查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- A Study of the Concept "Living Organism" and Living Organism Classification in Aboriginal Children
- Aboriginal Children's Alternative Conceptions of Animals and Animal Classification
- 概念式線上測驗系統之開發與應用
- 國中生物概念的類比學習之研究
- 生物分類的學派
- 生物多樣性的敲門磚--科學生物分類
- 以視覺設計文法比較臺澳科學教科書圖像--以七年級生物分類單元為例
- 系統分類學的演進
- 小組合作學習的教學理念與實務
- 淺談粒線體DNA之特性及其在生物分類上的應用
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | A Study of the Concept "Living Organism" and Living Organism Classification in Aboriginal Children=山地兒童生物概念及生物分類之研究 |
---|---|
作 者 | 陳世輝; 古智雄; | 書刊名 | Proceedings of the National Science Council : Part D, Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education |
卷 期 | 7:2 1997.05[民86.05] |
頁 次 | 頁96-109 |
分類號 | 529.9 |
關鍵詞 | 山地兒童; 生物概念; 生物分類; Aborigines; Living organism; Life concepts; Classification; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 本研究以花蓮縣山地國小二、四、六年級學生共 36 名為對象,研究山地兒童" 生物 " 概念之理解與應用。 在採用二階段個別晤談,分析熟悉物與不熟悉物的生命屬性歸 類後,有如下發現:兒童在生物的分類思考上有四種模式:(1) 生物 (2) 非生物 (3) 動物 (4) 植物,各年級兒童均以二種以上的組合思考生物屬性,在 " 生物 " 及生命的屬性上, 「運動」與「生長」最為普遍, 然而低年級兒童多以動物屬性指認 " 生物 ",而高年級兒 童則多以植物屬性指認生物。此外,兒童在 " 生物 " 概念上少用來自個人經驗的屬性,而 " 活的 " 概念則相反。在生物的類別階層上,兒童常將樹、草、鳥、魚等視為與 " 植物 " 、" 動物 " 同等地位,不知其有隸屬關係。 概念之深層與精緻並未有隨年齡升高而發展的 現象。對於錯誤概念之來源,生命歸屬與認知發展、語言關係,本研究亦於文中提出討論。 |
英文摘要 | This Study investigated the understanding and application of the conce pt "living organism" in aboriginal children. Thirty-six 2nd, 4th, 6th graders were selected from an aboriginal elementary school in Hualien. A structured, clinical interview with two different approaches was designed to assess the subjects' ability to classify familiar and unfamiliar objects according to life status. The results indicated four forms of classification: (1) living; (2) non-living; (3) animal; (4) botanical. Children in all grades used at least tow of them. Movement and growth were the most commonly given attributes of life and "living organisms". Young children relied relatively heavily on attributes true for animals but not for plants. whereas older children did the reverse. It was also found that children's concepts of "living organisms' and "living things" were different. They used individual experience more to attribute life and less to classify as "living organisms". "Human" was seen as living but not considered a "living organism". The biological subsets of plants (eg. trees, grasses, flowers) and animals (eg. birds. fish, bigers) were classified as comparable to the set "plant" and "animal", not as subsets of them. Sophistication of conceptual development was not found to improve with age. Finally, possible sources of misconception and the relationship between life attribution, congnitive development and linguistic factors were discussed. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。