本研究依據情境學習與社會建構的觀點，搭配鷹架理論，以探討高中生使用空氣汙染建模軟體所發展出的建模實務，以及可能遭遇的困難。
研究對象為北市某高中的學生，採以兩人為一組的方式進行建模活動，共12組（23人），而有效樣本為9組（18人），再依據個人概念試題的前、後測驗成績分成高分群與低分群。活動時間總計四週共16小時。資料收集方面，包括概念試題前後測、課室錄影、螢幕側錄、小組錄音與學生作品。
研究結果顯示，學生在整體的概念上有顯著性的進步，說明了提供機會讓學生參與擬真性的建模活動，可促進概念的理解。高分群在使用軟體功能的事件量上，比低分群多，但統計結果顯示，未達顯著性差異。而學生所進行的建模實務來說，分析實務方面，發現學生可提出其他軟體或課堂上所沒有探討且可能影響汙染物散佈的變因；此外，也能以直觀的方式探討模擬圖中汙染物的散佈情形。關係推理方面，則以單變因的推理為主。實驗模擬方面，學生未能以系統化的方式進行模擬。評估方面，學生並未根據模擬結果來修正模型。

This research is based on situated learning and social construction point of view, with scaffolding theory, to examine high school students’ modeling practices developed by the use of air pollution modeling software, and potential difficulties.
In this study, 18 students, working in dyads, and grouping into high score group and low score group depending on their pre- and post- tests score. This modeling unit took about 16 hours per four days. Data collection, including the pre- and post- tests, classroom video, screen-side recorded, audio records and students’ product.
The results show that students’ understandings about air quality were significantly improved. And High score group use software features frequently higher than low score group, but didn’t show a significantly difference between the two groups. In this study, the modeling practices students developed, inculding analysis, relationship reasoning, simulation, and evaluation. The results show that students can said more variables that might affect pollutants dispersion than ones learned from class or provided by modeling software. Besides they can interprete simulated result without any difficult. In the relationship reasoning, students often examine how the single variable affect pollutants dispersion. In the simulation，students did not manipulate variables systematically. In the last modeling practice, evaluation, student didn’t modify model according to simulated result.

中文部分：
Berk, L. E., & Winsler, A.（1995/1999）。鷹架兒童的學習：維高斯基與幼兒教育（谷瑞勉譯）。台北市：心理出版社有限公司。
川口寅之輔、米山正信、阪川武志與橫山隆允（1993）。牛頓科學硏習百科：化學. 台北市：牛頓出板股份有限公司。
王文科與王智弘（2007）。教育研究法 （11 版）。台北市：五南圖書出版股份有限公司。
李岱螢（2006）。不同認知結構學生於鷹架式建模課程中科學概念學習之個案研究。士論文，國立台灣師範大學，台北市。
黃福坤。（2007）。理想氣體的分子模型。轉自http://www.phy.ntnu.edu.tw/java/idealGas/
趙大衛（2009 ）。普通高級中學基礎生物（全）。台南市：翰林出版事業股份有限公司。

英文部分：
Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. （2001 ）. Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices. Cognition and Instruction, 19 （1）, 47-94.
Benson, H. （1996）. University physics （Revised ed.）. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. （1989）. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 （1）, 32-42.
Creswell, J. W. （1994）. Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fretz, E. B., Wu, H.-K., Zhang, B., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. （2002）. An investigation of software scaffolds supporting modeling practices. Research in Science Education, 32 （4）, 567-589.
Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J., & Elmer, R.（2000）. Positioning models in science education and in design and technology education. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter （Eds.）, Developing models in science education （pp. 3-17）. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Gobert, J. D., & Buckley, B. C.（2000）. Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22 （9）, 891-894.
Grosslight, L., Unger, C., & Jay, E. （1991）. Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28（9）, 799-822.
Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. （2000）. A typology school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22（9）, 1011-1026.
Hestenes, D. （2006）. Notes for a modeling theory of science, cognition and instruction. Paper presented at the Modelling in Physics and Physics Education, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Hogan, K., & Thomas, D.（2001）. Cognitive comparisons of students’systems modeling in ecology. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10 （4 ）, 319-345.
Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. （1995 ）. Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4 （1 ）, 39-103.
Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. （2000 ）. The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry instruction. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9 （2 ）, 105-143.
Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C. M., & Berger, C. F. （2003 ）. Teaching science in elementary and middle school classrooms: a project approach （Second ed. ）. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. （1991 ）. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. （2006 ）. Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In R. K. Sawyer （Ed. ）, The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences （pp. 371-388 ）. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lohner, S., van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. （2005 ）. Students' reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 441-461.
Metcalf, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. （2000 ）. Model-It: a design retrospective. Paper presented at the Innovations science and athematics education: advanced designs for technologies of learning, Mahwah: NJ.
Palincsar, A. S. （1998 ）. Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 49, 345-375.
Penner, D. E. （2000 ）. Cognition, computers, and synthetic science: Building knowledge and meaning through modeling. Review of Research in Education, 25 （1 ）, 1-35.
Penner, D. E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. （1998 ）. From physical models to biomechanics: a design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7 （3&4 ）, 429-449.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., A.Davis, E., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. （2004 ）. A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13 （3 ）, 337-386.
Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. （2005 ）. A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through software-based scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40 （4 ）, 235-244.
Rogoff, B. （1990 ）. Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. （1998 ）. Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68 （1 ）, 35-59.
Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., et al. （2009 ）. Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 （6 ）, 632-654.
Sins, P. H., Savelsbergh, E. R., & Joolingen, W. R. v. （2005 ）. The difficult process of scientific modelling: an analysis of novices' reasoning during computer-based modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 27 （14 ）, 1695-1721.
Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. （1998 ）. Secondary students' dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7 （3 ）, 215-234.
Vygotsky, L. S. （1978 ）. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wenger, E. （1998 ）. Communities of practices: Learning, meaning, and identity. London: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. （1991 ）. Voices of the mind: a sociocultural approach to mediated action. USA: Harvard University press.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. （1976 ）. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
Wu, H.-K. （2010 ）. Modeling a complex system: using novice-expert analysis for developing an effective technology-enhanced learning environment. International Journal of Science Education, 32 （2 ）, 195-219.
Yin, R. K. （2006 ）. Case study research: Design and methods. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli & P. B. Elmore （Eds. ）, Handbook of complementary methods in education research （3rd ed., pp. 111-121 ）. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.