摘要
知识程序化是技能获得的重要环节，也是认知心理学在问题解决领域研究的重点内容。陈述性知识向程序性知识的转化就是知识程序化的过程，也即学生将学习到的概念、定理用于解决具体问题的过程。而程序性知识的表征形式为产生式规则和产生式系统，那么这个过程就是学生获得产生式规则、形成产生式系统的过程。心理学家们已经承认知识程序化的实质就是产生式规则和产生式系统建立的过程，但是就产生式规则和产生式系统建立的具体过程却存在分歧。这种分歧表现在两种不同的观点上：一种观点认为，获取产生式规则要经过陈述性知识的阶段，即学生要首先学会陈述性知识，再通过知识的编辑转化为程序性知识；第二种观点认为，产生式规则可以不通过陈述性知识的学习而直接形成。
本论文设计了三个实验，旨在验证和比较这两种关于产生式建立的主要观点。首先根据两种不同的观点，将初中物理电学部分的电压知识自编成两种不同的学习材料。根据观点“获取产生式规则要经过陈述性知识的阶段”编制学习材料A，根据观点“产生式规则可以不通过陈述性知识的学习而直接形成”编制学习材料B，并将这两种学习材料用于课堂教学。
实验一将两种建立产生式的方法分别与一般的课堂教学方法进行比较。选取一个普通中学初三年级的四个班级，一个班级按照编制的学习材料A进行学习，一个班级按照编制的学习材料B进行学习，另外两个班级分别作为对照组。结果表明，两种方法比一般的课堂教学更能促进学生形成物理解题的产生式规则，从而使两个实验组的成绩明显高于两个对照组的成绩。
实验二将两种方法进行比较。将按照学习材料A和学习材料B建立产生式规则的被试分别按照原有知识水平分为好、中、差三组，比较两种方法在不同类型题目上的差异以及原有知识水平对产生式规则获得的影响。结果表明，在近迁移的题目上，学习材料A优于学习材料B；但在远迁移题目和陈述性知识考察题目上，两种学习材料的效果没有明显差异；原有知识水平对产生式规则的获得具有明显的影响。
实验三是实验二的后续研究。实验二结束后，从被试中抽取好、中、差学生共16名进行追述的口语报告，从被试的口语报告中进一步分析比较两种产生式的建立方法。口语报告结果显示，无论是好学生，还是差学生，学习学习材料A的被试解题思路比学习学习材料B的学生更为清晰，建立起来的产生式规则的数量也更多。
The proceduralization of knowledge is the important process of skill acquisition and it is also the central content for cognitive psychology in problem solving domain. The proceduralization of knowledge is the process of transforming the declarative knowledge to procedural knowledge. And at the same time, the production rules and the production system is the representation of the procedural knowledge. So it has been accepted that the essence of the proceduralization of knowledge is a process during which the production rules and production system are formed, however, the question that in what way the production rules and production system are formed has not been answered well.
Three experiments are run in this disquisition to compare two different viewpoints about establishment of productive rules and production system. The first view discuss that all knowledge first came into the system in a declarative form, with practice at using the knowledge in a particular context, production rules would develop, which embodied a procedural form of that knowledge. The second view consider that procedural knowledge can be acquired independent of declarative knowledge. The material A comes from the first view, while the material B comes from the second view.
The two different ways of establishment of productive rules and production system and ordinary learning style in class are compared in the first experiment. One of the four classes learns by the first way, one of the four classes learns by the second way, the other two classes are treated as control groups. It shows that two experimental groups get higher courses than two control groups.
Two different ways of establishment of productive rules and production system are compared in the second experiment. Subjects are grouped into three grades: excellent middling and bad, according to their original achievements. The result is that the effect of the first way is better than that of the second way in the aspect of near transfer, while the difference is not obvious neither in the aspect of far transfer nor in the declarative knowledge acquisition; all the students can grasp not only the first way but second way, no matter they are good students or learning difficult students.
Experiment three is the follow-up one of experiment two. In experiment three, oral reports are obtained from 16 subjects chosen from experiment two. The two different processes of the establishment of productive rules and production system related two different ways are researched on the basis of subjects' oral reports. The oral reports reveal that subjects who learned knowledge by the second way report their thinking more clearly than those who learned knowledge by the first way and that they establish more productive rules as well.
引文
1．廖伯琴，黄希庭，大学生解决物理问题的表征层次的实验研究，心理科学，1997，11月第6期。
2．莫雷，刘丽虹，样例表面内容对问题解决类比迁移过程的影响，心理学报，1999，31(3)，313-321。
3．黄巍，优差生解决有机化学合成的问题表征差异极其影响因素，心理科学，1994，4，217-222。
4．邓铸，余嘉元，问题解决中对问题的外部表征和内部表征，心理学动态，2001，9(3)，193。
5．梁宁建等，中学生问题解决策略的基本特征研究，心理科学，2002，25。
6．张卫：问题解决中的内隐认知。心理学动态，1999，第2期，7。
7．董纯才主编，《中国大百科全书·教育卷》，中国大百科全书出版社，1985年版，525页。
8．皮连生，智育理论——一种新的智育理论的探索，华东师范大学学报(教育科学版)，4，41-49。
9．朱新明，李亦菲，《架设人与计算机的桥梁》，湖北教育出版社，2000年1月版。
10．庆麟等编著，《认知教学心理学》，上海科学技术出版社，2000年8月版，40页。
11．朱新明，南宇珏，赫伯·塞蒙(1994)。通过样例和问题求解学习物理——加强对条件的认知。心理科学，第2期。
12．朱新明，秦裕林，施铁如，司马贺(1987)。通过样例和问题解决建立产生式，心理学报，第2期。
13．梁宁建，问题解决产生式系统的系列研究，华东师范大学1991年博士学位论文。
14．九年制义务教育课本，物理(试用本)九年级，上海教育出版社，1996年6月第一版。
15．九年制义务教育课本，物理教学参考资料(九年级)，上海教育出版社，1996年7月第一版。
16．九年制义务教育课本(试用本)，物理(九年级)，上海中小学课程教材改革委员会编，上海科学技术出版社，1997年6月第一版。
17．九年制义务教育课本(试用本)，物理教学参考书(九年级用)，上海中小学课程教材改革委员会编，上海科学技术出版社，1997年7月第一版。
18. Newell, A. & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving,. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
19. Sleeman, D. & Brown, J.S.(Eds)(1982). Intelligent tutoring systems. New York:Academic Press.
20. Anderson, J. R., Conrad, F.G., & Corbett, A. T. (1989). Skill acquisition and LISP tutor. Cognition Science, 2, 396-408.
21. Corbett, A. T. & Anderson, J. R.(1990).The effect of feedback control on learning to program with the LISP tutor. Proceedings of the 12the Annual conference of the Cognition Science Society, 796-803.
22. Anderson, J. R., (1980). Cognitive psychology and it's implication. San Francisco: Freeman.
23. Anderson J. R.(1990) Cognitive Psychology and Its Implication (3rd ed.). New York: Freeman, 240-241,281-282, 308-313.
24. Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychological Review, 89, 369-406.
25. Anderson J. R. (1987). Skill Acquisition: Compilation of Weak-Method Problem Solutions, Psychological Review, 1987, Vol 94, No. 2, 192-210.
26. Anderson J. R. & Jon M. Fincham (1994) .Acquisition of Procedural Skills From Examples, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 1994, Vol. 20, No. 6, 1322-1340.
27. Anderson, J. R., (2000). Cognitive psychology and it's implication (fifth edition) .Worth Publishers, New York, 279-312.
28. J.R. Anderson & J.A. Michon & P.L.C. van Geert (1999). Learning without Limits From problem solving towards a unified theory of learning, Druk: Universal Press, USA :39-44.
29. Servan-Schreiber, E., & Anderson, J. R.(1990).Chunking as a mechanism of implicit learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogniton, 16,592-608.
30. Laird, J. E., Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P.S. (1987). SOAR: An architecture for general intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 33, 1-64.
31. Newell, A. (1990). Unified Theories of Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32. Johnson, T. R. (1996). Control in Act-R and Soar, Proceedings of the First European Workshop on Cognitive Modeling (pp. 201-208): Technische Universitt Berlin.
33. Richard Cooper (1996). Perseverative Subgoaling and Production System Models of Problem Solving, http://cogent.psyc.bbk.ac.uk/publications/cooper96.htm.
34. Cooper, R., & Shallice, T. (1995). Soar and the case for Unified Theories of Cognition.Cognition, 55(2), 115-149.
35. Reder, L. M., Charney, D. H., & Morgan, K. I., (1986). The Role of Elaboration in Learning a Skill from an Instructional Text. Memory& Cognition, 14, pp64-78.
36. Pirolli, P. L.& Anderson, J. R., (1985). The Role of Learning from Examples in Acquisition of Recursive Programming Skills, Canadian Journal of Psychology, 39, pp240-272.
37. Ross, B. H.,& Kennedy, P. T. (1990) .Generalizing from the use of earlier examples in problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogniton, 16, 42-55.
38. Neves,D. M. & Anderson, J.R.(1981). Knowledge compilation: mechanisms for the automatization of cognitive skills. In Anderson J.R.(Eds),Cognitive skills and their acquisition(pp:57-84).Hillsadle, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Novick, L. R. & Holyoak, K. J. (1991). Mathematical problem solving by analogy. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 398-416.
40. Robert J. Sternberg & Talia Ben-Zeev, (2001). Complex Cognition. New York & Oxford University Press.
41. Zhu X. M., Lee Y. F., Simon H. A, Zhu D. (1996). Cue recognition and cue elaboration in learning from examples. Proceedings of National Academic of Science, U.S.A. 93, 1346-1351.
42. Zhang, J.(1997). The nature of external representation in problem solving. Cognition Science, 179-219.
43. Schoenfeld, J.(1985). Development of expertise in mathemational problem solving. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
44. Fong, G. T., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). Immediate and delayed transfer of training effects in statistical reasoning. Journal of experimental psychology: General, 120, 34-45.
45. Giek, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive psychology, 15, 1-38.
46. Daniel B. Willingham, Mary Jo Nissen & Peter Bullemer(1989), On the Development of Procedural Knowledge, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, Vol. 15, No. 6, 1047-1060.
47. Vincent A. W. M. M. Aleven & Kenneth R. Koedinger(2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based Cognitive Tutor. Cognitive Science, Vol. 26, Issue 2, March-April, 147-179.
48. Glenn Gunzelmann & John R. Anderson (2003), Problem solving:(?)Increased planning with practice, Cognitive Systems Research, Vol. 4, Issue 1, March, 57-76.
49. Henk J. Haarmann, Eddy J. Davelaar & Marius Usher(2003). Individual differences in semantic short-term memory capacity and reading comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, Vol. 48, Issue 2, February, 320-345.
50. Louise Sutherland(2002), Developing problem solving expertise: the impact of instruction in a question analysis strategy, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 12, Issue 2, April, 155-187.
51. Robert J. Sternberg(1999). Cognitive Psychology(Second Edition), Harcourt Brace College Publishers, USA, 349-390.