透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.238.195.81
  • 學位論文

國中學生在力學課程後對力與運動概念認知之現況調查研究

指導教授 : 黃福坤
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


學生在國中階段第一次接受正式力學課程。本研究旨在調查接受力學課程後的學生,所具有的「牛頓力學」概念認知情形。並針對學生的迷思概念,探究其背後的概念建構模式。近年來,許多國內外科教研究者針對特定學科深入探討學生們的另有架構,發現他們在「力與運動」方面存在最多的迷思概念,因為學生會以生活中對運動的原有概念作為學習力學的基礎。。 本研究的方法包含紙筆測驗及半結構式晤談。先針對國二至高二的613位學生實施「力學概念評量」(Force Concept Inventory,FCI),觀察不同階段的學生對「牛頓力學」概念的發展情形;並將此FCI評量結果作為本研究中另一份自行研發試題「國中力學概念評量」JMCI(Junior Mechanics Concept Inventory,JMCI)的參考。 JMCI評量試題完全以現行國中力學課程為範圍,參考FCI題目的精神及評量結果設計而成。以學校段考方式實施,對台北市某公立國中國三學後學生394人進行JMCI評量,之後並與當中76位學生進行晤談。將所得評量結果與晤談資料進行量與質的分析,深入了解學生對「力與運動」的想法。 本研究結果顯示: 一、受試者所持有的力學迷思概念與其它的相關研究結果非常類似。最嚴重的迷思情況是(約八成)學生認為「運動中的物體具有一沿運動方向的作用力(impetus)」。本研究中另外發現約七成的學生會以「最大靜摩擦力」的觀念來理解「摩擦力」;約四成的學生認為「靜止在地面上的物體受有摩擦力」;當要推動靜止物體時,外力必須克服此「物體與地面間的摩擦力」,但若要推動物體前進,則所施的外力除需抵銷「物體與地面間的摩擦力」外,還要克服「物體本身的重力」;惟有如此,物體才能移動。 二、藉由JMCI與FCI評量結果配合晤談資料的綜合分析,本研究將學生的力學概念建構模式分為七類,而這七類概念建構模式與概念評量題目的難易度及鑑別度間存在著良好的配合。此分類模式可作為老師們日後在了解學生概念建構與評量概念選題時的一個參考。 三、透過不同階段學生的FCI評量結果發現:普遍來說,愈高年級的學生其力學概念也愈健全,但進步的部份幾乎集中在各階段高分組(評量成績的前27﹪)的學生身上,低分組(評量成績的後27﹪)的學生在力學基本概念的進展上可說是微乎其微。顯示現今的教學方式應更加強了解低分組學生的概念迷思,秉持「有教無類」的精神,達到「因材施教」的效果! 四、本研究將FCI的評量結果與文獻中美國高中與大學生的資料相比較,發現我們中學生在力學基礎概念的表現優於國外的學生。但是否代表未來能有較優異的科學成就? 值得有心者共同來關心這樣議題。

關鍵字

力學 力與運動 概念 迷思概念 另有概念

並列摘要


The main purpose of this study is to investigate conceptual development of force and motion for junior high school students after they have learned Newtonian mechanics. Many researches have investigated rather intensively related students’ conceptions development: Students are rather egocentrism, and their concepts structures are quite different from teachers’ and scientists’ structure, especially in mechanics. Because kinematics concepts are basic concepts of “force and motion”, researches found that students have most different alternative frameworks about “force and motion”. Force Concept Inventory (FCI) is a popular tool to probe student’s concept structure for university or high school students. We also applied it to 613 students, range from 8th to 11th grade, to probe subject’s reasoning on “force and motion” in Newtonian mechanics. With collected data and review articles, we develop Junior Mechanics Concept Inventory (JMCI). JMCI is designed with similar goals as FCI, force students to make choice between Newtonian concepts and commonsense alternatives, but specify for our junior high school students. JMCI post-test was administered to 394 subjects after they have learned Newtonian mechanics, and 76 students were interviewed after right after the test. Data from paper -and-pencil test and interviews were carefully studied to find out students’ misconceptions. Many of our results support studies from previous research, especially about students’ misconception in “ impetus”, i.e. “There is a force action on an object to keep it in constant motion”. Our new findings are: Almost 70% students treat an object’s friction as “object’s maximum static friction”; About 40% students think “An object remains at rest horizontally is subject to friction”, they consider “A force applied by an external agent to push the object “forward ” must overcome the “friction force” and “gravitation force”. We categorize our test items into seven styles, in term of students’ concept structure, and found “ difficulty index and discrimination index” for those items fit into the same style almost fit within the same range. Researchers might find it helpful to design or select item problems from test bank according to our category if they want to probe students conceptual understanding in basic mechanics. Our study have shown that: current instruction in “force and motion” do promote top 27% students substantial progress in conceptual understanding, but almost nothing happened for bottom 27% students. We should do more help those students below average. Compared with FCI test results for students in the U.S., our students in Taiwan do have much better test score: Our top 27% students’ in high school have higher average score than university physics students in the U.S. However, “Will our students have better science achievements in the future?”, is a good topic for further research..

並列關鍵字

無資料

被引用紀錄


吳慧葳(2015)。數位遊戲式APP對中學體育班 學習成效評估-以高中物理力學篇為例〔碩士論文,淡江大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6846%2fTKU.2015.00620
張朝閔(2015)。探討動態或靜態表徵輔以序列式問題鷹架對拋體運動概念學習表現之影響〔碩士論文,國立交通大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6842%2fNCTU.2015.00436
陳智源(2002)。電腦多媒體輔助教學在高一「力與運動」課程的教學成效探討〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-2603200719122966
張柏強(2004)。建構抽象的科學概念之教學探討〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-2004200711163435
陳秋萍(2004)。以TUG-K測驗探討國三學生讀運動學圖形的表現〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-2004200713305250

延伸閱讀