摘 要
本研究旨在援引系統理論的核心思維以探討「板塊構造學說多重類比教學」。首先，對「系統典範在科學教育上的知識論意涵」與「系統化建構多重類比教學模式的可能進路」進行理論探索；其次則以「板塊構造學說」為標的主題，進行「系統性應用凱利方格法（RGT）以協助多重類比教學」之實徵研究。
實徵研究共安排三個組別的學生（n=121）給予不同教學處置，並以「板塊構造學說概念理解」前、後測進行效能評估。教學處置內容分別為：（一）一般教學組(CT)－以原教科書按一般方式實施進行教學活動；（二）多重類比組(MA)－以研究者所設計之「多重類比教學訊息系統」實施教學；（三）多重凱利組(MR)－以研究者所設計「多重類比教學系統」實施教學，並於課前、課（中）後參與RGT評值及接受「學習前、後構念系統比較」與「師生認知差異比較」之回饋。結果顯示：三個教學組之後測成績均較前測進步，但實驗效果Cohen’s d則依序為MR組(1.53)＞MA組(1.16)＞CT組(0.53)；經以Scheffe法做多重比較，顯示三個教學組的教學成效彼此間均有差異（α=.05）；MR組優於MA組，MA組優於CT。再者，研究中亦顯示，藉RGT可將「類比物與目標物」的相對關聯性及結構關係清楚理析，並可及時檢視師生認知差異、動態提供內外回饋；因此在協助「多重教學訊息系統建構與管控」、「學習者構念系統探析與監控」及「互動式教學程序系統（教學模式）建構」等作業上，皆可發揮良好效能。
此外，經由個別晤談發現，多重類比教學對學習者可產生如下影響： （一）簡單類比與複雜類比各具啟與增強之效，均有實用價值；（二）多個類比物可藉交集概念湧現「新基模」；（三）可促進自發性類比對應的發生；（四）可促進「因果關係」的動態推理；（五）有助於類比限制之自發性察覺；（六）系統性提供多重類比物可促進概念統整。至於當學習者面臨「異例」（anomaly）時，多重類比能對其思維動線產生何種影響，則有待進一步探討。
綜上可見，多重類比教學確能有助於「板塊構造學說」的學習，而RGT則有助於系統性建構「互動式多重類比教學模式」以增進學習效能。
關鍵詞：系統典範、板塊構造學說、多重類比、凱利方格法。

A Study on Teaching Plate Tectonics with Multiple Analogies from the Perspective of System Paradigm:
An Application of Repertory Grid Technique

Ke-Kung Chen

Abstract
The research aims to apply the core thinking of General System Theory to the study on “Teaching Plate Tectonics with Multiple Analogies (TPTMA).” Since the research is an attempt in a new approach, the author does the theoretical research on “the epistemological implication of system paradigm in science education” firstly. Then, Plate Tectonics is adopted as the target system to investigate the construction of TPTMA Model by means of G. Kelly’s Repertory Grid Technique (RGT).
When conducting the empirical study, we select Control group (CT group), Multiple-Analogy group (MA group) and MA with RGT group (MR group) to undertake different instruction treatments along with the pre-test and the post-test on “Plate Tectonics”. The instruction treatments are as follows: (1) CT group is taught based on the original textbook and the usual teaching process. (2) MA group is taught with TPTMA Information System designed by the author. (3) MR group is taught with TPTMA Model sophisticatedly arranged by the author. The MR group has to take RGT rating and the feedback information, which contains the conceptual system change of an individual student, the cognitive difference between the teacher and the student. The result reveals that the three groups do make progress from the pre-test to the post-test. Arranged in decreasing order, the effect size Cohen’s d’s (Cohen, 1988) are 1.53 for MR group, 1.16 for MA group and 0.53 for CT group. What’s more, according to the multiple comparisons in Scheffe’s method, a significant contrast is illustrated while any two of the three groups are compared with each other (α=.05). After the empirical study, it is also proved that RGT can achieve a lot in helping “construction and management of TPTMA Information System,” “exploration of learners’ understanding of analogies (Learners’ Construct System)” and “proposition of TPTMA Model.”
In addition, by interviewing individual students, the author finds that multiple analogies have the following remarkable impacts on learners’ thinking tracks: (1)Simple analogies and complex analogies have respectively enlightening and enforcing effects. (2)The mutual concepts of various analogies can emerge a new schema. (3)Multiple analogies can stimulate learners’ spontaneous generation of analogical mapping. (4)Multiple analogies can enhance learners’ dynamic inference of causality. (5)Multiple analogies help the self-awareness of limitation on analogies. (6)The systematic suggestion of multiple analogies can help the integration of concepts.
In conclusion, by making appropriate use of RGT, learners can easily draw a clear picture of the relative associations of multiple analogies and multiple target concepts. Besides, instructors can detect learners’ conceptual change dynamically and provide the feedback for the learners immediately. Therefore, RGT combined with multiple analogies can offer a tremendous help in teaching Plate Tectonics.

Key words: System paradigm, Plate Tectonics, Multiple Analogies, Kelly’s Repertory Grid Technique (RGT).

參考文獻
毛松霖主編（2002）：高級中學基礎地球科學。康熙圖書網路股份有限公司。
王心詠和黃台珠(1997)︰教師信念與實驗室教學實務對學習環境的影響：一位國中生物教師的個案研究。中華民國第十三屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編，347-353，台北市國立臺灣師範大學理學院。
王執明主編（2002）：高級中學基礎地球科學。龍騰文化事業公司。
台灣省政府教育廳（1987）：台灣省高級中學成績考查命題競賽入選試題彙編。
何春蓀（1984）：普通地質學。台北市：五南圖書。
余民寧和陳嘉成（1996）：概念構圖：另一種評量方法。政大學報（73），161-200。
吳芝儀（2000）：建構論及其在教育研究上的應用。載於中正大學教育學研究所主編：質的研究方法，183-214。高雄市：麗文文化公司。
李 靜、宋立軍和張大松（1994）：科學思維的推理藝術。臺北市：淑馨。
李宜靜(1997)：教學實務與班級經營：一位國中生物教師的個案研究。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
李賢哲和張蘭友(2001)：國小學童「電池」概念之探究–理論與實證。科學教育學刊, 9(3), 253-280。
林宏澤和林清泉（1991）：系統模擬。台北市：高立圖書。
林孟慧（1998）：理化類比對國三學生地球科學概念學習之影響。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林建隆和徐順益（1998）：以速度為類比物教授國二學生加速度物理概念之研究。中華民國第十四屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編。
林財庫(1996)：科學認識論與方法論之機械化約觀有機系統觀之比較。科學教育學刊,4(2)。
林財庫（1999）：以牛頓典範和系統典範對比的物理思想史教材來改變在職教師的傳統科學本質觀。1999科學史哲與科學教育學術研討會論文彙編。國立高雄師範大學。
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。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林顯輝（1991）：我國國中地球科學及國小自然科學教科書科學本質含量之分析。台灣省第二屆教育學術論文發表會（數理教育）, 233-255。
邱美紅和高淑芬（1997）：類比與科學概念之學習。中華民國第十三屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編，545-551。
邱美虹(1993)︰類比與科學概念的學習。教育研究資訊, 1(6), 79-90。
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。
金吾倫（1994）：托馬斯．庫恩。台北市：遠流出版公司。
查有梁（1996）：系統科學與教育。北京：人民教育出版社。
段曉林、熊召弟、熊同鑫和王美芬（1996）：科學學習心理學。臺北市：心理。
洪振方(1994)：從孔恩異例的認知與論證探討科學知識的重建。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
苗東升（1998）：系統科學精要。北京：中國人民大學出版社。
師大科教中心主編（1997）：高級中學基礎地球科學。國立編譯館。
翁敏婷(2000)︰國中生理化學習環境知覺及其與學術地位、自我效能關係之探討。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
高淑芬（1997）：類比對國二學生科學概念學習之影響。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
高淑芬和邱美虹（1998）：類比的檢索與對應。科學教育學刊，6(1), 63-80。
張 瓊、于祺明和劉文君（1994）：科學理論模型的建構。台北 淑馨出版社。
張俊彥（2001）：地球系統為整合主軸之多元化教學模組研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫期中報告，NSC 89-2511-S- 003-144。
張俊彥和翁玉華（2000）﹕我國高一學生的問題解決能力與其科學過程技能之相關研究。科學教育學刊, (8), 35-56。
張榮耀（2000）：以科學史與本體論的觀點探討概念改變之機制。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
教育部（1995）：高級中學課程標準。台北市：教育部。
教育部（1999）：國民教育九年一貫課程綱要：自然與科技學習領域。教育部。
畢思文和許 強（2002）：地球系統科學。北京：科學出版社。
許國志主編（2001）：系統科學與工程研究。上海：上海科技教育出版社。
郭人仲(1994)︰國中生物概念的類比學習之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
郭重吉（1992）：從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教育的改進，科學發展月刊，20（5）, 548-570。
郭重吉（2002）：建構論：科學哲學的省思。載於詹志禹主編：建構論－理論基礎與教育應用。台北市：正中書局。
陳可恭（2000）：系統思維在科學探究與學習上的意涵及應用，科學教育月刊, 252, 2-13。

陳恆迪（1993）：國中學生物理概念類比學之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳雅芬（2001）：以凱利方法探討學生對於氣體的概念理解。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
舒煒光和邱仁宗主編（1991）：當代西方科學哲學術評。台北市：水牛出版社。
黃光國（1998）：知識與行動－中華文化傳統的社會心理詮釋。台北市：心理出版社。
黃幸美（1995）：類比推理思考及其在教學上之應用。教育研究資訊，3（3）,128-142。
黃炎峰（2001）：高中學生對於直流電路概念及其類比模型理解之研究。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
黃譯瑩（1998）：課程統整之意義探究與模式建構。國科會人文及社會研究彙刊，8(4), 616-633。
黃譯瑩（2003）：統整課程系統。台北市：巨流圖書公司。
楊文金（1992）：在職國小教師對基本電路之概念研究。中華民國第八屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編，499-518。高雄：國立高雄師範大學。
楊文金（2000）：以凱利方格法探討個體理解教師教學與社群互動之效應：中學生對於能量與力量概念理解分析。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫書，NSC89-2511-S-003-147。
楊榮祥和林陳涌(1998)：利用凱利方格晤談法探討教師對科學本質的觀點－個案研究。科學教育學刊，6（2），p113-128 。
楊潔豪（1989）：地球物理探勘技術簡介。地工技術雜誌, 27,6-24。
趙金祁（2002）：科學教育的系統觀。科學教育月刊, 249。
趙金祁、許榮富和黃芳裕（1995）：建構論在科學教育研究的典範類型與應用－建構論的典範與評析。科學教育月刊,180。
蔣佳玲（1999）：從權力的觀點探討學生在小組互動中科學知識的建構。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
蔡秀芳(1999)︰營造學生為主動學習者之合作行動研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡聰明（2000）：數學的發現趣談。台北市：三民書局。
鄭斐娟(2000)︰探討國中學生生物科自我效能與教師期望之關係。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
蕭碧茹(1996)︰圖形類比融入國中理化教學之研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。

蕭碧茹和洪振方(2000)︰「物質的狀態」單元類比教材之研究。第十六屆科學教育年會論文集。
賴萱和(1999)：新制實習制度下生物實習教師專業成長之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
魏宏森和曾國屏（1995）：系統論-系統科學哲學。北京：清華大學出版社。
魏國彥和許晃雄（1997）：全球環境變遷導論。第七章 影響氣候的因子。
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Washington, DC: AAAS.
Adeniyi, E.O.(1985). Misconceptions of selected ecological concepts held by some Nigerian students. Journal of Biological Education, 19(4), 311-316.
Arnold, M., & Millar, R. (1987). Being constructive︰An alternative approach to the teaching of introductory ideas in electricity. Int. J. Sci. Educ, 9(5), 553-563.
Ault, C. R.(1998). Criteria of excellence for geological inquiry: The necessity of ambiguity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 189-212.
Ausubel, D. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rindhart & Winston.
Ausubel, D.（1963）. The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning. New York: Grune & Stratton.
Bean, T. W., Singer, H., & Cowen, S. (1990). Learning concepts from biology text through pictorial analogies and an analogical study guide. Journal of Educational Research, 83(4), 233-237.
Bezzi, A. (1996). Use of Repertory Grids in facilitating knowledge construction and reconstruction in geology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 179-204.
Bezzi, A. (1999). What is this thing called geoscience? Epistemological dimensions elicited with Repertory Grid and their implications for scientific literacy. Science Education, 83, 675-700.
Black, D. E., & Solomon, J.(1987). Can pupils use taught analogies for electric current? School Science Review, 69, 249-254.
Boulding, K.（1956）. General systems theory: The skeleton of science. Management Science, 2, 197-208.
Brewer, W. F. (1987). Schemas versus mental models in human memory. In P. Mirris (Ed.), Modeling Cognition, 187-197. Chichestster: Wiley.
Brook, J. A. (1992). Use of the repertory grid in career counseling. The Career Development Quarterly, 41, p39-50.
Brown, D. E.(1992). Using examples and analogies to remediate misconceptions in physics: factors influencing conceptual change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(1), 17-34.
Brown, D. E., & Clement, J. (1987). Overcoming Misconceptions in mechanics：A comparison of two examples-based teaching strategies. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No：ED283712).
Bruner, J. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge. MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Burstein, M. H. (1986). Concept formation by incremental analogical reasoning and debugging. In R. S. Michalski, J. G. Carbonell, & T. M. Mitchell (Eds.), Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach （2）, 351-370. Los Altos, CA: Kaufmann.
Burstein, M. H. (1988). Incremental learning from multiple Analogies. In A. Prieditis (Ed.), ANALOGICA: The First Workshop on An Analogical Reasoning, 37-62. Boston: Pitman.
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood. The MIT press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
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 Press.
Clement, C. A., & Gentner, D. (1991). Systematicity as a Selection Constraint in Analogical Mapping, Cognitive Science, 12, 563-86.
Clement, J. (1983). Use of analogies and spatial transformations by experts in solving mathematics problems. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, North American, Chapter, 5, 101-111.
Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring instruction to deal with students preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241-1251.
Cohen, I.B.( 1985). Revolution in Science. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Collins, A., & Gentner, D. (1987). How People Construct Mental Models. In D. Holland & Quinn (Eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought, 243-265. Cambridge University Press.
Corporaal, A. H. (1991). Repertory grid research into cognitions of prospective primary school teachers. Teaching & Teacher Education, 7(4), 315-329.
Dagher, Z. R. (1994). Does the use of analogies contribute to conceptual change? Science Education, 78(6), 601-614.
Danieli.(1995). The role of Management Consultants in the Development of Information Technology: The Indissoluble Nature of Socio-Political and Technical skills, Journal of Management Studies. 33, 27-46.
Demastes, S. S., Good, R. G., & Peebles, P. (1995). Students’ Conceptual Ecologies and Process of Conceptual Change in Evolution. Science Education, 79(6), 637-666.
Deult, R. (1991) On the Role of Analogies and Metaphors in Learning science, Science Education, 75(6).
Drake, P. (1995). Constructive Induction for Improved Learning of Boolean Functions. Master's Thesis, Oregon State University.
Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s Ideas in Science. Philadelphia︰Open University Press.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., and Scott, P. (1996). Young People’s Images of Science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science, Science Education, 75(6), 649-72.
Dupin, J. J., & Johsua, S. (1989). Analogies and “modeling analogies” in teaching: some examples in basic electricity. Science Education, 73(2), 207-224.
Ernst, W. G.（2000）. Earth Systems: Processes and issues. New York： Cambridge University Press.
Fetherstonhaugh, T. (1994). Using the repertory grid to probe students' ideas about energy. Research in Science & Technological Education, 12(2), 117-127.
Flick, L. (1991). Where concepts meet percepts: Stimulating analogical thought in children. Science Education, 75(2), 215-230.
Forrester, J. W. (1992). System Dynamics and Learner-Centered-Learning in Kindergarten through 12th Grade Education. Paper D-4337, Cambridge, Mass: MIT.

Gagn, E. D., Yekovich, C. W., & Yekovich, F. R. (1993). The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning. Happer Collins College Publishers.
Gagn, R. M. (1970). The Conditions of Learning. London: Holt-Saunders.
Gentner, D. (1986). Evidence for a Structure-mapping Theory of Analogy and Metaphor. Urbana: University of Illinois.
Gentner, D. & Gentner, D. (1983). Flowing waters or teeming crowds: Mental models of electricity. In Gentner, D. Stevens, A. L. (Eds.), Mental Models. New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gentner, D. & Jeziorski, M. (1990). Historical shifts in the use of analogy in science. Reports for Office of Educational Research and Improvement (Ed), Washington, DC.; Office of Naval Research, Arlington, va. ED318987.
Gentner, D. (1989). The mechanism of analogical learning. In Vosniadous, S. & Ortory, A. (Eds.) Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. N.Y.: Cambridge.
Gentner, D. (1999). Analogy. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil(1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Science, 17-20. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Gentner, D.（1983）.Structure-mapping：a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7,155-170.
Gentner, D., Rattermann, M. J., & Forbus, K, D., (1993). The roles of similarity in transfer: separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 525-575.
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 1-38.
Glynn S. M. (1989). The teaching with analogies model: Explaining concepts in expository texts. In K. D. Muth (Ed.), Children’s Comprehension of Narrative and Expository Text: Research into Practice. Neward, DE: International Reading Association, 185-204.
Glynn, S. M. (1991). Explaining science concepts：A teaching with analogical model. In S Glynn, R. Yeany & B. Britton (Eds), The Psychology of Learning Science, 219-240. Hillsdale, N. J.：Erlaum.
Glynn, S. M., Duit, R., & Thiele, R. B. (1995). Teaching science with analogies：A strategy for constructing knowledge. In M. Shawn, S. M. Glynn, Reinders, & R. Duit (Eds.), Learning Science in School：Research Reforming Practice. Mahwah, New Jersey：Lawence Erlbaum Associates.
Harrison A. G. & Treagust D. F. (1993). Teaching with analogy : A case study in grade-10 optics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 30(10), 1291-1307.
Hewson, P. W. & Thorley, N, R. (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-553.
Hewson, P. W., & Lemberger, J. (1999). Status and Subscribing: A Response to Schwitsgebel, Science & Education, 8, 507-523.
Hewson, P., & Hewson, M. (1992). The status of student conceptions. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies. Kiel, Germany: Institute of Science Education, 59-73.
Holyoak, K. J. & Thagard, P. R. (1989). A computational model of analogical problem solving.
Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1990). A constraint-satisfaction approach to analogue retrieval and mapping. In K. J. Gilhooly, M. T. Keane, R. Logic, & G. Erdos. (Eds.), Lines of Thinking Reflections on the Psychology of Thought (Vol. 1). New York: Wiley.
Holyoak, K., & Thagard, P. (1995). The construction of similarity. Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. London: MIT.
Keane, M. T.(1996). On adaptation in analogy: tests of pragmatic importance and adaptability in analogical problem solving. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental.
Keane, M. T., Ledgeway, T., & Duff, S. (1994). Constraints on analogical mapping: A comparison of three models. Cognitive Science, 18, 387-438.
Kelly, G. (1955). The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Norton, New York.
Klir, G. (1991). Facets of Systems Science. New York: Plenum Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolution (2nd edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmers. In I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the Growth and the Knowledge, 91-195. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, V. J. (1993). Earth Systems Education. (ERIC Digest EDO-SE-93-2).
Middleton, J. A. (1992). Teachers' vs. students' beliefs regarding intrinsic motivation in the mathematics classroom: A personal constructs approach. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H.,& Novak J. D.(2002). Teaching Science for Understanding: a Human Constructivist View. 黃台珠等 譯：促進理解之科學教學－人本建構取向觀點。台北市：心理出版社。
National Research Council（1996）. National Science Education Standard.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
Nersessian, N. (1992a). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive Models of Science Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 15. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Nersessian, N. (1992b). Constructing and instructing : The role of abstraction techniques in creating and learning physics. In R. A. Duschl and R. J. Hamilton, (eds.), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Science, and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany: SUNY Press.
Novak, J.D. & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge University Press.
Novak, J.D. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Novick, L. R., & Holyoak, K. J. (1991). Mathematical problem solving by analogy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 398-415.
Ossimitz, G. (2001). The Development Of Systems Thinking Skills. http://www. uniklu.ac.at/users/gossimit/sdyn/gdm_eng.htm
Pfundt, F. & Duit, R. (1991). Bibliography: Students’ Alternative Frameworks and Science Education. (3rd ed.). Keil, West Germany: IPN.
Pines, A.L. & West, Leo H.T. (1986) Conceptual understanding and science learning: an interpretation of research within a sources-of-knowledge framework. Science Education, 70(5):583-604.
Pinsof, WM (1992). Toward a scientific paradigm for family psychology: The integrative process systems perspective. Journal of Family Psychology, 5, 432-447.
Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167-200.
Polya, G. (1957). How to Solve it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton 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.
Richmond, B. (1993). Systems thinking: critical thinking skills for the 1990s and beyond. In: System Dynamics Review,9,2 (Summer 1993): 113-133.
Richmond, B., & Peterson, S. (1992). An Introduction to Systems Thinking. Lyme: High Performance Systems Inc.
Rumelhart, D. E. & Norman, D. A. (1981). Analogical processes in learning. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive Skills and Their Acquisition. Hillsdale, N. J. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, 335-359.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1981). Accretion, tuning, and restructuring: Three modes of learning. In J. W. Cotton & R. Klatzky (Eds.), Semantic factors in cognition (pp. 37-60). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sandquist, G. M. (1988). Introduction to System Science.戚萬伍 譯：系統科學概論。台北 科技圖書。
Schwartz, D. L. (1993). The construction and analogical transfer of symbolic visualizations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10). 1309-1325.
Segre, G., & Giani, U. (1987). Analogical reasoning and formalization in transport processes. In J. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Seminar Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, vol.1, 420-424.
Senge, P.(2002).School that learn. 楊振富 譯：學習型學校：第五項修練教育篇：獻給教育工作者父母以及關心教育的每個人。台北市：天下遠見出版社。
Shaw, M. & Gaines, B. (1995). Comparing Conceptual Structures: Consensus, Conflict, Correspondence and Contrast. http://ksi.cpsc.calgary.ca/articles.
Solomon, I. D. G. (1994). Analogical Transfer and “Functional Fixedness” in the Science Classroom, Journal of Educational Research, 87(6), 371-377.
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Coulson, R. L., & Anderson, D. K. (1989). Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stavy, R. (1991). Using analogy to overcome misconceptions about conservation of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(4), 305-313.
Stenberg, R. J. & Ketron, J. L. (1982). Selection and implementation of strategies in reasoning by analogy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74,399-413.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1983). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. West & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change , 211-232. London: Academic Press.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of Science , Cognitive Science and Educational Theory and Practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Takeuechi, H., Uyeda, S.,＆ Kanamori, H. (1966/1976). Debate about the Earth. Freeman Cooper & Co.
Tedeschi, R., & Calhoun, L. (1995). The post-traumatic growth inventory: measuring the positive legacy of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9(3), 455 –471.
Thagard, P. (1992a). Analogy, explanation and education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 537-544.
Thagard, P. (1992b). Conceptual Revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Thiele, R. B., & Treagust, D. F. (1991). Using analogies in secondary chemistry education. The Australian Science Teachers Journal, 37(2), 10-14.
Toulmin, S. (1972). Human Understanding. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Treagust, D. F., Duit, R, & Joslin, P. (1992), Science teachers’ use of analogies：Observations from Classroom Practice, International Science Education, 14(4), 413-22.
Tsai, C. C. (2001). A review and discussion of epistemological commitments, metacognition, and critical thinking with suggestions on their enhancement in Internet-assisted chemistry classrooms. Journal of Chemical Education, 78, 970-974.
Venville, G. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). The role of analogies in promoting conceptual change in biology. Instructional Science, 4, 71-87.
von Bertalanffy, L. V. (1969). General System Theory. New York: Braziller.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80, 121-140.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism : A Way of Knowing and Learning. London.
Vosniadou, S. (1989). Analogical reasoning as a mechanism in knowledge acquisition: A developmental perspective. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, 413-497. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S.(1961). Thought and Language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press. 李維 譯：思維與語言。 台北市 昭明出版社。
Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., & Novak, J. D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. D. L. Gabel(Ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. New York, Simon and Schuster MacMillan, 177-210.
Wandersee, J.H. (2000). Using Concept Mapping as a Knowledge Mapping Tool. In Fisher, K.M., Wandersee, J.H. & Moody, D.E. (Eds.), Mapping Biology Knowledge. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Winer, L. R. & Vazquez, A. J. (1995). The potential of repertory grid technique in the assessment of conceptual change in physics. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association , San Francisco.
Zeitoun, H. H. (1984). Teaching scientific analogies: A proposed model. Research in Science and Technology Education, 2, 107-125.
Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 179-217.