第五章 結論與建議
第三節 建議
一、教學方面
(一) 分布概念於數學與科學兩個學科領域間的橫向連結關係相當強烈，因此學 生若缺乏統計分布概念背景，將難以掌握以分布為基礎的科學概念。因此，
教授以分布為基礎的科學概念前，宜強化或補充統計分布概念。
(二) 承(一)，分布圖是原始資料經整理後而產生的圖像表徵，因而分布圖的理解 為瞭解資料分布的基本能力，因此欲瞭解以分布為基礎的科學概念，前提 必須具備分布圖理解能力，否則將產生學習困難。
(三) 強調使用分布特徵的教學模式可幫助學生掌握資料的整體架構，對於欲學 習的科學概念獲得全面性的瞭解，因此需使用數個分布特徵之概念建議使 用如 DDH 模式之教學方式。
(四) 本研究發現有學生傾向不理解、直接記憶知識內容，因此建議增加如 DDH 教學模式類型之探索性的資料處理課程內容，以提升學生之學習動機與興 趣。
(五) 實驗課程可另行補充授課概念之外，其他學科以分布為基礎的科學概念，
幫助學生延伸學習。
二、研究方面
(一) 研究中發現許多馬克士威速率分布概念之錯誤類型，然而因錯誤類型並不 在本研究範圍中，故未深入探討，後續可進一步研究以分布為基礎的科學 概念是否存在有共同的錯誤類型。
(二) 由於各年段、學科的學生皆不擅於使用數個分布特徵，且學生於畫分布圖 時經常忽略整體特徵，因此研究者推測分布特徵的使用情形可能與個體的 認知負荷有關，後續可進一步進行相關研究。
參考文獻 一、中文部分
李小燕、馮卓宏、邱俊才(2010)。Matlab 在大學物理教學中的應用。實驗技術與 管理，27(11)，124-126。
宋立平(2010)。類比教學法講解麥克斯韋速率分布率。大學物理，2，11-12。
林清山、張春興(1984)。教育心理學。臺北市：東華書局。
邱顯博(2002)。國二、國三學生的擴散作用概念與概念改變之研究。未出版之碩 士論文，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所，臺北市。
教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要數學領域。臺北市：教育部。
教育部(2008)。普通高級中學課程綱要。臺北市：教育部。
宿剛、鄭敏章、叢令梅(2008)。Matlab 在大學物理課程教學中的應用。浙江海洋 學院學報，27(2)，241-245。
彭芳麟(2005)。伽爾頓板實驗的計算機模擬。大學物理，1，1-10。
趙君培(2009)。國三學生對分佈特徵與分佈概念了解情形之研究。未出版之碩士 論文，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所，臺北市。
劉杰(2009)。數字化技術與大學物理教學。讀與寫雜誌，6(10)，198。
蔡福興、游光昭、蕭顯勝(2008)。從新學習觀點發掘數位遊戲式學習之價值。課 程與教學季刊，11(4)，237-278。
蘇安(2009)。Matlab 輔助熱學課程教學探索。河池學院學報，29(2)，100-102。
蘇 國 樑 (1994) 。 國 小 兒 童 統 計 概 念 分 析 之 研 究 (I) － 資 料 分 佈 概 念 分 析 (NSC83-0111-S-180-002-N)。臺北市：行政院國家科學委員會。
藍海江、潘曉明、丁紅、賴家勝(2009)。MATLAB 在基礎物理教學中的應用。
柳州師專學報，24(2)，119-127。
譚克平(2011)。以統計大概念的觀點重整臺灣中小學統計課程綱要以及評量架構 之開發(NSC98-2511-S-003-012-M)。臺北市：行政院國家科學委員會。
二、英文部分
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning: An
introduction to school learning. New York, NY: Grune & Stratton.
Bakker, A. (2004). Design research in statistics education: On symbolizing and
computer tools. Utrecht, The Netherlands: CD-Beta Press.
Bakker, A., & Gravemeijer, K. (2004). Learning to reason about distribution. In D.
Ben-Zvi & J. Garfield (Eds.), The challenge of developing statistical literacy,
reasoning and thinking (pp. 147-168). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer
Academic.Ben-Zvi, D. (2002). Seventh grade students' sense making of data and data
representations. Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on
Teaching Statistics. Voorburg, The Netherlands.Ben-Zvi, D., & Arcavi, A. (2001). Junior high school students' construction of global views of data and data representations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 45, 35-65.
Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61-100.
Bross, A. J. (2008). An evaluation of meaningful learning in a high school chemistry
course. Unpublished Ed.D., CITE/Language Arts, United States -- Pennsylvania.
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121-152.
Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories:
Examples from learning and discovery in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive
models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 129-186).
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Ciancetta, M. A. (2007). Statistics students reasoning when comparing distributions
of data. Unpublished Ph.D., Portland State University, United States -- Oregon.
Cobb, P. (1999). Individual and collective mathematical development: The case of statistical data analysis. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 1(1), 5.
Cobb, P. (2002). Modeling, symbolizing, and tool use in statistical data analysis. In K.
Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. v. Oers & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing,
modeling and tool use in mathematics education (pp. 171-195). Netherland:
Kluwer Academic.
Curcio, F. R. (1987). Comprehension of mathematical relationships expressed in graphs. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18(5), 382-393.
Duit, R. & Treagust, D. F. (1995). Students' conceptions and constructivist teaching approaches. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Improving science education
(pp. 46-69). Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.
Gagne, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The cognitive psychology of
school learning. New York, NY: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Gagne, R. M. (1985). The condition of learning and theory of instruction. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehert & Winston.
Garfield, J. B., & Ben-Zvi, D. (2004). Research on statistical literacy, reasoning, and thinking issues, challenges, and implications. In D. Ben-Zvi & J. B. Garfield (Eds.), The challenge of developing statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking (pp. 397-409). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Haury, D. L., & Rillero, P. (1994). Perspectives of hands-on science teaching.
Columbus, OH: The ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education.
Herron, J. D. (1996). The chemistry classroom: Formulas for successful teaching.
Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
Judd, C. H. (1908). The relation of special training to general intelligence.
Educational Review, 36, 28-42.
Kohler, W. (1929). Gestalt psychology. New York, NY: Horace Liveright.
Konold, C., Pollatsek, A., & Well, A. D. (1997). Students analyzing data: Research of critical barriers. In J. Garfield and G. Burrill (Eds.), Research on the role of
technology in teaching and learning statistics (pp. 151-167). Voorburg, The
Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.Konold, C., Robinson, A., & Khalil, K. (2002, July). Students' use of modal clumps to
summarize data. Paper presented at the Sixth International Conference on
Teaching Statistics, Cape Town, South Africa.Leavy, A. (2006). Using data comparison to support a focus on distribution:
Examining preservice teachers' understandings of distribution when engaged in statistical inquiry. Statistics Education Research Journal, 5(2), 89-114.
Li, Z., Dong S., Chui W. N.,& Shen, W. P. (2011). Matlab-based visualization and data processing for college physics teaching. Journal of Qinghai Nationalities
University, (5), 39-43.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2007a). Mathematics: Programme of study for key stage 3 and attainment targets.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2007b). Mathematics: Programme of study for key stage 4.
Reading, C., & Reid, J. (2006). An emerging hierarchy of reasoning about distribution:
from a variation perspective. Statistics Education Research Journal, 5(2), 46-68.
Schwartz, D. L., Bransford, J. D., & Sears, D. L. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary
perspective (pp. 1-51). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Showalter, V. M. (1974). A model for the structure of science. Cleveland, OH:
Educational Research Council of America.
Singley, K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Thorndike, E. L. (1904). An introduction to the theory of mental and social
measurement. New York, NY: Science Press.
Watkins, A. E., Scheaffer, R. L., & Cobb, G. W. (2004). Statistics in action:
Understanding a world of data. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
Wild, C. (2006). The concept of distribution. Statistics Education Research Journal,