Title

高一學生生物演化概念之研究

Authors

陳藍萍

Key Words

演化 ; 迷思概念 ; 本體分類論 ; 高一學生

PublicationName

臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2003年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

邱美虹

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究主要是藉由問卷及晤談的方式探討295位高一學生對於生物演化概念之認知情形。研究是先以問卷進行紙筆測驗,以了解高一學生生物演化概念的了解程度。此外,進一步選取紙筆測驗的三種解釋架構的學生為晤談對象,以瞭解高一學生在生物演化概念方面所具有的迷思概念,並以Chi之本體分類論為基礎,分析學生演化概念的本體分類情形。本研究結果發現如下: 一、高一學生在天擇之演化過程方面,學生的瞭解多不完整,並且存有許多迷思概念。 二、學生關於演化機制的迷思概念,在解釋架構方面可分為五大類型:(1)目的造成改變演化型;(2)目的造成一代基因改變演化型;(3)目的造成多代基因改變演化型;(4)環境造成加強性狀演化型;(5)獵物與捕食者相互影響演化型。在演化相關概念上包括「變異的來源」、「性狀的遺傳」、「演化的機制與意義」、「演化名詞的使用」等方面具有迷思概念。 三、持有達爾文論解釋架構的學生對演化過程的瞭解,大多傾向突現過程的概念,而持有拉馬克論及目的論解釋架構的學生則大多傾向以因果過程的概念來看待生物的演化過程。 四、學生的概念結構模式可分為三類六種,偏達爾文論的科學概念結構模式和概念結構模式1、偏拉馬克論的概念結構模式2和概念結構模式3以及偏向目的論的概念結構模式4和概念結構模式5六種。 本研究亦對未來相關研究、以及教學上提出建議,以供參考。

English Abstract

The purpose of this study was to probe 295 10th grade students’ conceptual cognition about organism evolution by questionnaire and interview. The questionnaire was to examine students’ organism evolution concept. In order to understand 10th grade students’ misconceptions of organism evolution, three types of explaining framework were selected as the interview subjects, and to utilize ontological categories of Chi as framework to analyze the ontological commitment for organism evolution concept of the students. The following conclusions were drawn: 1. As to the evolution mechanism-“natural selection”, the 10th graders failed to have a complete understanding of the evolution concepts of Darwinian and hold a lot of misconceptions. 2. There were five types of misconceptions in students’ explaining framework for evolution mechanism. It included: (1)The goal of survive creates the change evolution; (2)The goal of survive creates a generation of gene change evolution; (3)The goal of survive creates many generations of genes change evolution; (4)The environment creates strengthens the character evolution; (5)The prey mutually affects the evolution with predator evolution. In the evolution-related concept, the students had misconceptions including the area of “the origin of variation”, ”the heredity of Character”, ”mechanism and significance about evolution” and ”the use of evolution noun”. 3. From analyzing three groups of students’ interviewing data, the researcher found out that the students, who held Darwinian explaining framework, tended to use emergent process category in ontology to explain the evolution process; the students, who held Lamarckian or Teleological explaining framework, tended to use causal process category in ontology to explain the evolution process. 4. Students’ concept structure model fell into six types in three categories: (1)Darwinian scientific concept structure model and Darwinian concept structure model 1; (2)Lamarckian concept structure model 2 and Lamarckian concept structure model 3; (3)Teleological concept structure model 4 and Teleological concept structure model 5. From these findings, the researcher provided recommendations for further studies, science curriculum design, and science teaching about evolution.

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
Reference
  1. 林靜雯(2000):由概念改變及心智模式初探多重類比對國小四年級學生電學概念學習之影響。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  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。
    連結:
  3. 邱顯博(2002):國二、國三學生的擴散作用概念與概念改變之研究。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  4. 黃怡菱(2003):職前及在職國中自然科教師氣體粒子迷思概念之研究。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所教學碩士班碩士論文。
    連結:
  5. 張榮耀(2000):以科學史與本體論的觀點探討概念改變之機制。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  6. 郭人仲(1994):國中生物概念的類比學習之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  7. 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。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
    連結:
  8. 廖麗貞 林寶英 洪振方(2000):將達爾文演化論發展史融入大學生命科學通識課程之研究。科學教育學刊,8(2),179-198。
    連結:
  9. 劉俊庚(2002):迷思概念與概念改變教學策略之文獻分析-以概念構圖和後設分析模式探討其意涵與影響。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  10. 劉家成(2003):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。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  11. 劉誠宗(2003):學生對物種起源的解釋架構一貫性之探析。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所教學碩士班碩士論文。
    連結:
  12. 劉嘉茹(2000):以研究綱領與本體分類論探究概念改變機制之研究。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
    連結:
  13. Arnaudin M. W., & Mintzes J. J.(1985).Students’ alternative conceptions of the human circulatory systems: A cross-age study. Science Education, 69(5), 721-733.
    連結:
  14. Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View . NewYork: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    連結:
  15. Ausubel, D. P. ,Novak, J. D. & Hanesian, H.(1978). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. 2nd Ed. Journal of Resear in Science Teachin, 34(3), 303-318.
    連結:
  16. Bar, V., & Travis, A. S. (1991). Children’s views concerning phase changes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(4), 363-382.
    連結:
  17. Bishop, B. A., & Anderson ,C. W. (1990). Student conceptions of nature selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(5) ,415-427.
    連結:
  18. Brumby , M. N. (1979a).Problems in learning the concept of natural selection. Journal of Biological Education, 3(2), 119-122.
    連結:
  19. Brumby , M. N. (1981). The use of problem-solving in meanful learning in biological. Research of Science Education, 11, 103-110.
    連結:
  20. Brumby , M. N. (1984). Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection by medical biology students. Science Education, 68(4) ,493-503.
    連結:
  21. Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts, Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
    連結:
  22. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students’ preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241-1257.
    連結:
  23. Deadman, J. A., & Kelly , P. J. (1978). What do secondary school boys understand about evolution and heredity before taught the topics? Journal of Biological Education, 12 , 7-15.
    連結:
  24. Demastes, S. S., Settlage, J., & Good, R. (1995).Students’ conceptions of nature selection and its role in evolution: cases of replication and comparison. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 535-550.
    連結:
  25. Dobzhansky, T. (1973). Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution. The American Biology teacher, 35(3),125-129.
    連結:
  26. Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5,61-84.
    連結:
  27. Ferrari, M., & Chi, M. T. H. (1998). The nature of naïve explanations of natural selection. International Journal of Science Education. 20(10),1231-1256.
    連結:
  28. Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(1),53-62.
    連結:
  29. Gilbert, J. K., Osborne, R. J. & Fensham, P.J. (1982). Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Science Education, 66(4), 623-633.
    連結:
  30. Gould, S. J. (1996) Full House: The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin(New York: Harmony Books).
    連結:
  31. Hallden, O. (1988). The evolution of the spices : Pupils’ perspectives and school perspectives. International Journal of Science Education, 10 ,541-552.
    連結:
  32. Head, J.(1986). Research into alternative framework: Promise and problems. Science and Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.
    連結:
  33. Jensen, M.S., & Finley, F.N. (1995). Teaching evolution using historical arguments in a conceptual chang strategy. Science Eduction, 79(2), 147-166.
    連結:
  34. Jensen, M. S., & Findley, F. N. (1996). Changes in students’ understanding of evolution resulting from different curricular and instructional strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 879-990.
    連結:
  35. Lawson, A. E., & Thompson, L. D. (1988). Formal reasoning ability and misconceptions concerning genetics and natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 733-746.
    連結:
  36. Nicoll, G., Francisco, F., & Nakhleh, M. (2001). A three-tier system for assessing concept map links: a methodological study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 863-875.
    連結:
  37. Novak & Musonda (1991). A tweleve-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 117-153.
    連結:
  38. Osborne, J. F., Black, P.J., Meadows, J. M., & Smith, M. (1993). Young children’s (7-11) ideas about light and their development. International of Science Education, 15(1),83-93.
    連結:
  39. Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (1980). A method for the investigation of concept understanding in science. European Journal of science Education, 2(3), 311-321.
    連結:
  40. Piaget, J. (1964). Cognitive development in children: development and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 176-186.
    連結:
  41. Settlage, J. (1994). Conceptions of Natural Selection: A Snapshot of the Sense-Making Process. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 449-457.
    連結:
  42. Shemesh, M., & Lazarowitz R.(1989). Pupils' Reasoning Skills and Their Mastery of Biological Concepts. Journal of Biological Education, 23(1), 59-63.
    連結:
  43. Slotta, J. D.,Chi, M. T. H. and Joram, E. (1995) Assessing students’ misclassifications of physics concepts: An ontological basis for conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 373-400.
    連結:
  44. Starr, C., & Taggart, R.(1989). Biology:The Unity and Diversity of Life. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
    連結:
  45. Sutton, C. R., & West, L. (1982). Investigating children’s existing ideas about science. Leicester: University of Leicester, School of Education.
    連結:
  46. Trowbridge, J. E., & Mintzes, J. J.(1985). Students' Alternative Conceptions of Animals and Animal Classification. School Science & Mathematics, 85 (4), 304-316 .
    連結:
  47. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
    連結:
  48. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
    連結:
  49. Zuzovsky, R. (1994). Conceptualizing a teaching experience on the development of the idea of evolution : An epistemological approach to the education of science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 557-574.
    連結:
  50. 中文部分:
  51. 丁澤民、王偉、張世玲和連慧娟編譯(Starr C. & Taggart R. 原著)(1995):生物學。台北市:藝軒圖書出版社。
  52. 毛松霖(1995):地球科學迷思概念與概念改變之教學研究。國民中學學生概念學習學術研討會。台北市:國立台灣大學。
  53. 王美芬(1991):自然科錯誤概念之研究。台北市立師範學院學報,22,367-400。
  54. 王美芬(1995):國小四、五、六年級學生「生物構造配合功能」概念發展研究(Ⅱ)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告(NSC-85-2511-S-133-001)。
  55. 王美芬和熊召弟(1995):國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理出版社。
  56. 光復書局主編(2002):自然與生活科技一上。台北市:光復書局。
  57. 林明軫(1994):國小學童磁鐵與磁力性質迷思概念之初探。台南師院學生學刊,15,223-250。
  58. 林振霖(1993):國中學生的分子概念為基礎的化學反應概念學習與診斷教學的研究。中華民國第九屆科學教育學術研討會,頁147-176。
  59. 吳美芬(2002):師院學生演化概念認知之研究。 國立新竹師範學院數理研究所碩士論文。
  60. 吳銘隆編著(2003):SPSS統計應用學習實務:問卷分析與應用統計。台北市:知城數位科技。
  61. 吳慶軍(1997):從二元編碼理論探討山地學童光學概念的心智表徵及其在教學上的意涵。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計劃成果報告(NSC-86-2511-S-026-001)。
  62. 邱弘毅(1998):職前及在職國民小學教師的天氣概念極其相關迷思概念之研究。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
  63. 邱美虹、劉家茹、周金城和梁家祺(1999):認知師徒制對學生化學概念改變的影響。中華民國第十五屆科學教育學術研討會。彰化市:國立彰化師範大學。
  64. 邱美虹、周金城和林靜雯(2000):以述詞分析法探究認知師徒制的教學成效。中華民國第十六屆科學教育學術研討會。台北市:國立台灣師範大學。
  65. 邱美虹等譯(Thagard原著)(2003):概念革命。台北市:洪葉文化事業有限公司。
  66. 涂可欣譯(Ernst Mayr原著)(1999):看!這就是生物學。台北市:天下遠見出版社。
  67. 黃台珠(1984):概念的研究及其意義。科學教育(師大),66,44-56。
  68. 黃寶鈿(1998):從幾個學生錯誤概念的實例談理化科的教材教法。國民中學學生概念學習學術研討會。台北市:國立台灣大學。
  69. 黃寶鈿和黃湘武(1985):學生空氣概念:粒子性質及動力平衡。七十四年科學教育學術研討會論文彙編。
  70. 莊嘉坤(2000):國小學童生物適應環境概念學習之研究。八十九學年度師範學院教育學術論文發表會論文集。新竹市:國立新竹師範學院
  71. 郭重吉(1988):從認知觀點探討自然科學的學習。教育學院學報,13,352-378。
  72. 郭重吉(1990):學生科學知識認知結構的評估與描述。彰化師範大學學報,1,279-319。
  73. 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。
  74. 陳珊珊(1993):我國國三學生酸鹼概念之研究。國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
  75. 陳瓊森(1998):從建構主義觀點談概念形成及概念轉變。國民中學學生概念學習學術研討會。台北市:國立台灣大學。
  76. 盛承堯(1993):國小自然科學溶液概念及迷思概念之探討。花師數理教育學報,2(6),1-44。
  77. 國立編譯館主編(1994):生物下冊。台北市:國立編譯館。
  78. 楊文金(1993):多重現象與電學概念理解研究。科學教育學刊,1(2),頁135-160。
  79. 楊純珠(1999):「溶液」多媒體CAL之概念學習研究。國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
  80. 劉人和(1998):達爾文與演化論。菁莪季刊,10(3),12-18。
  81. 劉和義(1994):學生演化概念的發展評估與診斷教學之研究(Ⅰ)。國科會科教專題研究報告(NSC-79-0111-S-110-05-D)。
  82. 葉篤莊譯(1998):物種起源。台北市:台灣商務。
  83. 鄭湧涇(1998):概念學習研究對科學教學與師資培育的啟示。國民中學學生概念學習學術研討會。台北市:國立台灣大學。
  84. 龍騰文化事業公司編印(1999):基礎生物。台北縣:龍騰文化。
  85. 鍾聖校(1994):對科學教育錯誤概念研究之省思。教育研究資訊,2(3),89-110。
  86. 蘇育任(1993):「兒童的科學」研究之沿革與其對國小自然科教學之啟示。初等教育研究集刊,1,91-104。
  87. 顧錦濤(2000):國小學童生物演化概念學習之研究—融入學習角學習策略。屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
  88. 英文部分:
  89. Bishop, B. A., & Anderson, C. W. (1985).Evolution by nature selection:A teaching module(Occasional Paper No.91).East Lansing , MI:Institute for Research on Teaching , Michigan State University.
  90. Brumby , M. N. (1979b). Students’ preceptions and learning styles associated with the concept of evolution by nature selection. Unpublished doctoral dissertation ,University of Surrey , United Kingdom.
  91. Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J. J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York: John Wiley and Son.
  92. Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
  93. Chi, M. T. H. (1992) Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: examples from learning and discovery in science. In R.Giere(Ed.), Cognitive models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp.129-186). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  94. Chi, M. T. H. & Roscoe, R. D. (2002) The processes and challenges of conceptual change, M.Limon &L. Mason(Eds.), Reconsidering Conceptual Change.Issue in Theory and Practice, 3-27.
  95. Driver, R. (1983). The pupil as a Scientist. St Edmunds: St Edmundsbury Press.
  96. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
  97. Driver, R., & Bell, B. (1986). Students’ thinking and the learning of science: A constructivist view. School Science Review, 67(240), 443-456.
  98. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The conditions of learning (4rd). New York: Holt, Rinehart &Winston.
  99. Helenurm, K. (1992). Problems facing education in evolution. In R. G. Good, Trowbridge, J. E., Demastes, S. S., Wandersee, J. H., Hafner, M. S., & Cummins,C., L.(Eds.), Proceedings of the 1992 evolution education research conference.Luoisiana Status University at Baton Rough , December 4-5, 1992.
  100. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  101. Lien, C. J.(1995). A Qualitative Study of the Alternative Ideas of College Students about Chemical Equilibrium. Journal of National Taipei Teachers College, 3, 289-320.
  102. Mayr, E. (1997) This Is Biology(Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press)
  103. Novak, J. D. (1987). Proceeding of the Second International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educated Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Itheca, N. Y. Cornell University.
  104. Ohlsson, S. (1991) Young adults’ understanding of evolutionary explanations: preliminary observations. Technical Report. Learning Research and Development Center,University of Pittsburgh.
  105. Ohlsson, S., & Bee, N. V. (1992).The effect of expository text on children’sexplanations of biological evolution. OERI Report.Learning Research and Development Center ,University of Pittsburgh.
  106. Pfundt, H., & Duit, R.(1991). Bibliography:Students' Alternative Frameworks and Science Education. Kiel, Germany:University of Keil Institute for Science Education.
  107. Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Times Cited
  1. 吳家鶴(2005)。探究板塊構造運動的迷思概念與比較多重類比和反駁陳述對促進板塊構造運動迷思概念改變之成效。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班學位論文。2005。1-142。
  2. 茬家續(2006)。高一學生生物演化概念分析與概念改變教學之研究。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所學位論文。2006。1-153。
  3. 湯偉君(2007)。以解釋本質探討中學演化論之教科書內容與教學。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所學位論文。2007。1-599。
  4. 辛怡瑩(2008)。以概念演化樹探討跨年級學生對演化概念之發展。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所學位論文。2008。1-201。
  5. 羅育如(2012)。國小學童古生物演化概念學習成效之研究:以國立臺灣博物館古生物展解說活動為例。臺灣師範大學生命科學研究所學位論文。2012。1-139。