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：理化教師教學內容知識的探討 ∼以酸鹼中和為例
作者：黃平屯
作者(外文)：Ping-Tun Huang
校院名稱：國立彰化師範大學
系所名稱：科學教育研究所
指導教授：郭重吉
張惠博
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2013
主題關鍵詞：理化教師；教學內容知識；酸鹼中和；Physical science teacher；pedagogical content knowledge；acid-base neutralization
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(1) 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:27
綜合相關文獻得到科學教師PCK教學展現的面向，主要包括：教學取向、關於學生理解科學的知識、課程知識、教學表徵和策略知識、和評量知識；但是在現有的文獻中，對於上述各面向之間的關聯仍缺乏詳加探討，也缺少特定單元的教學實例以提供教師運用在實務上。據此，本研究聚焦酸鹼中和教學，探索兩位個案教師在上述的PCK面向內涵和面向之間的關係，並描述其PCK教學展現。研究設計參照「教師思考和行動的模式」，以質性方法蒐集資料，包括：晤談、教學討論和刺激訪談的錄音、教學設計稿、教師心得、研究筆記、教學錄影、自編的學生學習問卷。依紮根理論觀點分6個步驟分析資料： (1) 形成概念， (2) 精緻概念， (3) 編碼資料和概念， (4) 分類概念， (5) 統整展現面向的教學要素、類別、概念和資料， (6) 從教學概況分析教學中展現的PCK教學要素，比較各面向內涵，以詮釋PCK面向的關係。研究發現如下： (1) 個案教師展現PCK各類面向的教學要素呈現相同、相似與相異的內涵，相異內涵是基於「教師應該如何教」、「學生應該如何學」以及「學生應該學什麼」觀點的不同。 (2) 個案教師展現「科學教學本質」、「教師角色」、「學習策略」和「學習疑難」等4類教學要素強烈影響PCK內涵，是教師作教學決定的關鍵。(3) 個案教師展現PCK樣式是由其面向的教學要素連結統整所形成，面向之間以階層性單向告知的關係形成因果式影響，由教學取向為起端，教學策略和表徵知識與評量知識為末端；顯示教學取向主導教師的教學行動。(4) 個案教師展現的面向數量和連結疏密程度影響其PCK樣式結構穩定性，表現在其教學品質；影響因素是教學取向的落實與教學經驗的豐富。 (5) 個案教師的教學限制源自教師的學科知識、教學經驗與教學情境。 (6) 影響個案教師PCK面向內涵、關係和教學限制的因素包括內在性因素和外在性因素，這些因素交互影響形塑個案教師在酸鹼中和教學的PCK樣式。最後，本研究提出幾點關於研究和實務上的建議。
A review of literature indicated that science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) can be demonstrated in teaching practice along many dimensions, including knowledge of: teaching orientations, students’ understanding of scientific knowledge, curriculum, instructional representations and strategies, and assessment. However, the interrelationships between these dimensions have not been thoroughly explored yet. In addition, it is important for concrete examples of PCK to be articulated and documented so that teachers can access and use them in shaping their own practice. Therefore, focusing on the teaching of a unit on acid-base neutralization, this study aimed to explore the contents of two teachers’ PCK as it unfolded in teaching practice along the dimensions mentioned above and to build up portrayals of their PCK in the specific topic. Interrelationships among contents in theses dimensions were also investigated. Research design adopted in this study was modeled after a “teachers’ thought and action” model, using qualitative methodology for data collection, a range of data were collected from transcripts of stimulated interviews and sound recordings of meetings, drafts of teaching plans, teacher’s journal, researcher field notes, transcripts of classroom videos, and teachers’ questionnaires of students’ science learning. Analysis of data went through a series of steps, starting from analysis of collected data, to formation of concepts, categories, instructional elements, and finally to the formulation of research claims. The findings were triangulated by taking into account different data sources, data collection methods, and the perspectives of researchers. The findings of this study are summarized as follows: (1) The instructional elements of the teachers’ PCK along different dimensions present the same, or similar, or different characteristics. The different characteristics are based on teacher’s knowledge about "how should teachers teach," "how should students learn" and "what should students learn". (2) Within the case teachers’ PCK, there were four instructional elements on "nature of science teaching," "role of teacher,"" learning approach " and "students’ learning problems" which were found to have strong impacts on teachers’ PCK. Therefore the above four instructional elements are the keys to teachers’ instructional decisions. (3) The pattern of a case teachers’ enacted PCK is an integrated result of the interrelationships among the instructional elements belonging to the various knowledge dimensions. There is a hierarchical and causal relationship between the various dimensions of PCK, that is, teaching orientations inform and influence instructional representations, strategies and assessments. In short, teachers’ teaching orientations dominate and lead to their instructional actions. (4) The amount of a case teacher’s knowledge within each dimension and the extents with which the various dimensions of PCK are interconnected, were found to affect the structural stability of the enacted PCK pattern, and result in the teacher’s teaching quality. The differences between the two case teachers’ performances are based on their implementation of the teaching orientations and the extensiveness of teaching experiences. (5) Concerning the teachers’ teaching constrains, some derived from the teacher's own science subject matter knowledge and teaching experiences, some derived from teaching contexts. (6) The factors that impact the contents of the teachers’ PCK in each dimension, their mutual relationships, and teaching constrains include intrinsic factors and extrinsic factors. These factors are interrelated in shaping the patterns of case teachers’ enacted PCK in teaching the acid-base neutralization unit. Finally, this study made a number of recommendations for practice and research.
一、中文部分
江玉婷（1995）。國中地球科學教師學科教學知識之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
吳芝儀、廖梅花（譯）（2001）。質性研究入門：紮根理論研究方法（原作者：Strauss, A., &; Corbin, J.）。嘉義市：濤石文化。
李詩閔（2001）。以微量實驗裝置的教學活動探討學生對酸鹼概念的學習情況（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
林俊宏（1996）。國中生物實習教師學科教學知識之探究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。
施朱娟（1997）。國中酸鹼概念教學之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
陳姍姍（1993）。研究者國國三學生酸鹼概念之研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
段曉林（1996）。學科教學知識對未來科教師資培育上的啟示。「第一屆數理教學及師資培育學術研討會」發表之論文，國立彰化師範大學。
高榮成（1994）。化學實習教師學科教學知識發展之探究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。
高榮成、段曉林（1995）。化學實習教師學科教學知識之探究。科學教育，6， 113-133。
高敬文（1999）。質化研究方法論。台北市：師大書苑。
郭重吉（主編）（2007）。科學教師之路。台北市：心理。
郭義章、段曉林（1998）。國中初任理化教師思考與呈現其學科教學知識之個案研究。科學教育，8，53-69。
郭義章（1997）。國中初任理化教師思考與呈現其學科教學知識之個案研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。
張世忠、蔡孟芳、陳鶴元（2012）。國中科學教師的學科教學知識與科學教學導向之探討。科學教育學刊，20，413-433。new window
張惠博（2001）。九年一貫課程實施與教師的專業成長。科學教育月刊，239，13-25。
許綾娟（2009）。兩位國小自然科教師學科教學知識發展與比較之個案研究（未出版之碩士論文）。私立中原大學，桃園縣。
黃瑞琴（1991）。質的教育研究法。台北市：心理。
黃永和（1996）。國小實習教師數學科學科教學知識之個案研究（未出版之碩士論文）。國立新竹師範學院，新竹縣。
游清福（2007）。POE教學策略探究國小學童酸鹼概念改變之研究-以台北縣偏遠濱海地區為例（未出版之碩士論文）。台北市立教育大學，台北市。
曾景泉（1999）。影響生物實習教師使用發問類比之學科教學知識成份（未出版之碩士論文）。國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
黃麗娟（1995）。職前化學教師在微試教學中的學科教學知識（未出版之碩士論文）。國立彰化師範大學，彰化縣。
熊召弟、王美芬、段曉林、熊同鑫（譯）（1996）。科學學習心理學（原作者：Glynn, S. M., Yeany, R. H., &; Britton, B. K.）。台北市：心理。
潘淑滿（2003）。質性研究理論與應用。台北市：心理。
蔡清田（2012）。十二年國民基本教育課程改革。教育人力與專業發展，29，5-12。new window
薛梨真（1999）。國小課程統整的理念與實務。高雄市：高雄市教育局。
孫敏芝（2006）。實習教師學科教學知識之探討：教學設計與教學實務。教育研究與發展期刊，2，67-92。new window
二、英文部分
Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In Abell, S. K. &; Lederman, N. G. (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105-1149), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Abell, S. K. (2008). Twenty years later: Does pedagogical content knowledge remain a useful idea? International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1405-1416.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans: A Project 2061 report on literacy goals in science, mathematics, and technology. Washington, DC: Author.
Anderson, C. W., &; Smith, E. L. (1987). Teaching science. In V. Richardson-Koehler (Ed.), Educators’ handbook: A research perspective (pp. 84-111), New York, NY: Longman.
Athanassios, J., &; Komis, V. (2003). Investigating Greek students’ ideas about force and motion. Research in Science Education, 33, 375-392.
Ball, D. L., &; Bass, H. (2000). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics (pp. 83-104). Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
Baxter, J. A., &; Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome &; N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 147-163). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
Bell, B., &; Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics for formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536-553.
Berry, A., Loughrana J., &; Driel, J. H. V. (2008). Revisiting the roots of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1271-1279.
Bol, L., &; Strage, A. (1996). The contradiction between teachers’ instructional goals and assessment practices in high school biology courses. Science Education, 80, 145- 163.
Borko, H., &; Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. C. Berliner &; R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educations psychology. New York, NY: MacMillan.
Boz, Y. (2009). Turkrsh prospective chemistry teachers’ alternative conceptions about acids and bases. School Science and Mathematics, 109, 12-22.
Carlsen, W. (1999). Domain of teacher knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome &; N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Pedagogical content knowledge and science education (pp. 133-144). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Carter, K. (1990). Teachers’ knowledge and learning to teach. In W. R. Houston (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 291-310), New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Clark, C. M., &; Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers’ Thought Process. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 255-296), New York, NY: Macmillan.
Clermont, C. P., Borko, H., &; Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Comparative study of the pedagogical content knowledge of experienced and novice chemical demonstrators. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 419-441.
Cochran, K. F., DeRuiter, J. A., &; King, R. A. (1993). Pedagogical content knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 263-272.
Cohen, R., &; Yarden, A. (2009). Experienced junior-high-school teachers’ PCK in light of a curriculum change: The cell is to be studied longitudinally. Research in Science Education, 39, 131-155.
Cowie, B., &; Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education, 6, 101-116.
Cronin-Jones, L. L. (1991). Science teacher beliefs and their influence on curriculum implementation: Two case studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 235-250.
Davis, E. A. (2003). Knowledge integration in science teaching: Analysing teachers’ knowledge development. Research in Science Education, 34, 21-53.
Deemer, S. A. (2004). Classroom goal orientation in high school classrooms: Revealing links between teacher beliefs and classroom environments. Educational Researcher, 46, 73-90.
Demircioglu, G., Ayas, A., &; Demircioglu, H. (2005). Conceptual change achieved through a new teaching program on acids and bases. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 6, 36-51.
Dreschler, M., &; Van Driel, J. H. (2008). Experienced teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of teaching acid-base chemistry. Research in Science, 38, 611-631.
Duffee, L., &; Aikenhead, G. (1992). Curriculum change, student evaluation, and teacher practical knowledge. Science Education, 76, 493-506.
Fernandez-Balboa, J. M., &; Stiehl, J. (1995). Effective professors’ pedagogical processes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, 293-306.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). Helping novices learn to teach: Lessons from an exemplary support teacher. Journal of Teacher Education, 52, 17-30.
Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). The knower and the known: The nature of knowledge in research on teaching. In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Review of research in education (pp. 3-56). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Fernandez-Balboa, J. M., &; Stiehl, J. (1995). Effective professors’ pedagogical processes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, 293-306.
Friedrichsen, P. M., &; Dana, T. M. ( 2005). Substantive-level theory of highly regarded secondary biology teachers’ science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 218-244.
Furio, C., Vilches, A., Guisasola, J., &; Romo, V. (2002). Spanish teachers’ views of the goals of science education in secondary education. Research in Science and Technological Education, 20, 936-960.
Furio-Mas, C., Calatayud, L. M., Guisasola, J., &; Furio-Gomez, C. (2005). How are the concepts and theories of acid base reactions presented? Chemistry in textbooks and as presented by teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1337-1358.
Geddis, A. N., Onslow, B., Beynon, C., &; Oesch, J. (1993). Transforming content knowledge: Learning to teach about isotopes. Science Education, 77, 575-591.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. In J. Gess-Newsome &; N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 3-20). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York, NY: The Teachers College Press.
Hand, B. M., &; Treagust, D. F. (1988). Application of a conceptual conflict strategy to enhance student learning of acids and bases. Research in Science Education, 18, 53-63.
Harrison, A. G., &; Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352-381.
Hashweh, M. (1985). An exploratory study of teacher knowledge and teaching: The effects of science teachers’ knowledge of their subject matter and their conceptions of learning on their teaching (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Stanford Graduate School of Education, Stanford, CA.
Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11, 273-292.
Hollon, R. E., Roth, K. J., &; Anderson, C. W. (1991). Science teachers’ conceptions of teaching and learning. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching (pp. 145-185), Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Justi, R. S., &; Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Science teachers’ knowledge about and attitudes towards the use of models and modeling in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1273-1292.
Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: potential and perspectives for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45, 169-204.
Koballa, T. R., Glynn, S. M., Upson, L., &; Coleman, D. (2005). Conceptions of teaching science held by novice teachers in an alternative certification program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 287-308.
Kesidou, S., &; Roseman, J. E. (2002). How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 522-549.
Korthagan, F., &; Kessels, J. (1999). Linking theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28, 4-17.
Lee, E., &; Luft, J. A. (2010). Experienced secondary science teachers' representation of pedagogical content knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1343-1363.
Liew, C. W., &; Treagust, D. F. (1998). The effectiveness of predict-observe-explain tasks in diagnosis students’ understanding of science in identifying their levels of achievement. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Lin, J. W., Chiu, M. H., &; Liang, J. C. (2004). Exploring mental models and causes of students’ misconceptions in acids and bases. Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching annual international conference, Vancouver, Canada.
Lin, J. W., &; Chiu, M. H. (2005). Portraying science in classroom: A case study about teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge influencing in syudents’ understanding of acids and bases. Paper presented at the Asian Chemical Congress, Seoul, Korea.
Lin, J. W., &; Chiu, M. H. (2007). Exploring characteristics and diverse sources of students' mental models in acids and bases. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 771-803.
Loughran, J. J., Mulhall, P., &; Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of art iculating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 370-391.
Loughran, J., Berry, A., &; Mulhall P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Maehr, M. L., &; Midgley, C. (1996). Transforming school cultures. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Magnusson, S., Krajacik, J., &; Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome &; N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95-120). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Press.
Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41, 3-11.
Mastrilli, T. M. (1997). Instructional analogies used by biology teachers: Implications for practice and teacher preparation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 187- 204.
Morrison, J. A., &; Lederman, N. G. (2003). Science teachers' diagnosis and understanding of students' preconceptions. Science Education, 87, 849-867.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 317-328.
Nilsson, P. (2008). Teaching for understanding: The complex nature of pedagogical content knowledge in pre-service education. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1281-1299.
Okanlawon, A. E. (2010). Teaching reaction stoichiometry: Exploring and acknowledging nigerian chemistry teachers pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Sciences, 5, 107-129.
Park, S., &; Oliver, S. J. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Pedagogical content knowledge as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38, 261-284.
Rolinick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., &; Ndlovu, T. (2008). The place of subject matter knowledge in pedagogical content knowledge: A case study of South African teachers teaching the amount of substance and chemical equilibrium. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1365-1387.
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., &; Furtak, E. M. (2006). Informal formative assessment and scientific inquiry: Exploring teachers’ practices and student learning. Educational Assessment, 11, 205-235.
Samuelowicz, K., &; Bain, J. D. (1992). Conceptions of teaching held by academic teachers. Higher Education, 24, 93-111.
Samuelowicz, K., &; Bain, J. D. (2001). Revisiting academics’ beliefs about teaching and learning. Higher Education, 41, 299-325.
Schmidt, H. J. (1991). A label as a hidden persuader: Chemists’ neutralization concept. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 459-471.
Schmidt, H. J. (1995). Applying the concept of conjugation to the bronsted theory of acid-base reactions by senior high school students from germany. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 733-742.
Schneider, R. M., &; Plasman, K. (2011). Science teacher learning progressions: A review of science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge development. Review of Educational Research, 81, 530-565.
Sheppard, K. (2006). High school students’ understanding of titrations and related acid-base phenomena. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 7, 32-45.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
Smith, D. C., &; Neale, D. C. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching &; Teacher Education, 5, 1-20.
Tamir, P. (1988). The relationship between cognitive preferences, student background and achievement in science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25, 201-216.
Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., &; Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers’ approaches to teaching and students’ approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37, 57-70.
Tobin, K. G., &; Espinet, M. (1989). Impediments to change: Applications of coaching in high school science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 105-120.
Van der Valk, T., Van Driel, J. H., &; De Vos, W. (2007). Common characteristics of models in present-day scientific practice. Research in Science Education, 37, 469- 488.
Van Driel, J. H., &; Verloop, N. (1999). Teachers’ knowledge of models and modeling in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 1141-1153.
Van Driel, J. H., &; Verloop, N. (2002). Experienced teachers knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modelling in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1255-1272.
Van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., &; de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 673-695.
Veal, W. R., &; MaKinster, J. G. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4). Retrieved from http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/vealmak.html.
Wallace, C. S., &; Kang, N. H. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 936-960.
Westerman, D. A. (1991). Expert and novice decision making. Journal of Teacher Education, 42, 292-305.
Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S., &; Richart, A. E. (1987). 150 different ways of knowing: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers' thinking (pp. 104-124). London, England: Cassell.
Zoller, U. (1990). Students’ misunderstandings and misconceptions in college freshman chemistry (general and organic). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 1053-1065.


 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
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：841（臺灣：820，外國：21） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1614293 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67417815
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