統整教學模組實施下之小組互動及知識共同建構

Group Interactions and Knowledge Constructions in the Teaching of an Integrated Instructional Module

10.6173/CJSE.2004.1201.01

柯靜宜(Ching-Yi Ko)；張文華(Wen-Hua Chang)；郭重吉(Chorng-Jee Guo)

小組互動 ； 統整教學模組 ； Group Interaction ； Integrated Instructional Module

科學教育學刊

12卷1期（2004 / 03 / 01）

1 - 26

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討國中學生在統整教學模組的實施下，小組學生的學習情況。本研究採質性研究法進行資料收集及分析，研究中針對一個國一班級進行教室觀察，聚焦於一組具代表性的小組來收集錄影、錄音、晤談及文件等資料，並運用Secondary Teaching Analysis Matrix-S及採對話分析的方法來進行課室互動分析。研究發現包括：本研究中個案小組的互動面貌，是屬於Johnson 和Johnson所提出的「團體中心模式」，也就是小組成員會互相溝通，並合作完成任務；在本研究的教學模組下，學生可透過小組互動達成個人及小組的知識建構；小組學生互動及其知識建構會受到對話過程的社會脈絡所影響，主要直接影響如任務的本質影響了學生的參與程度、教師進行各種活動的方式影響了學生個人及小組知識建構、教師營造的學習情境及提供資源的方式能協助學生經由同儕互動學習到預定的知識與技能。

The purpose of this study is to explore the learning conditions of a group of seventh graders during the teaching of a teacher-developed integrated module. Interpretations of the learning conditions in this and the process of social interactions of a group. A junior high school class was observed, and a typical student group was selected to analyze their group interactions. Data including audiotapes, videotapes, interviews, and documents were first analyzed by using Secondary Teaching Analysis Matrix-S to identify some overarching patterns in the whole teaching process and discourse analysis was then followed to explore the relationships between events, interactions, and learning results within the focus group. It is found that the mode of group interaction was the 'group-centered pattern' suggested by Johnson and Johnson. That is, the members of the group accomplish tasks through communication and cooperation. Under the teacher's facilitation, students construct knowledge through group interactions, and knowledge constructions were done both by individuals and the group. In addition, the group interactions and knowledge constructions were influenced by social conditions of the process of dialogues. Based on the results generated, suggestions for teachers while developing and teaching integrated modules are provided.

1. Alexopoulou, E.,Driver, R.(1996).Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction model in pairs and fours.Journal of Research Science Teaching,33(10),1099-1114.
2. Barnes, D.,Todd, F.(1977).Communication and learning in small groups.London:Routledge.
3. Beane, J. A.(1998).Curriculum integration: Designing the core of democratic education.New York:Teachers College Press.
4. Bloom, D.,Theodorou, E.,J. L. Green,J. O. Harker (Eds.)(1988).Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse.Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
5. Cazden, C. B.(1988).Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning.Portman, NH:Heinemann.
6. Chen, H. M.,Chang, W. H.,Chang, H. P.(2002).Paper presented at 2002 ASERA annual conference, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
7. Cohen, E.(1994).Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.Review of Educational Research,64,1-35.
8. Crawford, T.,Kelly, G. J.,Brown, C.(2000).Ways of knowing beyond facts and laws of science: An ethnographic investigation student engagement in scientific practices.Journal of Research Science Teaching,37(3),237-258.
9. Dixon, C. N.(2000).Paper presented at the meeting of the Invited Workshop National Taiwan Normal University.
10. Fogarty, R.(1991).Ten ways to integrate curriculum.Educational Leadership,49,61-65.
11. Green, J. L.,Weade R.,Graham, K.,J. O. Harker (Eds.)(1988).Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse.Norwood, NJ:Ablex.
12. Johnson, D. W.,Johnson, F.(1991).Joining together-Group theory and group skills.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
13. Richmond, G.,Striley, J.(1996).Making meaning in classrooms: Social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building.Journal of Research Science Teaching,33(8),839-858.
14. Roth, W-M.,Brown, G. M.(1995).Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor.Cognition and Instruction,13(1),73-128.
15. Vygotsky, L. S.(1978).Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
16. Webb, N. M.(1991).Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in. small groups.Journal of Research in Mathematics Education,22,366-389.
17. Webb, N. M.(1989).Peer interaction and learning in small group.International Journal of Educational Research,13,21-39.
18. Webb, N. M.,R. Hertz-Lazarowitz,N. Miller (Eds.)(1992).Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning.New York:Cambridge University Press.
19. Windschitl, M.(2001).The diffusion and appropriation of ideas in the science classroom: Developing a taxonomy of events occurring between groups of learners.Journal of Research Science Teaching,38(1),17-42.
20. 王文科(1983)。皮亞傑理論初階。台北:國立編譯館。
21. 吳幸宜(1994)。學習理論與教學應用。台北:心理。
22. 李郁文(1998)。團體動力學－群體動力的理論與實務。台北:桂冠。
23. 杜聲鋒(1988)。皮亞傑及其思想。台北:遠流。
24. 孫逸秀(2000)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。彰化市，國立彰化師範大學。
25. 教育部(2000)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要－自然與生活科技學習領域。台北:教育部。
26. 陳伯璋(1999)。九年一貫課程的理念與理論分析。九年一貫研討會論文集，台北縣:
27. 楊極東(1992)。團體輔導－理論與實務。台北:五南。
28. 廖文武(1990)。皮亞傑教育的基礎理論。台北:五南。
29. 趙金婷(2000)。學習社群理念在教學上的應用。教育資料與研究，35，60-64。
30. 蔡敏玲(2001)。尋找教室團體互動的節奏與變奏－教育質性研究歷程的展現。台北:桂冠。

1. (2005)。學生「專題導向式合作解題」之過程研究。美和學報，24(1)，199-222。