本研究以三種教學法探究學生對「平面鏡成像性質」的概念，同時探討學習環教學模式與實驗活動教材之效果，以作為國中教師在平面鏡成像教學時的參考。本研究以「學習環教學模式教授實驗活動教材」（A組）、「慣用教法教授實驗活動教材」（B組）、及「慣用教法教授課本教材」（C組）等三種教法進行「平面鏡成像」教學，對象為台北縣瑞芳區某國中一年級共１７４名學生，分成三組，分別進行三種不同之教學。學習成就以自編之「平面鏡成像性質」測驗卷（α＝.８５）來測量，測量結果以單因子變異數分析及卡方考驗來檢視三種教法之學習成效。研究結果顯示：一、學生對於「平面鏡成像性質」之主要迷思概念有(一)成像位置在鏡面上;(二)成像在眼睛和物體的連線上;(三)以觀察者為參考點決定成像。二、A組在「平面鏡成像性質」測驗卷的表現顯著優於B組(p<.05)，B組亦顯著優於C組(p<.05)，顯示學習環教學模式的教學法及實驗活動教材比起慣用教學法及課本教材更有助於學生在「平面鏡成像性質」之學習。三、A、B兩組在平面鏡成像性質之：成像位置在正前方(水平方向) 、像的位置不隨觀察者移動而改變、成像位置在鏡後、像距等於物距、像和物大小相等、像的大小不隨物體移動而改變、像的大小不隨觀察者移動而改變、像的大小不隨光源移動而改變、像的位置不隨光源移動而改變等九個概念上有顯著的進步，而C組在成像位置在鏡後、像和物體的大小相等、像的大小不隨物體移動而改變、及像的大小不隨觀察者移動而改變等概念上有顯著的進步但程度明顯不如A、B兩組。本研究建議未來在平面鏡成像單元宜利用壓克力板之實驗活動教材協助教學。

The purpose of this study was to explore students’ concept of image in a plane mirror through three approaches, and to investigate the effect of learning cycle teaching model and experimental activity content, which can be utilized as the reference for teaching in this topic. Three different approaches-“learning cycle teaching model with experimental activity content”(group A), “traditional teaching style with experimental activity content”(group B), and “traditional teaching style with traditional content” (group C), were applied respectively to three groups of 174 students in the 7th grade in one of the junior high schools in Rei- Fong. “Test for Image in a Plane Mirror” (α＝.85) was used to evaluate students’ achievement. Data were analyzed through one-way ANOVA and χ2-test. The result indicated some facts. First, students had three major misconceptions as follows: (a) the image is located on mirror; (b) the image lies along the line of sight to the object; (c) students decided the position of an image by themselves as a referenced framwork. Second, in generally, the achievement of group A was significantly superior to group B (p<.05), while group B was significantly superior to group C (p<.05). Third, approaches of group A and group B were significantly effective in nine concepts of image in a plane mirror, group C made progress concepts such as “the image is located behind mirror”, “the size of image equals to object”, “the size of image is independent of the position of object”, and “the size of image is independent of the position of the viewer”. However, not effective as group A and group B. It is recommended that teachers adopt the experimental activity content in this study when they teach image of mirror.

尹基勉（1999）：「原子結構」概念之建構式教學研究。台北市：國立台灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文。
王美芬、熊昭地（1997）：國小自然科教材教法。台北：心理出版社。
王晉基、郭重吉（1992）：利用選擇題的方式來探求國中學生對「光」的迷思概念之研究。科學教育，3，73-90。彰化市：國立彰化師範大學。
王龍錫（1992）：國小學童光與視覺之概念發展研究（一）。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 81-0111-S-153-001 N）
王龍錫、張靜儀（1994）：國小學生光與視覺之概念發展研究（二）。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 83-0111-S-153-001 N）
古智雄（1992）：凸透鏡成像迷思概念的詮釋系統研究。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
吳慶軍（1997）：從二元編碼理論探討山地學童光學概念的心智表徵及其在教學上的意涵。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 86-2511-S-026-001）
吳璧純（1995）：小學新課程自然科概說教學錄影帶參考手冊。台北：國立教育資料館。
李玉貞（2000）：光學史融入教學對高中學生科學本質觀及光概念的改變之研究。高雄市：國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林清山譯（1990）：教育心裡學：認知取向。台北：遠流。
林陳涌（1995）：從經驗證據和科學理論之間的關係來探討自然科實驗教學的意義。科學教育月刊，184，2-15。
林曉雯（2000）：建構主義教學策略－學習環的基本理念及國小自然科學教學設計舉隅。科學教育，11，43-51。屏東：國立屏東師範學院。
林曉雯（2001）：國小自然科教師試行「學習環」之合作行動研究。屏東師院學報，14，953-986頁。
邱韻如（1998）：成影概念的成長與學習。台北市：國立台灣師範大學物理研究所博士論文。
馬文蔚、唐玄之、周永平主編（1995）：物理學發展史上的里程碑。新竹市：凡異出版社。
國立編譯館（2000）：高中物理第三冊。台北：國立編譯館。
國立編譯館（2001）：國中理化第一冊。台北：國立編譯館。
張川木（1998）：孩童之「光與色彩」概念研究。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 86-2511- S-110- 003）
張惠博（1993）：邁向科學探究的實驗教學。教師天地，62，12-20。
張麗莉（2001）：促進高中學生成像概念的發展之個案研究。高雄市：國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
教育部（1993）：國民小學自然課程標準。國民小學課程標準，133- 158。
教育部（1994）：國民中學理化課程標準。國民中學課程標準，271- 279。
教育部（2000）：國民教育九年一貫課程綱要草案。
莊崑泉（1994）：國中生物運輸單元試行學習環教學之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
莊崑泉與耿正屏（1995）：國中生物運輸單元試行學習環教學之研究。科學教育，6，27-50。彰化：國立彰化師範大學。
許有亮、陳忠志（1998）：國中生平面鏡成像的另有架構探討。物理教育，2（1），2-14。
許榮富、洪振方（1993）：凸透鏡成像理解的心智表徵及潛在特質分析。科學教育學刊，1（1），77-100。
許榮富、楊文金、洪振方（1990）：學習環的理論基礎及其內涵分析－物理概念教學理念的新構思。物理會刊，12（5），p375-398。
郭金美（1996）：學童光學概念改變教學之研究。嘉義師院學報，10，407-454。
郭金美（1999）：建構主義教學方法—影響學童光學概念學習教學模式的研究。嘉義師院學報，13，157-201。
郭重吉（1992）：從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。科學發展月刊，20（5），548-570。
郭重吉（1996）：從建構主義談數理師資培育的革新。科學發展月刊，24（7），555-562。
陳忠志（1989）：大一學生物理學錯誤概念之研究（Ⅱ）光學錯誤概念。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 77- 0111- S-017- 005- D）
黃湘武（1989）：我國學生科學概念與推理能力發展之相關研究：光的性質。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 78 - 0111- S – 003 - 017 D）
黃湘武與黃寶鈿（1989a）：學生平面鏡成像及其相關光學概念的研究。發表於第三次認知與學習基礎研究研討會。
黃湘武與黃寶鈿（1989b）：學生對投影及光性質之概念研究。第五屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編，233-262。台北市：國立台灣師範大學。
黃湘武與黃寶鈿（1991）：我國學生科學概念與推理能力發展之相關研究：認知衝突對學生平面鏡成像及相關光學概念的影響。台北市：行政院國家科學委員會。（NSC 80 - 0111- S – 003 - 027 D）
黃慧琳（1995）：學習環在國小自然科教學之研究。高雄市：國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
楊文金與許榮富（1987）：物理教育中實驗的角色。科學月刊，18（2），103-105。
Abraham, M. R.＆ Renner, J. W.(1986). The sequence of learning cycle activities in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 23（2）,121-143.
Allard, D. W., ＆ Barman, C. R.(1994). The learning cycle as an alternative method for college science teaching. Bioscience, 44（2）,99-102.
Anderson , C. & Smith , E. (1986). Children’s conceptions of light & color : Understanding the role of unseen rays . ED270318.
Anderson ,B., & Karrqvist , C.(1983). How Swedish pupils ,aged 12-15 years , understand light and its properties . European Journal of Science Education, 5(4),387-402.
Appleton, K.(1993). Using theory to guide practice：Teaching science from a constructivist perspective. School Science And Mathematics. 95(5), 269-274.
Ausubel, D. P.(1986). Educational Psychology：A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Barman, C. K.(1992). An evaluation of the use of a technique designed to assist prospective elementary teachers use the learning cycle with science textbooks. School Science and Mathematics. 92(2), 59-63.
Barman, C. R., Benz, R. J., Haywood, J. R., ＆ Houk, G. A.(1992). Science and learning cycle. Perspectives in Education and Deafness. 11(1), 18-21.
Barman, C. R., Cohen, M. R., ＆ Shedd, J. D.(1993). The learning cycle：a basic tool for teachers, too. Perspectives in Education and Deafness. 11(4), 7-11.
Bryant, R. J., ＆ Marek, E. A.(1987). They like lab-centered science. The Science Teacher. 54(8), 42-45.
Driver, R. ＆ Bell, B.(1986). Students’ thinking and the learning of science：A constructivist view. School Science And Mathematics. 86(3), 443-456.
Driver, R., Guesne, E., ＆ Tiberghien, A.(1985). Children’s Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes Philadelphia：Open University Press.
Duit, R. ＆ Treagust, D. F.(1998). Learning in science－from behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In Fraser, B. J.＆ Tobin, K. G.(Eds). International Handbooks of Science Education. pp3-25. Dordrecht：Kluwar Academic Publishers.
Duschl, R.(1990). Restructuring Science Education：The Importance of Theories And Their Development. New York：Teachers College Press.
Dykstra, D. Jr.(1982). A learning cycleon exponential growth and the energy crises. The Physics Teacher, 20(4), 245-246.
Eaton, J. F., & Others.(1986). Light：A Teaching Module. ED 272384.
Eaton, J. F., Anderson, C. W., & Smith, E. L. (1984). Students’ Misconceptions Interfer with Science Learning : Case Studies of Fifth-Grade Students. The Elementary School Journal. 84(4), 365-379.
Fetherstonhaugh , T ., & Treagust , D .(1992). Students’ understanding of light and its properties : teaching to engender conceptual change . Science Education ,76(7), 653-672.
Francis,R. G., Hill, D. M., ＆ Redden, M G.(1991). Mathematics and science：A shared learning cycle and a common learning environment. School Science And Mathematics. 91(8), 339-343.
Goldberg, F., & Mcdermott, L. C.(1986). Students difficulties in understanding image formation by a plane mirror. The Physics Teacher, 24(1), 472-480.
Guesne, E.(1985). Light. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, and A. Tiberghien (Ed.). Children’s Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes, Open University Press (pp.10-32).
Guesne, E., Sere, M. G., & Tiberghien, A.(1983). Investigations on Children’s Conceptions in Physics：Which Method from Which Result？ ED 242553.
Ivins, J., ＆ Markle, G.(1989). A comparison of two instructional strategies involving science laboratory activities. Paper presented in the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. San Francisco, CA.
Karplus, R. ＆ Their, H. D.(1967). A new look at elementary school science. IL：Rand McNally.
Karplus, R., Lawson, A. E., Wollman, W., Bernoff, R., Howe, A., Rusch, J. J. ＆ Sullivan, F.(1977). Science Teaching And the Development of Reasoning：A Work-Shop. Berkeley：Regents of the University of California.
Lawson, A. E.(1988). A better way to teach biology .The American Biology Teacher , 50(5) , 266-289 .
Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R., ＆ Renner, J. W. (1989). A Theory of Instruction：Uding The Learning Cycle to Teach Science Concepts And Thinking Skills. NARST Monograph, No. 1.
Marek, E. A., Eubanks, C. ＆ Gallaher, T. H.(1990). Teachers’ understanding and the use of learning cycle. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 27(9), 821-834.
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, 62-82. London：The Falmer Press.
Nussbaum, J.(1989). Classroom conceptual change：Philosophical Perspectives. International Journal of Science Education. 11, 530-540.
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.
Purser, R. K. ＆ Renner, J. W.(1983). Results of two tenth-grade biology teaching procedures. Science Education. 67(1), 85-98.
Renner, J. W., Abraham, M. R., ＆ Birnie, H. H.(1985). Secondary school students’ beliefs about the physics laboratory. Science Education. 65(9), 643-649.
Renner, J. W., Abraham, M. R., ＆ Birnie, H. H.（1988）.The necessity of each phase of the learning cycle in teaching high school physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 25(1), 39-58.
Renner, J. W., Saunder, W. L., & Shepadson, D.(1987). A comparison of concrete and formal science instruction u[on science achievement and reason ability of six-grade student. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 24(1). 39-51.
Saunders, W. L.（1992）. The constructivist perspective：Implications and teaching strategies for science. School Science And Mathematics. 92(3),136-141.
Saxena, A. B. (1991). The understanding of the properties of light by students in India . International Journal of Science Education. 12(4), 429-442.
Scharmann, L. C.（1991）. Teaching angiosperm reproduction by means of the learning cycle. School Science And Mathematics. 91(3), 100-104.
Selly, N. J.(1996). Children’s ideas on light and vision. International Journal of Science Education, 18(6), 712-723.
Stead, B. F., & Osborne, R. J. (1980). Exploring science students’concepts of light. Australian Science teachers Journal. 26(3), 84-90.
Tamir, D.（1989）. Training teachers to teach effectively in the laboratory. Science Education. 73(1), 59-69.
Tobin, K.（1990）. Research on science laboratory activities：In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science And Mathematics. 90(5), 403-418.
Tobin, K., ＆ Tippins, D.(1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K. Tobin(Ed), The Practice of Constructivism in Science Education. (pp3-12). Washington DC：AAAS Press.
Unruh, R., Countryman, L. L., ＆ Cooney, T.(1992). The PRISMS approach. The Science Teacher. 59(5), 36-41.
Von Glasersfeld, E.(1989). Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching. Synthese, 80(1), 121-140.
Wheatley, G. H.(1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75(1), 9-21.
Zollman, D.(1990). Learning cycles for a large-enrollment class. The Physics Teacher . 28(1), 20-25.