Chinese Journal of Science Education 2001,, 253-280 2001, 9(3), 253-280 1 2 1 2 90 8 24 90 10 3 18 (Akerson, Flick & Lederman, 2000) 2 Paradigm, 1998 1 AAAS 1993 NRC 1996
254 2000 3, 1999 4 5 2000b 6 Gunstone (2000) 1975 Lawrence Stenhouse (Teachers as Researchers) Science Teachers as Researchers (McGonigal, 1999) Researchers as Teachers (Tobin, 1999) 7 Varelas Pineda 1999 Collaborative Teacher Action Research Project, 1994; Garnett & Treagust, 1992a; Viard & Francoise, 2001 (), 1999; Garnett & Treagust, 1992b; Sanger & Greenbowe, 1997 Butts Smith1987 () 50 () Finley, Stewart Yarrch () Garnett & Treagust, 1992a 70% () 20% 10%Treagust,
255 () Bar & Zinn, 1998Mintzes, Wandersee Novak1998 Carry Kuhn Piaget Levine, 2000 2000 () preconception or preinstructional conception ChiNerssessianThagard, 2000 () alternative conception Niaz () misconception CartwrightChristie Fricke Lakatos Rocke Burbules Linn HodsonKitchenerLedermanMatthewsNiaz () alternative framework Niaz, 2000 () 1. Falsificationism (Karl R. Popper)
256, 2000, 2000, 1993 Trial Error 8 2. Paradigm Thomas S. Kuhn 1962 (Structure of Scientific Revolutions), 1994 Burblues Linn Hodson 1993 3. (Research programme) (Imre Lakatos), 1994 (Incommensurable )
257 Niaz, 2001 Chi Mortimer, 1995 2000 4. Larry Laudon () 1960 (1), 1995;, 1998 Piaget Gagne (2) Ausubel 9 (3) (4) 1. Mintzes & (5) Wandersee, 1998, 1992, 1993 (assimilation) (accommodation) equilibration Nersessian Thagard (sensorimotor period), 2000 (preparational thought period)
258 (concerte operation period) (formal (1) (Words Association)(2) operation period) (Mintzes & Wandersee, 1998) (Interview About Instances)(3) (Thinking Aloud Protocols) (4) (Stimulated Recall), 1998 3. (Ausubel, D. P.) 1968 Educational Psychology : A Cognitive View Ausubel, Novak & Hanesian, 1978; Mintzes, Wandersee & Novak, 1998 (Concept Structure Diagram) (Clinical Interview) (1) 2. (2) (3) (hierarchy of learning) (concept learning) (1) rote learning (2) (advance organizer) (3) (superordinate learning)(4) (subsumption (5) (integration recilliation)(6) (progressive differentiation)(7) (positive transfer)(meaningful learning), 1997 (1) (discriminative) (context) Concept Map Line Labeling Task(2) (definition) (classification) (Tree Construction Line Task) (3) (Concept Relations
259 Task) (4) (Sentence Generation Task)(5) (Essay Test)(6) Vee (Vee-Map), 1995 (Mintzes, Wandersee & Novak 2000) 4. Vygotsky 10, 1992;, 1995 (1) (2) (3) () Varelas & Pineda, 1999 (Mortimer, 1995), 1998 2000 Duit 1993 3000 Beeth, 1997 1. 2. 3. 4. Vee DrawingTwo-tier test 1.
260 1 Kuhn Lakatos Posner, Strike Hewson Carey Vosniadou Chi, Slotta, Leeuw Gitomer & Landan Thagard 2. 5. 3. 4. 6. 5. 6. Mintzes, 7. Wandersee Novak1998 8. 1. 9. 2. 10. Harrison, Grayson Treagust1999 3. 1 4. 2000 1. 2. 3. 4. Pfundt Duit
261 (1991) 2000 1. personal2. persistent3. robust 4. consistent 5. stable (2000) 2000 1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. () 1991 263 2 1992 171 39 3 1993 24 4 1993 109 DOE (Demonst ration, Observation, Explanation) 5 2 3 4 1. 2. 3. 5 1. 2. 1. 2. 3.
262 6 1. 2. 3. 4. 1994 83 6 1999 N = 25 7 2000 32 1. 2. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) 7 3. Adams Griffard (2001) 10 Mintzes, Wandersee Novak (1998) 11 7 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 7 8
263 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Garnett Treagust (1992b) 32 (Propositional Knowledge Statements) Asami, King Monk2000 10 Interview Protocol 11 5 1. - Garnett Treagust Sanger Greenbowe1997 16 2. 3. 4. Viard Francoise2001
264 9 1993 9 2000 () () () 2000b 2000 10 10 2-2-5-1 2-4-5-4
265 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 18 1 2-3 18 8 2 2 3 3 1 3 2 2 15-25 2000a 12 () 13
266 11 1 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 2 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 4 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 5 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 6 6-1 6-2 6-3 6-4 11 2 () () 14 12
267 2 0105290203 2001 5 29 2 3 I S 1 S1 1 S2 18 2 8
268 12 1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1 & 3 & 6 1-2 3-2 3-3 6-1 2 & 6 2-1 6-3 2 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 3 3-1 3-4 3 3-1 3-2 3-4 3-5 3 & 6 3-4 6-2 6 6-1 6-4 4 4-2 4-3 4-4 4 4-5 4 4-6 5 5-1 5-3 5 5-2 5-4 () S2 0011070102 S1 0011060102 0011090103
269 15 0011060102 S1 0011090102 () 0011090103 0105290203 2 S 2 2 0105290101
270 I S1 0105290203 I S 0105290101 I S1 I S1 I S1 I 2 S1 I 2 S1 0105290203
271 () S1 I S2 0011060102 0105290203 0105290101 123 () I S I 80120 23 S2 1 3 0105290302 I S1 S2 S1 S1 I S2 S2 0105290302 2
272 2 S2 I S2 I 2 I S2 S1 0105290203 () I S2S3 S3 S2 0105290203 0105290302 I 1 S1 Stavy & Berkovitz, 0105290402 2000 more A more B I 1 I S2 I
273 S2 I S2S2 S1 S1 0105290402 () I S I S I S I S 0105290101
274 I S I S I S I S 0105290402 0105290203 S2 I S2 0105290302 () 1. 2.
275 3. 4. () 1. 18 2. () () Lee (1999) ()
276 7. NSC 89 2511-S- 153-017 - 8. Posner 1. 2. 3. 4. (Harrison, Grayson, Treagust, 1999; Treagust, et al. 1996; 9. 1. Paradigm Thomas S. Kuhn 10. 2. 11. 10 Adams Griffard (2001) 12. Proposition Knowledge Statements (Proposition Statements) 3. (2000a) 13. 2000 8 3 14. Target Concept Map Expert Concept Map 15. 200 4. 5. 1. 1995 6. 1996, 2000)
277 2. 1993 DOE, 3, 15. 1993 16. 2000 3. 1994 The structure of scientific 17. 2000 What revolutions Kuhn, T. S. remains to be discovered Maddox, J. 4. 1992 18. 2000a 6-19 5. 1997 19. 2000b 6. 2000 20. 1993 7. 2000, 4, 183-236 21. 2000 8. 2000 22. 1991, 8(1), 1-34 9. 2000 23. 1993 Laudon, L. 10. 1998 24. 1993, 4, 511-542 25. 1994 11. 2000, 12, 3-13 26. 1992 12. 1998, 24, 30-35 499-518 13. 2000 27. 1999, 27, 361-379 14. 1995 28. 1994
278 37. Bar, V., & Zinn, B. (1998). Similar frameworks of action-at-a-distance: early scientists and pupils ideas. Science and Education, 7, 471-29. 1999 491. 38. Beeth, M. E. (1997). Teaching for conceptual change: using status as a meta-cognitive tool. 30. 1996 Science and Education, 6, 343-355. The psychology of learning 39. Butts, B., & Smith, R. (1987). What do students science Glynn, S. M. & Yeany, R. H. perceive as difficult in H.S.C. chemistry. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 32(4), 45-31. 2000 Using a diagnostic assessment 51. instrument to assess understanding of biology 40. Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992a). concepts. Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: electric 32. 2000 circuits and oxidation-reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(10), 1079-1099. 33. Adams, A. D., & Griffard, P. B. (2001). Analysis of alternative conceptions in physics and biology: similarities, differences, and implications for conceptual change. a paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, March 28. 34. Akerson, V. L., Flick, L. B., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of primary children s ideas in science on teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 363-385. 35. Asami, N., King, J., & Monk, M. (2000). Tuition and memory: mental models and cognitive processing in Japanese children s work on d.c. electrical circuits. Research in Science and Technological Education, 18(2), 141-153. 36. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational psychology: a cognitive view. (2 nd ed.) New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 41. Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992b). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry (galvanic) and electrolytic cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(10), 1079-1099. 42. Gunstone, R. (2000). Science teachers as researchers in Australia-some examples. Research in Science Education, 30(3), 255-257. 43. Harrison, A. G., Grayson, D. J., & Triages, D. F. (1999). Investigating a grade 11 student s evolving conceptions of heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1, 55-87. 44. Lee, K.-W. L. (1999). Particulate Representation of a Chemical Reaction Mechanism. Research in Science Education, 29(3), 401-415. 45. Levine, A. T. (2000). Which way is up? Thomas S Kuhn s analogy to conceptual development in childhood. Science and Education, 9, 107-122.
279 46. McGonigal, J. A. (1999). How learning to become a teacher-researcher prepared an educator to do science inquiry with elementary grade students. Research in Science Education, 29(1), 5-23. 47. Mintzes, J. J., & Wandersee, J. H. (1998). Research in science teaching and learning: a human constructivist view. Teaching science for understanding. San Diego, CA, Academic Press. 48. Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (1998). Teaching science for understanding a human constructivist view. California, Harcourt Brace & Company. Academic Press. 49. Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, D. J. (2000). Assessing science understanding a human constructivist View. California, A Harcourt Science and Technology Company. Academic Press. 50. Mortimer, E. F. (1995). Conceptual change or conceptual profile change? Science and Education, 4, 267-285. 51. Niaz, M. (2000). Gases as idealized: a rational reconstruction of students understanding of the behavior of gases. Science & Education, 9, 279-287. 52. Niaz, M. (2001). How important are the laws of definite and multiple proportions in chemistry and teaching chemistry? a history and philosophy of science perspective. Science and Education, 10, 243-266. 53. Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1991). Bibliography: Students alternative frameworks and science education. (3rd ed.). Kiel, West Germany: University of Kiel, IPN Reports in Brief. 54. Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Common student misconceptions in electrochemistry: galvanic, electrolytic, and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 377-398. 55. Stavy, R., & Berkovitz, B. (2000). Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative aspects of the concept of temperature. 56. Tobin, K. (1999). Teachers as researchers and researchers as teachers. Research in Science Education, 29(1), 1-3. 57. Treagust, D. F. (2000). Diagnostic assessment of secondary students science knowledge. 58. Treagust, D. F., Duit, R., & Fraser, B. J. (1996). Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics. New York, Teachers College Columbia University. 59. Varelas, M., & Pineda, E. (1999). Intermingling and Bumpiness: Exploring Meaning Making in the Discourse of a Science Classroom. Research in Science Education, 29(1), 25-49. 60. Viard, J., & Francoise, K. - L. (2001). The concept of electrical resistance: how Cassirer s philosophy, and the early developments of electric circuit theory, allow a better understanding of students learning difficulties. Science and Education, 10, 267-286.
280 Primary School Pupils Alternative Conceptions on Battery Theory and Practice Shyan Jer Lee 1 and Lan Yu Chang 2 1 Department of Natural Science Education, National Pingtung Teachers College, Pingtung, Taiwan 2 Kaohsiung Municipal Han-Ming Primary School, Kaohsiung, Taiwan Abstract In this research, we have applied literature in science conceptions research as well as field investigation to probe alternative conceptions of primary school pupils. Theoretical studies from the literature have shown that there were many emphases on the physical meaning and the effects drawn by philosophers of science leading to the formation of paradigms on science conceptions research. Our focus on primary school pupils alternative conceptions related to batteries are divided into four phases: (i) analyze context regarding battery in present primary school and subsequent nine-years of continuous curricula; (ii) summarize propositional statements and develop target concept map on battery from the comments and responses of researchers, in-service teachers and pupils; (iii) edit protocols for interviews; (iv) collect and analyze pupils alternative conceptions using the tools described above. Results, from 18 primary school pupils, show that our joint venture on concept formation research has been affected by the four temporal paradigms formed at certain prominent historical landmarks in science conceptions research. Our data also show some similarity and generalization with that in the literatures on science conceptions research. Key words : Alternative Conception, Primary School, Interview, Concept Research, Battery.