探討理想氣體動力論之建模教學對高一學生建構微觀氣體粒子運動心智模式的影響

Abstract

現今台灣的高中化學教材對於氣體動力論的教學，侷限在計算解題的能力培養，教材呈現方式往往以公式、數據關係或實驗的推導來解釋氣體動力論，而忽略了氣體動力論微觀模型上的學習。本研究希望以微觀角度出發，幫助學生建立氣體動力論模型，進而解釋氣體分子的行為。並分析學生對氣體動力論的心智模式，探討不同教學內容對學生心智模式類型的影響。 本研究分三組進行教學，研究對象為台北市某高中一年級學生，為了完整收集研究對象在教學過程中心智模式的演進，並配合晤談資料的收集方便性，因此由研究者對於研究對象進行個別教學，教學之後隨即進行後測與晤談，以記錄研究對象在研究過程中心智模式的改變。 為探討巨觀教材與微觀粒子教材對學生學習氣體動力論的影響，本研究設置兩組「巨觀教材組」與「巨觀＋微觀教材組」進行教學，分別討論學生在不同教材教學下，所產生的氣體動力論的學習成就與所形成的心智模式；另外為了進一步探討學生的建模能力對其氣體動力論心智模式的形成有何影響，另設置了「巨觀＋微觀＋模型教學組」，先進行建模教學，再進行氣體動力論教學。最後討論三組學生的學習成就與心智模式之差異。 研究結果發現本研究所使用之不同教材對學生學習成效有不同的影響，微觀教材組的學習成效大於巨觀教材組，表示微觀氣體粒子模型教學有助於學生學習學習氣體動力論的概念。學生在教學前對氣體行為有許多錯誤的解釋，在微觀教學之後，學生心智模式轉變成科學的模式，表示微觀氣體粒子模型教學有助於學生建立微觀氣體粒子運動的心智模式，用微觀粒子運動解釋氣體的巨觀行為。但在計算解題能力方面，本次三組教學後學生沒有進步。 另由模型問卷可發現，高一學生對本研究之模型問卷持有正向的態度。學生接受建模教材之後對模型的看法有所改變，認為模型可以用多樣化的各種方式呈現，只要能呈現出某個概念或想法即可視為模型。模型教學對高一學生學習氣體動力論的成效影響不大，只要使用微觀教材學生即可學習氣體動力論，因此本研究中微觀教材組與建模微觀教材組的學生在成就測驗表現相同，但建模教材的確有助於學生提升對模型的看法，轉向科學的模型態度。The main focus of teaching kinetic theory of gases in high school chemistry curriculum is to emphasize on promoting algorithmic abilities. The teaching materials usually present the macro-view materials such as formula or experiment data to explain the kinetic theory of gases, not the use of gas models in microscopic perspective. The purpose of this study is to help students build microscopic gas models, and use them to learn the kinetic theory of gases. This study also analyses students’ mental models to investigate the influence of different teaching materials. The participants in this study were thirty 10th high school students in Taipei. They were randomly assigned into three groups: 1.The macro-view group, using macro-view instructional materials; 2.The micro-view group, using both micro-view and macro-view instructional materials 3.The micro-view and modeling (MVM) group, using micro-view, macro-view instruction treatment and modeling materials. The researcher tutored all the students and interviewed them to obtain verbal data. The results of this study were as follows: First, the micro-view group and the MVM group had better achievement in the kinetic theory of gases concepts test than macro-view group. But there were no difference effects in the algorithmic ability test. Second, students used different kinds of models to explain kinetic theory of gases. There were five major models: Scientific model, collide container/ wrong inference model, push model, particle collision model, weight model and outside model. Students’ mental models had consistency in different problem situation and different learning stages. After the instruction, students’ mental model changed into correct scientific model for both the micro-view group and the MVM group. Third, the modeling instrument helped the micro-view and modeling group students changed their view about models into a scientific perspective. They thought model could help them explain scientific phenomenon, formulate ideas and theories about scientific events, not simply a real object’s replica.