"5 Why"鷹架式提問提升國小學生學習成就與科學探究學習能力之研究～以“如何做麵包？”教學模組為例

The Promotion of Pupil's Science Achievement and Scientific Inquiry Ability through the Use of "5 Why" Scaffolding Strategies-"How to Make Bread" Module as a Teaching Example

10.6173/CJSE.2008.1604.02

盧秀琴(Chow-Chin Lu)；洪榮昭(Jon-Chao Hong)；蔡春微(Chun-Wei Tsai)

5 Why鷹架式提問 ； 教學資源中心 ； 科學探究學習能力 ； 魚骨圖 ； 5 Why Scaffolding Asking Strategies ； Instructional Resource Center ； Science Inquiry Learning Ability ； Fishbone Diagram

科學教育學刊

16卷4期（2008 / 08 / 01）

395 - 413

繁體中文

本研究依據Kaartinen和Kumpulainen (2002)的精神，研發出適用於國小四年級學童”5 Why”鷹架式提問發展「如何做麵包？」教學模組。此模組主要是以社區的麵包工廠做為教學資源中心，提供製作麵包的理論與實務，且供應材料和器具讓學童做麵包，並負責解答相關的問題。本研究採用準實驗法進行研究，實驗組(n=105)使用”5 Why”鷹架式提問的探究教學，即教師引導思考方向，讓學童追根究底的討論，找出問題的根本原因，並提出問題解決的策略；對照組(n=105)使用直接講述教學。研究結果發現，實驗組學童的科學概念、技巧及科學探究學習能力，均顯著優於對照組學童；實驗組學童經由”5 Why”鷹架式提問之探究學習後，能擴散思考各個層面的問題，其畫出的魚骨圖能幫助聚合於核心問題並提出解決策略。

This study developed an inquiry teaching module, ”how to make bread?”, which is suitable for use with fourth-grade students by asking ”5 Why” scaffolding strategies, based on the work of Kaartinen and Kumpulainen (2002). The module used a community bread factory as an instructional resource center. The study was conducted using a quasi-experimental design. The experimental group (n=105) received inquiry-based teaching by asking ”5 Why” scaffolding strategies. That is, teachers issued some directions to inspire students to ask questions and solve problems. By then, pupils found the root cause of the problems, and developed problem solving strategies. The control group (n=105) were taught via a direct teaching approach with teachers' explaining, modeling, and revising. The pupils followed teachers' procedures and asked questions if needed. The results showed that experimental group pupils' scientific concepts and techniques of scientific inquiry ability were superior to the control group. In addition, the experimental group was able to extend their thinking and concentrate on a core problem with the help of drawing a fishbone diagram.

1. 歐用生(2002)。快樂學習或安樂死？～體驗學習的批判教育學意涵。課程與教學季刊，5(4)，107-124。
   連結：
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)(1994).Benchmarks for science literacy.New York:Oxford University Press.
3. Association for Experiential Education(1995).ABE definition of experiential education.The AEE Horizon,15(1),21.
4. Beck, J.,Forstmeier, W.(2007).Superstition and belief as inevitable by-products of an adaptive learning strategy.Human Nature,18,35-46.
5. Cohen, J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
6. Crawford, B. A.(2000).Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,37(9),916-937.
7. Dalal A. K.,Agarwal R.(1987).Causal thinking and expectation of success in the achievement context.Journal of General Psychology,114(1),57-68.
8. Evans, J.,St. B. T.(1989).Bias in human reasoning.Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
9. Finn, H.,Maxwell, M.,Calver, M.(2002).Why does experimentation matter in teaching ecology?.Journal of Biological Education,36,158-162.
10. Fugelsang, J. A.,Dunbar, K. N.(2005).Brain- based mechanisms underlying complex causal thinking.Neuropsychologia,43,1204-1213.
11. Where Did Root Cause Analysis Conic From?
12. Hong, J. C.(2006).Paper presented at the 2006 ISPIM Conference.Athens:Greece.
13. Hsnnafin, M.,Land, S.,Oliver, K.,C. Reigeluth (Ed.)(1999).Instructional design theories and models, volume 2.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Kaartinen, S.,Kumpulainen, K.(2002).Collaborative inquiry and the construction of explanation m the learning of science.Learning and Instruction,12(2),189-212.
15. Lu, C. C.,Hong, J. C.,Chen, C. C.(2007).Paper presented at Asian Conference on Creativity Development.Taiwan:National Taiwan Nominal University.
16. Lu, C. C.,Hong, J. C.,Tseng, Y. C.(2007).Paper presented at Redesigning pedagogy 2007 Conference, SC1 388.Singapore:National Institute of Education.
17. Lu, C. C.,Hong, J. C.,Tseng, Y. C.(2007).Paper presented at Asian Conference on Creativity Development.Taiwan:National Taiwan Normal University.
18. Lunenberg, M. L.,Volman, M.(1999).Ac-five learning: Views and actions of students and teachers in basic education.Teaching and Teacher Education,15(4),431-445.
19. Piaget, J.,D. Elkind (Ed.)(1967).Six psychological studies.NY:Random House (Original work publisher in 1940).
20. Polman, J. L.,Pea, R. D.(2001).Transformative communication as a cultural tool for guiding-inquiry science.Science Education,85(3),223-238.
21. Prostano, E. T.,Prostano, J. S.(1987).The school library media center.Englewood, CD:Libraries Unlimited.
22. Methods & tools, QA resources, cause-and-effect analysis
23. van Zee, B. H.,Hammer, D.,Bell, M.,Roy, P.,Peter, J.(2005).Learning and teaching science as inquiry: A case study of elementary school teachers` investigations of light.Science Education,89(6),1007-1042.
24. Social development theory
25. Scaffolding learning. Adapted from Strategic reading: Guiding students to lifelong literacy
26. Yager, K. F.(1992).The STS approach par allels constructivist practices.Science Education International,3(2),18-20.
27. Zion, M.,Slezak, M.(2005).It takes two to tango: in dynamic inquiry, the self-directed student acts in association with the facilitating teacher.Teaching and Teacher Education,21,875-894.
28. Zion, M.,Slezak, M.,Shapira, D.,Link, B.,Bashan, N.,Brumer, M.,Orian, T.,Nuasinowitz, R.,Court, D.,Agrest, B.,Mendelovici, R.,Valanides, N.(2004).Dynamic, open inquiry in Biology learning.Science Education,88(4),728-753.
29. 于瑞珍(2004)。校外教學與科學博物館。教學科技與媒體，70，15-28。
30. 王美芬、熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理出版社。
31. 朱則剛(1990)。在師範學院設立教育資源中心的理念與規劃。視聽教育雙月刊，31(4)，25-29。
32. 余安邦、林民程、張經昆、陳烘玉、陳浙雲、郭照燕、劉台光、周遠祁、趙家誌(2002)。社區有教室－學校課程與社區總體營造的遭逢與對話。台北:遠流。
33. 李崑山(1986)。國民小學戶外教學理論與實務初探。環境教育，29，62-69。
34. 林菁(1998)。一個教學與科技整合的理想－談國小教學資源中心。教學科技與媒體，38，3-13。
35. 洪榮昭(1997)。精釋 ( Hermenutic )研究法在政策評量的應用。中等教育，48(5)，39-47。
36. 翁榮桐(2000)。從知識管理論教學資源中心之設立。教師天地，107，66-67。
37. 教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要－自然與生活科技學習領域。台北:教育部。
38. 教育型文化創意商品研發案例
39. 郭琪瑩、王美芬(2004)。學校本位戶外教學對於科學態度之影響－以象山生態教學為例。台北市立師範學院學報：人文藝衍與社會科學類科學教育類，35(1)，165-186。
40. 陳浙雲、余安邦(2002)。社區有教室：九年一貫課程與社區學校化的實踐。教育研究資訊，10(3)，29-48。
41. 黃萬居(2002)。由教學原理論述 STS 教學活動之應用。科學教育研究與發展，29，59-85。
42. 從豐田公司5Why看國內企業流程優化

1. 林意雪,左榕(2021)。國小低年級教師轉化國語科讀寫教學之探究。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，14(3)，29-56。
2. 盧秀琴,劉靜文(2021)。國小自然科教師學習兩種探究式教學法與抉擇應用。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，14(1)，1-27。
3. 盧秀琴、陳月雲、洪榮昭(2011)。設計體驗式探究鷹架教學應用於非制式科學教育─不同探究能力學童的學習比較。科學教育學刊，19(4)，359-381。
4. 盧秀琴、洪榮昭、柯琳耀(2009)。運用社區資源實施5Why鷹架式提問教學活動。教育實踐與研究，22(2)，1-32。
5. 盧秀琴、徐于婷(2016)。國小師資生在自然領域的專業成長─以探究式教學為例。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，9(1)，115-142。
6. 羅廷瑛(2015)。多元文化探究教學模組實施國小學生數理成就及文化學習之行動研究。人文社會學報，11(4)，307-335。