[[alternative]]Experimental Studies of Knowledge Restructuring on Students'

[[abstract]]本研究從後實證哲學的科學發展觀探討「狹義的異例」與「廣義的異例」 在科學發展過程的不同作用，以之作為研究學生科學社群對異例的認知與 論證之活動設計，並結合後實證哲學的建構論觀點、認知心理學的建構論 、及社會建構論等，來探究學生科學社群知識重建的動態發展。本研究以 高二自然組137位學生及大一理科127位學生為研究對象，以自編的「科學 知識重建」研究工具及「康乃爾批判思考測驗（Ｘ）級」評量工具，根據 「多向度臨床探究法」進行資料蒐集，並作質與量的統合分析。研究結果 發現學生科學社群對異例的認知與論證，其科學知識重建的歷程可區分成 底下六個階段：質疑、分辨、與瞭解異例現象；反省、判斷、與抉擇來自 人與物、人與自己、及人與人交互作用的各種訊息；透過外展推理或類比 推理法形成以範例為主導的輔助假說，或者提出異於範例的新假說；用演 繹法和歸納法使輔助假說或新假說合理化，或者據此批判他人提出的各種 假說；作理論的抉擇，形成具有影響力的「觀念共同體」；以及在具影響 力的「觀念共同體」的特性之作用下，進行科學知識的「弱重建」或「根 本的重建」。最後，據以提出在後續研究、科學學習、及科學教學等三方 面的討論與建議。 The purpose of this study was threefold: to differentiate the narrow and the wider definition of anomaly from to analyze their different functions in science development; to design experimental activities based on the narrow and the wider definition of anomaly to explore how students engaged in argument to anomalous scientific data; and to integrate postpositivist, constructivism, and social constructivism to understand the dynamic development model of knowledge of scientific student community. The subjects were science majors of 137 in grade 11 and 127 freshmen. The instruments used in this study included the Knowledge Restructuring Open Test on the method of multidimension clinical exploration and the Cornell Critical Thinking Test (Level X). The major finding of the study was that scientific student community restructed their knowledge with six stages: (1)to question, distinguish, and understand anomalous scientific data;(2)to reflect, judge, and decide the informations from the interaction of subject and object; (3)to use analogical reasoning formulating auxiliary hypotheses based on exemplar, or to use abductive reasoning formulating new hypotheses different to exemplar; (4)to use deduction and induction rationalizing auxiliary hypotheses or new hypotheses; (5)to give a decision for information selection, and formulate an effective community of opinions; (6)to make a weak restructur- ing or radical restructuring according to community of opinions. Based on the results, suggestions were made for future implementation. The purpose of this study was threefold: to differentiate the