摘 要
本研究之研究目的在於探討「小老師分組教學」模式，對於國小學童之數學學習態度與數學學習成就之影響，以及家長對此教學策略的觀感。本研究以準實驗研究法為主，另輔以問卷調查與訪談，研究樣本為新竹市某國小二年級兩個班級之學童。
本研究主要發現如下：（一）學童經過「小老師分組教學」後，確實能感受到數學學習所帶來的樂趣與挑戰，並能將數學應用於生活中，也更願意多花時間學習數學；（二）在「小老師分組教學」模式下，學童更加主動尋找學習素材，課後亦會複習。當他們遇到數學困難時，更能主動思考如何自行解決，並勇於提出疑問，尋求適當的協助，而對於數學作業的認真和用心，也有明顯且正向的提升；（三）學童在「小老師分組教學」的模式下，更能主動發表意見並樂於指導他人，也能接受他人的質疑，並進行澄清；（四）「小老師分組教學」對學童之數學學習成就有顯著的提升，且顯著優於「學生分組學習」。對於性別不同或程度不同之學童亦皆能有所助益；（五）多數家長對於「小老師分組教學」方式，均持贊成與肯定的觀點，並認同學童在數學學習態度與學習成就上的進步。

Abstract
The purpose of this research was to discuss the effects of “small group lectured by students” on primary school students' attitudes and achievements in learning mathematics, as well as the parents' impressions towards such teaching strategies. The research was mainly based on a quasi-experiment supported by surveys and interviews. The research was based on grade two students from a chosen primary school in Hsinchu.
The main findings from the research are as follows: (1) With the “small group lectured by students”,students began to enjoy the challenge of learning math and were able to apply it in their daily lives, thus were more willing to spend more time studying the subject. (2) With the “small group lectured by students”,students were more willing to take the initiative in seeking other learning materials as well as reviewing what they were taught after class. When they were confronted with difficult mathematical problems, they were more capable of actively thinking for themselves on how to solve the problem and were more confident in asking questions when seeking help. There was also an obvious and positive improvement in completion of homework. (3) With the “small group lectured by students”,students took the initiative to express their opinions more often and were happy to guide others in answering other students' questions and clarifying answers. (4) With the “small group lectured by students”, there was an obvious improvement in students’ mathematical achievements, which was clearly better than “student group studies”. This was helpful for students of both genders and different levels. (5) The majority of parents noticed improvements in students' attitudes and achievements in learning math and approved of this teaching method.

參考文獻
一、中文部分
王振德（民88）：資源教室方案。台北：心理。
吳明清（民87）：教學方法的選用。載於黃政傑主編：教材教法的問題與趨勢。台北：師大書苑。
吳英長（民79）：討論教學法。載於黃光雄主編：教學理論。高雄：復文圖書出版社。
吳清源（民92）：討論式教學的特質與成效分析。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文。
林清山（民75）：教學的心理學基礎。載於中國教育學會主編：有效教學研究。台北：台灣書店。
林佩璇、黃政傑（民85）：合作學習。台北：五南。
林寶山（民85）：討論教學的技巧。載於黃政傑主編：多元化的教學方法。台北：師大書苑。
林寶山（民87）：教學原理與技巧。台北：五南。
胡芳智（民92）：臨床視導模式對國小數學教師教學行為之影響。國立新竹師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
洪榮昭（民82）：不同學習型態的學生在發現式學習CAI環境中的學習成效。國科會。
高廣孚（民77）：教學原理。台北：五南圖書。
黃文聖（民90）：國小學童在LOGO學習環境中數學學習與解題之研究。國立新竹師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
黃光雄（民80）：教學原理。台北：師大書苑。
黃政傑（民86）：教學原理。台北：師大書苑。
陳淑敏（民85）：從社會互動看皮雅傑與維高斯基的理論及其對幼教的啟示。 皮雅傑與維高斯基的對話手冊。台北市立師範學院。
陳峰津（民82）：教育方法論。台北：三民書局。
陳義勳（民89）：國小高年級自然科學建構主義教學之研究分析。國科會。
國立編譯館（民86）：國民小學數學教學指引第四冊。國立編譯館主編。
教育部（民82）：國民小學課程標準。台北：教育部。
教育部（民88）：特殊教育課程教材教法實施辦法。台北：教育部。
教育部（民90）：九年一貫課程數學領域暫行綱要。台北：教育部。
甯自強（民81）：藉由解題活動了解兒童及促進兒童增加對數學的了解。教師之友，32卷5期，p45-p47。
甯自強（民82）：建構式教學法的教學觀~由根本建構主義的觀點來看。國教學報，5期，p33-p41。
甯自強（1993）：國小數學科新課程的精神及改革動向~由建構主義的觀點來看。科學教育學刊，第1卷，第1期，p101-p108。
羅昭強（2001）：數學情意態度問卷的設計及解讀。發表於國立屏東師範學院學術研討會。
羅昭強（2002）：談國小數學建構取向教學。永不停止的對話—談國小數學教育，p91-105。

二、英文部分
Bar-Eli, N., &Raviv, A.（1982）.Underachievers as tutors. Journal of Education Research,75（3）,139-143.
Candler , A.C.,Blackburn,G.M. & Sowell, W. （1981）.Peer tutoring as a strategy individualizing instruction. Education,101（4）,pp.380-383.
Champagne,A.B.,Gunstone,R.F., & Klopfer,L.E.（1985）Effecting changes in cognitive structures among physics students . In L.H..T.West & A.L.Pines（Eds.）. Cognitive structure and conceptual change. Orlando,FL: Academic.
Chi,Feng-Ming（1995）. Discussion as inquiry in ESL/FEL reading：A study of taiwan college students’ meaning-construction of a literary test through small group.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages,Long Beach,CA.
Cooper,L.、Johnson,D.W、 Johnson,D.W和Wilderson,F.（1980）.The effects of cooperative,competitive,and individualistic experiences on interpersonal attraction among heterogeneous peers.The journal of social psychology,111,pp243-252.
Driver, R. & Oldham ,V . （1986）A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science .Studies in science education,13,105-122.
Ehly, S ., & Larsen, S.（1980）.Peer tutoring for individualized instruction.
Boston：Allyn and Bacon.
Farivar,S.（1991）.Intergroup relations in cooperative learning groups. （ERIC Document Reproduction No.ED 336 490）
Johnson,D.W.&Johnson,R.T.（1986b）.Encouraging student/student interaction. （ERIC Document Reproduction No.ED 266 960）
Johnson,D.W.&Johnson,R.T.（1993）.Impact of cooperative and individualistic learning on high-ability students’ achievement, self- esteem,and social. Journal of social psychology,133（6）,839-844.
Joyce,B.,&Weil,M（1980）.Model of teaching.New Jersey：Prentice-Hall.
Longwill,A.W,& klieinert,H.L.（1998）.The unexpected benefits of high school peer tutoring.Teaching Exceptional Children,30,（4）60-65.
Lyman,L., & Foyle,H.C. (1989).Cooperative learning in the middle school. .Paper presented at the Annual Kansas Symposium for Middle Level Education,Emporia.（ERIC Document Reproduction No.ED 302 866）
Mulopo,M.M.,& Fowler.H.S.（1987）.Effects of traditional and Discovery instructional approaches on learning outcomes for learners of different intellectual development：A study of chemistry students in zambia. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,24（3）, pp.217-227.
Roth,W.M.（1994）.Experimenting in a constructivist high school physics laboratory Journal of Research in Science Teaching,31（2）,pp197-223.
Scruggs,T.E., & Osguthorpe,R.,T.（1986）Tutoring interventions within special education settings：A comparison of cross-age and peer tutoring. Psychology in the schools,23,pp187-193.
Sharply,A.M., Irvine,J.W., &Sharpley,C.F.（1983）.An examination of the effectiveness of a cross-age tutoring program in mathematics for elementary school children.American Education Research Journal,20（1）,103-111.
Tan Ning-chun (1990). Cross-Cultural Comparison of Differences in Mathematics Attitude and Grade Six Students’ Ability to Solve Problems, Journal of Taiwan Provincial Taipei Teachers College, Vol. III(June 1990), .pp.289-324.