從爭議性科技議題的教學設計和實踐中詮釋科學教師的角色－個案研究

Interpretative Research on the Roles of the Science Teacher in Instruction of a Controversial Issue in Science and Technology-A Case Study

10.6173/CJSE.2006.1403.01

林樹聲(Shu-Sheng Lin)

中等教育 ； 爭議性科技議題 ； 科學教學 ； 個案研究 ； 教師教學角色 ； Secondary School ； Controversial Socio-scientific Issues ； Science Instruction ； Case Study ； Teacher's Roles in Teaching

科學教育學刊

14卷3期（2006 / 06 / 01）

237 - 255

繁體中文

本研究旨在詮釋一位國中生物教師教導爭議性科技議題－「基因改造食品」，從課程設計的準備階段到教學實踐和省思的過程中所展現的實務角色，及其所遇到的困難與解決的方法。研究採用教室觀察和個別訪談收集資料，並輔以分析個案教師設計的教案和其撰寫的教學日誌。研究結果顯示個案教師在教學的過程中扮演多重的角色，此點說明著教師專業的複雜度絕非僅止於作一位「知識傳遞者」而已。其中，以準備階段中扮演資料轉化和組織的「課程設計者」所遇到的困難最大。除了因為跨領域的主題必須統整較廣泛的學科知識外，在連結過去的知識與經驗至新目標與內容上，個案教師因為缺乏自信而需要外界的幫助。而在實踐階段，也因為個案教師初次教導此類議題，所以在教學內容的熟悉度和時間的掌控上就表現得較為生疏，因而變成了「教學生手」。此外，個案教師對於自己教學角色的轉換並不自覺，但經由訪談促使他回想曾經經歷的教學片段，往往能加深其對各種教學角色的體認和省思，進而回饋至更多教學實務的自主和改進上。所以在整個實驗中，他既是「反思者」，也是「學習者」，因此對於其教師專業的發展有正面的影響。

The purpose of this study is to understand the roles of a biology teacher in different stages in the instruction of controversial socio-scientific issues of ”genetically modified food”-ranging from preparation, practice to reflection. It also examines the problems the teacher faces and his solutions. The sources of data include classroom observation, interviews with the teacher, teacher's journals and teaching plans. The results show that the teacher plays multiple roles in the teaching process; such multiplicity of teaching roles manifests that the teacher is more than a knowledge transmitter at each phase. Among the different stages of instruction, the most difficult part for the teacher was the preparatory stage, in which the teacher as a curriculum designer has to incorporate and organize knowledge of wide-ranging subject matters with his prior knowledge and experiences. Lacking selfconfidence, the teacher, therefore, has to ask others for help to finish the design of the unit. Meanwhile, unfamiliarity with the contents and procedures turn the teacher into a novice. Besides, throughout the process of instruction the observed teacher was unaware of his changing roles. It was only after interviews with the researcher that the teacher developed a greater insight into the consequences of his implementation. He became more autonomous in teaching work after he reflected on the whole experience of curriculum design and practice. Because the teacher was both the ”reflective practitioner” and the ”learner” in this teaching experiment, he has significantly improved in terms of his own professional development.

1. 靳知勤(2004)。協助中學數理教師設計STS教學活動之行動研究。科學教育學刊，12(3)，341-364。
   連結：
2. Aiello-Nicosia, M. L.,Sperandeo-Mineo, R.M.(2000).Educational reconstruction of physics content to be taught and of pre-service teacher training: A case study.International Journal of Science Education,22(10),1085-1097.
3. Berliner, D. C.(1988).The development of expertise in pedagogy.Paper presented at the Charles W. Hunt Memorial Lecture-Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education,New Orleans, LA, Feb:
4. Biddle B. J.,T. Husen,N. Postlethwaite (Eds.)(1994).International encyclopedia of education.Oxford:Pergamon.
5. Biddle, B. J.,T. L. Good,I. F. Goodson (Eds.)(1997).International handbook of teachers and teaching.Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic.
6. Carlson, J.,R. W. Bybee (Ed.)(1985).Science/Technology/ Society, 1985 yearbook of the national science teachers association.Washington, DC:National Science Teachers Association.
7. Carspecken, P. F.(1996).Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide.New York:Routledge.
8. Clake, P.(2000).Teaching controversial issues.Green Teachers,62,29-32.
9. Costa, A. L.,Kallick, B.(Eds.)(2000).Assessing and reporting on habit of mind.Alexandria, VA:ASCD.
10. Cross, R. T.(1993).The risk of risks: A challenge and a dilemma for science and technology education.Research in Science and Technological Education,11(2),171-183.
11. Cutler, A. B.,Ruopp, F. N.,M. Z. Solomon (Ed.)(1999).The diagnostic teacher.New York:Teachers College.
12. Dawson, V.(2001).Addressing controversial issues in secondary school science.Australian Science Teachers` Journal,47(4),38-44.
13. Erickson, F.,M. C. Wittrock (Ed.)(1986).Handbook of research on teaching.New York:Macmillan.
14. Gall, M. D.,Gall, J. P.(1993).Teacher and student roles in different types of classroom discussions.Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,Atlanta, GA:
15. Grundy, S.(1987).Curriculum: Product or praxis.London:Falmer Press.
16. Guba, E.,Lincoln, Y. S.(1989).Fourth generation evaluation.Beverly Hills, CA:Sage.
17. Hurd, P. D.,R. W. Bybee (Ed.)(1985).Science/Technology/ Society, 1985 yearbook of the national science teachers association.Washington, DC:National Science Teachers Association.
18. Levidow, L.,R Levinson,J. Thomas (Eds.)(1997).Science Today-Problem or crisis?.New York:Routledge.
19. Millar, R.,R Levinson,J. Thomas (Eds.)(1997).Science Today-Problem or crisis?.New York:Routledge.
20. Orstein, A. C.,Lasley, T. J.(2000).Strategies for effective teaching.Boston:McGraw Hill.
21. Osborne, R.,Freyberg, P. (Eds.)(1985).Learning in science.N. H.:Heinemann.
22. Pedretti, E.(1995).From rhetoric to action: Implementing STS education through action research.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,32(5),463-485.
23. Peers, C. E.,Diezmann, C. M.,Watters, J. J.(2003).Supports and concerns for teacher professional growth during the implementation of a science curriculum innovation.Research in Science Education,33,89-110.
24. Pettersson, T.,Postholm, M. B.,Flem, A.,Gudmundsdottir, S.(2004).The classroom as a stage and the teacher`s role.Teaching and Teacher Education,20,589-605.
25. Randi, J.,Carno, L.,B. J. Biddle(Eds.)(1997).International handbook of teachers and teaching.Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
26. Sanders, R. L.,Borko, H.,Lockard, J. D.(1993).Secondary science teacher`s knowledge base when teaching science courses in and out their area of certification.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,30(7),723-736.
27. Strauss, A.,Corbin, J.(1998).Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory.Thousand Oaks, Calif:Sage.
28. Tobin, K. (Ed.)(1993).The practice of constructivism in science education.Washington, DC:AAAS.
29. Tobin, K.,LaMaster, S. U.(1995).Relationships between metaphors, beliefs, and actions in a context of science curriculum change.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,32(3),225-242.
30. Tsai, C. C.(2001).A science teacher`s reflections and knowledge growth about STS instruction after actual implementation.Science Education,86,23-41.
31. Wallace, J.,Louden, W.(2000).Teachers` learning: Stories of science education.Dordrecht:Kluwer Academic.
32. Wilson, J. T.,Chalmers-Neubauer, I.(1990).A comparison of teacher roles in three exemplary hands-on elementary science programs.Science Education,74(1),69-85.
33. 佘曉清(1999)。生物教師的教學信念、教學與師生互動－個案研究。科學教育學刊，7(1)，35-47。
34. 林樹聲、李田英(1997)。我國科學教育的回顧與前瞻論文集。台北市:國立台灣師範大學科學教育所。
35. 林樹聲、教育部主編(2004)。國民中小學九年一貫課程理論基礎（二）。台北市:教育部。
36. 施惠(2000)。STS教學模組對國小教師教學專業知能成長的探究。科學教育學刊，8(4)，335-355。
37. 教育部(2001)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北市:教育部。
38. 陳文典(1997)。STS教學教師所需之專業準備。科學教育學刊，5(2)，167-189。
39. 陳伯璋(1999)。九年一貫新課程綱要修訂的背景及內涵。教育研究資訊，7(1)，1-13。
40. 黃鴻博、郭重吉(1999)。STS教育理論的接納與實踐－一個國小教師的個案研究。科學教育學刊，7(1)，1-15。
41. 蘇育任(1997)。運用模組開發活動培育STS教師之可行性研究。科學教育學刊，5(2)，245-266。

1. 廖智偉(2011)。奈米科技議題教學對八年級學生科學態度之影響。國立臺灣大學物理學系學位論文。2011。1-174。