蘇格拉底詰問模式對六年級學生批判思考能力與傾向之影響

The Impact of the Socratic Questioning Model on Sixth Graders' Critical Thinking Abilities and Dispositions

10.6173/CJSE.2006.1405.05

蘇明勇(Ming-Yung Su)；黃萬居(Wan-Chu Huang)

批判思考 ； 批判思考能力 ； 批判思考傾向 ； 蘇格拉底詰問模式 ； Critical Thinking ； Critical Thinking Ability ； Critical Thinking Disposition ； Socratic Questioning Model

科學教育學刊

14卷5期（2006 / 12 / 01）

597 - 614

繁體中文

本研究的目的在探討蘇格拉底詰問模式對於六年級學生批判思考能力與傾向之影響。研究採準實驗研究不等前測－後測控制組設計，以台北市某一國民小學98位六年級學生為研究對象，其中34位為實驗組，64位為控制組，進行實驗教學。實驗組學生接受每週四節課，共為期九週之「蘇格拉底詰問模式」教學，而兩組控制組學生則接受一般自然科教學。研究工具包括「國小批判思考能力測驗」與「國小批判思考傾向測驗」，另輔以分析「國小班級結構問卷」、「學生學習回饋單」及「學生訪談記錄」，蒐集相關質性資料，做為解釋統計結果之參考。研究結果顯示接受「蘇格拉底詰問模式」教學的實驗組學生，在「批判思考能力測驗」的得分顯著高於一般教學模式之控制組學生。學生在「批判思考傾向測驗」的得分顯著高於一般教學模式之控制組學生。接受「蘇格拉底詰問模式」教學的不同班級地位學生，在「批判思考能力測驗」的得分無顯著差異。但高地位學生與低地位學生、中地位學生與低地位學生之間的批判思考能力則達顯著差異。至於不同班級地位學生在「批判思考傾向測驗」的得分無顯著差異。但高地位學生與低地位學生、中地位學生與低地位學生之間的批判思考傾向則達顯著差異。

This study aimed to investigate the impact of the Socratic Questioning Model (SQM) on sixth graders' critical thinking abilities and dispositions. A nonequivalent pretest-posttest control group design was used in this study of 98 sixth graders selected from an elementary school in Taipei city. Thirty-four pupils were assigned into experimental group, and sixty-four assigned into two control groups. The experimental group received the SQM instruction for four class periods per week for nine weeks, while both control groups remained in their regular science instruction. The quantitative data included results from (1) the Test of Critical Thinking Ability (TCCA), which was applied to the experimental and control groups for pretest and posttest; (2) the Test of Critical Thinking Disposition (TCCD), which was applied to the experimental and control groups for pretest and posttest; and (3) the Class Status Questionnaire (CSQ), which divided the experimental pupils into three groups and was administered to the experimental group after the intervention. The data were analyzed by ANCOVA. There were also qualitative data collected from interview, class observation, learning feedback and questionnaires. The major findings of this study were as follows: (a) The SQM had significantly positive effects on pupils' critical thinking abilities. This resulted from the fact that the experimental group had higher scores than the control group. (b) The SQM had significantly positive effects on pupils' critical thinking dispositions. This resulted from the fact that the experimental group had higher scores than the control group. (c) Pupils who received SQM with different class status did not showed significantly different critical thinking ability. (d) Pupils who received SQM with different class status did not showed significantly different critical thinking disposition.

1. 黃俊儒、楊文金(2003)。國中理化實驗課中學習機會分佈之研究－從社會互動及認知投入的角度。科學教育學刊，11(1)，75-95。
   連結：
2. 潘志忠(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。花蓮縣，國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所。
   連結：
3. Cobern, W, W.(1991).World view theory and science education research. NARST Monograph.Manhattan, KS:National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
4. Ennis, R. H.(1985).A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills.Educational Leadership,43(2),45-48.
5. Ennis, R. H.(1993).Critical thinking assessment.Theory into Practice,32(3),179-186.
6. Ennis, R. H.(1996).Critical thinking.Upper Saddle River, N. J.:Prentice-Hall.
7. McPeck, J. E.(1990).Teaching critical thinking.Routledge, New York:Chapman and Hall.
8. Norris, S. P.(1985).Synthesis of research on critical thinking.Educational Leadership,42(8),40-45.
9. Norris, S. P.,Ennis, R. H.(1989).Evaluation critical thinking.CA:Critical Thinking Press & Software.
10. Paul, R. W.(1995).Socratic question and roleplaying.Dillon Beach, CA:Foundation for Critical Thinking.
11. Siegel, H.(1999).What (Good) are thinking disposition?.Educational Theory,49(2),207-222.
12. Yager, R. E.(2000).The history and future of science education reform.Clearing House,74(1),51-54.
13. Yager, R. E.,J. H. Clarke,A. W. Biddle (Ed.)(1993).Teaching critical thinking: Reports from across the curriculum.Englewood Cliffs:Prentice-Hall.
14. 吳明隆(2000)。SPSS統計應用實務。台北市:松崗圖書。
15. 林玉体(2002)。西洋教育思想史。台北市:三民書局。
16. 邱旻昇(1999)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。台北市，國立台灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
17. 邱皓政(2002)。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析。台北市:五南書局。
18. 張玉成(1999)。教師發問技巧。台北市:心理出版社。
19. 教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程網要。台北市:教育部。
20. 郭生玉(1998)。心理與教育測驗。台北市:精華書局。
21. 陳膺宇(1994)。批判性思考運動初探。國立政治大學學報，69，144-171。
22. 陳麗華(1989)。國小社會科批判思考教學的省思。現代教育，7，121-135。
23. 溫明麗(1997)。批判性思考教學－哲學之旅。台北市:師大書苑。
24. 溫明麗(2001)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,未出版
25. 蘇明勇(2003)。批判思考之思考批判：科學教育中的批判思考教學與評量。科學教育研究與發展季刊，2003專刊，88-119。
26. 蘇明勇、黃萬居(2004)。蘇格拉底詰問模式對六年級學生批判思考能力與傾向之研究。中華民國第二十屆科學教育學術研討會，高雄縣:

1. (2023)。高教工程大學部學生批判思考傾向與能力之精進：以電機系大學部課程為例。大學教學實務與研究學刊，7(2)，57-86。