题名

大學生對基因改造作物議題的認知與論證能力之研究

并列篇名

University Students' Knowledge and Argumentation Skills Concerning a Socio-Scientific Issue

DOI

10.6173/CJSE.2010.1803.03

作者

林宗進(Tzung-Jin Lin)；林樹聲(Shu-Sheng Lin)；陳映均(Ying-Chun Chen)

关键词

大學生 ； 社會性科學議題 ； 知識 ； 基因改造作物 ； 論證 ； University Students ； Socio-Scientific Issues ； Knowledge in Science ； Genetically Modified Organisms ； Argumentation

期刊名称

科學教育學刊

卷期/出版年月

18卷3期（2010 / 06 / 01）

页次

229 - 252

内容语文

繁體中文
中文摘要

This study investigated undergraduate students' knowledge, argumentation skills and the relationship between them in the context of a socio-scientific issue-Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). Eighty undergraduate students were categorized into two groups: biology majors and non-biology majors. Two open-ended questionnaires were respectively used to evaluate students' argumentation skills and to measure their understanding of three kinds of GMO knowledge-ontological, epistemological and situational knowledge. The results revealed that biology majors scored significantly higher than non-biology majors in ontological knowledge, epistemological knowledge, situational knowledge and in overall knowledge (p＜.001). Biology majors broadly performed significantly better than non-biology majors on argumentation quality (p＜.05). A significantly positive correlation exists between the students' argumentation skills and their respective scores on ontological knowledge, situational knowledge and overall knowledge (r=.21-.27, p＜.05). The educational implications for improving university students' knowledge about GMO issues and argumentation skills were discussed.
英文摘要

This study investigated undergraduate students' knowledge, argumentation skills and the relationship between them in the context of a socio-scientific issue-Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). Eighty undergraduate students were categorized into two groups: biology majors and non-biology majors. Two open-ended questionnaires were respectively used to evaluate students' argumentation skills and to measure their understanding of three kinds of GMO knowledge-ontological, epistemological and situational knowledge. The results revealed that biology majors scored significantly higher than non-biology majors in ontological knowledge, epistemological knowledge, situational knowledge and in overall knowledge (p＜.001). Biology majors broadly performed significantly better than non-biology majors on argumentation quality (p＜.05). A significantly positive correlation exists between the students' argumentation skills and their respective scores on ontological knowledge, situational knowledge and overall knowledge (r=.21-.27, p＜.05). The educational implications for improving university students' knowledge about GMO issues and argumentation skills were discussed.
主题分类 社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. 林樹聲、黃柏鴻(2009)。國小六年級學生在社會性科學議題教學中之論證能力研究—不同學業成就學生間之比較。科學教育學刊，17(2)，111-133。
    連結：
  2. 林燕文、洪振方(2007)。對話論證的探究對促進學童科學概念理解之探討。花蓮教育大學學報，24，139-177。
    連結：
  3. 楊坤原、張賴妙理(2004)。遺傳學迷思概念之文獻探討及其在教學的啓示。科學教育學刊，12(3)，365-398。
    連結：
  4. Berland, L. K.,Reiser, B. J.(2009).Making sense of argumentation and explanation.Science Education,93(1),26-55.
  5. Brante, T.(Ed.),Fuller, S.(Ed.),Lynch, W.(Ed.)(1993).Controversial science from content to contention.Albany, NY:State University of New York Press.
  6. Chang, S. N.,Chiu, M. H.(2008).Lakatos' scientific research programmes as a framework for analysing informal argumentation about socioscientific issues.International Journal of Science Education,30(13),1753-1773.
  7. de Jong, T.,Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M.(1996).Types and qualities of knowledge.Educational Psychologist,31(2),105-113.
  8. Driver, R.,Newton, P.,Osborne, J.(2000).Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms.Science Education,84(3),287-312.
  9. Hogan, K.(2002).Small groups' ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39(4),341-368.
  10. Jimènez-Aleixandre, M. P.,Rodriguez, A. B.,Duschl, R. A.(2000)."Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics.Science Education,84(6),757-792.
  11. Kolstø, S. D.(2001).'To trust or not to trust,…'-pupils' ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue.International Journal of Science Education,23(9),877-901.
  12. Kolstø, S. D.(2006).Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a riskfocused socio-scientific issue.International Journal of Science Education,28(14),1689-1716.
  13. Kuhn, D.(1992).Thinking as argument.Harvard Educational Review,62(2),155-178.
  14. Kuhn, D.(1991).The skills of argument.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
  15. Levinson, R.(2006).Towards a theoretical framework for teaching controversial socioscientific issues.International Journal of Science Education,28(10),1201-1224.
  16. Levinson, R.(Ed.),Thomas, J.(Ed.)(1997).Science today: Problem or crisis?.New York:Routledge.
  17. Martins, I.,Ogborn, J.(1997).Metaphorical reasoning about genetics.International Journal of Science Education,19(1),47-63.
  18. Mason, L.,Scirica, F.(2006).Prediction of students' argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding.Learning and Instruction,16(5),492-509.
  19. Means, M. L.,Voss, J. F.(1996).Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels.Cognition and Instruction,14(2),139-178.
  20. Osborne, J.,Erduran, S.,Simon, S.(2004).Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41(10),994-1020.
  21. Oulton, C.,Dillon, J.,Grace, M. M.(2004).Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues.International Journal of Science Education,26(4),411-423.
  22. Prokop, P.,Lešková, A.,Kubiatko, M.,Diran, C.(2007).Slovakian students' knowledge of and attitudes toward biotechnology.International Journal of Science Education,29(7),895-907.
  23. Ryder, J.(2001).Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy.Studies in Science Education,36(1),1-44.
  24. Sadler, T. D.(2006).Promoting discourse and argumentation in science teacher education.Journal of Science Teacher Education,17(4),323-346.
  25. Sadler, T. D.(2004).Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41(5),513-536.
  26. Sadler, T. D.(2009).Situated learning in science education: Socio-scientific issues as contexts for practice.Studies in Science Education,45(1),1-42.
  27. Sadler, T. D.,Chambers, F. W.,Zeidler, D. L.(2004).Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue.International Journal of Science Education,26(4),387-409.
  28. Sadler, T. D.,Donnelly, L. A.(2006).Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality.International Journal of Science Education,28(12),1463-1488.
  29. Sadler, T. D.,Fowler, S. R.(2006).A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation.Science Education,90(6),986-1004.
  30. Sadler, T. D.,Zeidler, D. L.(2005).The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues.Science Education,89(1),71-93.
  31. Sadler, T. D.,Zeidler, D. L.(2005).Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,42(1),112-138.
  32. Scholtz, Z.,Braund, M.,Hodges, M.,Koopman, R.,Lubben, F.(2008).South African teachers' ability to argue: The emergence of inclusive argumentation.International Journal of Educational Development,28(1),21-34.
  33. Schwarz, B. B.,Neuman, Y.,Gil, J.,Ilya, M.(2003).Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentative activity.Journal of the Learning Sciences,12(2),219-256.
  34. Seethaler, S.(2005).Helping students make links through science controversy.The American Biology Teacher,67(5),265-274.
  35. Seethaler, S.,Linn, M.(2004).Genetically modified food in perspective: An inquiry-based curriculum to help middle school students make sense of tradeoffs.International Journal of Science Education,26(14),1765-1785.
  36. Simon, S.,Erduran, S.,Osborne, J.(2006).Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom.International Journal of Science Education,28(2-3),235-260.
  37. Toulmin, S. E.(1958).The uses of argument.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
  38. Tytler, R.,Duggan, S.,Gott, R.(2001).Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education.International Journal of Science Education,23(8),815-832.
  39. Upshur, R. E. G.(2000).Seven characteristics of medical evidence.Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice,6(2),93-97.
  40. Venville, G. J.,Gribble, S. J.,Donovan, J.(2005).An exploration of young children's understanding of genetics concepts from ontological and epistemological perspectives.Science Education,89(4),614-633.
  41. Venville, G. J.,Treagust, D. F.(1998).Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,35(9),1031-1055.
  42. Voss, J. F.(Ed.),Perkins, D. N.(Ed.),Segal, J. W.(Ed.)(1991).Informal reasoning and education.Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
  43. Wu, Y.-T.,Tsai, C.-C.(2007).High school students' informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses.International Journal of Science Education,29(9),1163-1187.
  44. Zeidler, D. L.(Ed.)(2003).The role of moral reasoning in socioscientific issues and discourse in science education.Dordrecht, Netherland:Kluwer Academic.
  45. Zeidler, D. L.,Sadler, T. D.,Simmons, M. L.,Howes, E. V.(2005).Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education.Science Education,89(3),357-377.
  46. Zohar, A.,Dori, Y. J.(2003).Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive?.The Journal of the Learning Sciences,12(2),145-181.
  47. Zohar, A.,Nemet, F.(2002).Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39(1),35-62.
  48. 沈孝宙(2008)。轉基因之爭。北京:化學工業。
  49. 林樹聲(2004)。通識素養的培育與爭議性科技議題的教學。南華通識教育研究，2，25-37。
  50. 林燕文、洪振方(2007)。對話論證的探究中學童論述策略對促進科學概念理解之研究。屏東教育大學學報，26，285-324。
  51. 邱皓政(2006)。量化研究與統計分析—SPSS中文視窗版資料分析範例解析。臺北市:五南。
  52. 湯清二(2000)。我國非主修生物大學生對DNA認知的瞭解與改善學習的策略探討。科學教育學刊，8(1)，101-121。
  53. 樓孟羽(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。嘉義市，國立嘉義大學科學教育研究所。
  54. 蔡俊彥、黃台珠(2008)。學童論證能力及科學本質觀之研究。屏東教育大學學報—理工類，28，85-116。
  55. 鄭榮輝、林陳涌(2006)。基因是什麼？—不同科系大學生的基因概念調查分析。中華民國第二十二屆科學教育學術研討會，臺北市:
被引用次数
  1. 陳文正,古智雄(2023)。從「熱認知觀點」探討國小學童的論證學習與科學解釋合理性判斷之研究。科學教育學刊，31(2)，109-132。
  2. 靳知勤、林樹聲(2012)。國小教師實踐社會性科學議題教學之教師知識成長與比較。科學教育學刊，20(1)，41-68。
  3. 賴吉永、溫媺純、張珮珊(2017)。科學探究與實作課程的發展、實施與評量：以實驗室中的科學論證為核心之研究。科學教育學刊，25(4)，355-389。
  4. 林秀玉、辛旻靜(2017)。大學生對人工生殖科技的接受度與觀點。科學教育學刊，25(S)，463-484。
  5. 潘怡如、陳雅君、林煥祥(2018)。以科學新聞融入教學提升中學生自我效能及論證能力之探討。科學教育學刊，26(1)，71-96。
print cancel