Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
標題: 台中地區某國中國一學生線型函數及其圖形單元錯誤類型分析
Analysis of the Types of Errors Found in the Linear Functions and Figure Unit among Seventh-Grade Students-A Junior High School in Taichung City as an Example
作者: 張俊傑
Chun-Chieh Chang
關鍵字: 錯誤類型分析;函數;線型函數與圖形;analysis of the types of errors;functions;linear functions and figures
引用: 一、中文部分 九章出版社編輯部 (1995)。錯解辨析。台北:九章出版社。 李芳樂 (1993)。數學錯誤成因的探討。初等教育學報(香港),4(1),77-82。 李國偉(2012):TIMSS 2011耐人尋味的問題。科學人,132期,25。 林義雄、陳澤民(譯) (1985)。數學學習心理學(原作者:R. R. Skemp)。台北: 九章出版社。 秦麗花 (1995)。國小數學學障兒童數學解題錯誤類型分析。特殊教育季刊,55 期,33-38。 郭丁熒 (1992)。追根究底談錯誤-有關學生錯誤的二十個問題。國教之友, 44(2),17-23。 郭靜姿、許慧如、劉貞宜、張馨仁與范成芳 (2001)。數學學習障礙之鑑定工具 發展與應用研究。特殊教育研究學刊,21期,135-163。 張新仁 (1989)。學習策略訓練之初探。教育文萃,18期,86-94。 張鳳燕 (1991)。教導心理學微觀。師友月刊,284期,24-29。 張景媛 (1994)。數學文字題錯誤概念分析及學生建構數學概念的研究。國立臺 灣師範大學教育心理與輔導學系教育心理學報,27期,175-200。 陳麗玲 (1993)。國小數學學習障礙學生計算錯誤類型分析之研究。國立彰化師 範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文。未出版,彰化市。 陳麗玲 (1995)。國小數學學習障礙學生計算錯誤類型之分析研究。特殊教育學 報,10期,125-172。 康軒出版社 (2017)。國民中學數學第二冊課本、習作。 楊弢亮 (1997)。中學數學教學法通論。台北:九章出版社。 葉偉文譯(1999)。幹嘛學數學?台北市:天下文化。 蘇慧娟 (1998)。高雄地區國二學生方根概念及運算錯誤類型之分析研究。國立 高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文。未出版,高雄市。 二、英文部分 Ashlock, R, B. (1990). Error Patterns in Computation: A Semi-Programmed Approach (5th ed.) Columbus, Ohio: Merrill. Baxter, P., & Dole, S. (1990). Research Supplement Working with the Brain, Not Against It: Correction of Systematic Errors in Subtraction. British Journal of Special Education, 17(1), 19-22. Brown, J. S. & Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic Models for Procedural Bugs in Basic Mathematical Skills. Cognitive Science, 2(2), 155-192. Brown, J. S., & VanLehn, K. (1980). Repair Theory: A Generative of Theory of Bugs in Procedural Skills. Cognitive Science, 4, 379-426. Dewey, J. (1910). How We Think. Boston: D. C. Heath and Co. Gagne, R. M. (1985). The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Ginsburg, H. P. (1989). Childrn's Arithmetic : How They Learn It and How You Teach It (2nd ed.). Austin, Texas : PRO-ED. Marshall, S. P.(1983). Schema Knowledge Structures for Representing and Understanding Arithmetic Story Problems. First Year Technical Report, San Diego State University,California, Department of Psychology. (ERIC No. ED 281716). Maurer, S. B. (1987). New Knowledge about Errors and New Views about Learners: What They Mean to Educators and More Educators Would Like to Know. Mayer, R. E. (1985). Educational Psychology: Cognitive Approach. NY: Freeman. Mayer, R. E. (1992). Thinking, Problem Solving, Cognition, 387-414. New York: W. H.Freeman and Company. Pines, A. L. (1980). A Model for Program Development and Evaluation: The Formative Role of Summative Evaluation and Research in Science Education. Paper Presented at the Annual Conference of the International Congress for Individualized Industruction(12th, Winds or, Canada). Pines, A. L., & West, L. H. T. (1986). Conceptual Understanding and Science Learning: An Interpretation of Research Within a Sources-of-Knowledge Framework. Science Education, 70, pp. 583-604. Polya, G. (1945). How To Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method, Princeton, USA,Princeton University Press. Radatz, H. (1979). Error Analysis in Mathematics Education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education , 10, 163-172. Resnick, L. B., Nesher, P., Leonard, F., Magone, M., Omanson, S., & Peled, I. (1989). Conceptual Bases of Arithmetic Errors: The Case of Decimal Fractions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education , 20, 8-27. Schoenfeld, A. (1985). Mathematical Problem Solving. New York: Academic Press. Schwarzenberger, R. L. E. (1984). The Importance of Mistakes: The Mathematical Gazette, 68(445), 159-172. Shuell, T.J. (1990). Phases of Meaningful Learning. Review of Educational Research, 60,531-547. Siegel, A. W. (1981). The Externalization of Cognitive Maps by Children and Adults: In Search of Ways to Ask Better Questions. In L. S. Liben, A. H. Patterson, & N.Newcombe (Eds.), Spatial Representation and Behavior Across the Life Span, New York: Academic Press. Skemp, R. R. (1971). The Psychology of Learning Mathematics. Harmondsworth, Penguin Books. Stein, S. K. (1996). Strength in Numbers: Discovering the Joy and Power of Mathematics in Everyday Life. New York: Wiley. Sutton, C., & West, L. (1982). Investigating Children's Existing Ideas about Science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 230424). Whitney, H. (1985). Taking Responsibility in School Mathematics Education in L. Streefland(Ed), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vo1.2,pp.123-141). Utrecht: State University of Utrecht.
一、 學生解「線型函數與圖形」的錯誤類型
二、 學生解「線型函數與圖形」的錯誤原因

The main purpose of this study is to explore the types of errors found among seventh-grade students who use the Kang Hsuan version of junior high mathematics after learning the 'Linear Functions and Figure unit' and analyze the causes of the errors. The analysis method in this study is conducted firstly by finding the most prevalent types of errors made based on the types of errors that the students actually make in each question. Then, an in-depth analysis of the causes of the errors is conducted, and in accordance with the topic design structure, all the test questions are explored in depth from seven different aspects. These seven aspects are as follows: interpretation of the meaning of the question, analysis of the test questions, commonly mistaken ideas, statistics of the test questions, examples of the correct equations by the students, examples of the students' wrong equations, and the types of errors and the analysis of the causes of the errors.
The researcher(s) divided the test paper into 15 questions with a total of 30 sub-questions. After in-depth analysis and assortment of the types of errors and the causes of the errors for each sub-question, the types of mistakes students often make in 'Linear Functions and Figure' unit questions and causes are sorted out. The analysis is as follows:
A. The types of errors made by the students when answering Linear Functions and Figure questions
1. The student is unclear about the question's meaning
2. The student does not understand linear functions
3. The student made an error in calculation
4. The student does not understand how to apply the nature of the function
5. The student has a poor ability in expressing the equation
B. The causes of students' errors in Linear Functions and Figure questions
(A) Poor mathematical foundation
1. The student's expression of the mathematical equation does not fit the definition
2. The student does not understand mathematical rules
3. Parentheses were not included when using the four arithmetic calculations
4. The mathematical operation does not match the equation specified
5. Carelessness when calculating
(B) Trouble with reading the question
1. The student has trouble with certain word meanings
2. The student misunderstood the question
(C) Lack of concepts or fragmentary concepts
1. The student does not understand independent/dependent variables
2. The student cannot decipher functions
3. The student does not know how to apply functions
4. The student did not answer according to the question's specifications
Rights: 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,2021-08-28起公開。
Appears in Collections:應用數學系所

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat Existing users please Login
nchu-107-5105053003-1.pdf6.51 MBAdobe PDFThis file is only available in the university internal network    Request a copy
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.