本文旨在從哲學觀點評論目前教育上最風行的理論 - 建構主義；首先追溯建構主 義的哲學根源，探討其各派別的優點與缺點。建構主義的思想與其研究成果極有價值：（一 ）它已產生為數眾多的重要實徵性研究數據，對吾人知曉並瞭解學生在學習科學時的困難有 極大貢獻；（二）以上知識使我們能夠發展出一些革新的自然科學教學法，以及對學習者有 更深刻的認識。然而，我們仍可發現建構主義在哲學上有甚多可議之處。它在方法論上的成 就雖然有目共睹，但據此即毫不批判的將其當作指示物，就產生了不得當的論點。作為一個 理論的「指示物」，建構主義遭遇到由「工具性認識論」引起的瑕疵，因這種認識論對科學 與科學家之觀點與實務所做的描述是錯誤的。更進一步來說，它把新知識形成的方式與舊知 識學習的方式混淆了，因它假定兩者相同，其實不然。此外，其認識論未能涉及孩童的發展 順序以及課程內容，而其教學法更缺乏足夠堅強的理論要點。本文盼望能透過哲學思考的嚴 謹評析，全面評估其主要論點及研究結果。今後我們不應僅執著於單一學派的思想，而須採 行重視多元多途的教學理論，才能促進科學教育的發展。

　　　　　The paradigm of constructivism has been dominating in many fields of education over the past two decades, however, understanding the very nature of constructivism remains unclear and unsettled. This paper is thus aimed at offering a comprehensive critique of constructivism in education which not only addresses the successes of constructivistic teaching, but also defines and identifies its weaknesses. Undoubtedly, it has stimulated substantial empirical data and proved teachers' knowledge and understanding of children's scientific thinking, its origins and its development. In turn, the existence of constructivistic teaching has reinforced the constructivistic theory. At heart, many seminal failings of constructivistic education seem to suggest that it offers no guidance on adjudication between theories, the organization and sequencing of content within the science curriculum and rejects any value for didaticism. Mature constructivism tends to abrogate all avenues of research to itself. But no single perspective is ever lilely to provide a findal description of science education. If constructivistic teaching obscures other educational perspectives, either by its popularity or its blandness, that could be damaging. Constructivism is flawed because it fails to come to grips with issues such as culture or power in the classrooms.