以實作評量方式探討引導發現式教學模式之學習成效－以「聲音」概念為例

Exploring the Effectiveness of Guided Discovery Teaching by Performance Assessment on the Concept of Sound Wave

10.6173/CJSE.2014.2201.03

顧炳宏(Bing-Hong Ku)；陳瓊森(Chyong-Sun Chen)；溫媺純(Lydia Mei-Chun Wen)

引導發現式教學 ； 紙筆測驗 ； 實作評量 ； 聲音概念 ； Guided Discovery Teaching ； Paper-and-pencil Test ； Performance Assessment ； Sound Wave Concept

科學教育學刊

22卷1期（2014 / 03 / 01）

57 - 86

繁體中文

本研究主要目的在探討實作評量和紙筆測驗此兩種不同評量方式對國中八年級聲音概念引導發現式教學成效之影響。本研究主要採準實驗研究法，針對三個實驗－控制組別，六個班，總人數203位的八年級學生，以質性、量化資料收集與分析方法並行的方式，探討引導發現式教學和傳統講述式教學，於不同評量情境下，對學生概念學習成效之影響之差異和成因。研究結果顯示，紙筆測驗不易測得學生真正的理解和能力，因此以聲音概念紙筆測驗作為評量工具時，無法顯現出引導發現式教學和傳統講述式教學兩者之間概念教學成效之差異；相反的，實作評量比紙筆測驗更能表現出學生真實的學習成效，因此若以聲音概念實作評量作為評量工具時，則可顯示引導發現式教學在概念學習成效上優於傳統講述式教學。此外，本研究根據研究結果亦衍申出「教學形式和評量形式應相互搭配」此一重要結論。

The purpose of this study mainly aimed to design guided discovery teaching activities and explore their effectiveness on the sound wave concept by performance assessment. A quasi-experimental method was employed in this study to explore the effectiveness of different teaching styles-guided discovery teaching and the traditional lecture teaching-on the sound wave concept by using different assessment formats-performance assessment and the paper-pencil test. Through both quantitative and qualitative data analyses, it was firstly found that compared with the traditional lecture teaching, guided discovery teaching did not provide better concept learning achievements in the paper-pencil test because of the failure of the paper-pencil test to probe the real understanding and abilities of students. Secondly, it was found that compared with the traditional lecture teaching, guided discovery teaching provided better concept learning achievements in performance assessment, which meant that performance assessment had better effects on probing students' concept learning than the paper-pencil test. Thirdly, based on the results mentioned above, this study also revealed the crucial conclusion of aligning the assessment format with the teaching style.

1. 余民寧(2007)。教育測驗與評量─成就測驗與教學評量。臺北市:心理。
   連結：
2. 涂志銘、林秀玉、張賴妙理、鄭湧涇(2008)。符合建構論理念的教學策略對植物的養分與能量概念學習的成效。科學教育學刊，16(1)，75-103。
   連結：
3. 楊凱琳、林福來、蕭志如(2012)。數學建模評量規準之研究。科學教育學刊，20(4)，319-342。
   連結：
4. 顧炳宏、陳瓊森、溫媺純(2011)。從學生的表現與觀點探討引導發現式教學作為發展探究教學之折衷方案角色的成效─以密度概念為例。科學教育學刊，19(3)，257-282。
   連結：
5. Abell, S. K.(Ed.),Lederman, N. G.(Ed.)(2007).Handbook of research on science education.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Airasian, P. W.(1994).Classroom assessment.New York:McGraw-Hill.
7. Airasian, P. W.(1996).Assessment in the classroom: A concise approach.New York:McGraw-Hill.
8. Bransford, J. D.(Ed.),Brown, A. L.(Ed.),Cocking, R. R.(Ed.)(2000).How people Learn.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
9. Brualdi, A.(1998).,Washington, DC:Eric Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.
10. Bruner, J. S.(1986).Actual minds, possible words.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
11. Bruner, J. S.(1990).Acts of meaning.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
12. Bruner, J. S.(1961).The act of discovery.Harvard Educational Review,31,21-32.
13. Bruner, J. S.(1960).The process of education.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
14. Burger, S. E.,Burger, D. L.(1994).Determining the validity of performance-based assessment.Educational Measurement: Issue and Practice,13(1),9-15.
15. Cobb, P.(1998).The tension between theories of learning and instruction in mathematics education.Educational Psychologist,23(2),87-103.
16. Collette, A. T.,Chiappetta, E. L.(1989).Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools (2nd ed.).Columbus, OH:Charles E. Merrill.
17. Craig, R.(1956).Directed versus independent discovery of established relations.Journal of Educational Psychology,47(4),223-234.
18. Crocker, L.(1997).Assessing content representativeness of performance assessment exercises.Applied Measurement in Education,10(1),83-95.
19. Dunbar, S. B.,Koretz, D. M.,Hoover, H. D.(1991).Quality control in the development and use of performance assessment.Applied Measurement in Education,4(4),289-303.
20. Gagné, R. M.,Brown, L. T.(1961).Some factors in the programming of conceptual learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology,62(4),313-321.
21. Hickman, P.,Isola, D.,Reif, M.(2008).Using formative assessment and feedback to improve science teacher practice.Assessing science learning: Perspectives from research and practice,Arlington, VA:
22. Lesh, R. A.,Doerr, H. M.(2003).Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Linder, C. J.(1992).Understanding sound: So what is the problem?.Physics Education,27(5),258-264.
24. Linder, C. J.,Erickson, G. L.(1989).A study of tertiary physics students' conceptualizations of sound.International Journal of Science Education,11(5),491-501.
25. Linn, R. L.,Burton, E.(1994).Performance-based assessment: Implication of task specificity.Educational Measurement: Issue and Practice,13(1),5-8.
26. Linn, R. L.,Gronlund, N. E.(2000).Measurement and assessment in teaching (6th ed.).London:Prentice-Hall.
27. Linn, R. L.,Gronlund, N. E.(2003).Measurement and assessment in teaching (8th ed.).London:Prentice-Hall.
28. Linn, R. L.,Miller, M. D.(2005).Measurement and assessment in teaching (9th ed.).London:Prentice-Hall.
29. Matthews, M. R.(2002).Constructivism and science education: A further appraisal.Journal of Science Education and Technology,11(2),121-134.
30. Messick, S.(1995).Standards of validity and the validity of standard in performance assessment.Educational Measurement: Issue and Practice,14(4),5-8.
31. National Research Council(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
32. Piaget, J.(1972).The principles of genetic epistemology.New York:Basic Books.
33. Quellmalz, E. S.(1991).Developing criteria for performance assessments: The missing link.Applied Measurement in Education,4(4),319-331.
34. Skinner, B. F.(1968).The technology of teaching.New York:Applet on Century-Crofts.
35. Staver, J. R.(1998).Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science learning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,35(5),501-520.
36. Stiggins, R. J.(1987).Design and development of performance assessment.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,6(3),33-42.
37. Tsai, C. C.(2003).The interplay between philosophy of science and the practice of science education.Curriculum and Teaching,18(1),27-43.
38. Tsai, C. C.(1998).Science learning and constructivism.Curriculum and Teaching,13(1),31-52.
39. Wiggins, G. P.(1998).Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
40. 王文中、呂金燮、吳毓瑩、張郁雯、張淑慧(2008)。教育測驗與評量─教室學習觀點。五南:臺北市。
41. 吳挺鋒(2010)。中學生科學興趣大調查─臺灣孩子八成不想當科學家。天下雜誌，460，70-75。
42. 李坤崇(1999)。多元化教學評量。臺北市:心理。
43. 涂金堂(2009)。教育測驗與評量。臺北市:三民。
44. 張敏雪(1998)。教室內的實作評量。教育資料與研究，20，24-27。
45. 張靜儀、陳世峰(2002)。國小學童聲音概念二階段評量診斷工具之發展研究。屏東師院學報，17，401-440。
46. 教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程總綱綱要。臺北市:作者。
47. 陳文典(2000)。實作評量的理念與實施。科學教育月刊，231，64-66。
48. 陳文典、陳義勳、李武雄、簡茂發(1995)。由馬里蘭州的學習成就評量與其在臺灣的試測結果看─實作評量的功能與運用。科學教育月刊，185，2-11。
49. 彭森明(1996)。實作評量─理論與實際。教育資料與研究，9，44-48。
50. 詹志禹編(2002)。建構論：理論基礎與教育應用。臺北縣:正中。
51. 顧炳宏、楊孟欣、陳瓊森(2009)。多變的聲音─國中八年級聲波概念之教學活動設計。科學教育月刊，322，20-32。

1. 戴建耘,劉銘恩,黃敦煌,丁淑觀(2020)。從實作評量探討小組解構問題發展程序性知識與新課綱核心素養。科學教育學刊，28(S)，483-507。
2. 賴志樫(2020)。生活科技課程實作教學的理論探究與教師訪談。課程與教學，23(4)，1-25。