.(1996). Improving Teaching and Learning in Science and Mathematics. New York Teachers College Press.
  105. Vidyapati, T. J.(1995)Higher secondary school student’s concepts of acid and bases. School Science Review,77(278),82-83.
  106. Von Glaserfeld, E. (1989). Constructivism in educations. In Husen, T. & Postlethwaite, T. N. (Eds.). The international encyclopedia in education. New York: Pergamon Press.
  107. White, R.T., & Tisher, R.P. (1985).Research of Natural Sciences. In M. Wittrock. (Ed.), Handbook on Research on teaching (3rd Ed). pp.874-905.New York:MacMillan.
  108. Wozny , Lucy(1984)The spreadsheet in an educational setting. Micro computing working paper series F84-4. Drexel University.
Times Cited
  1. 易諳峙(2005)。資訊融入國小面積迷思概念教學─以國小四年級為例。淡江大學教育科技學系碩士班學位論文。2005。1-309。 
  2. 陳惟謙(2004)。探討台北、新竹縣市的國二生對「水」之概念深淺的研究。臺灣師範大學化學系學位論文。2004。1-238。
  3. 楊鵬耀(2004)。探究電腦多媒體教學對於國三學生學習酸鹼概念與概念改變之歷程。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班學位論文。2004。1-227。
  4. 蔡昆諭(2005)。國中學生力與運動的迷思概念。臺灣師範大學物理學系在職進修碩士班學位論文。2005。1-183。
  5. 邱柏融(2008)。建模教學對國小五年級學生酸鹼心智模式改變之探究。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所學位論文。2008。1-171。
  6. 蔡俊義(2011)。多重表徵理論在理化科教學成效之研究—以酸鹼鹽單元為例。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班學位論文。2011。1-186。
  7. 劉小鈴(2016)。台灣與中國國中自然教科書之內容分析比較 ―以酸鹼鹽單元為例。中原大學教育研究所學位論文。2016。1-188。