國小低年級學童生活中的科學問題探究

First and Second Graders' Scientific Problems in Daily Life

本研究的目的有四。首先，在於探究台灣地區國小低年級學童具備哪些生活中的科學問題。其次，則在探討學童們尋求解答的歷程。其三，則是藉由學童所提出的科學問題，分析學童現階段所貝有的因果推理機制；最後，本研究旨在探討學生的迷思問題類型。 本研究以課堂引導討論以及調查訪問的方式來蒐集資料，全部樣本共有來自全省一、二年及學生440位，研究結果共蒐集到6279個問題，其中有50個問題是每一個學校的學生都會提出的，有78個問題是被提出至少10次以上。城鄉以及年級這兩個因素在提出問題人數的比率與提出問題的多寡上都無顯著差異。 本研究發現，低年級學童對於小學自然科四大學科領中的生物（33.7%）與物理（21.1%）兩類，提出較多問題；而化學類則敬陪末座（4.7%）。而生物中，又以有關生物的構造與功能（42.4%）的問題最多；至於物理方面則以力學有關的現象（38.3%）的問題最多。除此之外，較少在國小自然科課程內被強調的科技類知識具被學生頗為關心（7.4%），尤其是這些科技產品的製作道理（23.1%）。至於學童在這些類別上問題的多寡並沒有城鄉或是年級上的差異，而學童在科學問題中最常提及的物品以及身邊的事物，也在研究中述及。 有關學童在認知歸因的類別上，最常提問的問題類型分別是：根據事物在時間或空間的相近的關係來提問（58.7%）；根據事物與其熟悉事物的相異比較來提問（14.3%）；提問事物的由來以及形成的原因（12.2%）；以及提問原來不存在的東西如何出現的傳動衍生關係（7.5%）。這些結果，與White（1988）的研究相吻合。另外，城鄉以及年級這兩個因素在各歸因類別的數量上，並無顯著差異。至於，歸因類別中有關錯誤類推的類型以及學生的迷思問題都反應了學生對某些自然現象的錯誤建構。

There were four purposes for the present study. The first one was to investigate Taiwanese first and second graders’ scientific problems in daily life. The second purpose was to explore how those students solved their problems. The third purpose was to analyze students’ reasoning patterns of students’ misconceptions. The data collected in the present study were based on classroom discussions and interviews. There were 440 first and second graders participating in the present study. 6279 problems are raised by them. Within those problems， 50 problems were repeatedly raised by every school’s students， and 78 problems were raised over 10 times. There are no significant differences on the number of students’ problems on the factor of the students’ grade or of the location of the school. The results reveal that the first and second graders are most interested in problems regarding biology （33.7%）or physics（21.1%）. They raised even fewer problems concerning chemistry （4.7%）. Also students are concerned with technology problems. The objects or events mentioned often by students are listed in the research results.
Regarding the issue of students’ reasoning patterns， it seems that students tend t raise problems according to the following cues：temporal and spatial contiguity（58.7%）， observation of similarity or difference between events（14.3%）， origination （12.2%）， and generative relations（7.5%）. There are also no significant differences of the reasoning patterns on the factor of the students’ grade or of the location of the school. In addition to the reasoning pattern， some of students’ misconceptions reveal their preconceptions about natural phenomena.