摘 要

許多的研究均指出自我解釋有助於學習(Chi et al., 1989, 1991, 1994)，因此有些學者發現圖表或圖解具有促進自我解釋的功效( Ainsworth & Loizou, 2003; Cox, 1999)，但亦有學者持相反意見(Wilkin, 1997)；再者在教材中加入了輔助的圖表或圖解後，是否對學習者產生過多的認知負荷而不利學習亦是研究者想探討的問題；因此本研究以自我解釋的方式閱讀不同表徵的教材，以探討各組的學習表現、自我解釋數量、自我解釋類型的數量分佈、自我解釋的型態、在閱讀時所感知到的認知負荷並探知各組概念改變的情形及對自我解釋的態度。

研究對象為國小四年級中等程度的學生32名，隨機、平均分配至文組、格文組、圖文組、圖格文組共四組進行研究。閱讀過程中以自我解釋的方式學習，並於前測、後測結束後晤談以瞭解受試者的迷思概念及概念改變情形。研究結果如下：

1.各組學習表現：以圖文組表現最佳，之後依序為圖格文組、格文組、文組。
2.自我解釋數量：圖文組自我解釋量為數最多，再來是圖格文組、格文組、文組，且學習表現和自我解釋數量為顯著正相關。
3.自我解釋類型分佈：含有圖片的組別在「情境精緻的自我解釋」比無圖片的組別來得多；含有表格的組別在「講述摘要或大意的自我解釋」比無表格之組別來得多。
4.自我解釋的型態：格文組、圖文組各有5類，圖格文組有6類，其中的共同點為：若受試者有交互參看不同表徵而自我解釋者，在學習表現及自我解釋數量上會表現得較好。
5.各組的認知負荷：圖文組的認知負荷最低，文組的認知負荷最高，且認知負荷和學習表現為顯著負相關。
6.迷思概念與概念改變的情形：在動物和植物的繁殖概念中共同迷思概念為「學生易將繁殖和生長混淆」，且迷思概念主要成因為動、植物之外形、字義上的錯誤學習、日常生活經驗、直覺式的判斷；在概念改變方面，受試者較難產生概念改變的亦為上述這些成因之下的迷思概念。
7.對自我解釋的態度：圖文組和圖格文組「對自我解釋的接納度」及「自我解釋的學習功效」有較高的正向支持率，反之格文組、文組則無。

Abstract

Many researches have been demonstrated that self-explaining is an effective strategy for learners to learn. Some researchers also found that diagrams and pictures can facilitate the self-explanation effect, however, Wilkin (1997) argues that diagrams may inhibit self-explanation effect. Besides, will texts with alternative representations be more cognitive load for learners to learn? So, the purpose of this study is trying to explore students’ performance, cognitive load and conceptual change of the process to study different format of material about reproduction concepts of plants and animals while self-explaining.

Participants (thirty-two 4th graders) were randomly assigned to four groups: text group (only texts), table group (with tables and texts), picture group (with pictures and texts), mixed group (with tables, pictures and texts). In the study phase, subjects were asked to generate self-explanations while they were learning and after pre-test and post-test, they were interviewed to let their misconceptions and circumstances of conceptual change to be known. The main results of this study are as follows:

1. Learning outcomes : picture group scored highest than all other groups.
2. Number of self-explanations : students in the picture group generated more self- explanations than all other groups and students who generated a greater number of self-explanations performed better at learning performance.
3. Kinds of self-explanations : groups with pictures were generated more” elaborate situation self-explanations” than groups without pictures; groups with tables were generated more” summary self-explanations” than groups without tables.
4. Types of self-explanations : both table group and picture group have 5 types while mixed group has 6 types. The point in common is that students self-explaining with reading different representations will perform better in learning outcomes and generate more self-explanations.
5. Cognitive load : the cognitive load of picture group is lowest while text group is highest and there is a significantly negative relation between cognitive load and performances.
6. Misconceptions and conceptual change : the common misconception of the reproduction concepts of plants and animals is that students tend to think “reproduction” as “growing” and the main sources of misconceptions are the shape of plants and animals, misunderstanding of words, life experience and intuition. As for conceptual change, that is hard for students to change is the misconceptions which from the sources mentioned above.
7. Attitudes toward self explanations : picture group and mixed group had the most positive attitude to the acceptance and learning effects of self- explanations, in other way, table group and text group hadn’t.

參考文獻
中文部份

王亦欣（2003) 。探討國二學生閱讀漫畫表徵的文本對地球科學概念學習的影響—以天文和溫室效應為例。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
王美芬（1992） 。國小一、二、三年級學生「生物構造配合功能」概念發展研究（I）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC-81-0111-S- 133-501-N）。
王美芬（1998） 。兒童科學觀的理論與研究。台北市：心理出版社。
吳柏林（1999） 。現代統計學（第二版）。台北市：五南。
吳清香（2003） 。國民小學高年級學生植物繁殖迷思概念之研究。國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義市。
宋曜廷（2000) 。先前知識、文章結構與多媒體呈現對文章學習的影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系研究所博士論文，未出版，台北市。
林育聖（2002） 。自我解釋對程式語言IF敘述學習的影響。國立台灣師範大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
林靜雯 (2000) 。由概念改變及心智模式初探多重類比對國小四年級學生電學概念學習之影響。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
林曉雯 (2003) 。學生對「開花植物生長與發育」概念之了解。師大學報:科學教育類， 48 (1)，47-62。
邱美虹（1994） 。從”自我解釋”所產生的推論探究高中生化學平衡的學習。師大學報，39，489-524。
邱美虹、陳英嫻（1995） 。月相盈虧之概念改變。師大學報，40，509-548。
邱美虹（1996） 。學習策略與科學學習。科學教育月刊，191，2-15。
邱美虹（2000） 。概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊，8(1)，1-34。
邱美虹等(譯) （2003） 。P. Thagard著。概念革命 (Conceptual Revolutions)。台北市：洪葉。
邱月玲（2002） 。不同的科學圖文配置對學生閱讀學習的影響-以『月相概念』為例。國立台中師範學院自然科學教育學系碩士論文，未出版，台中市。
施惠（1993） 。國小學生對動物生殖類型的概念結構研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC-81-0111-S-134-03-N）。
施惠（1996） 。國小學生對動物生殖類型的概念建構之研究教學活動設計。新 竹師院學報，9，191-228。
洪蘭（譯）（2001） 。R. Carter著。大腦的秘密檔案（Mapping the Mind）。台北市：遠流出版社。
范懿文、陳彙芳（2000） 。認知負荷對多媒體電腦輔助學習成效之影響研究。資訊管理研究，2，45-60。
徐易稜（2001） 。多媒體呈現方式對學習者認知負與荷學習成效之影響研究。國立中央大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
張欣怡（1997） 。地球科學不同課文表徵教材對學習表現之研究。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
張春興（1991） 。現代心理學。台北市：東華書局。
許良榮（1996） 。圖形與科學課文學習關係的探討。教育研究資訊，4(4)，121-131。
陳世輝（1995） 。山地兒童生物概念及生物分類之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC-84-2511-S-026-002-N）。
顏麗娟（2003） 。國小學童植物生殖概念之研究。市立台北師範學院科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳盈吉（2004） 。探討動態類比對於科學概念學習與概念改變歷程之研究-以國二學生學習氣體粒子概念為例。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
陳密桃（2003） 。認知負荷理論及其對教學的啟示。國立高雄師範大學教育學系教育學刊，21，29-51。
陳業勇（2001） 。國小學生「動物生殖」概念之研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
郭璟諭（2003） 。媒體組合方式與認知型態對學習成效與認知負荷之影響。國立中央大學資訊管理學系研究所碩士論文，未出版，桃園縣。
彭文貴（2002） 。國小六年級學童對植物生殖概念及其迷思概念之研究。國立台中師範學院自然科學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版，台中市。
黃克文（1996） 。認知負荷與個人特質及學習成就之關聯。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。未出版，台北市。
熊召弟、陳業勇、林益興和楊婷喬 (2001) 。國小學生的「動物生殖」觀。國立台北師範學院學報, 14, 573-614。
潘文富（1997） 。國小學生種子萌芽迷思概念之探討。屏師科學教育，6，18-27。
廖進德（2002） 。國小學童對「植物繁殖」概念學習之研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
鄭昭明（1996） 。認知心理學：理論與實踐。台北市：桂冠圖書公司。
鄭德麟（2005，3月17日） 。調查統計青少年最缺價值澄清能力、溝通與批判思考能力分列前三名，最應具備能力為語文、溝通、批判思考。青年日報，11版。
謝琇玲（1996） 。插圖對學生閱讀學習的影響研究。高雄工學院學報，3，305-315。
藍雅齡（1998） 。讀圖訓練對國二學生理解地球科學圖形之影響。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北市。
藍嘉淑（2000） 。圖片在國中生物科教學的角色及其對學生圖片理解之影響。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，高雄市。

英文部分

Aasman, J., Mulder, G.., & Mulder, L. J. M. (1987). Operator effort and the measurement of heart-rate variability. Human Factors, 29, 161-170.
Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1985). Computer-based instruction: Methods and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Aleven, V. A. W. M. M., & Koedinger, K.R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26, 147-179.
Ainsworth, S., & Loizou, A. T. (2003).The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669-681.
Atkinson, R. K., & Renkl, A. (2001). The provision of instructional explanation in example-based learning: Analysis from a cognitive-load perspective. Paper presented at 9th EARLI conference. Fribourg (CH), August 2001.
Bell, B. F. (1981). When is an animal not an animal? Journal of Biological Education, 15 (3), 213-218.
Bell, B. F. (1985).Students’ ideas about plant: What are they? Journal of
　 Biological Education, 19(3), 213-218.
Bernstein, A. C., & Cowan, P. A. (1975). Children’s concepts of how people get babies. Child Development, 46, 77-91.
Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P., & Brown, A. (1995). Training in self-explanation and self-regulation strategies-investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition on problem solving. Cognitive and Instruction, 13, 221-252.
Bobis, J., Sweller , J., & Cooper, M. (1993). Cognitive load effects in a primary-school geometry task. Learning and Instruction, 3, 1-21.
Bratfisch, O., Borg. G.., & Dornic, S. (1972). Perceived item-difficulty in three tests of intellectual performance capacity. Report No.29. Stockholm: Institute of Applied Psychology.
Braund, M. (1991). Children’s ideas in classifying animals. Journal of Biological Education, 25 (2), 103-110.
Braund, M. (1998). Trends in children’s concepts of vertebrate and invertebrate. Journal of Biological Education, 32 (2), 112-118.
Brunken, R., Plas, J. L., & Leutner, D. ( 2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53-61.
Burdick, J. G. (1960). A study of cross-section drawings used as technical of illustrations in high school science textbooks. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University.
Calin-Jageman, R. J., & Ratner, H. H. (2005). The role of encoding in the self-explanation effect. Cognition & Instruction, 23(4), 523-543.
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chambliss, M. J. (1994). Evaluation the quality of textbooks for diverse learners. Remedial and Special Education, 15(6), 348-362.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instru- ction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1996). Cognitive load while learning to use a computer program. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, 1-20.
Chen, S. H., & Ku, C. H. (1999). Aboringinal children’s conceptions and alternative conceptions of plant. Proceedings of the National Science Council Part D: Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(1), 10-19.
Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Examples for learning and discovery in science. In R. Giere (Eds.), Cognitive models of science: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science (pp.129-186). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M.W., Reiman, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self- Explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
Chi, M. T. H., deLeeuw, N., Chiu, M., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self- explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. A. (1991). The content of physics self-explanations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 69-105.
Conover, W. J. (1999). Wiley series in probability and statistics: Applied probability and statistics section ( third edition). New York: Willy.
Cox, R. (1999). Representation construction, externalised cognition and individual differences. Learning and Instruction, 9, 343-363.
Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making Sense of Secondary Science. London: Routledge.
Ferguson-Hessler, M.G. M., & de Jong, T. (1990). Studying physics texts: Differences in study processes between good and poor students. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 41-54.
Fleming, M. L. (1987). Designing pictorial/verbal instruction: Some speculative extensions from research to practice. In Houghton, H. A. & Willows, D. M.(Eds.), The Psychology of illustration: Volume2. Instructional issues (pp.136-157), New York: Springer-Verlag.
Gellevij, M., Van Der Meij, H., De Jong, T., & Pieters, J. (2002). Multimodal versus unimodal instruction in a complex learning context. Journal of Experimental Education, 70(3), 215-240.
Gimino, A. (2002). Students’ investment of mental effort. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Glenberg, A. M., & Lanston, W. E. (1992). Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental model. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 129-151.
Gobert , J. D., & Clement, J. J. (1999). Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student-generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 39-53.
Goldman, R. J., & Goldman, J. D. G. (1982). How children perceive the origin of babies and the roles of mothers and fathers in procreation: A cross-national study. Child Development, 53, 491-504.
Hayes, D. A., & Readence, J. E. (1983). Transfer of learning from illustration- dependent text. Journal of Educational Research, 76(4), 245-248.
Hegarty, M., & Just, M. A. (1989). Understanding machines from text and diagrams. In H. Mandl & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and picture. (pp. 171-194). New York: North Holland.
Hegarty, M., & Just, M.A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 717-742.
Hendy, C. H., Hamilton, K. M., & Landry, L. N. (1993). Measuring subjective workload: When is one scale better than many? Human Factors, 35, 579-601.
Holliday, W. G. (1977). Differential cognitive and affective responses to flow diagrams in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14(2), 129-138.
Holliday, W. G., Brunner, L. L., & Donais, E. L. (1977). Differential cognitive and affective responses to flow diagrams in science, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13(2), 129-138.
Holmes, B. C. (1987). Children’s inferences with print and pictures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 14-18.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, S. (1996). Managing split-attention and redundancy in multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 13, 351-371.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, S. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors, 40, 1-17.
Kieras, D. (1978). Beyond pictures and words: Alternative information-processing models for imagery effects in verbal memory. Psychological Bulletin, 85(3), 532-554.
Kreitler, H., & Kreitler, S. (1966). Children’s concepts of sexuality and birth. Child Development, 37, 363-378.
Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-99.
Levie, W. H. (1987). Research on pictures: A guide to the literature. The Psychology of Illustration, 1, 51-85.
Levin, J. R. (1982). Pictures as Prose-Learning Devices. In A. Flemmer & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Discourse processing, NY: North Holland, 412-444.
Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The Psychology of Illustration (pp. 51-85). New York: Springer-Veralg.
Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effect of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology, 30(4), 195-232.
Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding Instructions…. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 49-63.
Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science text book lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 64-73.
Mayer, W. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
Mayer, R. E., & Gallini, J. K. (1990).When is an illustrations worth ten thousand words? Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 715-726.
Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
McNamara, D. S. (2004). SERT: self-explanation reading training. Discourse Processes, 38(1), 1-30.
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The Childes Project. MahWah, New Jersey: LEA.
Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97.
Mousavi., S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319-334.
Mulder, L. J. M. (1988). Assessment of cardiovascular reactivity by means of spectral analysis. Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Mulder, L. J. M. (1992). Measurement and analysis methods heart rate and respiration for use in applied environments. Biological Psychology, 34, 205-236.
Nathan, M. J., Mertz, K., & Ryan, B. (1994). Learning through self-explanation of mathematical examples: Effects of cognitive load. Paper presented at the 1994 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
Neuman, Y., Lebowitz, L., & Schwarz, B. (2000). Patterns of verbal mediation during problem solving: A sequential analysis of self-explanation. Journal of Experimental Education, 68(3), 197-223.
Okeke, E. C., & Wood-Robinson, C. (1980). A study of Nigerian pupil’s understanding of selected biological concepts. Journal of Biological Education, 14(4), 329-338.
Paas, F. G. W.C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in Statistics: A cognitive load approch. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (4), 429-434.
Paas, F. G..W.C., & van Merrienboer, J. J.G. (1994). Variability of worked examples and trasfer of geometrical problem solving skill: A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 122-133.)
Paas, F. G. W. C., Renkle, A., & Sweller, J. (2003a). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Paas, F. G. W. C., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gernven, P. W. M. (2003b). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63-71.
Paas, F. G. W. C., van Merrienboer, J. J. G., ＆ Adam J. J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 419-430.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Paivio, A. (1986). Dual coding theory. In Mental Representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford university.
Paivio, A. (1991). Images In Minds: The Evolution of A Theory. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Pillow, B. H., Mash, C., & Hill, S. A. V. (2002). Facilitating children’s understanding of misinterpretation: Explanatory efforts and improvements in perspective taking. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(2), 133-148.
Pirolli, P. L., & Recker, M. (1994). Learning strategies and transfer in the domain of programming. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 235-275.
Ponser, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accomm- odation of a scientific conception：Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
Reid, D. J. (1990a). The role of pictures in learning biology: Part 1, perception and observation processing. Journal of Biology Education, 24(3), 161-172.
Reid, D. J. (1990b). The role of pictures in learning biology: Part 2, pictures-text processing. Journal of Biology Education, 24(4), 251-258.
Reid, D. J., & Beveridge, M. (1990). Reading illustrated science texts: A microcomputer based investigation of children’s strategies. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 76-87.
Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21, 1-29.
Renkl, A. (1999). Learning mathematics from worked-out examples: Analyzing and fostering self-explanations. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 477-488.
Renkl, A. (2002). Worked-out examples: instructional explanations support learning by self-explanations. Learning & Instruction, 12(5), 529-556.
Renkl, A., & Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Learning from examples: Fostering self-explanations in computer-based learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 10(2), 105-119.
Richards, D.D., & Siegler, R. S. (1984). The effects of task requirements children’s Life judgments. Child Development, 55(5), 1689-1696.
Robinson, D. H., & Molina, E. (2002). The Relative Involvement of Visual and Auditory Working Memory When Studying Adjunct Displays. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(1), 118-131.
Robinson, D. H., Katayama, A.D., & Fan, A. C. (1996). Evidence for conjoint retention of information encoded from spatial adjunct displays. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(3), 221-239.
Robinson, D. H., & Schraw, G.. (1994). Computational efficiency through visual argument: do graphic organizers communicate relations in text too effectively? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 19, 399-415.
Robinson, D. H., & Skinner, C. H. (1996). Why graphic organizers facilitate search processes: fewer words or computationally efficient indexing? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(2), 166-180.
Roth, W. M., Bowen G.. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 977-1019.
Salomon, G.. (1989). Interaction of media, cognition and learning. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: How do graphical represe -ntations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 185-213.
Schnotz, W. (2002). Commentary: Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14,101-120.
Stead, B. (1980). Plants learning in science project. Working paper No.24. Waikato Univ., Hamilton (New Zealand).(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 236 007).
Steiner, G. (1999). Learning from an illustrated text: The construction of mental models. Learning: Nineteen Scenarios From Everyday Life, 167-197.
Stenning, K., & Oberlander, J. (1995). A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementations. Cognitive Science, 19(1), 97-140.
Stephan, J. (1985). Biology in elementary schools: Children’s conceptions of life. American Biology Teacher, 47(4), 222-225.
Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
Sweller, J., Merrienboer, J. J. G. van, & Paas, F. G. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
Trowbridge, J. E., & Mintzes, J. J. (1988). Alternative conceptions in animal classification: A cross-age study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25 (7), 547-571.
Tull, D. (1991). Elementary textbooks versus the child: Conflicting perceptions of biology. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the National association for Research in Science Teaching. Lake Geneva. WI. (ERIC Document Repyoduction Service No. ED 337 359).
Tyson, L. M., Venville, G. J., Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1997). A multidi- mensional framework for interpreting conceptual change events in the classroom. Science Education, 81, 387-404.
VanLehn, K., Jones, R. M, & Chi, M. T. H. (1992). A modal of the self-explanation effect. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 1-59.
VanLehn, K. & Jones, R. M. (1993). What mediates the self-explanation effect? Knowledge gap, schemas or analogies? In M. Polson (Ed.), Proceedings of the fifteenth annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp.1034-1039). Hillsdale, NJL Erlbaum.
van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5-13.
van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Schuurman, J. G., de Croock, M. B. M., & Pass, F. G. W. C. (2002). Redirecting learners’ attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 12, 11-37.
van Merrienboer, J. J. G., ＆ Sweller J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 147-177.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in children. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-585.
Vosniadou S. & Ioannides, C. (1998). From conceptual development to science education: a psychological point of view. International Journal of Science Education. 20 (10) 1213-1230.
Waller, R. (1981). Understanding network diagrams. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Los Angles.
Wax, N., & Stavy, R. (1987). Children’s conceptions of plants as living things.
Paper Presented at biennial meeting of the International Society for the Study
of Behavioral Development. Tokyo, Japan.(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.ED 294 732).
Wilkin, B. (1997). Learning from explanations: Diagrams can “Inhibit” the self-explanation effect. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Reasoning with diagrammatic representations II (pp. 136-143). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
Winn, W. (1980). The effects of block-word diagrams on the structuring of science concepts as a function of general ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17(3), 201-211.
Winn, W. (1987). Charts, graphs, and diagrams in educational materials. In The Psychology of Illustration, 1, 152-198.
Winn, W. (1989).The Design and Use of Instructional Graphics. In H. Mandl & J. R. Levin( Eds. ), Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Picture. (pp. 125-144). New York: North Holland.
Winn, W. (1993). An account of how readers search for information in diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 162-185.
Wood-Robinson, C. (1994). Young people’s idea about inheritance and evolution. Studies in Science Education, 24, 29-47.
Yeung, A. S., Jin, P., & Sweller, S. (1997). Cognitive load and learner expertise: Split-attention and redundancy effects in reading with explanatory notes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 1-21.
Yip, Din-yan. (1997). A lesson learnt from apple. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 43(2), 27-30.