一般教育环境下生物学概念形成过程特征及影响因素的实验研究
|
摘要
对于一般教学条件下的科学概念尤其是生物学概念的形成过程特征及影响因素历来缺乏系统的研究。现有相关工作主要停留在教学经验总结的层面,使得教学实践缺乏有效的理论指导。因此,开展生物学概念形成过程特征的系统研究具有重要的理论和实践价值。本文从心理学和神经生物学的两大视角出发,选取中学生物学中重要的生物学概念作为分析对象,将心理学人工概念的研究方法与多元统计分析方法相结合,探讨了生物学概念形成过程的基本特征及其影响因子的相互关系,以期填补生物学概念形成过程的理论空白,拓宽对生物学概念形成过程特征的认识,并为优化生物学教与学的策略提供必要的依据。论文分三大部分对生物学概念的形成展开了分层次的研究。
第一部分为理论研究,主要是对已有概念形成过程的研究进行综述,并通过对不同的概念形成过程理论及研究范式的分析,确定实验研究的思路和方法,奠定本课题研究基础。
第二部分为实验研究,研究综合运用假设检验模型、通径分析等方法,对一般教学条件下生物学概念的形成特征及影响因子之间的关系进行了三方面的研究。第一、生物学概念形成过程共性特征研究;第二、不同条件下生物学概念形成过程差异的比较研究;第三、生物学概念形成过程影响因素的通径分析。
第三部分为研究的总结与展望。
通过研究得到如下结论:
1、一般教学条件下生物学概念的形成具有:高起点、缓增长、平台震荡的特征,没有突破现象。
2、生物学概念形成过程存在一定的阈值,不同教法对概念形成的效果因概念阈值及学生水平不同而呈动态变化。
●不同概念难度条件下学生达到阈值所需要的时间不同----随概念难度增加而增加;
●不同学生水平条件下学生达到阈值所需要的时间不同----随学生水平提高而缩短;
●不同教法及不同学生水平条件下学生达到阈值所需要的时间不同----探究教学更有利于缩短高水平学生达到阈值的时间。
3、对生物学概念形成过程影响因素的通径分析结果:
●学生学习能力是影响生物学概念形成过程的首要因素
学生学习能力是对概念形成过程最重要的直接因素,同时其总效应也最大。学生学习能力与其他影响因子之间没有直接关系,其对概念的形成表现为直接影响。
●概念难度对生物学概念形成过程有重要影响
概念难度对生物学概念形成过程的影响不仅表现为直接影响,而且通过学生认知活动对概念形成过程有间接的影响。
●教学有效性对生物学概念形成过程的影响存在不同路径
该因素的影响力小于学生学习能力和概念难度而居第三位,它对概念形成过程的影响表现为直接影响和通过学生认知活动产生的间接影响。
●学生认知活动对生物学概念形成的影响表现为弱相关或零相关
学生认知活动对概念形成的影响表现为弱相关或零相关,显示识记可能对概念形成过程具有重要作用,值得我们关注,需要继续研究。
上述研究形成的基本认识可望为优化生物教学策略提供可选择的途径。
It was lack of systematic research on characteristic and the impact factors of scientific particularly biology concept's forming process under the teaching condition. Most of the research was the summary of the teaching experience, causes the teaching practice lack the effective theory instruction. Therefore, explore the characteristic's in concept forming process has the theory and the practice value. It was lack the systematical research on character of the . scientific concept formation especially the biological concepts. This paper selects three biological concepts as the objects of research, explores the features that biology concepts formation and relations among the impact factors deeply in the angle of psychology and nerve biology by the means of the combination of traditional psychology and multiple-statistics in order to give some references to the biology teaching and research. It has a certain theory and practice value about enriching the theory of the biology concepts formation and realizing them further.
This research explore the three issues: Firstly, the characters of biological concept formation. Secondly, the difference of the biological concept formation under the different impact factors. Thirdly, the relations between different impact factors.
The paper is made up of three parts which has a hierarchy research on the biology concepts formation
The first part mainly summarizes the existing concepts formation researches, and then open out the research signification, ideas and methods by analyzing the theory that the concepts formations and impact factors
In Part Two we get some references value results by the series of experiments on the students' the biology concept formation in the teaching and the exploration the relationship of the influenced factors using hypothesis-testing model, factor analysis methods, classroom coding analysis technologies and the path analysis. The part is divided into three steps on the research of the concept formation. Firstly, explore the characteristics of the concept formation. Secondly, compare the process of the concept formation in the different conditions. Finally, study the relationship of the influenced factors.
In Part Three, after recalling the theories and experiments done in the research, we point out its limits and have an expectation on the future research trends.
This research suggest:
1. The process of biological concept formation was divided into three steps. Firstly, it beginning at higher lever. Secondly, it growth slowly and thirdly, oscillation on plateau. Without the phenomena of mutative process.
2. Maybe there is a threshold in the concept learning. The time that the different concept students spend is different in reaching the threshold. The more difficulties, the more time they will spend. The time that the different kinds of the students spend is different in reaching the threshold of the same concept. The more level they have, the less time they will spend. The explorative teaching helps to reach the threshold better under the condition of the same concept and the students' learning level with the different teaching influencing.
3. The results of path analysis on the biological concept formation:
Firstly, The student's ability is the most important direct factor in the concept formation and its total efficiency is the biggest, too. The student's ability is not direct related with other factors, so it has a direct influence on the concept formation.
Secondly, The difficulties of the concepts are also the important factor that influences the concept formation. It not only directly influences the concept formation but also indirectly influences the concept formation through the students' cognizing.
Behind it, the factor of teaching effectiveness influences the concept formation less than the student's ability and concept difficulties from the analysis of the results. It is the direct influences that influences the concept formation and indirectly influence it through the students' cognizing.
Fourthly, the students' cognizing has zero influence on the concept formation, which makes us focus on.
第一部分为理论研究,主要是对已有概念形成过程的研究进行综述,并通过对不同的概念形成过程理论及研究范式的分析,确定实验研究的思路和方法,奠定本课题研究基础。
第二部分为实验研究,研究综合运用假设检验模型、通径分析等方法,对一般教学条件下生物学概念的形成特征及影响因子之间的关系进行了三方面的研究。第一、生物学概念形成过程共性特征研究;第二、不同条件下生物学概念形成过程差异的比较研究;第三、生物学概念形成过程影响因素的通径分析。
第三部分为研究的总结与展望。
通过研究得到如下结论:
1、一般教学条件下生物学概念的形成具有:高起点、缓增长、平台震荡的特征,没有突破现象。
2、生物学概念形成过程存在一定的阈值,不同教法对概念形成的效果因概念阈值及学生水平不同而呈动态变化。
●不同概念难度条件下学生达到阈值所需要的时间不同----随概念难度增加而增加;
●不同学生水平条件下学生达到阈值所需要的时间不同----随学生水平提高而缩短;
●不同教法及不同学生水平条件下学生达到阈值所需要的时间不同----探究教学更有利于缩短高水平学生达到阈值的时间。
3、对生物学概念形成过程影响因素的通径分析结果:
●学生学习能力是影响生物学概念形成过程的首要因素
学生学习能力是对概念形成过程最重要的直接因素,同时其总效应也最大。学生学习能力与其他影响因子之间没有直接关系,其对概念的形成表现为直接影响。
●概念难度对生物学概念形成过程有重要影响
概念难度对生物学概念形成过程的影响不仅表现为直接影响,而且通过学生认知活动对概念形成过程有间接的影响。
●教学有效性对生物学概念形成过程的影响存在不同路径
该因素的影响力小于学生学习能力和概念难度而居第三位,它对概念形成过程的影响表现为直接影响和通过学生认知活动产生的间接影响。
●学生认知活动对生物学概念形成的影响表现为弱相关或零相关
学生认知活动对概念形成的影响表现为弱相关或零相关,显示识记可能对概念形成过程具有重要作用,值得我们关注,需要继续研究。
上述研究形成的基本认识可望为优化生物教学策略提供可选择的途径。
It was lack of systematic research on characteristic and the impact factors of scientific particularly biology concept's forming process under the teaching condition. Most of the research was the summary of the teaching experience, causes the teaching practice lack the effective theory instruction. Therefore, explore the characteristic's in concept forming process has the theory and the practice value. It was lack the systematical research on character of the . scientific concept formation especially the biological concepts. This paper selects three biological concepts as the objects of research, explores the features that biology concepts formation and relations among the impact factors deeply in the angle of psychology and nerve biology by the means of the combination of traditional psychology and multiple-statistics in order to give some references to the biology teaching and research. It has a certain theory and practice value about enriching the theory of the biology concepts formation and realizing them further.
This research explore the three issues: Firstly, the characters of biological concept formation. Secondly, the difference of the biological concept formation under the different impact factors. Thirdly, the relations between different impact factors.
The paper is made up of three parts which has a hierarchy research on the biology concepts formation
The first part mainly summarizes the existing concepts formation researches, and then open out the research signification, ideas and methods by analyzing the theory that the concepts formations and impact factors
In Part Two we get some references value results by the series of experiments on the students' the biology concept formation in the teaching and the exploration the relationship of the influenced factors using hypothesis-testing model, factor analysis methods, classroom coding analysis technologies and the path analysis. The part is divided into three steps on the research of the concept formation. Firstly, explore the characteristics of the concept formation. Secondly, compare the process of the concept formation in the different conditions. Finally, study the relationship of the influenced factors.
In Part Three, after recalling the theories and experiments done in the research, we point out its limits and have an expectation on the future research trends.
This research suggest:
1. The process of biological concept formation was divided into three steps. Firstly, it beginning at higher lever. Secondly, it growth slowly and thirdly, oscillation on plateau. Without the phenomena of mutative process.
2. Maybe there is a threshold in the concept learning. The time that the different concept students spend is different in reaching the threshold. The more difficulties, the more time they will spend. The time that the different kinds of the students spend is different in reaching the threshold of the same concept. The more level they have, the less time they will spend. The explorative teaching helps to reach the threshold better under the condition of the same concept and the students' learning level with the different teaching influencing.
3. The results of path analysis on the biological concept formation:
Firstly, The student's ability is the most important direct factor in the concept formation and its total efficiency is the biggest, too. The student's ability is not direct related with other factors, so it has a direct influence on the concept formation.
Secondly, The difficulties of the concepts are also the important factor that influences the concept formation. It not only directly influences the concept formation but also indirectly influences the concept formation through the students' cognizing.
Behind it, the factor of teaching effectiveness influences the concept formation less than the student's ability and concept difficulties from the analysis of the results. It is the direct influences that influences the concept formation and indirectly influence it through the students' cognizing.
Fourthly, the students' cognizing has zero influence on the concept formation, which makes us focus on.
引文
1林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞黄.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
1 Medin.D.L.(1989).concepts and conceptual structure.American Psychologist.44.1469-1481.
3.Lamberts,K..& Shanks,D.(Eds).(1997).Knowledge,concept,and categories.Cambridge.MA:MIT Press.
4杨治良.概念形成过程的一项实验研究.心理科学通讯,1985,(5):31-35
5母小勇.成人与中学生科学概念形成过程的四个对比实验.心理科学.2002,25(5):569-572
1林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
2邵志芳.思维心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社.2007
1 Bear,M.F.Conors,B.W.Paradiso,M.A.著.王建军主译.神经科学:探索脑(中文版).北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
1 姚泰.生理学(第六版).北京:人民卫生出版社.2004.
1姚泰.生理学(第六版).北京:人民卫生出版社.2004
1 Bear,M.F.Conors,B.W.Paradiso,M.A.著.王建军主译.神经科学:探索脑(中文版) 北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
1 邵志芳.思维心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社.2007.
1 Reber,A.S.& Allen.R.(1978).Analogic abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar learning:A functionalist interpretation.Cognition.6.pp.189-221.
1 Lamberts.K..& Shanks,D.(Eds).(1997) Knowledge.concept,and categories.Cambridge,MA:MIT Press.
1 杨治良.概念形成过程渐进---突变过程的实验性探索 心理学报,1986,(4):380-387.
1 林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
1 Allen S..(2004).Concept Formation:'Object' Attributes Dynamically Inhibited from Conscious Awareness.Journal of Integrative Neuroscience.3.(1):31-46.
1.曹孚.外国教育史.北京:人民教育出版社,1979:247-250.
2.辞海编辑委员会.辞海.上海:上海辞书出版社,1999:3745.
3.丛立新等.国内概念教学的研究现状及意义.教育科学研究,2006,(4):34-36.
4.陈琦、刘儒德.当代教育心理学.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997:86-93.
5.陈烜之主编.认知心理学.广州:广东高等教育出版社.2006.
6.陈志伟、贾秀英编.中学科学教育.杭州:浙江大学出版社,2001:32-50.
7.陈彦芬.学生前科学概念的特点及对理科教学的启.上海教育科研,2004,(10):44-47.
8.范黎明.结合学生气质特征进行数学教学.中学数学教学参考,1997,(1-2):14-16.
9.高晓冬.高中生物学概念知识的教学.贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版),2000,18(2):92-94.
10.胡继飞 郑晓蕙.生物教育心理学.广州:广东高等教育出版社.
11.胡玺丹等.Inspiration软件中概念图的4种基本模式及其在生物教学中的运用.生物学通报,2008,28(5):36-38.
12.黄兴丰.数学课堂活动的研究.华东师范大学博士论文.2008.
13.刘春燕、乔梁.行为主义与认知心理学对概念形成过程的理论评述.健康心理学杂志,2001,9(3):229-230.
14.李国胜.生物学概念教学六法.生物学教学,1998,(8):32.
15.林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
16.陆建身主编.生物教育展望.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:217-220.
17.母小勇.成人与中学生科学概念形成过程的四个对比实验.心理科学,2002,25(5):569-572.
18.母小勇、张莉华.一个科学概念形成过程的初步实验研究.心理科学,200023(5):620-621.
19.那英军.生物学科的概念教学浅议.吕梁高等专科学校学报,2005,21(1):71-72.
20.皮连生.学与教的心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1999:198.
21.彭聃龄.普通心理学.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1988:260-261.
22.曲亮生等.国外物理教育工作者关于物理概念教学的研究.学科教育,1999,(6):27-29.
23.任衍钢.浅谈生物学教学中概念的引入方法.生物学杂志,1994,(4):42-43.
24.任衍钢.初中生物学教学中概念的同化方法.生物学教学,1998,(6):13-14.
25.邵志芳.思维心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社.2007.
26.沈建华.运用知识分类学习论指导生物学概念教学.生物学教学,2003,28(1):22-23.
27.唐建军.浅谈复习中的概念教学.生物学教学,1997,(12):17-18.
28.王岳.小学科学教育中儿童概念学习问题探讨,课程·教材·教法,1994,(3):3-7.
29.徐学福.探究学习的内涵辨析.教育科学,2002,18(3):33-36.
30.徐辉.谈生物教学中对概念的处理方法.中学生物教学,2003,(10):20-21.
31.姚泰.生理学(第六版).北京:人民卫生出版社.2004.
32.杨治良.概念形成过程渐进--突变过程的实验性探索.心理学报,1986,(4):380-387.
33.杨治良.概念形成过程的一项实验研究.心理科学通讯,1985,(5):31-35.
34.游隆信.生物学概念的教学策略探析.生物学教学,2005,21(5):12-14.
35.袁维新.基于概念重建的教学模式与策略.课程·教材·教法,2007,27(11):15-19.
36.袁振国.当代教育学.北京:教育科学出版社,1998:64-70.
37.曾琦等.概念学习的心理学研究成果及新进展.教育科学研究,2006,(4):37-40.
38.张庆林、王永明、张仲明.假设检验思维过程中的启发式策略研究.心理学报,1997,29(1):29-36.
39.张庆林、杨春燕.假设检验思维策略的发展研究.心理科学,1998,21(1):13-16.
40.张庆林、司继伟.大学生形成析取概念的假设检验策略研究.心理学报,1999,31(4):397-404.
41.张秋玲.我国生物概念教学二十年.教育科学研究,2006,(4):51-54.
42.朱智贤主编.心理学大词典.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1989:208-209.
43.钟以俊.现代学习原理与学法指导.北京:中国科学技术出版社,1995:56-58.
44.周新民.浅谈生物学知识中的概念教学.中学生物学,2003,(1):16.
45.郑晓蕙主编.生物课程与教学论.杭州:浙江教育出版社,2003.64-94.
46.郑美琴.探究性学习在生物概念教学中的应用.福建教学研究,2003,(8).
47.Bear,M.F.Conors,B.W.Paradiso,M.A.著.神经科学:探索脑(中文版).北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
48.Kathleen M.Galotti著,吴国宏等译.认知心理学.西安:陕西师范大学出版社. 2005.
49.Allen S.,(2004).Concept Formation:'Object' Attributes Dynamically Inhibited from Conscious Awareness.Journal of Integrative Neuroscience,3,(1):31-46.
50.Abelson,R.P.,& I_alljee,M.G.(1988).Knowledge-structures and causal explanation.In D.J.Hilton(Ed.),Contemporary science and natural explanation:Commonsense conceptions of causality(pp.175-202).
51.Anderson,J.R.(1988).The place of cognitive architectures in a rational analyses.In The Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society(pp.1-10).Montreal,Canada:University of Montreal.
52.Arkes,H.R.,& Harkness,A.R.(1980).Effect of making a diagnosis on subsequent recognition of symptoms.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Learning and Memory,6,568-575.
53.Armstrong,S.L.,Gleitman,L.R.,& Gleitman,H.(1983).What some concepts might not be.Cognition.13,263-308.
54.Asch,S.E.,& Zukier,H.(1984).Thinking about persons.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,,46,1230-1240.
55.Ashby,F.G.,& Lee,W.W.(1991).Predicting similarity and categorization from identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,120,150-172.
56.Barr,R.A.,& Caplan,L.J.(1987).Category representations and their implications for category structure.Memory and Cognition,15,397-418.
57.Barsalou,L.W.(1983).Ad hoc categories.Memory and Cognition,11,211-227.
58.Barsalou,L.W.(1985).Ideals,central tendency,and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory and Cognition,11,629-654.
59.Barsalou,L.W.(1987).The instability of graded structure:Implications for the nature of concepts.In U.Neisser(Ed.),Concepts and conceptual development:The cological and intellectual factors in categorization(pp.101-140).Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press.
60.Barsalou,L.W.(1989).Intra-concept similarity and its implications for inter-concept similarity.In S.Vosniadou & A.Ortony(Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning(pp.76-121).Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press.
61.Barsalou,L.W.,& Billman,D.(1988,April).Systematicity and semantic ambiguity.Paper presented at a workshop on semantic ambiguity,Adelphi University.
62.Barsalou,L.W.,&Medin,D.L.(1986).Concepts:Fixed definitions or dynamic context-dependent representations? Cahiers de Psychologic Cognitive,6,187-202.
63.Bellezza,E S.(1984).Reliability of retrieval from semantic memory:Noun meanings.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,22,377-380.
64.Biederman,I.(1985).Human image understanding:Recent research and a theory.Computer Fision,Graphics,and Image Processing,32,29-83.
65.Biederman,I.(1987).Recognition-by-componentsA:theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review,94,115-147.
66.Berryman.R.,Cumming.W.W.,Cohen.L.R.& Johnson.D.F.(1965).Acquisition and transfer of simultaneous oddity.Psychological Reports.17,767-775.
67.Botel,C.,Linden,J.,Roelofs,E.& Erkens,G..(2002).Collaborative Concept Mapping: Provoking and Supporting Meaningful Discourse.Theory into practice, 41(1):40-47.
68.Bourne, L.E., et al:Cognitive Processes.1979.
69.Brooks, L.R.Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances.Cognition and categorization, 1978:169-211
70.Bruner, J.S., Goodnow, J.& Austin:A study of thinking.New York:Wiley and Sons, 1956.
71.Brooks, L., Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances.Cognition and categorization, 1978.
72.Cantor, N., & Mischel, W.(1977).Traits as prototypes:Effects on recognition memory.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 38-48.
73.Carter.D.E., & Eckerman.D.A.(1975), Symbolic matching by pigeons:Rate of learning complex discriminations predicted from simple discriminations.Science.187, 662-664.
74.Doyle, W.(1984).Classroom organization and management.In Morlin, C, &Wittrock (Eds), Handbook of research of teaching.(3rd.).New York:Macmillan.
75.Doyle, W.(1984).How Order is achieved in Classrooms:an Interim Report, Journal of curriculum studies, 6(3):259-277.
76.Fodor, J.A.(1998).Concepts:Where cognitive science went wrong.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
77.Franks, B.(1995).Sense generation:A “quasi-classical” approach to concepts and concept combination.Cognitive Science, 19(4), 441-506.
78.Franks, B., & Braisby, N.(1997).Concepts in action:The evolutionary role of concepts and similarity.In M.Ramscar, U.Hahn, E.Cambouropolos, & H.Pain (Eds.), Proceedings of SimCat 97:Interdisciplinary workshop on similarity and categorization.Edinburgh.Scotland:Edinburgh University Press:91-98
79.Karolina(O｜¨)sterlind(2005).Concept formation in environmental education:14-year olds'work on the intensified greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone layer.International Journal of Science Education,27(6):891-908
80.Keil,E.C.,(1986).The acquisition of natural kind and artifact terms.In W.Demopoulos &A.Marras(Eds.),Language learning and concept acquisition.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.
81.Klein,S.B.Learning:Principles and applications.New York:McGraw-Hill,1978
82.Knowlton,B.J.,& Squire,L.R.(1993).The leaming of categories:Parallel brain systems for item memory and category knowledge.Science,262,1747-1749.
83.Komatsu,L.K.(1992).Recent views of conceptual structure.Psychological Bulletin,112,500-526.
84.Kuo-en Chang,et al(2002).The Effect of Concept Mapping to Enhance Text Comprehension and Summarization.The Journal of Experimental Education,71(1),5-23.
85.Lamberts,K.,& Shanks,D.(Eds).(1997).Knowledge,concept,and categories.Cambridge,MA:MIT Press.
86.McCloskey,M.E.,& Glucksberg,S.(1978).Natural categories:Well defined or fuzzy sets?Memory and cognition,6,462-472.
87.Medin,D.L.(1989).concepts and conceptual structure.American Psychologist,44,1469-1481.
88.Medin,D.L.,& Smith,E.E.,(1984).Concept and concept formation.Annual Review of Psychology,35,113-138.
89.Medin,D.L.& Ortony,A.(1989).Psychological essentialism.In S.Vosniadou & A.Ortny (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning(pp.179-195).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
90.Mervis,C.B.(1980).Category structure and the development categorization.In R.Spiro,B.C.Bruce,& W.F.Brewer(Eds.),Theoretical issues in reading comprehension(pp.279-307).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.
91.Millward,R.B.,Models of concept formation.Aptitude,learning,and instruction.Vol.2.1980.
92.Murphy,G.L.& Medin,D.L.(1985).The role of theories in conceptual coherence.Psychological Review,92:289-316.
93.Nam Sang-don(1995).The effects of cooperative versus individual computer-based instruction and learning style on concept learning,Florida State University.
94.Nosofsky,R.M.& Johansen,M.K.(2000).Exemplar-based random walk model of speed categorization.Psychological Review,104,266-300.
95.Nosofsky,R.M.,& Zaki,S.R.(1998).Dissociation between categorization and recognition in amnesic and normal individuals:An exemplar-based interpretation.Psychological Science,9,247-255.
96.Nosofsky,R.M.,& Zaki,S.R.(1999).Math modeling,neuropsychology,and category learning:Response to B.Knowlton(1999).Trends in cognitive Science,3,125-126
97.Poldrack,R.A.,Prabhankaran,V.& Seger,C.A.et al,(1999).Striatal activation during acquisition of a cognitive skill.Neuropsychology,13(4),564-574.
98.Posner,M.I.,& Keele,S.W.(1968).On the genesis of abstract ideas.Journal of Experimental Psychology,77,353-363.
99.Putnam,H.(1975).The meaning of"meaning".In Mind,Language and Reality(Vol.2):Philosophical Papers.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
100.Reber,A.S.& Allen,R.(1978).Analogic abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar learning:A functionalist interpretation.Cognition,6,pp.189-221.
101.Reber,P.J.,Stark,C.E.& Squire,L.R.(1998).cortical areas supporting category learning identified using functional MRI.Proceeding of the National Academy of Science USA,95,747-750.
102.Restle.F.,The selection in cue learning.Psychological Review,1976,69,329-343.
103.Rosch,E.(1973).On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories.In T.E.Moore(Ed.),Cognitive development and the acquisition of language(pp.111-144).New York:Academic Press.
104.Schwarz,B.B.,Neuman,Y.,Gil,J.;& Ilya,M.(2003).Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity.Journal of the Learning Sciences,12,221-258.
105.Schroth,Marvin L.A comparison of concept formation strategies in pattern recognition tasks.Journal of General Psychology;1990,117(3):7-303
106.Schroth,Marvin L.The Effects of Type and Amount of Pretraining on Transfer in Concept Formation.Journal of General Psychology;2000,127(3):9-261
107.She,Hsiao-Ching,(2004).Fostering radical conceptual change through Dual-Situated Learning Model.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41(2),.pp.142-164.
108.Smith,J.D.,& Kemler,D.G.(1984).Overall similarity in adults' classification:The child in all of us.Journal of Experiment Psychology:General,113,137-159.
109.Smith,E.E.,& Medin,D.L.(1981).Categories and concepts.Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press.
110.Smith,E.E,& Shoben,E.J.,& Rips,L.J.(1974).Structure and process in semantic memory:A feature model for semantic decisions.Psychological Review,81,214-241.
111.Squire,L.R.& Knowlton,B.J.(1995).Learning about categories in the absence of memory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA,92,12470-12474.
112.Thomas W.Bean et al(1990).Learning Concepts from Biology Text Through Pictrial Analogies and an Analogies Study Guide.Journal of Education Research.83(4):233-237
113.Wittgenstein,L.(1953).Philosophical investigations.New York:Macmillan.
114.Wiley,J.,& Voss,J.F.(1999).Constructing arguments from multiple sources:Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text.Journal of Educational Psychology,91,301-311.
1 Medin.D.L.(1989).concepts and conceptual structure.American Psychologist.44.1469-1481.
3.Lamberts,K..& Shanks,D.(Eds).(1997).Knowledge,concept,and categories.Cambridge.MA:MIT Press.
4杨治良.概念形成过程的一项实验研究.心理科学通讯,1985,(5):31-35
5母小勇.成人与中学生科学概念形成过程的四个对比实验.心理科学.2002,25(5):569-572
1林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
2邵志芳.思维心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社.2007
1 Bear,M.F.Conors,B.W.Paradiso,M.A.著.王建军主译.神经科学:探索脑(中文版).北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
1 姚泰.生理学(第六版).北京:人民卫生出版社.2004.
1姚泰.生理学(第六版).北京:人民卫生出版社.2004
1 Bear,M.F.Conors,B.W.Paradiso,M.A.著.王建军主译.神经科学:探索脑(中文版) 北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
1 邵志芳.思维心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社.2007.
1 Reber,A.S.& Allen.R.(1978).Analogic abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar learning:A functionalist interpretation.Cognition.6.pp.189-221.
1 Lamberts.K..& Shanks,D.(Eds).(1997) Knowledge.concept,and categories.Cambridge,MA:MIT Press.
1 杨治良.概念形成过程渐进---突变过程的实验性探索 心理学报,1986,(4):380-387.
1 林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
1 Allen S..(2004).Concept Formation:'Object' Attributes Dynamically Inhibited from Conscious Awareness.Journal of Integrative Neuroscience.3.(1):31-46.
1.曹孚.外国教育史.北京:人民教育出版社,1979:247-250.
2.辞海编辑委员会.辞海.上海:上海辞书出版社,1999:3745.
3.丛立新等.国内概念教学的研究现状及意义.教育科学研究,2006,(4):34-36.
4.陈琦、刘儒德.当代教育心理学.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997:86-93.
5.陈烜之主编.认知心理学.广州:广东高等教育出版社.2006.
6.陈志伟、贾秀英编.中学科学教育.杭州:浙江大学出版社,2001:32-50.
7.陈彦芬.学生前科学概念的特点及对理科教学的启.上海教育科研,2004,(10):44-47.
8.范黎明.结合学生气质特征进行数学教学.中学数学教学参考,1997,(1-2):14-16.
9.高晓冬.高中生物学概念知识的教学.贵州师范大学学报(自然科学版),2000,18(2):92-94.
10.胡继飞 郑晓蕙.生物教育心理学.广州:广东高等教育出版社.
11.胡玺丹等.Inspiration软件中概念图的4种基本模式及其在生物教学中的运用.生物学通报,2008,28(5):36-38.
12.黄兴丰.数学课堂活动的研究.华东师范大学博士论文.2008.
13.刘春燕、乔梁.行为主义与认知心理学对概念形成过程的理论评述.健康心理学杂志,2001,9(3):229-230.
14.李国胜.生物学概念教学六法.生物学教学,1998,(8):32.
15.林崇德、杨治良、黄希庭主编.心理学大辞典.上海:上海教育出版社.2003:378.
16.陆建身主编.生物教育展望.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001:217-220.
17.母小勇.成人与中学生科学概念形成过程的四个对比实验.心理科学,2002,25(5):569-572.
18.母小勇、张莉华.一个科学概念形成过程的初步实验研究.心理科学,200023(5):620-621.
19.那英军.生物学科的概念教学浅议.吕梁高等专科学校学报,2005,21(1):71-72.
20.皮连生.学与教的心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社,1999:198.
21.彭聃龄.普通心理学.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1988:260-261.
22.曲亮生等.国外物理教育工作者关于物理概念教学的研究.学科教育,1999,(6):27-29.
23.任衍钢.浅谈生物学教学中概念的引入方法.生物学杂志,1994,(4):42-43.
24.任衍钢.初中生物学教学中概念的同化方法.生物学教学,1998,(6):13-14.
25.邵志芳.思维心理学.上海:华东师范大学出版社.2007.
26.沈建华.运用知识分类学习论指导生物学概念教学.生物学教学,2003,28(1):22-23.
27.唐建军.浅谈复习中的概念教学.生物学教学,1997,(12):17-18.
28.王岳.小学科学教育中儿童概念学习问题探讨,课程·教材·教法,1994,(3):3-7.
29.徐学福.探究学习的内涵辨析.教育科学,2002,18(3):33-36.
30.徐辉.谈生物教学中对概念的处理方法.中学生物教学,2003,(10):20-21.
31.姚泰.生理学(第六版).北京:人民卫生出版社.2004.
32.杨治良.概念形成过程渐进--突变过程的实验性探索.心理学报,1986,(4):380-387.
33.杨治良.概念形成过程的一项实验研究.心理科学通讯,1985,(5):31-35.
34.游隆信.生物学概念的教学策略探析.生物学教学,2005,21(5):12-14.
35.袁维新.基于概念重建的教学模式与策略.课程·教材·教法,2007,27(11):15-19.
36.袁振国.当代教育学.北京:教育科学出版社,1998:64-70.
37.曾琦等.概念学习的心理学研究成果及新进展.教育科学研究,2006,(4):37-40.
38.张庆林、王永明、张仲明.假设检验思维过程中的启发式策略研究.心理学报,1997,29(1):29-36.
39.张庆林、杨春燕.假设检验思维策略的发展研究.心理科学,1998,21(1):13-16.
40.张庆林、司继伟.大学生形成析取概念的假设检验策略研究.心理学报,1999,31(4):397-404.
41.张秋玲.我国生物概念教学二十年.教育科学研究,2006,(4):51-54.
42.朱智贤主编.心理学大词典.北京:北京师范大学出版社,1989:208-209.
43.钟以俊.现代学习原理与学法指导.北京:中国科学技术出版社,1995:56-58.
44.周新民.浅谈生物学知识中的概念教学.中学生物学,2003,(1):16.
45.郑晓蕙主编.生物课程与教学论.杭州:浙江教育出版社,2003.64-94.
46.郑美琴.探究性学习在生物概念教学中的应用.福建教学研究,2003,(8).
47.Bear,M.F.Conors,B.W.Paradiso,M.A.著.神经科学:探索脑(中文版).北京:高等教育出版社,2004.
48.Kathleen M.Galotti著,吴国宏等译.认知心理学.西安:陕西师范大学出版社. 2005.
49.Allen S.,(2004).Concept Formation:'Object' Attributes Dynamically Inhibited from Conscious Awareness.Journal of Integrative Neuroscience,3,(1):31-46.
50.Abelson,R.P.,& I_alljee,M.G.(1988).Knowledge-structures and causal explanation.In D.J.Hilton(Ed.),Contemporary science and natural explanation:Commonsense conceptions of causality(pp.175-202).
51.Anderson,J.R.(1988).The place of cognitive architectures in a rational analyses.In The Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society(pp.1-10).Montreal,Canada:University of Montreal.
52.Arkes,H.R.,& Harkness,A.R.(1980).Effect of making a diagnosis on subsequent recognition of symptoms.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Human Learning and Memory,6,568-575.
53.Armstrong,S.L.,Gleitman,L.R.,& Gleitman,H.(1983).What some concepts might not be.Cognition.13,263-308.
54.Asch,S.E.,& Zukier,H.(1984).Thinking about persons.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,,46,1230-1240.
55.Ashby,F.G.,& Lee,W.W.(1991).Predicting similarity and categorization from identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology:General,120,150-172.
56.Barr,R.A.,& Caplan,L.J.(1987).Category representations and their implications for category structure.Memory and Cognition,15,397-418.
57.Barsalou,L.W.(1983).Ad hoc categories.Memory and Cognition,11,211-227.
58.Barsalou,L.W.(1985).Ideals,central tendency,and frequency of instantiation as determinants of graded structure in categories.Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning,Memory and Cognition,11,629-654.
59.Barsalou,L.W.(1987).The instability of graded structure:Implications for the nature of concepts.In U.Neisser(Ed.),Concepts and conceptual development:The cological and intellectual factors in categorization(pp.101-140).Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press.
60.Barsalou,L.W.(1989).Intra-concept similarity and its implications for inter-concept similarity.In S.Vosniadou & A.Ortony(Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning(pp.76-121).Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press.
61.Barsalou,L.W.,& Billman,D.(1988,April).Systematicity and semantic ambiguity.Paper presented at a workshop on semantic ambiguity,Adelphi University.
62.Barsalou,L.W.,&Medin,D.L.(1986).Concepts:Fixed definitions or dynamic context-dependent representations? Cahiers de Psychologic Cognitive,6,187-202.
63.Bellezza,E S.(1984).Reliability of retrieval from semantic memory:Noun meanings.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,22,377-380.
64.Biederman,I.(1985).Human image understanding:Recent research and a theory.Computer Fision,Graphics,and Image Processing,32,29-83.
65.Biederman,I.(1987).Recognition-by-componentsA:theory of human image understanding.Psychological Review,94,115-147.
66.Berryman.R.,Cumming.W.W.,Cohen.L.R.& Johnson.D.F.(1965).Acquisition and transfer of simultaneous oddity.Psychological Reports.17,767-775.
67.Botel,C.,Linden,J.,Roelofs,E.& Erkens,G..(2002).Collaborative Concept Mapping: Provoking and Supporting Meaningful Discourse.Theory into practice, 41(1):40-47.
68.Bourne, L.E., et al:Cognitive Processes.1979.
69.Brooks, L.R.Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances.Cognition and categorization, 1978:169-211
70.Bruner, J.S., Goodnow, J.& Austin:A study of thinking.New York:Wiley and Sons, 1956.
71.Brooks, L., Nonanalytic concept formation and memory for instances.Cognition and categorization, 1978.
72.Cantor, N., & Mischel, W.(1977).Traits as prototypes:Effects on recognition memory.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 38-48.
73.Carter.D.E., & Eckerman.D.A.(1975), Symbolic matching by pigeons:Rate of learning complex discriminations predicted from simple discriminations.Science.187, 662-664.
74.Doyle, W.(1984).Classroom organization and management.In Morlin, C, &Wittrock (Eds), Handbook of research of teaching.(3rd.).New York:Macmillan.
75.Doyle, W.(1984).How Order is achieved in Classrooms:an Interim Report, Journal of curriculum studies, 6(3):259-277.
76.Fodor, J.A.(1998).Concepts:Where cognitive science went wrong.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
77.Franks, B.(1995).Sense generation:A “quasi-classical” approach to concepts and concept combination.Cognitive Science, 19(4), 441-506.
78.Franks, B., & Braisby, N.(1997).Concepts in action:The evolutionary role of concepts and similarity.In M.Ramscar, U.Hahn, E.Cambouropolos, & H.Pain (Eds.), Proceedings of SimCat 97:Interdisciplinary workshop on similarity and categorization.Edinburgh.Scotland:Edinburgh University Press:91-98
79.Karolina(O｜¨)sterlind(2005).Concept formation in environmental education:14-year olds'work on the intensified greenhouse effect and the depletion of the ozone layer.International Journal of Science Education,27(6):891-908
80.Keil,E.C.,(1986).The acquisition of natural kind and artifact terms.In W.Demopoulos &A.Marras(Eds.),Language learning and concept acquisition.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.
81.Klein,S.B.Learning:Principles and applications.New York:McGraw-Hill,1978
82.Knowlton,B.J.,& Squire,L.R.(1993).The leaming of categories:Parallel brain systems for item memory and category knowledge.Science,262,1747-1749.
83.Komatsu,L.K.(1992).Recent views of conceptual structure.Psychological Bulletin,112,500-526.
84.Kuo-en Chang,et al(2002).The Effect of Concept Mapping to Enhance Text Comprehension and Summarization.The Journal of Experimental Education,71(1),5-23.
85.Lamberts,K.,& Shanks,D.(Eds).(1997).Knowledge,concept,and categories.Cambridge,MA:MIT Press.
86.McCloskey,M.E.,& Glucksberg,S.(1978).Natural categories:Well defined or fuzzy sets?Memory and cognition,6,462-472.
87.Medin,D.L.(1989).concepts and conceptual structure.American Psychologist,44,1469-1481.
88.Medin,D.L.,& Smith,E.E.,(1984).Concept and concept formation.Annual Review of Psychology,35,113-138.
89.Medin,D.L.& Ortony,A.(1989).Psychological essentialism.In S.Vosniadou & A.Ortny (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning(pp.179-195).Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
90.Mervis,C.B.(1980).Category structure and the development categorization.In R.Spiro,B.C.Bruce,& W.F.Brewer(Eds.),Theoretical issues in reading comprehension(pp.279-307).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.
91.Millward,R.B.,Models of concept formation.Aptitude,learning,and instruction.Vol.2.1980.
92.Murphy,G.L.& Medin,D.L.(1985).The role of theories in conceptual coherence.Psychological Review,92:289-316.
93.Nam Sang-don(1995).The effects of cooperative versus individual computer-based instruction and learning style on concept learning,Florida State University.
94.Nosofsky,R.M.& Johansen,M.K.(2000).Exemplar-based random walk model of speed categorization.Psychological Review,104,266-300.
95.Nosofsky,R.M.,& Zaki,S.R.(1998).Dissociation between categorization and recognition in amnesic and normal individuals:An exemplar-based interpretation.Psychological Science,9,247-255.
96.Nosofsky,R.M.,& Zaki,S.R.(1999).Math modeling,neuropsychology,and category learning:Response to B.Knowlton(1999).Trends in cognitive Science,3,125-126
97.Poldrack,R.A.,Prabhankaran,V.& Seger,C.A.et al,(1999).Striatal activation during acquisition of a cognitive skill.Neuropsychology,13(4),564-574.
98.Posner,M.I.,& Keele,S.W.(1968).On the genesis of abstract ideas.Journal of Experimental Psychology,77,353-363.
99.Putnam,H.(1975).The meaning of"meaning".In Mind,Language and Reality(Vol.2):Philosophical Papers.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
100.Reber,A.S.& Allen,R.(1978).Analogic abstraction strategies in synthetic grammar learning:A functionalist interpretation.Cognition,6,pp.189-221.
101.Reber,P.J.,Stark,C.E.& Squire,L.R.(1998).cortical areas supporting category learning identified using functional MRI.Proceeding of the National Academy of Science USA,95,747-750.
102.Restle.F.,The selection in cue learning.Psychological Review,1976,69,329-343.
103.Rosch,E.(1973).On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories.In T.E.Moore(Ed.),Cognitive development and the acquisition of language(pp.111-144).New York:Academic Press.
104.Schwarz,B.B.,Neuman,Y.,Gil,J.;& Ilya,M.(2003).Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity.Journal of the Learning Sciences,12,221-258.
105.Schroth,Marvin L.A comparison of concept formation strategies in pattern recognition tasks.Journal of General Psychology;1990,117(3):7-303
106.Schroth,Marvin L.The Effects of Type and Amount of Pretraining on Transfer in Concept Formation.Journal of General Psychology;2000,127(3):9-261
107.She,Hsiao-Ching,(2004).Fostering radical conceptual change through Dual-Situated Learning Model.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41(2),.pp.142-164.
108.Smith,J.D.,& Kemler,D.G.(1984).Overall similarity in adults' classification:The child in all of us.Journal of Experiment Psychology:General,113,137-159.
109.Smith,E.E.,& Medin,D.L.(1981).Categories and concepts.Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press.
110.Smith,E.E,& Shoben,E.J.,& Rips,L.J.(1974).Structure and process in semantic memory:A feature model for semantic decisions.Psychological Review,81,214-241.
111.Squire,L.R.& Knowlton,B.J.(1995).Learning about categories in the absence of memory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA,92,12470-12474.
112.Thomas W.Bean et al(1990).Learning Concepts from Biology Text Through Pictrial Analogies and an Analogies Study Guide.Journal of Education Research.83(4):233-237
113.Wittgenstein,L.(1953).Philosophical investigations.New York:Macmillan.
114.Wiley,J.,& Voss,J.F.(1999).Constructing arguments from multiple sources:Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text.Journal of Educational Psychology,91,301-311.