教學策略是指安排學習環境中的教材教法及其他環境資源以促進學習的效率和速率，而某一種學習的有效教學策略並不一定適於另一種學習。 本研究以教材的排列順序及前教學策略的提供作為促進觀念學習的兩種重要控制因素。在教材結構上，三種排列順序一同時排列式，連續斷裂式及協同分組式一予以比較，並假設同時排列式和協同分組式將優於連續斷製式。在採用歐斯伯 (Ausubel, 1968) 的前階組織作為前教學策略上，假設提供前供前階組織能幫助學習者建立對新教材的知識架構，因此將比無提供前階組織的教學策略為佳。以具中上能力的高二學生為對象，並以學習心理學的正負增強及正負懲罰為教材，經應用3 x 2 的二位數變異數分析法處理後測─前測的進步分數，結果發現：教材排列順序與前教學策略在交互作用上未達顯著水準，三種教材排列順序並無顯著差別，然而二種前階組織教材的差別達顯著水準(P<.05)，無提供前階組織反較有提供前階組織為佳。因此，前階組織設計並不一定助於學習。由於在教材結構上的發現與過去美國的研究結果頗為不同，因此可推論觀念學習的教學策略似乎受學習者的背景 (中國，外國) 和教學情境 (教室的或看腦化的教學) 的影響。以不同科目及不同形式的前階組織設計繼續研究觀念學習的教學策略有其必要。

Instructional strategy means the prescriptive arrangement of materials, presentation modes and other environmental resources in order to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of learning. But an effective set of instructional strategies for a specific learning ?pradigm (e.g. concept learning) is not necessarily functional for another kind of learning paradigm. This study was to investigate an effective instructional strategies for concept learning. Content structure and prein structional strategy were two independent variables and concept learning acquisition was the dependent measure. Three kinds of sequencing-simultaneous, collective and succesive-were compared in designing the content structure of training materials. With and without advance organizer were selected as pre­instructional strategies. It was hypothesized that (1) the simultaneous and the collective sequencing of content would be more effective than the successive sequencing, (2) providing advance organizer to the learner was superior than without providing it. 3(content sequencing) X 2(advance organizer) two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the concept acquisition score. Subjects were 212 eleventh grade students from two college preparatory schools. When using psychological concepts (positive/negative reinforcement and punishment) as task instrument, it was found that the interaction of content sequencing and preinstructional strategy was non-significant, the differences of three kinds of content sequencing was also nonsignificant. But the difference of with and without advance organizer was significant. (p<.05). Students who did not receive advance organizer performed better than those who received it. A few assumptions were drawn from the results: The instructional strategies of concept learning seem to be affected by the background of the students (nationality or cognitive style factor) and instructional setting (classroom or computerized instruction). Further studies of concept learning strategies on different subject materials or on using different formats of advance organizer with in one subject were suggested.