本研究旨在探討不同性別的國中生理化學習狀況與其學業成就關係，國中生理化學習狀況由理化學習動機、性別、是否覺得理化困難及理化的學習方法幾個變項來研究學生的學業成就。發展並修定「國中生理化科學習狀況調查問卷」作為研究工具，以台北縣市、桃園縣及新竹市共14個班級416個國二及國三學生為研究對象進行研究調查，主要的研究發現如下：
一、雖然男女學生在理化科學習動機差異並未達顯著差異，但是男生的自我效能顯著高於女生，而女生在學習態度上顯著優於男生。
二、男生感到困難的分別是英文、數學、國文，而女生感到困難的分別是數學、理化、英文；其間存在明顯的性別差異。
三、男、女生被認可都可能學好理化，唯其理由不同。前者被歸因為其對理化的興趣及能力，後者則被歸因為認真、易受到鼓勵等。
四、學生的自我效能在學習成果具有顯著相關。
五、就學習成就來說，學習方法與學習動機具交互作用，即學習方法僅對高學習動機者有顯著效應，對低學習動機者則無。
最後，本研究根據上述的研究結果對科學教學提出相關的討論與建議。

This study is aimed to investigate the correlation between learning condition and academic achievement in science for junior high school students with different genders. The researcher analyzed the subjects’ learning condition on the basis of learning motivation、learning tactics、genders and if they perceive science as a difficult subject. For achieve these purposes, “The science learning condition Questionnaire for junior high school students” was developed and modified. Totally 416 students of 14 classes from Taipei, Tauyan and HsinChu were involved in this study. The main findings are listed as follows:
a. Different genders don’t show an obvious significance. Boys’ self-efficacy is higher than girls’, and girl’s learning attitude is better than boy’s.
b. For boys, the subject’s difficulties sequence is English, mathematics, and Chinese and the sequence for girls is mathematics, science, and English. Different genders show an obvious significance.
c. Students believe that gender is not the major parameter to affect their learning on science, but they believe there are different reasons for boys and girls learning well. They think boys are more interested in science and good at it, but girls would study harder and get more encouragement than boys.
d. The self-efficacy is the most important parameter to effect students’ learning achievement.
e. For students with high learning motivation, learning tactics affect their academic achievements, but it doesn’t affect students with low learning motivation.
Stemming from the results of this study, the researcher provides some suggestions and discussions for science education.

中文部分：
王福林(1990)：新制師院學生與師專學生家庭社經地位及其學習行為、學業成就之調查分析。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
毛國楠(1997)：成績回饋方式對不同能力水準國中生數學科的學習動機、學習策略、學習態度與學業成就之影響。教育心理學報，29，pp.117-136。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系。
吳心楷（1997）：科學學習相關的認知能力與認知風格之性別差異探討。科學教育月刊第204期。pp.16-23
吳明隆(1998)：國民教育階段學生數學學習之性別差異的探究。科學教育第8期。pp.29-43
吳靜吉、程炳林(1994)：國民中小學生學習動機、學習策略與學業成績之相關研究。國立政治大學學報，66，pp.13-18。
何秀珠(1994)：國小男女教師性別角色與學生學校適應、學業成就之關係。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
李然堯（1983）：中國兒童性別角色發展之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
李旻樺(2002)：高中學生之自我效能、成功期望、學習任務價值與課業學習動機調整策略之研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導與諮商系碩士論文。
林清山譯(Mayer, R. E.著)(1995)： 教育心理學：認知取向。台北：遠流出版公司。
邱維城(1980)：高中化學成就測驗之編製，測驗年刊，27輯，pp.67-70。
周淑儀(2000)：國小教師性別角色刻板印象與兩性平等教育進修需求之研究。臺中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
洪志生(1981)：我國國民中學學生科學能力之分析，師大教育研究所集刊，23輯，pp.246-261。
洪菁穗(1998)： 探討國中生在理化科的學術地位、自我效能與學業成敗歸因之關係。國立台灣大學物理研究所碩士論文。
洪寶蓮（1990）。大學生學習與讀書策略量表之修訂及調查研究。國立彰化師範大學輔導研究所碩士論文。
程炳林(2001)：動機、目標設定、行動控制、學習策略之關係：自我調整學習歷程模式之建構及驗證。師大學報：教育類，46(1)，pp.67-92
郭郁智(2000)：國民中學學生學習策略、批判思考能力與學業成就之相關研究。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文
郭宜君（1996）。嘉義市成人學習策略及其相關因素之研究。國立中正大學成人及繼續教育研究所碩士論文
張春興、陳李綢(民66)：國小男女生學業成績的性別差異與其教師性別差異的關係。國立台灣師範大學教育心理學系教育心理學報第10期。pp.21-34
張春興、林清山(1989)：教育心理學。東華書局
張春興(1994)：教育心理學-三化取向的理論與實踐。東華書局
張景琪(2001)：國小學童數學科學習信念、目標取向、學習策略與數學學業成就之相關研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
黃旭鈞(1995)：從動機理論看今日國小教學現況及其改進之道。教育資料文摘。35卷1期。pp.154-162
黃郁文(1994)：自我效能概念及其學業成就表現之關係。諮商與輔導，106，pp.39-41。
黃幸美(1995)：數理與科學教育的性別差異之探討。婦女與兩性學刊，第六期，pp.95-133。
黃麗鈴、徐新逸(1999)：學業成就自我效能影響因素之探討。諮商與輔導，160，pp.2-5。
彭文蓉(1995)：如何運用成就目標取向理論了解學生運動行為與增加其運動動機。台灣省學校體育，5(2)，pp.58-63。
湯清二(1987)：國中學生生物科學習因素與其科學態度和學習成就之關係，教育學院學報，12期，pp.451-471
潘志煌(1997)：師生互動中的性別差異---國小班級多重個案研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
胥彥華（1989）：學習策略對國小六年級學生閱讀效果之研究。國立彰化師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
曾秀錦(1989)：國中新生自然科學能力測驗編製之研究。台灣教育學院特教所碩士論文。
孫志麟(1991)：自我效能的基本概念及其在教育上的應用。教育研究，22，pp.47-53。
陳玉玲(1995)：目標設定、目標投入與自我效能對國小學生數學作業表現的影響。國立高雄師範大學教育學系碩士論文。
陳李綢(1988)：學習策略的研究與教學。資優教育季刊第29期。pp.15-24
陳李綢(1995)：有效學習策略的研究與應用。學生輔導38期。pp.40-47
楊龍立(1990)：中小學生在科學成就及對科學的態度中性別差異的探討。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
蕭錫錡、梁麗珍(2001)：如何提升自我導向學習能力。人文及社會學科教學通訊。12卷2期。pp.153-165
劉信雄(1992)：國小學生認知風格、學習策略、自我效能與學業成就關係之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文。
劉安彥(1994)：運用動機來促進學生學習。教育資料與研究創刊號。pp.37-43
鄭芬蘭(1999)：學習動機目標導向在學習輔導上的應用。學生輔導，62，90-99。
蘇美鳳(2000)：國小六年級學童自卑感與成就動機之關係。台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
蔡銘津(1996)：如何教導學生有效的學習策略。高市文教85年6月。pp.60-62
董三期（1997）。小學三年級學生國語文學習策略之研究-以瓜瓜班為例。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
蕭錫錡、梁麗珍(2001)：如何提升自我導向學習能力。人文及社會學科教學通訊12卷2期。pp.153-165。
魏麗敏(1996)：國小學生學習動機、數學焦慮與數學成就之研究。國民教育研究集刊(臺中師院)，85年6月第4期， pp.133-155。
謝臥龍、駱慧文、吳雅玲(1999)：從性別平等教育觀點來探討高雄地區國小課堂中師生互動的關係。教育研究資訊，7(1)，pp.57-80。
謝臥龍（2000）：推動兩性平等教育，教師應扮演的角色。載於謝臥龍主編：高中職教師兩性平等教育工作坊研習教材，pp.19-30。高雄：高雄醫學大學。
盧青延(1992)：我國國民中學補習學校學生學習動機、學習策略與學業成就關係之研究。國立師範大學社會教育學系碩士論文。
盧欽銘(1979)：高中生物科成就測驗的編製，測驗年刊，26輯，pp.86-89。
英文部分：
Ames, C. (1984). Achievement attributions and self instruction in competitive and individualistic goal structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, pp.478-487.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: student’s learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), pp.260-267.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivattion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, pp.261-271.
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation, Princeton：Van Nostrand.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action：A social cognitive theroy.Englewood Cliffs, NJ：Prentice Hall.
Bembenutty, H. (1999). Sustaining motivation and academic goals: the role of academic delay of gratification. Learning & Individual Differences, 11, pp.233-258.
Benz, C. R.,& others. (1980). Sex role expectations of classroom teachers, grades1-12. (ERIC Document R2eproduction Service NO. ED 113264)
Butt，D.P.(1980) A summary of research in science education -1979. Science Education ，69(2)，pp.121-138.
Brophy, J. (1986) . On motivating students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED276724).
Bossert, S. T. (1981). Understanding sex differences in children’s classroom sex experiences. Elementary School Journal, 81(5) , pp.255-263.
Cook, L. K., & Mayer, R. E. (1983). Reading strategies training for meaningful learning from course. In M. Pessley & J. R. Levin (Eds.), Cognitive Strategy Research, pp.87-126, New York : Springer-Verlag.
Dansereau, D. F., Collins, K. W., Mdonald, B. A., Holley, C. D., Garland, J., Diekhoff,G., & Evans, S. H. (1979). Evaluation of a learning strategy system. In H. F.O’Neil & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Cognitive and affective learning strategies, pp.3-43. New York : Academic Press.
Dansereau, D. F.(1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander (Eds.). Learning and study strategies. New York : Academic Press.
Dweck, C.S. (1985). Intrinsic motivation, perceived control, and self-evaluation maintenance: An achievement goal analysis. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.).
Eaton, M. J., & Dembo, M. H. (1997). Differences in the motivational beliefs of Asian American and non-Asian students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, pp.433-440.
Eccles, J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B.,Kaczala, C.M.,Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C.(1983).Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J.T. Spence (Ed.). Achievement and achievement motivation, pp.75-146. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals： An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, pp. 5-12.
Fennema, F. (1984). Girls, women, and mathematics. In E. Fennema and M. J. Ayer. (Eds.). Women and Education：Equity or Equality﹖Berkeley, CA：McCutchan Publishing.
Graham, S., & Golan, S. (1991). Influeneces on achievement: Task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, pp.187-194.
Jones, B. F. (1988). Text learning strategy instruction : Guidelines from theory andpractice. In C. E. Weinstein, E. T. Goetz & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies : Issues in assessment, instruction and evaluation, pp.233-260. CA : Academic Press.
Klainin，S., Fenshan,P.J., West,L.H.T.(1989). The superior achievement of girls in chemistry and physics in upper secondary school in Thailand. Research in Science & Technological Education, Vol.7 No.1，pp.5-14
Larochelle, M., & Desautels, J.(1991). Of course, it’s just obvious: Adolescents’ ideas of scientific knowledge. International Journal ofScience Education, 13(4), pp.373-389.
Maccoby, E., Jacklin, C.N.(1974). The psychology of sex differences. Stanford University Press.
McCann,E.J., & Garcia, T. (1999). Maintaining motivation and regulating emotion: measuring individual differences in academic volitional strategies. Learning and Individual Difference, 11, pp.259-279.
Meece, J. L., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Hoyle, R. H. (1988). Students’ goal orientations and cognitive engagement in classroom activities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, pp.514-523.
Millar, R. (1989). Bending the evidence: The relationship between theory and experiment in science education. In R. Millar(Ed.), Doing science:Images of science in science education, pp.38-61. London: FalmerPress.
Nicholls, J.G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91, pp.328-346.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), pp.543-578.
Patrick, H., Ryan, A. M., Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The differential impact of extrinsic and mastery goal orientations on males’ and females’ self- regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 11(2), pp.153-171.
Pintrich, P. R., Smith , D. A.,& Makeachie, W. J. (1989). A Manual for the use of the Movitated Strategies for learning Questionaire (MSLQ). Mich：National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning (NCRIPTAL), School of Education, The University Michigan.
Rigney, J. W., Munro, A., & Crook, D. E. (1979). Teaching task-oriented selective reading : A learning strategy. In H. F. O’Neil & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.),Cognitive and affective learning strategies, pp.177-206. New York : Academic Press.
Sansone, C., Weir, C., Hapster, L., & Morgan, C. (1992). Once a boring task always a boring task? Interest as a self- regulatory mechanism. Journal of personality and social psychology, 63, pp. 379-390.
Schmeck, R. R., & Lockhart, D. (1983). Learning Styles and Classroom Evaluation Methods: Different Strokes for Different Folks. College Student Journal, 17(1), pp.94-100.
Schunk, D. H. (1989).Self-efficacy and achievment behavior. Educational Psychology Review, 1, pp.173-208.
Singer, R. N., & Gerson, R. F. (1979). Learning strategies, cognitive processes, and motor learning. In H. F. O’Neil & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Cognitive and affective learning strategies, pp.215-247. New York : Academic Press.
Stafford，R.E.(1961) Sex difference in spatial visualization as evidence of sex-linked inheritance. Perceptual and Motor Shills，1961，13，pp.428.
Stockard, J., & Johnson, M. M. (1980). Sex roles. Englewood Cliffs, NJ：Prentice-Hall.
Tracy, D.M. (1987). Toys, spatial ability, and science and mathematics achievement. Are they related﹖Sex Roles, 17(3-4)，pp.115-138.
Tobias, S. (1976). Math anxiety：what it is and what can bedone about it? Ms., 3, pp. 56-59.
Wilhite, S. C. (1990). Self-efficacy, locus of control, self-assessment of memory ability, and study activities as predictors of college course achievement. Journal of Educational psychology, 82, pp.696-700.
White, R. T. (1996).The link between the laboratory and learning.
International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), pp.761-774.
Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M.Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, pp.305-327. New York :Macmillan.
Weinstein, C. E. (1987). Learning and study strategies inventory (LASSI): User’sManual. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing Company.
Wigfield, A., & Ecc les, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: a theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12, pp. 265-310.
Wolters, C. A. (1998). Self- regulated le arning and college students’ regulation motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, pp.224-235.
Wolters, C. A. (1999). The relation between high school students’ motivational regulation and their use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom. Learning & Individual Differences,11, pp. 281-300.
Yewchuk, C. (1992). Gender issues in education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 371 553).