研究生: |
李昭賢 Chao-Hsien-Li |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
幼兒經歷科學相關方案想法展現之研究 A study on the development of young children's ideas while experiencing science-related projects |
指導教授: | 簡淑真 |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
人類發展與家庭學系 Department of Human Development and Family Studies |
論文出版年: | 2004 |
畢業學年度: | 92 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 282 |
中文關鍵詞: | 主題式課程 、幼兒教育 、幼兒的想法/概念 |
英文關鍵詞: | thematic curriculum, preschool education, young children's ideas/conception |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:275 下載:57 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
幼兒經歷科學相關方案想法展現之研究
摘要
本研究深入幼稚園教室的自然情境,探究人、事、物交織互動的社會脈絡中,幼兒主動建構對其自己本身富有意義的知識、能力與態度;因之,本研究的研究目的為:分析幼兒在活動進行前的前置想法,在活動進行中的實際運作情形及其想法的展現,以及在活動進行後的想法改變情形;亦即呈現幼兒經歷科學相關主題課程中,展現想法的詮釋觀點。
本研究以台北市大安區「海洋幼稚園」的「小魚兒班」為研究對象,此幼稚園的教學模式以「主題式課程」為主,並配合角落活動的安排以延伸幼兒探究主題的發展,小魚兒班的課程主題是在上學期末由師生共同討論出來的,研究觀察期間,其主要進行的主題為「科學遊戲」,次主題在幼兒自然產生的興趣中慢慢浮現,研究者考量自身能力的限制,撰擇兩個次主題:「繩子」及「車子軌道」次主題發展的歷程為研究分析的主要資料,探究幼兒經歷此二次主題課程中的想法展現歷程。研究者參與觀察的時間為兩個月,每週有三個上午的觀察時間,並利用下午的時間與教師及幼兒進行正式訪談,研究期間與該班教師及幼兒建立和諧關係。
本研究主要發現如下所述:
(一) 從幼兒的興趣出發,透過團討的分享經驗以繼續延伸次主題的發展
(二) 小組中具「領導者」角色的幼兒是推動活動進行的主要因素,但也是影響活動落幕的關鍵者
(三) 幼兒認為最困難的問題解決了,就是學會了
(四) 幼兒喜歡重覆操作、練習
(五) 幼兒的想法具有一些特色:1.受知覺主導的思維/直覺判斷;2.以看到現象的變化進行判斷;3.透過「比喻」的想法來想解決問題的方法;4.具有擬人化的語言;4.具有許多迷思想法
(六)幼兒在解決問題的過程中,會依問題的焦點及條件不同,而呈現不同解決問題的風貎
關鍵詞:主題式課程、幼兒教育、幼兒的想法/概念
A Study on the development of young children’s ideas while experiencing science-related projects
Abstract
This research scrutinizes thoroughly the natural environment of the preschool classroom to explore how the various interactive social aspects can impact the young children on building meaningful knowledge, capabilities and attitudes of themselves; therefore, the goals of this research are to analyze the thinking process of the young children before activities; the actual thinking process and the expansion of that thinking during activities and the change of thinking after the activities which means the explanatory comments on the thinking process after the young children experience science-related subjects.
The target young children of this research are in the “Little Fish Class” in “Ocean Preschool” at Da-An District of Taipei City. The main teaching mode of this Preschool is based on “thematic curriculum”, there are activities on the side to help the young children to explore more extensively into the theme that is being taught. The teachers and the students of the “Little Fish Class” discussed and decided on their current theme at the last semester. During the conduction of this research, the main theme was “Scientific Games”, however, other minor themes also came to surface when the young children started to show their interests in them. Based on the limitation of capability of this researcher, only two minor themes were being chosen: “rope” and “car track”. The main research material of this report came from the analysis of the young children’ thinking process when they experiences with the minor themes. The researcher observed the class for two months, there were three mornings of observation period in each week, also there were interviews with the teachers and the students in the afternoons. The researcher maintained a harmonious relationship with the teachers and the students during the research period.
The main findings of this research are as follow:
1. Starting from the interests of the young children and through the experience of group discussion to lead to the development of the minor themes.
2. If there is a “leader” in the group, this young child can influence the group by pushing the activity in progress or ending it.
3. A young child learns when he overcomes his most difficult problem.
4. Young children love to be repetitive in their acts.
5. There are some distinct characteristics in young children’ thinking: (1) They think intuitively;(2)They judge after they visualize the changing process;(3)Using “analogy” to come up with solutions to problems;(4)Possess personified languages;(5)Possess many misconceptions.
6. During the process of problem solving, the young children tend to solve the problems in different ways based on their perceptions of different focal points and conditions of the problems.
Key words: thematic curriculum, preschool education, young children’ ideas/concept
參考文獻
壹、中文文獻
王素芸(1987)。學前兒童空間概念之研究。中國文化大學兒童福利學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
王文科譯(1992)。卜拉絲姬原著。兒童的認知發展導論。台北:文景。
王美芬(1991)。自然科錯誤概念之研究。台北市立師範學院學報,22,371-400.
王美芬(1993)。幼兒對於生命現象的解釋用語。中華民國第九屆科學教育學術研討會論文集,329-356。
王美芬(1997)。幼兒對於呼吸和消化作用的認知研究。科學教育研究與發展季刊,6,4-18。
王美芬、熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理。
王美芬(2002)。認知建構論與自然科教學。載於王美芬、戴維揚(主編),新課程建構式教學理論與實踐:數學、健康與體育、自然與生活科技(頁129-150)。台北:師大。
王幸雯(2001)。兒童速度概念之研究。台灣師範大學家政教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
丘嘉慧(2002)。天生的邏輯推理好手-談幼兒科學教育之課程與教學。載於國際兒童育協會中華民國分會、政治大學(主辦),「2003幼兒教育學術研討會-幼兒教育發展與生態環境」研討會,台北。
朱則剛(1996)。建構主義知識論對教學與教學研究的意義。教育研究雙月刊,49,25-38。
李暉、郭重吉、段曉林(1993)。國中理化教師試行建構主義教學之個案研究。科學教育(彰化師大),5,27-51。
李維(譯)(1998)。Vygotsky, Lev S.著。思維與語言。台北:昭明心理。
李映萱(2003)。建構取向教學中教師引導之個案研究。國立政治大學幼兒教育學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
吳素妏(2003)。學童等時性概念的發展研究。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
林義雄、陳澤民(譯)(1986)。Skemp, R.R.著。數學學習心理學。台北:九章。
林正弘(1987)。過時的科學觀:邏輯經驗論的科學哲學。載於當代雜誌第10期(主編),科學哲學專輯-科學理性知識基礎典範結構方法革命(頁20-26)。
林雅慧(2000)。國小低年級教師進行科學對談之行動研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,彰化。
林麗卿(2000)。敘事體在學前幼兒發展中之功能探討。新竹師院學報,13,49-186。
幸曼玲(1998)。從社會互動看幼兒的學習:Vygotsky理論的應用。發表於「幼兒園中教與學的對談」學術研討會(頁89-107)。
幸曼玲(1999)。皮亞傑的建構論與幼兒教育的課程模式。簡楚瑛編,幼教課程模式,第十一章。台北:心理。
幸曼玲(2002)。建立我們的「斐利老師」。載於毛毛蟲兒童哲學基金會(編),認識裴利(頁27-32),台北。
周慧茹(1998)。建構教室中數學知識形成歷程之詮釋分析。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
周淑惠(1998)。幼兒自然科學經驗:教材教法。台北:心理。
周淑惠(2002)。解題與經驗取向的幼兒科學方案。(國科會專案報告,計畫編號:NSC90-2511-S-134-001-x3)
周淑惠(2003a)。幼兒之光、影概念研究。新竹師院學報,16,133-154。
周淑惠(2003b)。幼兒自然科學概念與思維。台北:心理。
高敬文、黃美瑛、陳靜媛、羅素貞(1990)。兒童科學教具與玩具之評估-以認知概念為基礎的模式(Ⅰ)。(國科會專案報告,編號:NS-78-0111-S-153-002)
高敬文、黃美瑛、陳靜媛、羅素貞(1991)。兒童科學教具與玩具之評估-以認知概念為基礎的模式(Ⅱ)。(國科會專案報告,計畫編號:NS-79-0111-S-153-01)
張世忠(2000)。建構教學-理論與應用。台北:五南。
張美玉(1996)。建構主義的教學模式和歷程檔案評量在自然科學之研究(I)。(國科會專案報告,計畫編號:NSC84-2511-S134-003)
張美玉(1997),建構主義的教學模式和歷程檔案評量在自然科學之研究(Ⅱ)。(國科會專案報告,計畫編號:NSC85-2511-S134-004)
張靜嚳(1995)。何謂建構主義?建構與教學,3(1+4版)。2003年6月24日,取自http://203.64.25.5/c&T/v3-1.htm.
張靜嚳(1996)。建構教學問題與評量。建構與教學,8(1+6版)。2003年6月24日,取自http://203.64.25.5/c&T/v8-1.htm.
張惠博(1999)。迷思概念的研究方法。載於國立台灣師範大學(主辦),「科學概念學習研究」研習會,台北。
范毓娟、郭重吉(1995)。在國中理化課程中施行建構主義教學之個案研究。科學教育(彰化師大),6卷,69-87。
胡志偉(1997)。國小教師對建構教學的看法與使用意願。教育與心理研究,20(上),55-70。
游麗卿(1998)。Vygotsky對研究概念發展的啟示。幼教天地,15,227-239。
游麗卿(1999)。Vygotsky社會文化歷史理論:搜集和分析教室社會溝通活動的對話及其脈絡探究概念發展。國教學報,11,230-258。
黃台珠(1988)。概念的研究及其意義。科學教育月刊,66,44-55。
黃瑞琴(2000)。質的教育研究方法(再版六刷)。臺北:心理出版社。
黃松源(2001)。國小自然科建構取向教學之行動研究-教師自我成長與學生學習成效之探討。台北市立師範學院自然科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
郭重吉(1989)。從認知的觀點探討科學教育的理論與實際。發表於行政院國家科學委員會(主辦),認知與學習基礎研究第三次研討會,台北市。
郭重吉、董正玲(1992)。利用晤談方式探究國小兒童運動與力概念的另有架構。彰師科學教育,93-123。
陳雅美(摘譯)(1993)。Inagaki, K.演講稿。皮亞傑與後皮亞傑發展觀點之比較:以幼兒科學教育為例(上、下)。幼教學刊,2,16-22。
陳燕珍譯(1999)。幼兒物理知識之活動:皮亞傑理論在幼兒園中的應用。台北:光佑。
陳淑敏(1994)。Vygotsky的心理發展理論和教育。屏東師院學報,7。
陳淑敏(1997)。從建構主義的教學理論談教師專業成長-以義大利雷吉歐市立幼教系統為例。新幼教,3月號,7-11。
陳淑敏(2001)。幼稚園建構教學理論與實務。台北:心理。
陳淑敏(2002a)。社會建構取向的幼稚園自然科學教育。屏東師範學院學報,16期,65-98。
陳淑敏(2002b)。建構教學對幼兒科學知識學習之影響。教育與心理研究,25,401-430。
陳淑芳、江麗莉、簡淑真等(2002)。幼兒科學基本能力指標建構研究。載於國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所(主辦),第十八屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編。
楊玉娥(1995)。學齡前兒童時間概念發展之研究。(國科會專案,編號:NSC84-2331-B037-097)
楊順南(2002)。實在與建構-一個發展心理學觀點的分析。載於詹志禹(主編),建構論:理論基礎與教育應用(頁78-113)。台北:正中書局。
漢菊德、陳正乾(譯)(1996)。Donaldson, M.著。兒童心智。台北:遠流。
趙金祁、許榮富、黃芳裕(1995)。建構論在科教育研究典範類型與應用(一)-建構論的典範與評析。科學教育月刊,180,2-16。
詹志禹(2002)。編者序。載於詹志禹(主編),建構論:理論基礎與教育應用(頁9)。台北:正中書局。
熊召弟(1992)。我國國小學生對生物現象概念意義化之研究。國科會專題研究成果報告。
熊召弟(1996)。建構者觀的自然教學。科學教育研究與發展,3,3-11。
甄曉蘭、曾志華(1997)。建構教學理念的興起與應用。國民教育研究學報,3期,179-208。
劉惠美(1988)。幼兒死亡概念之研究。國立台灣師範大學家庭教育學系碩士論文,未出版,台北。
劉明智(1993)。應用SAE模式探討國小學生力的概念發展。載於國主屏東師範學院(主辦),「國小自然科學教育」學術研討會實錄(頁146-148),屏東。
鍾聖校(1995)。認知心理學。台北:心理。
盧素碧(1996)。幼兒的發展與輔導。台北:文景。
蔡敏玲(1995)。詮釋性研究的一個可能方式:我如何建構婷婷和穎的故事。收錄於黃政傑等者,質的教育研究:方法與實例(頁71-114)。台北:漢文。
戴維揚(2002)。建構結構概念轉移的教學。戴於王美芬、戴維揚(主編),新課程:建構式教學理論與實踐:數學、健康與體育、自然與生活科技(頁93-128)。台北:師大。
簡淑真(1998)。建構論及其在幼兒教育上應用。課程與教學季刊,1(3),61-80。課程與教學學會出版。
簡淑真、熊召弟(1999)。建構主義在幼兒科學教育上的應用—一個合作性教學研究。(國科會專題研究計畫成果報告,編號:NSC-88-2413-H-003-033)
簡淑真、熊召弟(2002a)。建構理念應用於幼兒科學教學之研究-一個合作性教學研究。載於輔仁大學民生學院兒童與家庭學系主辦之「兒童與家庭-趨勢、未來與創新」學術研討會彙輯下集(頁49-62)。台北。
簡淑真、陳淑芳、李田英(2002b)。建構幼兒科學教學模式之建立與驗證研究(2/2)(更名為建構取向幼兒科學教學之實施研究)。(專案研究成果報告,編號:NSC-90-2511-S-003-024)
謝青龍(1995)。從「迷思概念」到「另有架構」的概念改變。科學教育月刊,180,23-29。
羅雅芬等譯(2000)。兒童的一百種語文:瑞吉歐‧艾蜜莉亞教育取向-進一步的迴響。台北:心理出版。
蘇育任(1993)。「兒童的科學」研究之沿革與其對國小自然科教學之啟示。初等教育研究所期刊,1,91-104。
蘇幼良(2002)。以建構主義教學策略探究國小二年級學童對「聲音」的概念學習。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
閰如玉(1998)。建構理念在國小自然科教學運作歷程之探究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
貳、英文文獻
Abimbola, I.U.(1988).The problem of terminology in the study of student conceptions in science. Science Education, 72(2), 175-184.
Brunkhorst. (1991). Getting started with science inquiring for early childhood education. In Elkind, D. 9th(Ed.) Perspectives on early childhood education : growing with young children toward the 21st century. NEA Early childhood education series.
Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.(1992)。Qualitative research for education:An Introduction to theory and methods(2nd,Ed.)Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
Driver, R. & Easley, J.(1978).Pupils and paradigm:A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Science in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
Driver, R. & Erickson, G.(1983).Theories-in-action: some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science. Study in Science Education, 10, 37-60.
Driver, R. & Oldham, V.(1986).A Constructivist Approach to Curriculum Development in Science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.
Duit, R.(1991).On the Role of Analogies and Metaphors in Learning Science. Science Education, 75(6), 649-672.
Duit, R. & Treagust, D.F.(1998).Learning in Science - From Behaviorism Towards Constructivism and Beyond. International handbook on science education(pp.3-25). New York:Kluwer Academic Publisher Press.
Erickson, F.(1986).Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock(Ed.),Handbook of research in teaching(pp.119-161).New York:Macmillan.
Forman, E.A.,& Cazden, C.B.(1985).Exploring Vygotskian perspectives in education:The cognitive value of peer interaction. In J.V.Wertsch(Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspective (pp.323-347).New York: Cambridge University.
Fisher, K.M., & Lipson, J.I.(1986).Twenty questions about student errors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(9), 783-803.
Fosnot, Catherine T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practices. (pp.8-33). New York: Teachers College Press.
Fleer, M. (1990). Scaffolding conceptual change in early childhood. Research in science education,20,114-123.
Fleer(1992). Identifying teacher – child interaction which scaffolds scientific thinking in young children. Science Education,76(4),373-397.
Fleer, M. & Beaslery, W.(1993).A Study of Conceptual Development in Early Childhood. Research in Science Education, 21, 104-112.
Forman, G.E.(1993).The constructivist perspective to early education. In J.L. Roopnarine, J.E. Johnson. Approaches in early Childhood education. Columbus, OH:Merrill.
Fosnot, Catherine T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practices. (p. 8-33). New York: Teachers College Press.
Goodnow, J.(1977).Children’s drawing. Cambridge, MA: Havard University Press.
Gilbert, J.K., Osborne, J.R., & Fensham, P.(1982).Children’s science and its consequences for teaching children. Science Education, 66(4), 623-33.
Gilbert, J.K., & Watts, D.M.(1983).Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98.
Gergen, Kenneth J. (1995) Social construction and the educational process. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in education (pp. 17-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Gould, J.S.(1996).A constructivist perspective on teaching and learning in the language arts. In C.T. Fosnot(Ed.),Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Gallas,K.(1992).Metaphor and Analogy in Children’s Science Talks.Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association(San Francisco,CA,April,1992)(ED 357 952).
Gallas, K.(1994).The Language of Learning: How children talk, write, dance, draw, and sing their understanding of the world. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gallas, K.(1995).Talking their way into science. New York: Teachers College Press.
Guzzetti, B.J., Snyder, T.E., glass, G.V., & Gamas, W.S.(1993).Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 117-159.
Ginsburg, H. P. (1997). Entering the child’s mind(Chapter 2). Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Ginsburg, H. P., & Opper, S. (1998).Biography and Basic Ideas. In (2nd.ed.),Piaget’s Yheory of Intellectual Development(pp.1-7). N.J.,U.S.A.:Prentice-Hall.Inc.
Goswami, U.(1998).Cognition in children. Authorised translation from English language edition published by Psychology Press , a member of the Taylor & Francis Group.
Hewson, M.G., & Hewsons, P.W.(1983).Effect of instruction using students’ prior knowledge and conceptual change strategies on science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 731-743.
Helm, H., & Novak, J.D.(Eds.)(1983).Proceedings of the International Seminar on Misconceptions in Science and Mathematics. Cornell University. Ithaca, New York.
Head, J.(1986).Research into “alternative frameworks”: promise and problems. Research in Science and Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.
Hashweh, M.Z.(1988).Descriptive studies of students’ conceptions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(2), 513-529.
Hudson, J.A.(1993).Understanding events: The development of script knowledge. In M. Bennett(Ed.), The development of social cognition(pp.142-167).
Hatano, G. & Inagaki, K.(2000). Domain-specific constraints of conceptual development. International Journal of Behavioral Development,24(3),267-275.
Johnson, P. & Gott, R.(1996).Constructivism and Evidence from Children’s Ideas. Science Education, 80(5), 561-577.
Kamii, C. & DeVries, R. (1978). Physical knowledge in preschool education:implications of Piaget’s theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
Lemke, J.L.(1990).Talking Science: Language, learning and values.
Mathews, J.(1984).Children drawing: Are young children really scribbling. Child Development and Care, 18, 1-39.
Mintzes, J.J.(1984).Nave theories in Biology: children’s concepts of the human body. School Science and Mathematics, 84, 548-555.
Maria, K.(1997).A case study of conceptual change in a young child. The elementary school Journal,98(1),67-87.
Nussbaum(1976/1985).The earth as a cosmic body.In R.Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien(eds.), Children’s ideas in science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Osborne, R.(1984).Children’s dynamics. Physics Teaching, 22, 504-508.
Orsolini, M., & Pontecorvo, C.(1992).Children’s talk in classroom discussions. Journal of Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 113-136.
Piaget, J.(1970).Genetic Epistemology.Translated by Eleanor Duckworth. New York:Columbia University Press.
Posner, G.J.,Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., & Gertzog, W.A.(1982).Accommodation of A Scientific Conception:Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211-227.
Rosch, E., & Mervis, C.B.(1975).Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605.
Rothenberg, A.(1979).The emerging goddess. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Ricoeur, P.(1984).Time and narrative. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
Richards, J. (1995).Construct〔ion/iv〕ism: Pick one of the Above. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in education (pp. 41-56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Solomon, J.(1994).The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, 23, 1-19.
Shotter, John, (1995). In dialogue: Social constructionism and radical constructivism. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in education (pp. 41-56). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stepans, J.I.(2003,10月).Ways to identify and make sense of students’ science misconceptions..發表於台東大學(主辦),九十二學年度科學概念相關學習研究會會議手冊(講義稿),屏東。
von Glasersfeld, Ernst. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In Watzlawick, P. (Ed.) The invented reslity. NY: Nortonl Company Inc.
von Glasersfeld, Ernst.(1989).Constructivism in education. In T. Husen & N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education, suppl.1, 162-163.Oxford:Pergamon.
von Glasersfeld, Ernst. (1990). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In Davis, R.B., Maher, C.A., & Noddings, N.(eds.) Constructivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. NCTM.
von Glasersfeld, Ernst.(1993a).Constructivist perspectives on teacher learning. In Tobin,K.(Ed.).The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education(pp.1-22)Washing, D.C.:the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
von Glasersfeld, Ernst.(1993b).Questions and Answers about Radical Constructivism. In Tobin,K.(Ed.).The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education(pp.23-38)Washing, D.C.:the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
von Glasersfeld,E.(1995).Piaget’s constructivist theory of knowing. In Radical Constructivism: A way of Knowing and Learning(pp.53-75). London: The Falmer Press. Taylor & Faands Inc.
von Glasersfeld, Ernst.(1996). Introduction: Aspects of Constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practices. (p. 3-7). New York: Teachers College Press.
von Glasersfeld, Ernst. (1998). Cognition, construction of knowledge and teaching. In Matthews, M. R. (Ed.) .Constructivism in science education. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Vosniadou, S. & Brewer, W.F.(1992).Mental models of the earth:a study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-582.
Valanides, N.; Gritsi, F.; Kampeza, M. & Ravanis, K.(2000). Changing pre-school children’s conceptions of the day/night cycle. International journal of early years education,8(1),27-39.
Volkmann, M.J.(2003,10月).Assessing Misconceptions.發表於台東大學(主辦),九十二學年度科學概念相關學習研究會會議手冊(講義稿),屏東。