摘要
根據視覺語法的觀點，本研究探討國三學生閱讀「感應起電」示意圖之讀圖理解表現情形，並分析性別與學習成就的效應，與學生讀圖文的習慣和偏好。
研究設計採調查研究和晤談兩部分。根據視覺語法中「敘述性結構」與「概念性結構」的「動作者」、「過程」、「目標」、「屬性」、「載體」等面向發展「感應起電讀圖理解測驗」，其重測信度為0.7，α係數為0.77。並發展「讀圖文習慣問卷」以及「讀圖歷程問卷」。研究對象為台北市某市立國中九年級72位學生，分別施以上述測驗，並以ANOVA等統計進行資料分析。晤談另外分層抽取12位學生參與訪談，以深入瞭解其圖形理解情形。研究發現如下：
一、不同學習成就學生在示意圖的「敘述性結構」與「概念性結構」理解上有顯著差異；差異的主要來源是「敘述性結構」中的「動作者」、「過程」、「目標」等面向，以及「概念性結構」中的「屬性」面向。此外，在「載體」面向方面，性別和學習成就間有顯著交互作用。
二、讀圖歷程方面，大部分學生以閱讀圖片標題為主，整張圖以Z字型方式閱讀；就圖中四部份則是以直線形由下而上方式閱讀，先閱讀文字接著再看圖。
三、在讀圖習慣與偏好方面，學生一致認為圖片具有輔助文字理解的功能，而高學習成就學生，偏好表格與流程圖等圖形表徵，中、低學習成就學生則偏好照片式的圖片，另外低成就學生也喜歡分解圖和掛圖式的圖形。針對不同特質學生給予不同表徵圖形的教學似有必要。
四、晤談結果顯示學生對圖形中的各成分的解讀存有另有概念；對於色彩模態、版面配置學生亦提供其想法。
最後根據上述研究結果對不同學習成就學生讀圖情形提出討論與建議。

Ninth Graders' Image Reading Comprehension of Electrostatic Induction Diagrams
Abstract
Based upon visual grammar, this study aimed at probing the effects of gender and academic performance on pupils’ image reading comprehension of electrostatic induction diagrams, and investigating their image preference and image-text reading habit.

A survey design and clinical interview approach were deployed in this study. According to the Narrative Structure and Ideational Structure of visual grammar, the “Test of Electrostatic Induction Diagram Reading Comprehension” was developed, which was composed of five categories of items: understanding of the "Actor", "Process", "Goal", "Attribute" and "Carrier" element of a diagram. The test-retest stability is 0.7, Alpha coefficient is 0.77. Meanwhile, “Questionnaire of Image Reading Preference” and “Questionnaire of Image-Text Reading Habit” were also developed. Seventy-two ninth graders from a school in Taipei city participated in this study, they were administrated the above instruments. Twelve interviewees were sampled randomly and were interviewed to probe their conceptual understanding of electrostatic induction via image reading.

Major findings were listed as followed:
1. Different levels of academic performance students understood significantly different on the Narrative and Ideational Structures of the Diagrams. The sources of the difference could be the ‘Actor’, ‘Process’ and ‘Goad’ elements of Narrative Structure, and the ‘Attribute’ element of Ideational structure. In addition, an interaction between gender and academic performance was observed on the ‘Carrier’ element of both structures.

2. The result of study of "reading image process" shows all students tend to read the captions of the images first, and read the contents of the image in a zigzag manner. The four parts of the image are read in a linear manner from top to bottom, with texts read first and then image.

3. All students agreed that images are useful on improving understanding of science text, however, high academic achievers preferred reading tables and flowcharts; middle and low achievers relied more on photos, and low achievers preferred analytic chart and wall charts as well. It seems necessary to deliver science content with different types of visual representation to the learners.

4. The result of the interview reveals that students held variant interpretations about the elements of the diagrams. They even echoed comments on color modality and layout of the diagrams.

Lastly, the implications of the findings on science teaching and learning were suggested and further studies were also recommended.

參考文獻
中文部分

史家瑩主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書2上，翰林書局。
史家瑩主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書2下，翰林書局。
史家瑩主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書3上，翰林書局。
史家瑩主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書3下，翰林書局。
江彩鳳(2003)。數位圖像應用於國小兒童創造力測驗之研究。國立新竹師範學院美勞教育學系碩士論文。
李美滿(2002)。探討高二學生對生物課本圖片詮釋之相關因素。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所教學碩士班論文。
林伶芳(2005)。教科書和教師教學對學童「動物生殖」心智模式。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
林英智主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書2上，南一書局。
林英智主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書2下，南一書局。
林英智主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書3上，南一書局。
林英智主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書3下，南一書局。
林菁(1995)。圖像複雜度與兒童的認知學習。嘉義師院學報，173-207。
宋曜廷(2000)。先前知識、文章結構和多媒體呈現對文章學習的影響。國立臺灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文。
邱月玲(2001)。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。臺中師範學院自然科學教育學系碩士論文。
邱美虹(2003)。2003數學與科學的對話：概念學習會議手冊。科教處學術研討會。94-95。
吳明德(1986)。插圖對學習的影響。視聽教育雙月刊，28（3），61-67。
胡壯麟、朱永生、張德錄(1989)。系統功能語法概論。湖南教育出版社。
洪佳慧(2002)。由教科書內容與性別面向分析我國國二學生在第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查（TIMSS-R）的學習表現-生命科學以及環境與資源議題部分。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
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。
許佩玲(2004)。從系統功能語言學觀點探討不同圖文整合方式之科學課文對閱讀理解的影響－以月相單元為例。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳明印(1998)。教科書圖表設計的理論基礎與運用。研習資訊，15(6)，54-59。
梁榮彰(2005)。圖像提示對國中一年級學生理解數學圖像測驗的成效研究。國立交通大學網路學習碩士在職專班碩士論文。
郭重吉主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書第三冊，南一書局。
郭重吉主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書第四冊，南一書局。
郭重吉主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書第五冊，南一書局。
郭重吉主編(2006)。國中自然與生活科技教科書第六冊，南一書局。
廖翎吟(2003)。國小兒童靜態3D電腦圖像空間深度判斷研究。國立新竹師範學院美勞教育研究所碩士論文。
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期，305-315
謝貞秀、張英傑(2003)。國小三四年級平面圖形概念之研究。國立台北師範學院學報。16，97-134。
藍嘉淑(2000)。圖片在國中生物教學的角度及其對學生圖片理解之影響。高雄師範大學科學科學教育所碩士論文
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。

英文部分

Ametller, J., ＆ Pintó, R. (2002). Students’reading of innovative images of energy at secondary school level. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3), 285-312.
Bonder﹐G ..(1991)﹒I have found you an argument：The conceptual knowledge of beginning chemistry graduate students﹒Journal of Chemical Education﹐68﹐385-388.
Fani﹐S.﹐Fiona﹐O.﹐and Jon﹐O.﹐(2002)﹒ Analysis of science textbook pictures about energy and pupils’ readings of them﹒International Journal of Science Education﹐24(3)﹐257-283.
Gropper, G. L. (1966). Comment on sense-impression response to differing pictorial and verbal stimuli. Communication Review, 14, 91-97.
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 (p.171-194). New York﹕North Holland.
Holliday﹐W. G. (1976). Teaching verbal chains using flow diagrams and texts﹒Communication Review﹐24﹐63-78.
Holliday﹐W. G. (1977). Differential cognitive and affective responses to flow diagrams in science﹒Journal of Research in Science Teaching﹐14(2)﹐129-138.
Kelly, J. D. (1993). The effects of display format and data density on time spent reading statistics in text, tables, and praphs. Journalism Quarterly, 70(1), 140-149.
Kress, G., ＆ van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Rrading Images：The Grammar of Visual Design.
Lewis, H. (1963). Spatial representation in drawing as a correlate of development and a basis for picture preference. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 10(2), 95-107.
Levin﹐J. R. (1982). Picture as prose-learning devices﹒ In A﹒Flammer ＆ W﹒Kintsch(Eds.), Discourse processing (p.412-444). New York﹕North Holland.
Lederman﹐N. G. (1983). Delineating classroom variables related to students’ conception of the nature of science﹒Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation﹐Syrancuse University﹐New York﹒
Lord﹐T. R. (1978). The influence of pictorial illustrations with written text and previous achievement on the reading comprehension of fourth grade science studcnts﹒Journal of Research in Science Teaching﹐15(5)﹐401-405.
Molitor, S., Ballstaedt, S. P., ＆ Mandl, H. (1989). Problem in knowledge acquisition from text. In H. Mandl ＆ J. R. Levin(Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and picture(p.3-36). New York﹕North Holland.
Mayer, R. E., ＆ Anderson, R. B. (1991). Animations need narrations﹕An experimental test of a dual coding hypothesis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(4), 484-490.
Mayer, R. E., ＆ Anderson, R. B. (1992). The instructive animation﹕Helping students build connections between word and pictures in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 444-452.
Pylyshyn, Z. (1973). What the mind’s eye tells the mind’s brain. Psychological Bulletin, 80, 1-24.
Paivio, A. (1986). Dual coding theory. In Mental Representation﹕A Dual Coding Approach. New York﹕Oxford university.
Peňa, B. M. and Dpto, M. J. G. Q. (2001). The importance of images in astronomy education. International Journal of Science Education, 23(11), 1126-1135.
Reid, D. J., ＆ Miller, G. J. (1980). Pupil’s perception of biological pictures and its implications for readability studies of biology textbooks. Journal of Biological Education, 14(1), 59-69.
Reid﹐D. J. (1990a). The role of picture in learning biology﹕Part 2, picture-text processing. Journal of Biology Education, 24(4), 251-258.
Reid﹐D. J. (1990b). The role of picture in learning biology﹕Part 1, perception and observation. Journal of Biology Education, 24(3), 161-172.
Ravenscroft﹐A. (2001). Designing e-learning interactions in the 21st century：revisiting and rethinking the role of the theory﹒European Journal of Education﹐36(2)﹐pp﹒133-156.
Trembath﹐ R﹒ J﹒(1980). Decting and classify the origins of science misconceptions﹒ EDU253395﹒
Veel, R. (1998). The greening of school science：Ecogenesis in secondary ciassrooms. In Martin, J. R. ＆ Veel, R.,Reading science：Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. London and New York：Routledge.
Vernon﹐M. D.(1950). The visual presentation of factual data﹒British Journal of Psychology﹐20﹐174-185.
Vernon﹐M. D.(1951). Learning and understanding﹒Quarterly Journal of experimental Psychology﹐3﹐19-23.
Weisberg , J. S. (1970). The use of visual advance organizers for learning earth science concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7, 161-165.
Winn, W. (1993). An account of how readers search for information in diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18, 162-185.
Wandersee﹐J. H., Mintzes﹐J. J., ＆ Novak﹐J. D.,(1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning﹒New York﹕National Science Teachers Association﹐pp﹒177-180.
Ward, R. E. ＆ Wandersee, J. H. (2002). Struggling to understand abstract science topics: a Roundhouse diagram-based study. International Journal of Science Education, 24(6), 575-591.