郭靜姿王雅奇2019-08-282003-8-292019-08-282003http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22N2003000369%22.&%22.id.&amp;http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/91948本研究旨在根據de Bono的六頂思考帽訓練課程編擬一套適合五年級資優生的思考訓練課程 ，並經由十次的實驗教學後，探討此課程對增進國小資優生問題解決能力之成效。 本研究採不等組前後測實驗設計，以立意取樣方式選取台北市碧湖國小及胡適國小五年級 資優生為樣本，其中碧湖國小十四名為實驗組，胡適國小十四名資優生為對照組，共三十 四名。實驗組學生參加十次的教學課程（每次一單元，時間為二節，每節四十分鐘），對 照組則接受原資優班之教學，無實驗處理。本研究之主要研究工具為「問題解決測驗」與 「問題解決實作題」，所得資料以單因子共變數分析進行假設考驗。 本研究主要發現如下： 一、在問題解決測驗方面： 1.實驗組與對照組在總分之差異達到顯著水準（F=8.51 , p<.05）。 2.實驗組在「解釋推論」（F=24.44，P<.05）、「猜測原因」（F=22.34，P<.05）、「逆 向原因猜測」（F=8.75，P<.05）、「決定解決方法」（F=7.87，P<.05）等分測驗前後測 得分差異之進步量達到顯著水準，而在「預防問題」（F=1.46，P>.05）分測驗差異則未達 顯著水準。 因此，本訓練課程對國小資優生問題解決能力之訓練成效頗佳。 二、在問題解決實作題目方面： 1. 實驗組與對照組在總分之差異達到顯著水準（F=19.12， p<.05）。 2. 實驗組與對照組在「界定問題」（F=1.17，P>.05）與「蒐集資料」，（F=0.68，P>.05 ）兩分測驗中，並未達顯著差異，而在「應用策略以解決問題」（F=4.32，P<.05）以及「 評估問題解決方案的有效性」（F=5.09，P<.05）兩分測驗實驗組與對照組則達到顯著差異 。 三、在教學回饋問卷方面，此課程受到多數學生的肯定與喜愛。The main purposes of this study were to design a thinking training course for 5th grade gifted students bases on de Bono`s “Six Thinking Hats”, and to investigate the impacts of ten-times training course on problem solving ability of gifted students in the elementary school. An nonequivalent pretest-posttest experimental design was employed. The subjects of this study involved thirty-four students selected from Taipei Municipal Bi-Hu and Hu-Shi elementary schools.The experiment group consisting of 14 studnents from Bi-Hu elementary school attended a ten-units thinking training course.The instruments are the Test of Problem Solving(TOPS) and performance assessment of problem solving.Tthe data were analyzed by one-way ANCOVA. The major finding of this study were concluded as follows: 1.The assessment results of the Test of Problem Solving(TOPS)： (1)The were significant differences between the experiment group and the matched group on total scores（F=8.51 , p<.05）. (2) The were significant differences between the experiment group and the matched group in the following subtests: explaining inferences（F=24.44 , P<.05 ）, determining causes（F=22.34，P<.05）, negative why questions（F=8.75，P<.05 ） and determining solutions（F=7.87，P<.05）. But no significant difference in the “avoiding problems” subtest（F=1.46，P>.05）. Therefore, there was significant training effect on improving the problem solving ability of the experiment group. 2.The assessment results ofthe performance assessment: (1)The were significant differents between the experiment group and the matched group on total scores（F=19.12， p<.05）. (2) The were significant differents between the experiment group and the matched group in the following subtests:”applying techniques to solve problems “（F=4.32，P<.05）and “evaluating effectiveness of solutions to problems” （F=5.09，P<.05）.But no significant differences in the “ identifying problem” （F=1.17，P>.05） and “collecting information” （F=0. 68，P>.05）subtest. 3.The subjects reported that they enjoy the training course .資優生六頂思考帽問題解決能力