思考導向的探究式學習對國二學生科學探究能力的影響

The Influences of a Thinking-Based Inquiry Learning Intervention on Eighth Graders' Scientific Inquiry Abilities

10.6173/CJSE.2010.1805.01

洪振方(Jeng-Fung Hung)

明示教學 ； 科學思考策略 ； 科學探究能力 ； 探究式學習 ； Explicit Teaching ； Scientific Thinking Strategies ； Scientific Inquiry Abilities ； Inquiry Learning

科學教育學刊

18卷5期（2010 / 10 / 01）

389 - 415

繁體中文

本研究之思考導向的探究式學習是以探索、解釋、交流及反思等提供學生探究的經驗，再結合與探究有關的科學思考策略的明示教學，以及Zohar (2004)提出的課室中發展思考的五項教學策略所構成，目的在探討其對國二學生科學探究能力的影響。研究採不等組前後測準實驗設計，實驗對象爲三所國中二年級學生共10班，分別爲實驗組5班共172人和對照組5班共172人。實驗組實施思考導向的探究式學習，對照組實施教科書的實驗教學，實驗處理期間爲國二第一學期。以科學過程技能前測爲共變項，科學探究能力爲依變項，進行多變量共變數分析。研究發現：(1)實驗組在形成另有假說、評價及選擇假說、設計實驗、預測實驗結果及解釋等探究能力比對照組好；(2)實驗組在形成另有假說和設計實驗等探究能力的學習保留效果比對照組好；(3)實驗組在控制實驗的設計上仍存在一些問題。本研究對上述的發現，提出教學上與研究上的建議。

The thinking-based inquiry learning approach in this study was to provide students' inquiry experiences through explorations, explanations, communications and reflections, combined with explicit teaching of scientific thinking strategies related to inquiry as well as the five teaching strategies proposed by Zohar (2004), to explore the influence on eighth graders' scientific inquiry abilities. A non-equivalent pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design was adopted. Ten classes of eighth graders participated in this study with an experiment group and a control group each of 172 persons. The thinking-based inquiry learning experimental sequence and an equivalent control group sequence with traditional publisher-designed experiments were conducted separately for one semester. An MANCOVA was conducted with students' pre-test science process skills scores as the covariate and their scientific inquiry abilities as the dependent variables. The results revealed that students in the experimental groups developed better scientific inquiry abilities such as formulating alternative hypotheses, evaluating, selecting hypothesis, designing experiments, predicting results and explaining, than students in the control groups. Additionally, a better learning retention effect was found for experimental groups in formulating alternative hypotheses and designing experiments. However, some difficulties in designing controlled experiments were still observed for students in the experiment groups. Based on the findings of the present study, some recommendations were provided for science teaching and further research.

1. 楊秀停、王國華(2007)。實施引導式探究教學對於國小學童學習成效之影響。科學教育學刊，15(4)，439-459。
   連結：
2. Abd-El-Khalick, F.,Boujaoude, S.,Duschl, R.,Lederman, N. G.,Mamlok-Naamn, R.,Hofstein, A.(2004).Inquiry in science education: International perspectives.Science Education,88(3),397-419.
3. Alonzo, A. C.,Aschbacher, P. R.(2004).Value-added? Long assessment of students' scientific inquiry skill.Annual Meeting of the AERA,San Diego:
4. Ben-David, A.,Zohar, A.(2009).Contribution of meta-strategic knowledge to scientific inquiry learning.International Journal of Science Education,31(12),1657-1682.
5. Bybee, R. W.(1997).Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices.Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.
6. Chen, Z.,Klahr, D.(1999).All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy.Child Development,70(5),1098-1120.
7. Cohen, J.(1992).A power primer.Psychological Bulletin,112(1),155-159.
8. Flick, L. B.(Ed.),Lederman, N. G.(Ed.)(2004).Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer.
9. Germann, P. J.,Aram, R.,Burke, G.(1996).Identifying patterns and relationships among the responses of seventh-grade students to the science process skill of designing experiments.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,33(1),79-99.
10. Hackling, M. W.(1998).Working scientifically: Implementing and assessing open investigation work in science.East Perth, Australia:Education Department of Western Australia.
11. Holt, L. C.,Kysilka, M. L.(2006).Instructional patterns: Strategies for maximizing student learning.London:Sage.
12. Keys, C. W.,Bryan, L. A.(2001).Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38(6),631-645.
13. Klahr, D.,Dunbar, K.(1988).Dual search space during scientific reasoning.Cognitive Science,12(1),1-48.
14. Krajcik, J. S.,Czerniak, C. M.,Berger, C. F.(2002).Teaching science in elementary and middle school classrooms: A project-based approach.New York:McGraw Hill.
15. Kuhn, D.(2005).Education for thinking.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
16. Lawrenz, F.,Huffman, D.,Welch, W.(2001).The science achievement of various subgroups on alternative assessment formats.Science Education,85(3),279-290.
17. Lawson, A. E.(2002).Science teaching and development of thinking.Belmont, CA:Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.
18. Lee, O.,Buxton, C.,Lewis, S.,LeRoy, K.(2006).Science inquiry and student diversity: Enhanced abilities and continuing difficulties after an instructional intervention.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,43(7),607-636.
19. Liu, C. -T.,Veronesi, P. D.,Lieu, J.,Yager, R. E.(1994).1994-95 Iowa assessment handbook.Iowa:University of Iowa.
20. National Research Council(2000).Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
21. National Research Council(1996).National Science Education Standards.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
22. Oliver, A.(2006).Creative teaching: Science in the early years and primary classroom.London:David Fulton.
23. Rhoton, J.(Ed.),Shane, P.(Ed.)(2006).Teaching science in the twenty-first century.Arlington, VA:NSTA Press.
24. Roberts, R.,Gott, R.(2000).Procedural understanding in biology: How is it characterized in texts?.School Science Review,82(298),83-91.
25. Smithenry, D. W.(2010).Integrating guided inquiry into a traditional chemistry curricular framework.International Journal of Science Education,32(13),1689-1714.
26. Tamir, P.(1983).Inquiry and the science teacher.Science Education,67(5),657-672.
27. Toth, E. E.,Klahr, D.,Chen, Z(2000).Bridging research and practice: A cognitively based classroom intervention for teaching experimentation skills to elementary school children.Cognition and Instruction,18(4),423-459.
28. Venville, G.(Ed.),Dawson, V.(Ed.)(2004).The art of teaching science.Crows Nest, NSW:Allen & Unwin.
29. Wenning, C. J.(2007).Assessing inquiry skills as a component of scientific literacy.Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online,4(2),21-24.
30. Zimmerman, C.(2007).The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school.Developmental Review,27(2),172-223.
31. Zion, M.,Michalsky, T.,Mevarech, Z. R.(2005).The effects of metacognitive instruction embedded within an asynchronous learning network on scientific inquiry skills.International Journal of Science Education,27(8),957-983.
32. Zohar, A.(2004).Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students' learning and teachers' professional development.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer.
33. Zohar, A.,Ben-David, A.(2008).Explicit teaching of meta-strategic knowledge in authentic classroom situations.Metacognition and Learning,3(1),59-82.
34. Zohar, A.,Peled, B.(2008).The effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge on low- and high-achieving students.Learning and Instruction,18(4),337-353.
35. 朱淑吟(2002)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。花蓮市，國立花蓮師範學院國小科學教育研究所。
36. 林清山(1992)。心理與教育統計學。臺北市:東華。

1. 楊家驊(2023)。國小六年級學生對於科學探究本質之認識。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所學位論文。2023。1-103。