摘要
本研究利用我國在「國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查(TIMSS 2003)」的實測結果，擷取我國平均答對率低於國際答對率或低於50%之科學試題，計40題(不含子題)，對新竹市、新竹縣與苗栗縣三縣市，依智、仁、勇三類學校，以隨機抽樣的方式各抽出學生總數相近的小四學生做一重測，並以統計分析比較。其次，併同九年一貫低、中年級課程及教科書的調查分析，檢視學生對試題之自我效能。最後，再針對部分試題，對學生進行晤談，以了解學生對試題的理解與作答過程。茲將本研究的發現敘述如下：
一、2006竹苗三縣市重測平均答對率與TIMSS 2003台灣實測與國際平均答對率的比較，三個領域皆呈現退步的現象。
二、竹苗三個縣市之整體答對率皆無顯著差異。
三、不同規模學校之答對率具顯著差異，智類學校優於仁類與勇類學校。
四、重測學生對科學試題作答之自我效能：
1、高答對率之試題，幾乎為學生有較高理解程度。
2、試題出現某些生字或專有名詞為學生尚未學習過。
3、多數學生認為自己會的比較少。
4、認為學校是否教授過方面，生命科學領域試題之自我效能最高，地球科學與物質科學領域部分較差。
五、訪談學生之作答，發現有許多來自日常經驗或廣告訊息等所造成的錯誤概念。

Abstract
This study uses the result of “Trends in International Mathematics and Sciences Study 2003” in our county , which is adopted from the average rate of true answer lower than the international rate or 50 percent of science questions, totally 40 questions.
The research samples are random sampling from fourth grade students of the elementary schools which are separated as wisdom, kind, brave pattern of schools. (including Hsinchu county, Hsinchu city, Miaoli county).The obtained data were analyzed by statistics. Furthermore, to analyze the combination of the basic, middle grade’s courses and textbooks for viewing the self-efficiency. The main findings were as follows:
1. The comparison of the average rate of true duplication between Hsinchu, Miaoli counties and TIMSS 2003 shows regression in three areas, especially the material area.
2. The totally rate of true in these three counties is no significance.
3. The different model of schools in the rate of true answer has great significance. The model of wisdom school is superior to the kind and brave model of school.
4. The self-efficiency of the students in duplication on answering the science questions:
(1)In realization of the questions, students have more understanding in the high rate of true answer.
(2)Unknowing the literal meaning of words, students don’t understand the special term.
(3) The self-acknowledge in answering questions, most students just guess than realize the answer.
(4) In the teaching aspect, students think that their high self-efficiency is in the life sciences area instead of the earth sciences and the material sciences.
5. The process of interview with the students:
(1)The major reason causing low score is that students don’t understand the question and misunderstand the meaning.
(2)Students’ wrong concept come from their daily experience, advertisement information, told from generation to generation, self-reading books that produce quote out of context and incorrect inference.
(3)In answering the non choice questions, students due to lacking the ability of writing which bring about the low score.

參考文獻
（一）中文部份
王文科 (1999)。教育研究法。台北市：五南。
王美芬、熊召弟 (1998)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北：心理出版社。
李輝雄 (1995)。高雄市高一學生數學解題歷程之分析研究。國立高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
李靜瑤 (1994)。高雄市國二學生數學解題歷程之分析研究。國立高雄師範大學數學研究所碩士論文。
吳琪玉 (2005)。探討我國八年級學生在TIMSS 1999與TIMSS 2003數學與科學之表現。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
吳秀蓮 (2006)。TIMSS 2003國小四年級科學測驗題目與國小課程內容分析。國立新竹教育大學人資處課程與教學碩士論文。
林美惠 (1997)。題目表徵形式與國小二年級學生加減法解題之相關研究。國立嘉義師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
林碧珍 (1989)。國小學生數學解題的表現及其相關因素的研究。國立台灣師範大學數學研究所碩士論文。
林碧珍 (1990)。新竹師院輔導區國小數學科「怎樣解題」教材實施情況調查與學習成效研究。新竹師院學報，3，363-391。
林碧珍 (1991)。經由數學解題啟發數學的理解。國教世紀，27(3)，2-5。
洪佳慧 (2002)。由教科書內容與性別面向分析我國國二學生在第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查（TIMSS-R）的學習表現-生命科學以及環境與資源議題部分。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
洪瑞鎂 (2001)。從「第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查」探究台灣國二學生的數學基本能力。國立臺灣師範大學數學研究所碩士論文。
侯怡如 (2002)。由考試文化的角度分析我國學生在TIMSS 1999的答題表現----生命科學部分。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
教育部 (2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要自然與生活科技學習領域。台北市：教育部。
莊志彥、蘇育任 (1999)。國小學童知覺選擇與動物分類概念之研究。科學教育學刊，7 (2)，135-156。
張春興 (1997)。教育心理學─三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華書局。
張秋男 (2001)。TIMSS 2003國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查國家報告。國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究中心。
張一誠 (2001)。由我國國中教科書內容分析國二學生在第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查(TIMSS-R)之表現：物理、科學探究與科學本質以及地球科學部分。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳永倫 (2005)。我國八年級學生自然科教材與科學學習成就趨勢分析。國立臺灣師範大學化學系碩士論文。
陳聖昌 (2005)。我國八年級學生對科學學習喜好之調查研究。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳麗妃 (2006)。TIMSS 2003國小四年級學生背景、家庭環境、科學興趣、自信與科學成就關係之比較分析：以七國為例。國立新竹教育大學進修部課程與教學碩士論文。
黃幸美 (1996)。數學科新課程學習評量之探討。國民小學數學科新課程學習評量方法之初探，15-21。台北縣：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
黃幸美 (1997)。兒童的概念學習、解題思考與迷思概念。教育研究雙月刊，55，55-60。
黃敏晃 (1987)。如何解數學題？數學解題策略簡介。科學月刊，18，515-522。
黃敏晃 (1996)。國小數學新課程影帶手冊：解題與溝通。國立教育資料館。
莊裕庭 (2002)。國二高低數學成就學生解題之後設認知個案研究。國立高雄師範大學數學研究所碩士論文。
楊宗達、熊召弟、譚寧君 (2001)。數學與科學的對話：國小學童理解「密度」相關概念之研究。
楊明家 (1997)。國小六年級不同解題能力學生在數學解題歷程後設認知行為之比較研究。屏東師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
鄧竹景 (2006)。從TIMSS 2003資料分析不同成就國家國小四年級受測學校科學教師之特質—以九國為例。國立新竹教育大學人資處課程與教學碩士論文。
劉曜源 (1999)。國小學生問題解決能力之探討。國教天地，136，24-29。
劉佳蓉 (2001)。我國國二學生在TIMSS-1999中之理化學習成就分析。國立臺灣師範大學化學系碩士論文。
鄭昭明 (1993)。認知心理學─理論與實踐。台北：桂冠圖書股份有限公司。
鄭士鴻 (2005)。由TIMSS 2003的結果分析各國八年級學生科學學習成就與影響因素以及探討我國不同特質的班級理化課課堂活動。國立臺灣師範大學化學系碩士論文。
鍾聖校 (1992)。認知心理學。台北：五南出版社。
顏秀玫 (2004)。我國小學四年級學生在「國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查(TIMSS 2003)」中科學低分題之分析。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
戴政吉 (1999)。四年級學生的小數迷思概念─由學生習作所犯之錯誤談起。國教天地，134，106-112。
戴政吉 (2001)。國小四年級學童長度與面積概念之研究。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
戴曉霞 (1995)。IEA研究及其方法論之探討。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
羅珮華 (2000)。「第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查」之抽樣設計。科學教育月刊，235，14-20。
羅珮華 (2003)。從「第三次國際科學與數學教育成就研究後續調查（TIMSS 1999）」結果探討國中學生學習成就與學生特質的關係：七個國家之比較。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。

（二）英文部分
Ashby,N. Ed. (2005). The Achiever. Volume 4, Number 2. US Department of Education.
Blosser,P.E. (1988). problem solving─Secondary School Science. ERIC Document No:ED 309049.
Driver,R.,& Guesne,E.,& Tiberghien,A.(1985). Children’s Ideas in Science. Milton Keynes:Open University Press.
Feher,E.& Meyer,K.R.(1992).Children's conceptions of color. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,29（5）,505-520.
Fierros,E.G. (1999). Examining Gender Differences in Mathematics Achievement on the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS).
Fisher,K.M. (1985). A misconception in biology:Aminoacids and translation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,22(1),53-62.
Fowler,F. C.; Poetter,T. S. (1999). Framing French Success in Elementary Mathematics Curriculum and Pedagogy: Implications for American Educations.
Foy, P., & Joncas, M. (2000). TIMSS Sample Design. In Martin et al. (eds) TIMSS1999 International Technical Report. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Gagne,E,D. (1995). The cognitive psychology of learning.Boston, MA: Little,Brown,and Company.
Garofalo,J.,& Lester,F.K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,16,163-176.
Gibbs, W. Wayt, & Fox, Douglas (1999). The False Crisis in Science Education. Scientific American. v281 n4 p.86-93.
Glynn, R. H.； Yeany,R.H., & B. K. Britton (1991). A Constructive view of learning science. In S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany,R.H., & B. K. Britton (Eds.) The psychology of learning science. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erblaum Associates, Publishers.
Gonzalez,E,J.,& Fermin,M. (1997). Diagnosis of Spanish primary school student’s common alternative science concepts. School Science & Mathematics,97(2),68-74.
Gonzalez,E,J., & Miles,J,A.(Eds) (2001).TIMSS 1999 User Guide for the International Database:IEA’s Repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eighth Grade.Chestnut Hill,MA:Boston College.
Jones,R. (1998). Solving Problems in Math and Science Education. American School Board Journal, v185 n7 p16-20.
Kilpatrick,J. (1985). A restrospective account of the past 25 years of research and learning mathematical problem solving. In E. Silver(Ed.) Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives. Hillsdale,NJ: Lawrece Eribaum Associates.
Kind,P. M. (1999). Performance Assessment in Science- What Are We Measuring? Studies in Educational Evaluation, v25 n3 p179-194.
Klieme,E.; Clausen,M. (1999). Identifying Facets of Problem Solving in Mathematics Instruction.
Klieme,E.; Baumert,J. (2001). Identifying National Cultures of Mathematics Education: Analysis of Cognitive Demands and Differential Item Functioning in TIMSS. European Journal of Psychology of Education, v16 n3 p385-402.
Krulik,S.K.,& Rudnick,J.A. (1989). Problem solving: A handbook for senior high school teachers. Boston,MA: Aiiyn & Bacon.
Lee,K.W.L.；Goh,N.K.；Chia,L.S.；Chin,C., & Tan.L.L. (2000). Science Teachers and Problem Solving in Elementary Schools in Singapore.
Lee,Okhee; Paik,Seoung-hey (2000). Conceptions of Science Achievement in Major Reform Document. School Science and Mathematics, v100 n1 p16-29.
Marshall,S.P. (1983). Sex differences in learning mathematics:A longitudinal study with item and error analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology,79,372-383.
Martin, M.O. (1996).Third International Mathematics and Science Study：An overview.In M.O. Martin&D.L. Kelly (Eds.),TIMSS technical report volume I：Design and development (pp.1-1 - 1-20).Chestnut Hill,MA：Boston College.
Martin, M. O.； Mullis, I. V. S.；Gonzalez, E. J.； O’Connor, K.； Chrostowski, S. J.； Steven, M.； Gregory, K. D.,；Smith, T. A., & Garden , R. A. (2001). Science Benchmarking Report: TIMSS 1999 –Eighth Grade. Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Martin, M. O.； Mullis, I. V. S.； Gonzalez, E. J.；Gregory, K. D.； Smith, T. A.,；Chrostowski, S. J.；Garden, R. A., & O’Connor, K. M. (2004). TIMSS 2003 International Science Report: Findings From IEA’s Trends inInternational Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grades Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Martinez,Joseph G. R. (2001). Exploring, Inventing, and Discovering Mathematics: A Pedagogical Response to the TIMSS. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, v7 n2 p114-119.
Mayer,R.E. (1982). Thinking, problem solving, cognition.NY:W.H. Freeman and Company.
Mayer,R.E.(1987). Educational psychology:A cognitive approach.Boston: Little, Brown,and Company.
Mayer,R.E. (1992). Thinking, problem solving, cognition.NY:W.H. Freeman and Company.
McCoy,L.P. (1994). Mathematical problem-solving of elementary school male and female students. School Science & Mathematics,94(5),266-271.
Meier,S.L.,& Hovde,R.L. (1996). Problem solving: Teacher’s perceptions, content area models, and interdisciplinary connections. School Science & Mathematics,96(5),230-237.
Mullis, I.V.S.；Martin, M.O.；Smith, T.A.；Garden, R.A.；Gregory, K.D., & Gonzalez, E.J. et al. (2001). TIMSS assessment frameworks and specifications 2003.Chestnut Hill,MA：Boston College.
Muth,K.D. (1991). Effects of cuing on middle-school students’performance on arithmetic word problem containing extraneous information: Journal of Education Psychology,83(1),173-174.
Peterson,R.F.；Treagust,D.F.,& Carnett,P. (1989). Development and application of a diagnostic instrument to evaluate grade-11 and grade-12 students’concepts of covalent bonding and structure following a course of instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,26(4),301-314.
Resnick,P. (1982). Students’symbolization process in algebra.ERIC Document Reproduction Service,No.300230.
Robitaille, D.F.,McKnight, C.C.,Schmidt, W.H.,Britton, E.,Raizen, S.,＆ Nicol, C. (1993). TIMSS monograph No. 1:Curriculum frameworks for mathematics and science.Vancouver,BC：Pacific Educational Press.
Scheonfeld,A.H. (1985). Verbal data, protocol analysis, and the issue of control. In A.H. Schoenfeld(Ed.), mathematical problem solving,270-344. NY:Academic Press.
Scheonfeld,A.H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, cognition, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Leaning. Macmillan Publishing Company, Maxwell Macmillan Canada.
Schmidt,W. H.; Wang,Hsing Chi; Mcknight,Curtis C. (2005). Curriculum Coherence: An Examination of US Mathematics and Science Content Standards from an Internationl Perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, v37 n5 p525-559.
Solomon,J. (1987). Social influence of the construction of pupils understanding of science. Studies in Science Education,14,63-82.
Solso,R.L. (1995). Cognitive Psychology (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Sternberg,R.J. (1996). Intelligence,information processing, and analogical reasoning: The componential analysis of human abilities. Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.
Struke,K.A.,& Posner,G.J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L.T. West & A.L. Pines (Eds.). Cognitive structures and conceptual change (pp.221-230). N.J. :Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tatsuoka,K. K.; Corter,J. E.;Tatsuoka Curtis (2004). Patterns of Diagnosed Mathematical Content and Process Skills in TIMSS-R across a Sample of 20 Countries. American Educational Research Journal, v41 n4 p901-926.
TIMSS (2003). TIMSS 2003 Main Survey Operations Manual, prepared by the International Study Center, Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
Travers, K.J.& Westbury, I. (1989). The IEA study of mathematics I: Analysis of mathematics curricula.Oxford：Pergamon Press.
Wagemaker, H. (2001). Preface.In I.V.S. Mullis et al.,TIMSS assessment frameworks and specifications 2003 (pp.i-ii).Chestnut Hill,MA：Boston College.
Walker, D.A. (1976). The IEA six subject survey: an empirical study of education in twenty-one countries. Almqvist & Wiksell International.
Wandersee,J.H.；Mintzes,J.J., & Novak,J.D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science teaching and learning. New York, NY: Macmillan.
Yancy,A.V. (1981). Pupil generated diagrams as strategy for solving word problem for elementary mathematics. Specialist in Education Degree Thesis,Univerity of Louisvile.