本研究旨在探討數學擬題教學在一個國小二年級班級實施的情形。在十二週共二十四節的擬題教學中，研究者利用自行設計的擬題教學學習單，讓學生進行個別擬題，並且透過教室觀察、錄音、訪談、擬題教學回饋問卷及數學解題能力評量前後測、統計分析等質化與量化的方法，來了解實驗組學生在口頭擬題、書面擬題、擬題後解自己擬的題目及擬題後解別人擬的題目等四個擬題教學階段中，（一）擬題學習的歷程；（二）擬題作品的特色與錯誤類型；（三）算式、圖畫、文字三種擬題類型的擬題情形；（四）高低擬題能力組在解題能力上的表現；以及（五）擬題教學對於解題能力的增進與否。經過研究者的觀察與資料分析，發現大多數的學生對擬題教學都有很高的學習興趣，而且擬題與解題時也相當有信心。在研究結果方面，研究者得到以下的結論：（一）學生經由四個階段的擬題學習歷程，其在擬題與解題的表現上，無論是速度或正確率，都有明顯的進步。（二）學生擬題作品呈現多樣化的型態，根據研究者的分類，其特色可分為情境延伸、學生喜好、學校生活、日常生活等四類，而錯誤類型可分為數學邏輯與語文概念等兩類。（三）學生在算式、圖畫與文字三種擬題類型當中，擬圖畫題或文字題的表現均優於擬算式題，而擬圖畫題與文字題間的表現並無差異。（四）高擬題能力組在解題能力的表現上優於低擬題能力組，其解題的速度與正確率，都比低擬題能力組來得好。（五）透過實驗組與對照組前後測的比較，實驗組學生在數學解題能力評量的表現明顯地優於對照組學生，由此可知擬題教學可以增進解題能力。

The main purpose of this study is to understand the possible effects of the problem-posing teaching technique in an elementary school, grade-two class. With problem-posing teaching technique of twenty-four classes within 12 weeks, the experimenter first used the problem-posing texts to ask students to formulate mathematical problems. After reviewing the problems formulated by students, the necessary interviews were done. The statistical analysis is done on pre-tests and post-tests of mathematical-solving ability. Students’ feedbacks about problem posing teaching technique are collected. There were four stages in this experiment: (1) oral presentation of problem-posing, (2) written presentation of problem-posing, (3) written presentation of problem-posing and problem-solving by the same person, (4) wiitten presentation of problem-posing by one and problem-solving by another. The experimenter explored the following themes during these four stages: (1) the process of problem-posing learning, (2) the characteristics and erroneous types of the students’ opus, (3) the differences on the problem-posing abilities when students faced formulas, pictures and written contexts, (4) the behaviors of the high problem-posing ability group and the low problem-posing ability group, (5) the enhance of problem-solving abilities due to problem-posing teaching technique. From this study, the experimenter found that the majority of the students participated in this study interesting in this teaching technique, and students’ gained confidence in posing and solving mathematical problems. Besides, the experimenter also found that: (1) the students’ ability in posing and solving problems progressed gradually in speed and correctness, (2) the characteristics and erroneous types of the students’ opus were diverse, which included relativeness of situations, students’ interests, school lives, and daily lives, correctness of mathematical logic, ambiguity of language, (3) students were better to pose problems from pictures and written contexts than from formulas, but there was no difference between from pictures and from written contexts, (4) the high problem-posing ability group performs better in speed and correctness to solve problem than the low problem-posing ability group, (5) Comparing the controlled and non-controlled groups, problem-posing teaching technique seems to helpe students to enhance their problem-solving ability.

目　　　　次
第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的 7
第三節 待答問題 7
第四節 名詞釋義 8
第二章 文獻探討 10
第一節 擬題的意義與內涵 10
第二節 擬題活動的理論基礎 26
第三節 擬題教學的相關研究 35
第四節 擬題教學與評量 42
第五節 擬題教學活動融入國小二年級數學課程教材之分析 50
第三章 研究方法 54
第一節 研究對象及教材 54
第二節 研究工具 55
第三節 研究設計與實施步驟 66
第四節 資料的處理與分析 74
第四章 研究結果與討論 78
第一節 學生的擬題學習歷程 78
第二節 學生擬題作品分析 98
第三節 學生在三種擬題類型表現上的差異 113
第四節 高低擬題能力組在解題能力上的差異 119
第五節 擬題教學對學生解題能力的增進 121
第五章 結論與建議 126
第一節 結論 126
第二節 建議 136
參考文獻 142
附件一 擬題教學學習單（算式） 151
附件二 擬題教學學習單（圖畫） 156
附件三 擬題教學學習單（文字） 162
附件四 數學解題能力評量(前測) 167
附件五 數學解題能力評量(後測) 171
附件六 擬題教學回饋問卷 175
附件七 學生擬題作品九分評量表 177
附件八 學生擬題作品舉隅 178
附件九 學生擬題學習歷程作品舉隅 186

參考文獻
一、 中文部分
江文慈（民86）。整合與超越：多元智力取向的評量。測驗輔導雙月刊，143，2952-2954。
坪田耕三（1987 ）。生動的算術。日本：國土社。
林文生（民85）。一位國小數學教師佈題情境及其對學生解題交互影響之分析研究。國立台北師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。台北。
林碧珍（民78）。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教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。台北。
林德宗（民88）擬題活動在國小五年級數學教室裡的應用。國科會大專學生參與專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC 88-2815-C-023-001-S）。
周幸儀（民91）。國小二年級數學科合作擬題教學之行動研究。國立台南師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。台南。
周筱亭（民84）。國民小學教師對新課程應有的認識。國立嘉義師範學院八十二學年度數學教育研討會。
南一出版社（民90）。國民小學數學課本第三冊。台南：南一書局企業股份有限公司。
南一出版社（民90）。國民小學數學教師手冊第三冊。台南：南一書局企業股份有限公司。
翁嘉英（民77）。國小兒童解數學應用題認知歷程。國立台灣大學心理研究所碩士論文（未出版）。台北。
徐文鈺（民81）。圖示策略訓練課程對國小五年級學生的數學應用題解題能力與錯誤類型之影響。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所碩士論文（未出版）。台北。
徐文鈺（民85）。擬題教學策略對國小兒童分數概念的解題能力、擬題能力之分析研究。國立台灣師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文（未出版）。台北。
孫秀芳（民86）。國小二年級學生加減法擬題能力之研究。國科會補助大學生研究專案成果報告（NSC 86-2815-C-023-005-H）。
教育部（民65）。國民小學課程標準。台北：教育部。
教育部（民82）。國民小學課程標準。台北：教育部。
教育部（民89）。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北：教育部。
陳美芳（民84）。「學生因素」與「題目因素」對國小高年級兒童乘除法應用問題解題影響之研究。國立師範大學教育心理與輔導研究所博士論文（未出版）。台北。
張春興（民85）。教育心理學-三化取向的理論與實踐。台北市：東華書局。
梁淑坤（民83）。「擬題」的研究及其在課程的角色。國民小學數學科新課程概說（低年級）。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習彙編。
梁淑坤（民84）。師範生擬題行為之研究。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC 83-0111-S-023-007, NSC 84-2511-023-001）。
梁淑坤（民85）。從佈題探討數學科教科書的評鑑。教師之友，37(4)，23-28。
梁淑坤（民86）。擬題能力之評量：工具之製作。國科會專題研究計畫成果報告（NSC 84-2511-S-023-006）。
梁淑坤（民86）。擬題與數學課程的融合Ⅰ。國科會補助研究計畫的成果報告（NSC 85-2511-S-023-003）。
梁淑坤（民88）。從擬題研究提出數學教學建議。載於高雄市政府公務人力資源發展中心（編），新典範數學（184-220）。高雄：高市府人發中心編。
曾志華（民84）。淺談社會建構論在數學教育上的應用。教師之友，36（5），45-49。
黃敏晃（民85）。國小數學新課程下的評量趨勢。八十四學年度數學教育研討會論文暨會議實錄彙編，甯自強主編，國立嘉義師範學院。
楊惠如（民89）。擬題活動融入國小三年級數學科教學之行動研究。國立嘉義師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。嘉義。
劉芳妃（民87）。合作擬題活動融入國一數學科教學之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學數學教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。高雄。
劉祥通（民85）。數學寫作教學策略初探。八十四學年度數學教育研討會。
劉錫麒（民82）。數學思考教學研究。台北：師大書苑。


二、 英文部分
Borba M. C. (1994). High School Students’ Mathematical Problem Posing: An Exploratory Study in the Classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.
Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1983). The art of problem posing. Philadelphia, PA: Franklin Institute Press.
Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1988). Problem posing in mathematics education. Questioning Exchange, 2(2), 121-131.
Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1993). Problem posing: Reflection and application. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cai, J. (1998). An investigation of U. S. and Chinese students’ mathematical problem posing and problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 37-50.
Cudmore, D. H., & English, L. D. (1998). Using Intranets to Foster Statistical Problem Posing and Critiquing in Secondary Mathematics Classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 1998.
Dillon, J. T. (1982). Problem finding and solving. Journal of Creative Behavior, 16, 97-111.
Dillon, J. T. (1988). Levels of problem posing vs. problem solving. Questioning Exchange 2(2), 105-115.
English, L. D. (1997). Promoting a problem-posing classroom. Teaching children Mathematics, 4(3), 172.
English, L. D. (1998). Children’s problem posing within formal and informal context. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 83-106.
Gagne, E.D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company.
Gergen, K. J. (1985). Social Constructionist Inquiry: Context and Implication. Gergen, Kenneth J. & Davis, Keith E. (Eds.) (1985). The social Construction of the person. New York: Springer----Verlag.
Greer, B. (1991). Children’s word matching multiplication and division calculation. In F. Furinghetti (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifteen International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics. Vol. 2. Assisi, Italy: Author.
Hashimoto, Y. (1987). Classroom practics of problem solving in Japanese elementary school. Proceedings of the U.S. Japan Seminar on Mathematical Problem solving.
Hinsley, D. A., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1977). From word to equations—meaning and representation in algebra word problems. In M. Just & P. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Keil, G. E. (1965). Writing and solving original problems as a means of improving verbal arithmetic problem solving ability. Doctoral dissertation.
Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Problem formulating: Were do good problems come from? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed), Cognitive science and mathematics education(pp.123-147). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Kintsch, W., ＆ Greeno, J. G. (1985). Understanding and solving word arithmetic problem. Psychological Review, 92, 109-129
Kozmetsky, G. (1980). The significant role of problem solving in education. In D.T. Tuma ＆ F. Reif (Eds.), Problem solving and education: Issues in teaching and research (pp. 151-157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Krulik, S., ＆ Rudnick, J. A. (1993). Reasoning and problem solving: A handbook for elementary school teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bason.
Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Leung, S. S. (1996). Problem posing as assessment: Reflections and re- constructions. The Mathematics Educator, 1(2), 159-171.
Leung, S. S. (1997). On the role of creative thinking in problem posing. Zentralbatt fur Didaktik der Mathematik, 97(3), 81-85.
Leung, S. S. & Silver, E.A. (1997). The role of task format, mathematics knowledge, and Creative thinking on the arithmetic problem posing of prospective elementary school teachers. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 9(1), 5-24.
Mayer, R. E. (1982). Memory for algebra story problems. Journal of Educational psychology, 74, 199-216.
Mayer, R. E. (1987). Educational Psychology: A cognitive approach. Boston: Little, Brown. And Company.
Moses, B., Bjork, E., & Goldenberg, E. P. (1993). Beyond problem solving: problem posing. In S.I. Brown & M. I. Walter (Eds.), Problem posing: Reflections and applications（pp.178-188）. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1980). An agenda for action: Recommendations for school mathematics of the 1980s. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
Nohda, N. (1984). The heart of ‘open approach’ in mathematics teaching. In T. Kawaguchi (Ed.), Proceedings of ICIM-JSME regional conference on mathematics education (pp.314-318). Tokyo: Japan Society of Mathematics Education.
Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. (2nd ed.). New York: Doubleday.
Reitman, W. (1965). Cognition and thought. New York: Wiley.
Resnick, L. B., ＆ Ford, W. W. (1981). The psychology of mathematics for instruction. Hillsdale, NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum.
Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children’s problem–solving ability in arithmetic. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp.153-196). New York: Academic Press.
Schloemer, C. G. (1994). Integrating problem posing into instruction in advanced algebra: Feasibility and outcome. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.
Schoenfeld, A.H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic.
Schoenfeld, A.H. (1994). Mathematical thinking and problem solving. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Silver, E.A. (1985). Introduction. In E.A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerce Erlbaum.
Silver, E.A. (1987). Foundations of cognitive theory and research for mathematics problem solving instruction. In A, H. Schoenfeld (Ed.) Cognitive science and mathematics education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Silver, E.A. (1993). On mathematical problem posing. In N. Nohda ＆ F. L. Lin (Eds.). Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol.1(pp.66-85), Tsukuba, Japan: Auther.
Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing, For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19-28.
Silver, E. A. (1995). The nature and use of open problem in mathematics education: Mathematical and pedagogical perspectives. International Reviews on Mathematical Education , 2 , 67-72.
Silver, E. A. (1996). An analysis of arithmetic problem posing by middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Vol.27, No.5, 521-539.
Silver, E. A., & Cai, J. (1993). Mathematical problem posing and problem solving by middle school students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational research association, Atlanta, GA.
Silver, E. A., & Mamona, J. (1990). Problem posing by middle school teachers. In C. A. Maher, G. A. Goldin, & R. B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting, North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp.263-269). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
Silver, E. A., Mamona-Downs, J., Leung, S. S. & Kenney P.A. (1996). Posing mathematical problems: An exploratory study. Journal for research in mathematics Education, 27(3), 293-309.
Silverman, F. L., Winograd, K. & Strohauer, D. (1992). Student-Generated story problems. Arithmetic teacher, 39(8), 6-12.
Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for research in Mathematics education. Vol.26, No.2, 114-145
Skinner, P. (1990). What’s your problem: Posing and solving mathematical problem, K-2. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Stenmark, J. k. (1989). Assessment alternatives in mathematics: An overview of assessment rechniques that promote learning. Berkerly: Regents, University of California.
Stovanova, E. & Ellerton , N. F. (1996). A framework for research into student’s problem posing in school mathematics. In Corwin, R. B. (Ed.). Talking Mathematics: Supporting Children’s Voices. Portsmouth, NH.
Stover, G. B. (1982). Structural variables affecting mathematical word problem difficulty in sixth graders. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 5050A.
Tsubota, E. (1987). On children’s problem posing (grade 1 to 3). Japan.
Von Glasersfeld , E. (1995). Radical constructivism a way of knowing and learning. London: The Farmer Press.
Winograd, K (1990). Writing, solving and sharing original math story problem: Case studies of fifth grade children’s cognitive behavior. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Northern Colorado.
Writz, R. W. & Kahn, E. (1982). Another look at application in elementary school mathematics. The Arithmetic Teacher, 30, 21-25.