本研究之目的在於探討虛擬實驗的學習環境對實驗學習成效的影響，以國中自然課程中物理部分的凸透鏡成像、單擺週期的測量以及光的三原色等三個單元為虛擬實驗教學之內容，利用FLASH所設計之動畫模擬，使用Tamir(1989)「給問題、給方法、不給答案」和「給問題、不給方法、不給答案」兩種不同類別的模擬實驗學習環境，並以單元成就測驗做為前後測的工具，探討兩種不同虛擬實驗學習方法所達成的學習成效差異和進步幅度差異。實驗過程並測驗學生的科學能力，同時測量學習者的學習型態，目的在找尋虛擬實驗學習方式和學習型態之間的關係，最終施以系統態度問卷調查。研究樣本為四班國中二年級學生，共一百二十八人，以準實驗研究方式將學生分成兩組實驗組，並根據實驗步驟之提供與否，給予兩種經過設計與控制的實驗學習方式，資料分析採二因子混合設計共變數分析及獨立樣本二因子共變數分析。
根據實驗所得發現以下結果：
1.兩組學生在三個單元中，實驗步驟的給予與否對單元學習成效有顯著的影響，給予實驗步驟組之成績，均明顯優於自行設計實驗步驟的設計實驗步驟組。
2.就進步幅度而言，在三個單元中均呈現給予實驗步驟組的進步幅度顯著大於設計實驗步驟組。給予步驟組的學生在三個單元中進步幅度均顯著，而設計實驗步驟組的同學僅在凸透鏡一單元進步顯著。
3.就實驗組別和學習型態的交互作用而言，在三個單元中均呈現交互作用不顯著的現象，而實驗組間的成績出現顯著的情形，即不論是哪一種學習型態的學生，均是給予實驗步驟組的學習成效優於設計實驗步驟組的同學。
4.兩個實驗組的學生均對虛擬實驗室的學習方式，給予正面的評價，而給予步驟組的同學又比設計步驟組的同學給了系統更高度的評價。

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of learning in two kinds of network-based virtual Physics experiment on junior high school students’ performance and attitudes toward virtual experiments. To conduct such a research object, firstly, three experimental units of optics and motion were selected, including “the image of a convex lens”, “simple pendulum”, and “three original colors of light”. Then, the three animation simulations by Flash MX were made into two different learning web environments. Six units were assigned to experimental groups: the first group learned 3 units that experimental-steps were given, and the second group learned 3 units that experimental-steps were not given . The achievements of students before and after each experiment unit were analyzed by test-sheets, learning sheets and questionnaires. Additional tools include science process skill tests and Felder’s index of learning styles. Comparison was made on two groups of students. The sample of the study was 128 8th-grade students of 4 classes in junior high school. The methods of data analyzing were two ways mixed-design mancova and independent two-way mancova. The result of the analysis reveals that,
1. The first group scored significantly higher than the second group in all three units.
2. The first group progressed significantly more than the second group in all three units. In the first group, the scores of the post-test were significantly higher than the scores of the pre-test in three units. It means that the first group progressed significantly. In the second group, the scores of the post-test were significantly higher than the scores of the pre-test just in “the image of a convex lens” unit. It means that the second group progressed significantly just in “the image of a convex lens” unit.
3. There was no significant interaction between groups and learning styles. For all learning styles, the first group scored significantly higher than the second group in all three units.
4. On the analysis of attitude toward virtual experiments, students in both groups show positive acceptance and students in the first group show more.

中文部分
江武雄（1997）。國民中學化學科教師教學困難及問題之調查研究（二）。行政院國家科學委員會報告NSC-75-0111-S-018-06。
江蓓蒂（1990）。中美初級中學自然科學教科書之分析與比較。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心。
祁明輝（1998）。理化演示教學。科學教育，212期，16-18。
林秀蓁（1995）。一位國中理化教師實驗室之教學與經營。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
林勇成（2002）。網路虛擬實驗室在國小自然領域教學之學習成效研究。國立台南師範學院資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
林俊華 (1986)。國中學生科學過程技能學習成就之調查研究。國立師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
林寶山（1984）。科學方法過程能力測驗指導手冊。復文圖書出版社。
林寶山、陳瓊森（1984）。統整科學能力測驗。高雄師範學院特殊教育中心。
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。
范光仁（2002）。虛擬化實驗室對國中生理化知識之有效學習。國立交通大學網路學習學程碩士論文。
范麗玉（1998）。國中物理建構式教學策略之行動研究。高雄師範大學物理學系碩士論文。
吳盟仁（2000）。國中網路虛擬化學實驗。國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所碩士論文。
吳幸宜（1994）譯。學習理論與教學應用。台北市：心理出版社。
黃竹坤(2001)。應用模擬動畫於國中理化輔助教學之研究。國立高雄師範大學物理系碩士論文。
黃志清(2001)。應用模擬動畫輔助國中理化實驗教學之研究。國立高雄師範大學物理系碩士論文。
黃玉枝（1991）。「國中資優學生與普通學生學習風格及學校適應之比較研究」，國立臺灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。
黃寶鈿和劉靄雯（1993）。化學師資基本能力及條件之初步研究。師大學報，38，203- 222。
黃啟淵（ 1992）。探究國中生參與化學專題研習活動中的表現----個案研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
黃湃翔（1995）。科學探究的實驗室教學。高市文教,55 卷, 43-46。
董家莒(2000)。「問題解決」為基礎之電腦輔助教學成效。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
許榮富（1986）。科學過程技能組織因子模式及影響因素。國科會報告NSC75-0111-S003-13。
許榮富、趙金祁（1987）。科學實驗教學目標之確認之客觀性評量分析研究。國科會報告NSC76-0111-S003-24。
陳素真（1994）。「實驗設計」技能之教材研究。行政院國家科學委員會報告，NSC-83-　0111-S-003-024.
陳義勳（1993）譯。國民小學自然科學實驗教學之舉隅。市師科學教育季利，18。
郭文禎（1999）。國小學生投入實驗活動的方式與其對實驗看法之關係。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
郭重吉和江武雄（1995）。如何實行符合建構主義理念的教學-以國中理化為例。載於八十三學年度台灣中區國民中學數理學科概念改變教學策略研習會研習手冊。彰化市：國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
董家莒、張俊彥(2000)。問題解決或無問題解決電腦輔助教學成效的比較研究。科學教育學刊，8，4，357-377。
楊家興 (1995) 。情境教學理論與超媒體學習環境。教學科技與媒體，22，40~48。
楊文金和許榮富（1987）。物理教育中實驗的角色。科學月利，18(2)，103-105。
蔡佩穎和張文華（1999）。國一學生參與生物實驗活動之過程分析與成效探討。科學教育，9，108-126。
謝祥宏、耿正屏(1996)。交互式多媒體教學系統對高中學生學習細胞生理概念之研究。科學教育，92-120。
戴文雄(1994)。學習型態與電腦輔助學習對機械製圖學習成效之研究。載於第九屆全國技術及職業教育研討會論文集-一般技職及人文教育類(231-240)，台北。
簡聿成（2000）。融入科學史之電腦輔助學習教材對高中生科學探究思考學習之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所，碩士論文。
英文部份
Akpan, J. P., & Andre, T., (2000). Using a computer simulation before dissection to help student learn anatomy. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(3), 297-313.
Bricken, M., & Byrne, C. M. (1992). Summer students in virtual reality: A pilot study on educational applications of virtual reality technology. In A. Wexelblat(Ed.), Virtual reality applications and explorations. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press Professional.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning.Educationsal Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
Byrne, C. M. (1996). Water on tap: The use of virtual reality as an educational tool. Unpublished P.H.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, College of Engineering.
Carlsen, D., & Andre, T. (1992). Use of a microcomputer simulation and conceptual change text to overcome student preconceptions about electric circuits. Journal of Computer-based Instruction, 19, 105-109.
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 149-210.
Clark,R.(1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
Clark,R.(1985). Confounding in educational computing research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1(2), 137-148.
Clark,R.(1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
Clement, J. (1985). Misconceptions in graphing, Proceedings of the 9th Conference of theInternational Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1, 369 - 375.
Dale Mann（1996）. Serious Play. Teacher College Record. 97（3）, 446- 469.
De Jong, T., & Njoo, M. (1992). Learning and instruction with computer simulations: Learning processes involved. In E. De Corte & M. C. Linn & H. Mandl & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-Based Learning Environments and Problem Solving (pp. 411-427). Berlin: Springer.
De Jong, T. & Van Joolingen W. R.（1998）. Scientific Discovery Learning With Computer Simulations of Conceptual Domains. Review of Educational Research. 68（2）, 179-201.
Domin, D. S.(1999). A Review of Laboratory Instruction Styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 543-547.
Dori, Y. J. & Yochim, J. M. (1990). Leraning patterans of college students using intelligent computer-aided instruction. Journal of College Science Teacher, 63(11), 99-103.
Felder, R.M. (1988) . Learning and Teaching Styles In Engineering Education ,Engr. Education, 78(7), 674–681
Felder, R.M. (1993). "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and Teaching Styles in College Science Education."J. College Science Teaching, 23(5), 286-290.
Felder, R.M. and Soloman, B.A. Index of Learning Styles, Retrieved April 20, 2004, from the World Wide Web:
http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSpage.html
Gredler, M.E.(1997). Learning and instruction theory into practice (3rd ed.). New Jersey:Prentice-Hall,Inc.
Hargrave, C. P. & Kenton, J. M. (2000). Preinstructional Simulation: Implications for Science Classroom Teaching. Jl. Of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching. 19（1）, 47-58
Hartley K.（2000）. Online Simulation. Learning & Leading with Technology. 28（3）, 32-35.
Jung, C.G.（1971）, Psychological Types, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Kolb, D.A., (1984). “Experiential Learning：Experience as the source of Learning and Development.”, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Linn, M. C. (1995). Designing computer learning environments for engineering and computer science: The scaffolded knowledge integration framework. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(2), 103-126.
Marzano, R.J. (1998). A theory-based meta-analysis of research on instruction. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning.
Mokros, J. R., & Tinker, R. F. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4), 369-383.
Cholmsky P. (2003). Why GIZMOSTM work: Empirical evidence for the instructional effectiveness of Explorelearning’s interactive content. Retrieved May 25, 2004, from the World Wide Web:
http://www.explorelearning.com/View/downloads/WhyGizmosWork.pdf
Pilkington R.; Grierson A.（1996）Generating explanations in a simulation-based learning environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45（5）, 527-551.
R. N. steinberg（2000）. Computers in teaching science: To simulate or not to simulate? American Journal of Physics, 68（7）, 37-41.
Rath, A., & Brown, D. E. (1996). Modes of engagement in science inquiry: A microanalysis of elementary students' orientations toward phenomena at a summer science camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1083-1097.
Rivers, R.H., & Vockell, E. (1987). Computer simulations to stimulate scientific problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 403-415.
Reid, D.J.; Zhang J.; Chen Q. （2003）Supporting scientific discovery learning in a simulation environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19（1）, 9-20.
Roblyer, M. D., Castine, W. H. & King, F. J. (1988). Assessing the impact of computer-based instruction: A review of recent research. Computers in the Schools, 5(3/4), 1-149.
Roychoudhury, A., & Roth, W.-M. (1996). Interactions in an open-inquiry physics laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 18 (4), 423-445.
Salzman, M. C., Dede, C., Loftin, B., & Chen, J. (in press). The design and evaluation of virtual reality-based learning environments. Presence.
Stephen M. A. & Stanley R. T. (2000). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development. Allyn and Bacon
Swaak J.; van Joolingen W.R.; de Jong T.（1998）. Supporting simulation-based learning; the effects of model progression and assignments on definitional and intutive knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 8（3）, 235-252.
Tamir, P. (1976). The role of the laboratory in science teaching. (Tech. Rep. 10). Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa, Science Education Center.
Tamir, P.(1989). Training teacher to teach effectively in the Leaboratory. Science Education, 73(1), 59-69.
Tobin, K.G., & Capie, W. (1980). Teaching process skills in the middle school. School Science and Mathematics, 80, 590-600.
Tobin , K. G.（1990）.Research on science laboratory activities：In pursuit of better
question and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90（5）, 403-418.
Winn, W. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality. (Tech. Rep. No. R-93-9). Washington: University of Washington, HITL. Retrieved May 01, 2004, from the World Wide Web:
http://www.hitl.washington.edu/publicatons.
White, B. Y. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cognition and instruction, 10(1), 1-100.
Zywno M.S.（2003）. A contribution to validation of score meaning for Felder-Soloman’s index of learning styles. Proceedings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.