臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：電腦輔助建模學習活動對國小學童認知結構、建模實務與模型認識觀之研究
作者：林英傑
作者(外文)：Yingchieh Lin
校院名稱：臺北市立教育大學
系所名稱：教育學系博士班
指導教授：崔夢萍
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2012
主題關鍵詞：電腦輔助建模學習活動；認知結構；建模實務；模型認識觀；computer-based modeling learning activities；cognitive structures；modeling practices；epistemology of models
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:26
本研究旨在探討電腦輔助建模學習活動對國小高年級學童認知結構、建模實務與模型認識觀的影響。本研究共分三個研究主題進行：
(一)探討電腦輔助建模學習活動對國小高年級學生認知結構及表達模型的影響。研究對象為兩班國小66位六年級學生，分別實施四週的「溫室效應與全球暖化」單元的電腦輔助建模學習課程與一般教學活動，研究者以錄音及訪談方式收集資料，再以概念流程圖析法將訪談內容繪製成概念流程圖，分析學生的認知結構學習成效，並輔以錄影方式錄製三個焦點小組學生建模歷程及所呈現的模型。研究結果發現：（1）國小高年級學生經過電腦輔助建模學習活動後，無論認知結構的「量」與「質」及訊息處理策略的使用，都能獲得較佳的效果；（2）不論是高學業成就或是低學業成就學生都比較能從電腦輔助建模學習活動中受益；（3）除了認知結構的量之外，高學業成就學生在認知結構的整合度上，以及中高階的訊息處理策略明顯受益，但是低學業成就的學生只能在認知結構的「量」有進步；（4）電腦建模工具Model-It協助學生建立模型、測試模型以及修正模型，協助學生將溫室效應機制反應的心智模型表達出來；（5）模型不僅在協助學生表達心智表徵，更重要的是可以讓學生認知結構中的概念數量、整合性與訊息處理策略皆獲得較佳的學習成果。
(二)探討電腦輔助建模學習活動對國小高年級學童建模實務影響與建模歷程的類型。研究對象為兩班國小66位六年級學生，實驗組進行四週進行電腦輔助建模學習活動，並輔以錄影方式錄製學生建模歷程，對照組則以一般教學介入，研究結果發現：（1）電腦輔助建模學習活動能有效提升國小學童建模實務之學習成效，實驗組學生在五項建模實務之表現顯著優於對照組學生，建模實務的表現中以「模型修正與改善」實際顯著程度最高，「描述推理過程」實際顯著的程度最低；（2）學生呈現不同的建模歷程，可見學生之間建模歷程具有差異性，學生建模類型有精鍊型、修正型和固定型三類，此影響學生進行模型的檢驗及表達模型的呈現。
(三)探討電腦輔助建模學習活動對國小高年級學生模型認識觀的影響，並進一步分析模型認識觀與認知結構及其與建模實務的關係。研究對象為兩班國小65位六年級學生，實驗組實施四週的「水質優養化」單元的電腦輔助建模學習活動，對照組則以一般教學介入，研究結果發現：（1）電腦輔助建模學習活動能提升學生國小高年級學童之模型認識觀，實驗組學生的模型認識觀表現顯著優於對照組學生，而實驗組與對照組在模型認識觀上最大差異之處，是在「模型的變動本質」向度；（2）實驗組學生的模型認識觀層級大約是達到Grosslight等人（1991）研究所分類的層級二（Level2），比過去研究似乎獲得更佳的模型認識觀；（3）學生所持的模型認識觀和其認知結構呈現相關，其中又以「模型是解釋的工具」與「模型的變動本質」和認知結構所有向度達到顯著相關；（4）實驗組學生依照所持之模型認識觀分數高低排序，再以中位數將二組學生各自分成成熟模型認識觀組與素樸模型認識觀組，結果發現成熟模型認識觀組學生在接受電腦輔助建模學習活動後，在認知結構上比素樸模型認識觀組學生為佳；（5）學生所持的模型認識觀和其建模實務呈現相關，其中又以「模型是真實的複製品」和建模實務所有向度達到顯著相關；（6）成熟模型認識觀組學生在接受電腦輔助建模學習活動後，在建模實務上也比素樸模型認識觀組學生為佳。
綜合上述，本研究之電腦輔助建模學習活動能提升國小高年級學童之認知結構、建模實務與模型認識觀的成長。本研究建議將建模學習活動提早至小學階段，在教師的引導下讓學生自行建立屬於自己的模型，並從中理解模型的用途與限制，對學生的科學素養有很大的助益。
This study was conducted to explore the effects of computer-based modeling learning activities on sixth graders’ cognitive structures, modeling practices and epistemology of models. This study was implemented for three phases. In the first phase, the study was conducted to explore the effects of computer-based modeling learning activities on sixth graders’ understanding of the greenhouse effect and global warming. The subjects were sixty-six sixth graders in Taipei. The control group received a traditional instruction. The experimental group received an instruction which was based on Model-It integrating computer-based modeling learning activities. The interview data were gathered a week after the instruction. The interview narratives were transcribed into the format of ‘flow maps’ to evaluate students’ cognitive structures. The conversations and online computer activities of three paired sixth-graders were video recorded while they created their models. The results of this study revealed that（1）students in the computer-based modeling learning activities group performed significantly on leaning outcomes in terms of the quality and quantity of their cognitive structures, and the usage of the information processing strategies.（2）Both high academic achievers and low achievers benefited from the computer-based modeling learning activities.（3）The high academic achievers in the computer-based modeling learning activities displayed larger and more integrated cognitive structures, and better usage of information processing strategies than those of high achievers in the traditional group.（4）The low achievers only showed greater extent of the cognitive structures than their counter partners in the traditional group.（5）The Model-It was an effective computer-based modeling tool, which facilitated students to express, test, and revise their models.（6）Models not only help students express their mental models, but also help students reach better learning outcomes in terms of concepts, integration, and information processing within their cognitive structures.
In the second phase, the study was conducted to explore the effects of computer-based modeling learning activities on sixth graders’ modeling practices and modeling process. The subjects were sixty-six sixth graders in Taipei. The control group received a traditional instruction. The experimental group received the computer-based modeling learning activities. Paper and pencil tests of modeling practices were implemented in the two groups before and after the study to evaluate students’ development of specific modeling practices. The conversations and online computer activities of three paired sixth-graders were video recorded while they created their models. The results of this study showed that（1）the development of modeling practices were effectively enhanced through the computer-based modeling learning activities. The effect size of revising and improving models was high. And, the effect size of describing a reasoning process was low. （2）The students showed three different categories of modeling process including refinement, adjustment and regularity.
In the third phase, the study was conducted to examine the effects of computer-based modeling learning activities on students’ epistemology of models and to investigate the relation between students’ epistemology of models and their cognitive structures as well as modeling practices. The subjects were sixty-five sixth graders in Taipei. The control group received a traditional instruction, whereas the experimental group received a set of computer-based modeling learning activities about eutrophication. The results were as following:（1）The development of students’ epistemologies of models was effectively enhanced through the computer-based modeling learning activities. The great discrepancy between experimental group and control group was the changing nature of models.（2）According to Grosslight et al.’s （1991）three general levels of epistemology of models, the experimental group students in this study attained better epistemology of models and reached Level 2 as compared with previous studies.（3）The results of the study indicated positive correlation between students’ epistemologies of models and their cognitive structures. Moreover, two aspects of epistemology of models - models as explanatory tools, the changing nature of models - were significantly correlated with all aspects of cognitive structures.（3）The experimental group students were divided into two groups based on a median split, one group reflecting a naïve perspective on epistemologies of models, and one group reflecting a sophisticated perspective on epistemologies of models. The results revealed that students with more sophisticated epistemologies of models are better able to further their cognitive structures.（4）Students’ epistemologies of models were significantly correlated with their modeling practices. The models as exact replicas were significantly correlated with all aspects of modeling practices. （5）Students with more sophisticated epistemologies of models were better able to further their modeling practices as compared to students with less sophisticated epistemologies of models.
Based on the above results of the study, this study provided the initial evidences of positive effects of computer-based modeling learning activities on sixth graders’ cognitive structures, modeling practices and epistemology of models. It was suggested that science teachers could design and implement a sequence of computer-based modeling learning activities associated with a computer-based modeling tool to promote students’ conceptual learning and to emphasize the necessity of considering epistemological understanding in research as well as in education practice.
林振欽、洪振方（2008）。國中學生電腦模擬單擺建模歷程個案研究。高雄師大學報：自然科學與科技類，17，1-24。
林清山（1992）。心理與教育統計學。台北：東華。
張志康、邱美虹（2009）。建模能力分析指標的發展與應用―以電化學為例。科學教育學刊，17，319-342。new window
張春興（2004）。教育心理學―三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華。
張志康、邱美虹（2009）。建模能力分析指標的發展與應用―以電化學為例。科學教育學刊，17，319-342。new window
Acher, A., Arcà, M., &; Sanmartí, N. (2007). Modeling as a teaching learning process for understanding materials: A case study in primary education., Science Education, 91(3), 398-418.
Anderson, O. R., &; Demetrius, O. J. (1993). A flow-map method of representing cognitive structure based on respondents’ narrative using science content. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 953-969.
Anderson, O. R., Randle, D., &; Covotsos, T. (2001). The role of ideational networks in laboratory inquiry learning and knowledge of evolution among seventh grade students. Science Education, 85(4), 410-425.
Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., Barnett, M. G., &; Squire, K. (2001). Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices/understandings. Cognition and Instruction, 19(1), 47-94.
Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., Barnett, M., &; Keating, T. (2000). Virtual solar system project: Building understanding through model building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 719-756.
Bass, J. E., &; Maddux, C. D. (1982). Scientific explanations and Piagetian operational levels. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19(7), 533-541.
Bell-Basca, B., Grotzer, T.A., Donis, K., &; Shaw, S. (2000, April-May). Using domino and relational causality to analyze ecosystems: realizing that what goes around comes around. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
Biggs, J. B., &; Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press.
Bischoff, P. J., &; Anderson, O. R. (2001). Development of knowledge frameworks and higher order cognitive operations among secondary school students who studied a unit on ecology. Journal of Biological Education, 35(2), 81-88.
Boulter, C. J. (2000). Language, models and modelling in the primary science classroom. In J. K. Gilbert &; C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 289-306). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., &; Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-41.
Buckley, B. C. &; Boulter, C. (2000). Investigating the role of representations and expressed models in building mental models. In J. K. Gilbert &; C. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 119 - 135). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Buckley, B. C. (2000). Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 895-935.
Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., Kindfield, A. C. H., Horwitz, P., Tinker, R. F., Gerlits, B., et al. (2004). Model-based teaching and learning with BioLogicaTM: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 23 – 41.
Chittleborough, G., Treagust, D., Mamiala, M., and Mocerino, M. (2005). Students’ perceptions of the role of models in the process of science and in the process of learning. International Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 195-212.
Clement, J. (2000). Model based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1041-1053.
Cobern, W. W. &; Loving, C. C. (2000). Defining "Science" in a Multicultural World: Implications for Science Education. Science Education, 85(1), 50-67.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., &; Scott, P. (1994), Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom, Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
Elby, A., &; Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education, 85(5), 554–567.
Ergazaki, M., Komis, V., &; Zogza, V. (2005). High-school students' reasoning while constructing plant growth models in a computer-supported educational environment. International Journal of Science Education, 27(8), 909-933.
Ergazaki, M., Zogza, V., &; Komis, V. (2007). Analysing students’ shared activity while modeling a biological process in a computer-supported educational environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 158-168.
Fretz, E. B., Wu, H.-K., Zhang, B., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J. S., &; Soloway, E. (2002). An investigation of software scaffolds supporting modeling practices. Research in Science Education, 32, 567-589.
Giere, R. N. (1999). Using models to represent reality. In L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian, &; P. Thagard (Eds.), Model-based reasoning in scientific discovevy (pp. 41-57). New York: Plenum.
Gilbert, J. K. (1993). Models and Modeling in Science Education. Hatfield, UK: Association for Science Education.
Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C., &; Elmer, R. (2000). Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education. In J. K. Gilbert &; C. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 3-18). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Gobert J., O'Dwyer L., Horwitz P., Buckley B., Sharona T. L., &; Wilensky U. (2011). Examining the Relationship Between Students' Understanding of the Nature of Models and Conceptual Learning in Biology, Physics, and Chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 33(5), 653-684.
Gobert, J. &; Discenna, J. (1997). The Relationship between Students' Epistemologies and Model-Based Reasoning. Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University, Department of Science Studies. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED409164).
Gobert, J. D., &; Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 891-894.
Gobert, J.D., &; Pallant, A. (2004). Fostering students’ epistemologies of models via authentic model-based tasks. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 7-22.
Greca, I. M., &; Moreira, M. A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modeling. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1-11.
Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., &; Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 799–822.
Held, C., Markus, K., &; Gottfried, V.（2006）. Mental Models And the Mind: Current Developments in Cognitive Psychology, Neuroscience, And Philosophy of Mind. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Hempel, C. G. (1958). Fundamentals of concept formation in empirical science. In C. G. Hempel (Ed.), International encyclopedia of unified science: Foundations of the unity of science (Vol. 2, pp. 88-93). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students’ knowledge about the nature of science. Science &; Education, 84, 51-70.
Hogan, K., &; Thomas, D. (2001). Cognitive comparisons of students’ systems modeling in ecology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10, 319-345.
Jackson, S. L., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., &; Soloway, E. (1996). A learner-centred tool for students building models. Communications of the ACM, 39(4), 48-49.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1989). Mental Models. In M. I. Posner’s (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (469-499). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Keating, J., Greenberg, R. D., Baldwin, M., &; Thousand, J. (1998). A collaborative action research model for teacher preparation programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 49(5), 381-390.
Komis, V., Ergazaki, M., &; Zogza, V. (2007). Comparing computer-supported dynamic modeling and “paper &; pencil” concept mapping technique in students' collaborative activity. Computers &; Education, 49(4), 991-1017.
Kurtz dos Santos, A. C., &; Ogborn, J. (1994). Sixth form students’ ability to engage in computational modelling. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 10, 182-200.
Lave, J., &; Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lohner, S., van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., &; van Hout-Wolters, B. (2005). Students’ reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 441-461.
Mandinach, E.B. (1989). Model-building and the use of computer simulation of dynamic systems. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 221–243.
Matthews, M. R. (2002). Constructivism and science education: A further appraisal. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(2), 121-134.
Morrison, M., &; Morgan, M. S. (1999). Models as mediating instruments. In M. Morgan &; M. Morrison (Eds.), Models as mediators: Perspectives on natural and social science (pp. 10-37). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2000). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Novak, J. D., &; Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York and Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Papaevripidou, M., Constantinou, C. P., &; Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Modeling complex marine ecosystems: An investigation of two teaching approaches with fifth graders. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 145-157.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Penner, D. E. (2001). Cognition, computers, and synthetic science: Building knowledge and meaning through modeling. Review of Research in Education, 25, 1-36.
Penner, D. E., Giles, N. D., Lehrer, R., &; Schauble, L. (1997). Building functional models: Designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 125-143.
Piaget, J. (1974). The Child’s Conception of Movement and Speed. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Rappin, N., Guzdial, M., Realff, M., &; Ludovice, P. (2001). Connections as a focus for model-building learning in engineering. Interactive Learning Environments, 9(2), 101–141.
Saari, H., &; Viiri, J. (2003). A research-based teaching sequence for teaching the concept of modeling to seventh-grade students. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1333-1352.
Schwarz, C., &; White, B. (2005). Meta-modeling knowledge: Developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 165-205.
Seel, N. M., &; Blumschein, P. (2009). Systems modeling in learning and instruction: A theoretical perspective. In P. Blumschein, W. Hung, D. Jonassen, &; J. Strobel (Eds.), Model-based approaches to learning: Using systems models and simulations to improve understanding and problem solving in complex domains (pp. 3-15). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
Shavelson, R. (1974). Methods for examining representations of subject matter structure in students' memory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 11(3), 231-249.
Shrader, G., Lindgren, R., &; Sherin, B. (2000, April). A pedagogically-oriented analysis of the modeling process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Sins, P. H. M., Savelsbergh, E. R., &; van Joolingen, W. R. (2005). The difficult process of scientific modelling: An analysis of novices’ reasoning during computer-based modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1695-1721.
Sins, P. H.M., Savelsbergh, E.R., van Joolingen, W., van Hout-Wolters, B. (2009). The relation between students’ epistemological understanding of computer models and their cognitive processing in a modeling task. International Journal of Science Education, 31(9), 1205-1229.
Spitulnik, M. W., Krajcik, J., &; Soloway, E. (1999). Construction of models to promote scientific understanding. In W. Feurzeig &; N. Roberts (Eds.), Modeling and simulation in science and mathematics education (pp. 70-94). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., &; Soloway, E. (1998). Secondary students' dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(3), 215-234.
Sandoval, W. A., &; Millwood, K. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition &; Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
Talsma, V. L. (2000). Scientific understandings revealed by students’ computer models of a stream: A trickle or a flood? In B. Fishman &; S. O’Conner-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 98–105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G., &; Mamiala, T. L. (2002). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 357–368.
Tsai C.-C. (1999). Content analysis of Taiwanese 14 year olds’ information processing operations following physics instruction, with relations to science attainment and scientific epistemological beliefs. Research in Science and Technological Education, 17, 125-138.
Tsai, C. C., &; Huang, C. M. (2002). Exploring students’ cognitive structures in learning science: A review of relevant methods. Journal of Biological Education, 36, 163-169.
Tsai, C.-C. &; Chou, Y.-R. (2005). The role of “core” and “anchored” concepts in knowledge recall: A study of knowledge organization of learning thermal physics. Knowledge Organization, 32, 143-158.
Tsai, C.-C. &; Huang, C.-M. (2001). Development of cognitive structures and information processing strategies of elementary school students learning about biological reproduction. Journal of Biological Education, 36, 21-26.
Tsai, C.-C. (1998). An analysis of Taiwanese eighth graders’ science achievement, scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structure outcomes after learning basic atomic theory. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 413-425.
Tsai, C.-C. (2000). The effects of STS-oriented instruction on female tenth graders’ cognitive structure outcomes and the role of student scientific epistemological beliefs. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1099-1115.
Tsai, C.-C. (2001). Probing students’ cognitive structures in science: The use of a flow map method coupled with a metalistening technique. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27, 257-268.
Van Joolingen, W. R., de Jong, T., &; Dimitrakopoulou, A. (2007). Issues in computer supported inquiry learning in science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 111-119.
Vosniadou, S. (2002). Mental Models in Conceptual Development. In L. Magnani &; N. Nersessian (Eds), Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values. New York: Kluwer Academic Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Van Driel, J. H. &; Verloop, N. (1999).Teachers’ knowledge of models and modelling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(11), 1141-1153.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity.Cambridge University Press.
White, B. Y., &; Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118.
Wichmann, A., Gottdenker, J., &; Jonassen, D. (2007). Scientific inquing learning using computer supported experimentation. Retrieved January, 20, 2007, from URL http:// spaceplanting.coe. missouri.edu/doc/docs/ ICCE_predictioncycle.pdf.
Winbourne, P. (1994). Learning about mathematical modelling: A case study using Model Builder. In H. Mellar, J. Bliss, R. Boohan, J. Ogborn, &; C. Tompsett (Eds.), Learning with artificial worlds: Computer based modelling in the curriculum (pp. 94-103). Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
Wu, H.-K. (2010). Modeling a complex system: Using novice-expert analysis for developing an effective technology-enhanced learning environment. International Journal of Science Education, 32(2), 195-219.
Wu, Y.-T., &; Tsai, C.-C. (2005). Development of elementary school students' cognitive structures and information processing strategies under long-term constructivist-oriented science instruction. Science Education, 89(5), 822-846.
Wu, Y.-T., &; Tsai, C.-C. (2011). High school students’ informal reasoning regarding a socio-scientific issue, with relations to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 371-400.
Zhang, B., Liu, X., &; Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Expert models and modeling processes associated with a computer-modeling tool. Science Education, 90, 579-604.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1477（臺灣：1474，外國：3） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1855660 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67649310
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上