本研究主要探討空間能力、先備知識不同的學習者，使用不同的表徵順序學習「人體的呼吸運動」之成效。本研究對象共130名七年級學生，依班級分配置靜動組（先靜態後動態）或動靜組（先動態後靜態），每組各有65名學生。資料收集主要為空間能力量表、概念測驗（前、後測）與16位半結構式晤談。研究結果顯示，接受多重表徵的閱讀活動後，不論空間能力、先備知識的高低或處於表徵順序組別不同，學生對於人體呼吸運動的理解皆有顯著的進步。在表徵順序與空間能力交互作用下，靜動組的高空間能力學生其學習成效顯著優於動靜組的高空間能力者；但兩個表徵順序組中的低空間能力者，其學習成效則無差異。再對照量化與晤談結果發現，動靜組高空間能力者因為先閱讀動態表徵，易被動態表徵中肋骨顯眼的動作所吸引、印象深刻，而易填選與肋骨相關的答案。此外，動靜組學生普遍認為動態表徵速度太快，但靜動組卻沒有此感受，表示此現象可能是因為表徵呈現順序不同所致。

　　綜合量化與質性之結果，顯示學習時先使用靜態，後觀看動態的表徵呈現順序之學習效果為佳。本研究對於表徵順序探討的結果，希望能提供教學現場、表徵設計者，使用適宜的表徵順序以有效幫助學生學習，也提供給未來研究作參考。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of representation sequences, spatial ability, and prior knowledge on students’ conceptual understandings of human respiration. 130 seventh graders were assigned to two groups- SD group (with static first, then dynamic), and DS group (with dynamic first, then static), 65 students in each group. Data sources included spatial ability test, pre-test and post-test of concepts, and semi-structured interviews with 16 students. No matter student who has different spatial ability, prior knowledge, or in different groups, results of this study showed that student has significant improvement after reading activities in the human respiration topic. According to the two-way ANCOVA analysis of spatial ability and representation sequences, students with high spatial ability in SD group performed significantly better than those with high spatial ability in DS group on post-test of concepts. However, the analysis also showed no difference on post-test scores between students with low spatial ability in SD and DS groups. To synthesize the results of quantitative and qualitative analyses, students with high spatial ability in DS group tended to choose an answer including the word of “rib,” because they read dynamic representations first, and were easily attracted by the obvious motion of ribs. Additionally, DS group thought that the speed of dynamic representations was too fast, but SD group did not. This result suggested that this perception may be caused to use different representations’ sequence.

In summary, learning achievement will be greater if students are presented with static representations before dynamic ones. The findings of this study can provide suggestions to teachers and software designers on the design of computer-based representations and offer implications for future research.

（一）中文文獻
丁斌悅（2001）。國二學生學習線型函數時的概念表徵發展研究。國立台灣師範大學數學所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
左台益、蔡志仁（2001）。動態視窗之橢圓教學實驗。師大學報4（1，2）: 21-42.
吳淑珍（2004）。排灣族國中一年級學生呼吸作用另有概念之探究。屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東。　
李岱芳（2001）。情境式學習在「氧化還原」網站之應用與研究。靜宜大學應用化學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台中。
認知心理學（李素卿譯）（2003）。台北市：五南。（原出版年：2000年）
李彩瑩（2008）。不同概念圖形式融入生態議題電子故事繪本對不同先備知識國小學童之學習成效影響研究。國立新竹教育大學數位學習科技研究所，未出版，新竹。
卓沛勳（2007）。空間能力測驗之因素分析。國立台灣科技大學技術及職業教育研究所，未出版，台北。
周孚平（2004）。屏東縣漢原族群國中學生有關呼吸作用迷思概念形成原因之研究。屏東師範學院數理教育研究所，未出版，屏東。
林小慧（2005）。具體影像空間教學策略與中學生理化學習之相關研究。國立臺北教育大學自然科學教育學系，未出版，臺北。
邱美虹和陳英嫻（1995）。月相盈虧之概念改變。師大學報，40，509-548。
邱惠芬（2003）。多媒體介面對國小學童學習動機、學習成就及學習保留的影響。國立屏東師範學院科技研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
凌久原（2007）。動態多重表徵對於國中生幾何單元學習成效之影響。國立成功大學教育所碩士論文，未出版，台南。
高慧蓮、吳淑珍、蘇明洲（2004）。國小三年級學童呼吸作用另有概念成因之探究。屏東師院學報，20，355-384。
張春興（2006）。教育心理學－三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華書局。
梁勇能（2000）。動態幾何環境下，國二學生空間能力學習之研究。國立臺灣師範大學數學研究所，未出版，臺北。
許良榮（1996a）。課文結構與先備知識對於科學理論之學習助益性的研究。台中師院學報，10，471-504。
許良榮（1996b）。圖形與科學課文學習關係的探討。教育研究資訊，4（4）， 121-131。
許茂聰（2002）。國小六年級學童呼吸作用概念研究。屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
陳恆迪、徐順益（1994）。國中學生物理概念類比學習之研究。科學教育，5， 141-166。
康鳳梅（2002）。高工學生空間能力指標建構之研究（1/2）。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫期中進度報告（NSC91-2516-S-003-007）。台北市：國立台灣師範大學工業教育學系。
彭嘉妮（2007）。國小六年級學童在分數符號、小數符號和圖形表徵三者間轉譯表現之研究。國立屏東教育大學數理教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，屏東。
黃永和（1997）。教學表徵"-教師的教學法寶。國教世紀，178，17-24。
詹森仁、郭秋田、楊永仁、顏春煌、王頌平、周國傑、洪銘仁（2005）。多媒體理論與應用。台北：旗標。
廖焜熙、邱美虹（1996）。三維度視覺化技能在化學學習上的探討。科學教育月刋，189，14-36。
榮欽科技（2008）。多媒體概論-理論與實務。台北：博碩文化。
盧莉閔、王國華（1999）。國中生物科施行概念改變教學策略之研究。科學教育，9，127-137。

（二）英文文獻
Ainsworth, S. E. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-52.
Ainsworth, S. E. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-198.
Ainsworth, S. E. & VanLabeke, N. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction ,14(3), 241-255.
Bishop, J. E. (1978). Developing students' spatial ability. The science teacher, 45, 20-23.
Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Inc., Publishers.
Foote, M. (1981). Recognizing spatial relationships in biology. The science teacher, 48(2), 31.
Giunchiglia, F. & Walsh, T. (1992). A theory of abstraction. Artificial Intelligence, 57, 323-389.
Holzinger, A., Kichmeier-Rust, M. & Albert, D. (2008). Dynamic media in computer science education; content complexity and learing performance: Is less more? Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 279-290.
Krajcik, J., Czerniak, C.& Berger, C. (2002). Teaching science in elementary and middle school classrooms: A project-based approach. Boston: McGraw-Hill College Press.
Lennon, P. A. (2000). Improving students’ flexibility of closure while presenting biology content. The American biology teacher, 62(3), 177-180.
Lewalter, D. (2003). Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals. Learning and Instruction , 13(2), 177-189.
Linn, M. C., Chang, H.-Y., Chiu, J., Zhang, H., & McElhaney, K. (2010). Can desirable difficulties overcome deceptive clarity in scientific visualizations? In A. Benjamin (Ed.), Successful remembering and successful forgetting: a Festschrift in honor of Robert A. Bjork (pp. 239-262). New York: Routledge.
Lord, T. R. (1985). Enhancing the visuo-spatial aptitude of students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(5), 395-405.
Lord, T. R. (1988). Is the final grade in college biology a true measure of student knowledge? Contemporary Education, 59(4), 219-222.
Lord, T. R. (1990). Enhancing learning in the life sciences through spatial perception. Innovative Higher Education, 15(1), 5-16.
Lowe, R. K. (2003). Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction, 13, 157-176.
Macnab, W. & Johnstone, A. H. (1990). Spatial skills which contribute to competence in the biological sciences. Journal of Biological Education, 24(1), 37-41.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University press.
Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125-139.
Moreno, R. & Mayer R. E. (1999). Multimedia-supported metaphors for meaning making in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 215-248.
Pellegrino, J. W., & Kail, R. (1982). Process analyses of spatial aptitude. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence, Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Russell-Gebbett, J. (1984). Pupils' perceptions of three-dimensional structures in biology lessons. Journal of Biological Education, 18(3), 220-226.
Schnotz, W. & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 141-56.
Schnotz, W. & Lowe, R. (2003). External and internal representations in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction , 13, 117-123.
Stavridou, F. & Kakana, D. (2008). Graphic abilities in relation to mathematical and scientific ability in adolescents. Educational Research, 50(1), 75-93.
Tsui, C.-Y. (2003). Teaching and learning genetics with multiple representations. Unpublished master’s thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Australia.
Tversky, B. and Morrison, J. B. (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
Urhahne, D., Nick, S. & Sascha S. (2009). The effect of three-dimensional simulations on the understanding of chemical structures and their properties. Research in Science Education, 39(4), 495-513.
Verdi, M. P., Johnson, J. T., Stock, W. A., Kulhavy, R. W. & Whitman-Ahern, P. (1997). Organized spatial displays and texts: effects of presentation order and display type on learning outcomes. Journal of Experimental Education, 65(4), 303-17.
Wu, H.-K. and Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education , 88(3), 465-492.