本研究的主要目的是探討國三學生，在處理需要力平衡概念的浮力問題時，是否能根據物體在液體中不同的浮沉情況，辨識出作用於物體上所有的作用力？以及探討學生是否能利用力平衡的觀點，來判斷在不同的浮沉情境，液體中物體所受作用力之間的關係？
研究對象為桃園縣某國中3年級的學生105名，利用研究者自行編製的「浮力情境紙筆測驗」為研究工具，包含繪製力圖、作用力的辨識、浮力與重力的關係判斷。調查國三學生在浮力的問題情境中，其具備的力學概念。另一方面，為了進一步了解學生對於力的理解，以及力平衡觀念的認知，則針對18位學生利用半結構的訪談加以詮釋分析，以期能探究學生的力學概念和了解學生浮力單元的學習困難。研究結果如下：
1.物體所受作用力較少時，學生在繪製力圖及辨識作用力的表現較好。
2.學生在繪製力圖時，通常能辨識出物體所受的重力與浮力，但容易忽略其他的作用力。
3.部份學生在繪製力圖時，誤將壓力視為一種作用力。
4.學生在使用浮力公式時，通常只注意其中一個因素，而無法同時考量物體體積與液體密度的變化，造成判斷上的錯誤。
5.部份學生以直觀方式判斷浮力，認為浮力越大，物體越容易上升；浮力越小，物體則容易下沉。
6.部份學生無法瞭解浮力的成因，以至於認為物體在液體中的位置，會改變物體所受的浮力。
7.部份學生缺乏辨識浮體與沉體的能力。

This dissertation aims to explore if junior high school students (ninth grade) could identify all the acting forces exerted on a floating object in different circumstances when they deal with buoyancy problems. In addition, this thesis also studied whether students could distinguish the relationship between all the acting forces in different circumstances based on the concept of equilibrium.

Our research sample involved 105 junior high school students in Taoyuan County, Taiwan. A test written by the author was exploited as an investigation tool which focuses on the identification of applied forces, force diagrams drawing, as well as the determination of the relationship between buoyancy and gravity on the objects being studied. This test would reveal their conception while they worked on the buoyancy problems. On the other hand, in order to fully understand what extent students could reach with respect to the concepts of “exerted forces” and “equilibrium of forces”, interviews with 18 students via half-structure protocol were also pursued and interpreted. The results are expected to help understand their comprehension as well as the difficulties they may have in learning the concept of buoyancy. The findings are summarized as follows:

1.When fewer forces were exerted on an object, the better force diagrams were drawn and the forces better identified.
2.In drawing force diagrams, some students tend to identify the force of buoyancy and gravity easily while neglecting forces.
3.Some students mistook pressure as an acting force.
4.When students used buoyancy equation to resolve problems, they could not simultaneously consider the variation between object volume and liquid density, but rather focus on one quantity, thereby leading to some misjudgments.
5.Some students judged buoyancy intuitively: the larger the buoyancy force is, the easier the object would rise; the smaller the buoyancy force, the easier the object would sink.
6.Some students could not understand the real cause of buoyancy, leading to the misunderstanding that the buoyancy force would differ while an object is differently positioned in a liquid.
7.Some students are not able to differentiate between floating and sunken bodies.

中文資料
全中平（1993）。國民小學五年級學生對力與運動概念之分析研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告。
全中平（1994）。師範學院學生對學習物理力學概念之分析研究。國立臺北師範學院學報，7，481~506。
江新合、許榮富、林寶山(1991)。我國學生自然科概念發展與診斷教學之研究;(1)中學生浮力相關概念發展及其相關迷思概念的分析研究。國科會專題研究報告。
余秀麗（2003）。探討國三學生對於重力概念之了解及心智模式。國立台灣師範大學碩士論文。
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）。Paul Thagard著。概念革命(Conceptual Revolutions)。台北市：洪葉。
邱美虹與林靜雯（2002）。以多重類比探究兒童電流心智模式之改變。科學教育學刊，10(2)，109-134。
吳昆勇（2002）。阿基米得原理與引導式發現教學法對學生學習浮力概念的影響。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林俊義（2002）。國二學生浮力迷思概念之研究。國立彰化師範大學物理系物理教學碩士班碩士論文。
張春興（1998）。教育心理學。台北：東華。89-112。
張志康（2008）。從概念改變理論探究建模教學對學生力學心智模式與建模能力之影響。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
郭重吉（1989）。利用晤談方式探查國中學生對重要物理概念的另有架構之研究(Ⅰ)。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告。
郭重吉（1990）。學生科學知識認知結構的評估與描述。彰化師範大學學報，1，280-319。
洪木利（1983）。兒童重力概念型態之研究。高雄師範學院學報，183-199。
侯佳典（2007）。5E探究式學習環教學對國二學生浮力概念改變成效之研究。國立彰化師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
陳忠志（1987）。力學錯誤概念與教學成效之關係。行政院國家科學委員會。
陳珊珊（1993）。我國國三學生酸鹼概念之研究。國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
馬文蔚（1995）。物理發展史上的里程碑。新竹，凡異出版。
夏秋蘋（2008）。從力的比較觀點探討九年級學生理解浮力概念困難之研究。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
黃台珠（1984）。概念的研究及其意義。科學教育，66，165-177。
黃萬居（1993）。國小學生的概念構圖和自然科學學習成就之研究。台北市立師範學院學報，24，47-66。
黃瑞龍（2002）。電腦輔助學習在國中理化浮力單元教學之研究。國立彰化師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
董正玲與郭重吉（1992）。探究國小兒童運動與力概念的另有架構。科學教育，93-121。
彭泰源（1999）。國小五年級學童力與運動概念學習之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
楊文金（1993）。多重現象與電學概念理解研究。科學教育學刊，1(2)，135-160。
楊其安（1989）。利用晤談探究國中學生對力學概念的另有架構。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
楊純珠（1999）。「溶液」多媒體CAL 之概念學習研究。國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
鄭文彥（2006）。以類比橋融入浮力單元對國中學生迷思概念改變之研究。國立彰化師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
鄭昭明（1993）。認知心理學：理論與實踐。台北：桂冠圖書。
劉宏文（1996）。概念及概念學習在學科教學上之應用。科學教育月刊，192期，2-8。
劉家成（2002）。以動態評量探究國中學生浮力概念的心智模式及概念改變之歷程。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
劉俊庚（2002）。迷思概念與概念改變教學策略之文獻分析－以概念構圖和後設分析模式探討其意涵與影響。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡春來（2002）。探討國中生對摩擦力的迷思概念。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
簡順永（2000）。高二學生力概念的運用調查分析。國立台灣師範大學物理系研究所碩士論文。
鍾聖校（1994）。對科學教育錯誤概念研究之省思。教育研究資訊，2(3)，89-110。
蘇育任（1994）。中部地區國小教師與師資班學生對放射性之迷思概念研究。初等教育研究集刊，2，83-98。
饒見維（1994）。知識場論：認知、思考與教育的統合理論。初版。台北市：五南圖書出版有限公司。

西文資料
Anderson, B. (1986). The experiential gestalt of causation: a common core to pupils’ preconceptions in science . European Journal of Science Education, 8(2), 155-171.
Bar, V., Zinn B., Goldmuntz, R., & Sneider, C. (1994). Childrens’s concepts about weight and free fall. Science Education, 78(2), 149-169.
Biddulph, F., & Osborne, R (1983). Children’s ideas about “Metals.”Learning in science pro-ject (primary). Working paper No.112. New Zealand: Waikato Univ., Science Education Research Unit ( ERIC document Reporduction Service No. ED 252395)
Brumby, M. N. (1984). Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection by medical biology students. Science Education, 68(4), 493-503.
Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Implications for learning and discovery in sciences. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp.129-186). Minneapolis: university of Minneosota Press.
Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & deLeeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts.Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
Clement, J. (1982). Students’ preconceptions in introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66-70.
Dentici, O. A., Grossi, M. G., Borghi, L., & De Ambrosis, A. (1984). Understanding floating: a study of children aged between six and eight years. European Journal of Science Education, 6(3), 235-243.
Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien , A. (1985). Children's ideas in science. Open University Press.
Eaton, J. F. Anderson, C. W. & Smith, E. L. (1983). When students don’t know. Science and Children, 20(7), 7-9.
Erickson, G. L. (1980).Children's viewpoints of heat: A second look. Science Education, 64, 323-336.
Fisher (1985) Fisher, K. M. (1985). A misconception in biology: amino acids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(1), 53-62.
Elaine Reynoso, H., Enrique Fierro, H., & Gerrdo Torres, O. (1993). The alternative frameworks presented by Mexican students and teachers concerning the free fall of bodies. International Journal of Science Education, 15(2), 127-138.
Galili, I., & Bar, V. (1992). Motion implies force: Where to expect vestiges of the misconception? International Journal of Science Education, 14, 63–81.
Galili, I., Goldberg, F., & Bendall, S. (1993). The effects of prior knowledge and instruction on understanding image formation. Journal of Research in Science Teacher. 30, 271-303.
Galili, I., & Bar, V. (1997). Children’s operational knowledge about weight. International Journal of Science Education, 19(3), 317-340.
Gilbert, J. K., ＆ Osborne, R. J.（1980）：. The use of models in science and science teaching . European Journal of Science Education , 2(1), 3-13.
Gilbert,J. K. ,Osborne, R. J. & Fensham,P. J.(1982).Children’s science and its consequences for teaching. Scienc Education,66(4),623-633。
Gilbert, J. K. & Watts, K. M. (1983). Concepts, misconception and alternative conceptions: changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98.
Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1980). Understanding gravity. Science Education, 65(3), 294-299.
Hashwen, M. (1988). Descriptive studies of students’ conceptions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(2), 121-134.
Head, J. (1986). Research into 'alternative frameworks': promise and problem. Research in Science & Technological Education, 4(2), 203-211.
Heinze-fry, J. A., & Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping brings long-term movement toward meaningful learning. Science Education, 74(4), 461-472.
Hestenes, D., Wells, W., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141~158.
Hewson, M. G., & Hewson, 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.
Novick & Nussbaum, (1978). Using Interviews to Probe Understanding. Science Teacher, 45(8), 29-30.
Novak, J. D., & Gowan, D. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge. Cambridge Uinversity Press.
Novak, J. D. (1977). An alternative to Piagetian psychology for science and mathematics education. Science Education, 61(4), 453-477.
Novak, J. D. (1988). Learning science and the science of learning. Studies in Science Education, 15, 77-101.
Osborne,R. ,& Cosgrove, M. M. (1983).Children conceptions ofn the changes of state of water. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,20(9), 825-838
Palmer, D. (2001). Students’ alternative conceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about gravity. International Journal of Science Education, 23(7), 691-706.
Palmer, D. H. & Flanagan, R. B. (1996). Readiness to change the conception that "Motion-Implies-Force". A comparison of 12-Year-Old and 16-Year-Old students” Peter W. Hewson, Section Editor.
Pella, M. O. (1966). Concept Learning in Science.Science Teacher, 33(9), pp.31-34.
Pella, M. O. (1975). Concept of concept. University of Wisconsin-Madison Press.
Sanger, M. J. & Greenbowe, T. J.(2000). Addressing student misconceptions concerning electron flow in aqueous solutions with instruction including computer animations and conceptual change strategies. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 521-537.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L. T. West & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211-231) Academics press, Inc.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, Cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147-176). Albany, NY: SUNY press.
Stuart, H. A. (1985). Should concept maps be scored numerically? European Journal of Science Education, 7, 3-8.
Thagard, P. (1992). Conceptual revolutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Thijs, G. D. (1992). Evaluation of an introductory course on "Force" considering students' Preconceptions. Science Education, 76(2), 155-174.
Treagust, D. F., Duit. R ,& Fraser, B. J. (1996). Improving Teaching and Learning in Science and Mathematics.New York : Teachers College Press.
Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic test to evaluate student’s misconceptions in science. International Journal of Science Education, 10(2), 159-169.
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.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, pp. 45-69.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental Models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18(1), 123-183.
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.
Watts, D. M. (1983). A study of schoolchildren’s alternative frameworks of the concept of force. European Journal of Science Education, 5(2), 217-230.
Watts, D. M., & Zylbersztajn, A. (1981). A survey of some children’s ideas about force. Physics Education, 16, 360-365.
Watts, D. M. (1982). Gravity－don’t take it for granted！Physics Education, 17(4), 116-121.