题名

運用專業成長活動促進高職教師探究教學之覺轉變之個案研究

并列篇名

A Case Study on the Transition of Vocational High-School Teachers' Perception of Inquiry Teaching through the Application of Professional Development Activities

DOI

10.6173/CJSE.2014.2204.02

作者

張宇樑(Yu-Liang (Aldy) Chang)

关键词

知覺 ； 高職教師 ； 專業成長 ； 探究教學 ； Perception ； Vocational High-School Teacher ； Professional Development ； Inquiry Teaching

期刊名称

科學教育學刊

卷期/出版年月

22卷4期（2014 / 12 / 01）

页次

363 - 388

内容语文

繁體中文
中文摘要

本研究奠基於高瞻計畫之執行，由大學端研究團隊協助一群高職教師透過專業成長課程、討論分享、和省思調整等方式擴展其專業知能，以合作方式共同進行以「跨領域機電整合智慧機器人」為主題及探究教學為核心之課程設計。據此，本文旨在探討高職教師於此專業成長過程中，對於「探究教學」知覺的轉變情形。研究者採用質化個案方法，以嘉義地區某國立高級職業學校之9名教師為研究對象，蒐集在接受為期一年專業成長過程中對探究教學知覺之轉變情形資料，並以編輯分析式策略進行分析。研究結果發現，參與之高職教師們在探究教學之知覺的兩大面向「學習觀點的定位知覺」及「課程與教學的實務知覺」上有明顯之轉變；且在接受專業成長活動後，已能明確知覺到探究教學對學生科學學習之助益，更能據以設計主題之探究教學活動。最後根據結果提出對高中職教師透過專業成長活動進行課程設計、及藉由與大學端之長期合作模式來協助教師們在探究教學知覺上轉變之兩項建議，期望能促進高中職教師理解與投入探究教學之實施。
英文摘要

Based on the execution of the High Scope Project, this study aimed to group vocational highschool teachers for the purpose of professional development with the assistance of the university research team. The targeted group of teachers was equipped with appropriate professional knowledge and ability to cooperatively deign the ＂interdisciplinary inquiry curriculum on 'Mechatronic' intelligence robot,＂ accompanied by various activities of discussion, sharing, reflection, and adjustment. Accordingly, this article was to explore the possible transition of these vocational high-school teachers' perception of ＂inquiry teaching＂ during this one-year professional development process. A qualitative case study approach was employed in this study. Participants were nine teachers of a public vocational high-school in Chiayi area. Data were collected throughout the executive process of the professional development program and then analyzed by the editing analytic techniques for examining the transition of these teachers' perception of inquiry teaching. According to the data analyses, two themes regarding these teachers' perception of inquiry teaching were extracted to show their changes after receiving the professionaldevelopment program: ＂orientated perception of learning conception＂ and ＂practical perception of curriculum and instruction.＂ The findings indicated that these teachers progressively aware the advantages of inquiry teaching for their students' scientific learning, which led to a proper deign of the targeted curriculum with an emphasis of inquiry teaching. Recommendations derived from findings and discussions were proposed for assisting high-school teachers in future curriculum design tasks and= enhancing their perception transition through the support of a cooperative long-term professional development program provided by the university research team. It is also expected that more highschool teachers can comprehend the core concept of inquiry teaching and are willing to devote themselves to implementing inquiry teaching in their classrooms.
主题分类 社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. 李松濤、林煥祥、洪振方(2010)。探究式教學對學童科學論證能力影響之研究。科學教育學刊，18(3)，177-203。
    連結：
  2. 林孟郁、鍾武龍、張月霞、李哲迪、陳穎儀(2013)。高中教師在創新科學課程專業學習社群中的發展歷程。科學教育學刊，21(1)，75-96。
    連結：
  3. 林勇吉、秦爾聰、段曉林(2010)。以敘說探究探討一位國中教師發展數學探究教學之信念與實務。教育科學研究期刊，55(3)，1-32。
    連結：
  4. 林建良、黃台珠、莊雪華、趙大衛(2013)。發展一延伸性CIPP課程評鑑模式運用於高瞻計畫課程─以高中機器人課程為例。科學教育學刊，21(3)，237-262。
    連結：
  5. 洪碧霞、蕭嘉偉、林素微(2010)。PISA數學素養認知成份分析對補救教學的意涵。課程與教學季刊，13(1)，47-66。
    連結：
  6. 陳均伊(2010)。教師專業成長之個案研究：一位國中自然教師探究教學觀點的轉變。教育科學研究期刊，55(2)，233-264。
    連結：
  7. 曾崇賢、段曉林、靳知勤(2011)。探究教學的專業成長歷程─以十位國中科學教師的觀點為例。科學教育學刊，19(2)，143-168。
    連結：
  8. 劉宏文、張惠博(2001)。高中學生進行開放式探究活動之個案研究─問題的形成與解決。科學教育學刊，9，169-196。
    連結：
  9. 蔡明致、林莞如、葉辰楨、張文華、王國華(2011)。試行AA Vee圖融入三階段探究教學模式對科學教師專業成長之影響。師資培育教師專業發展期刊，4(1)，87-116。
    連結：
  10. 蔡執仲、段曉林(2005)。探究式實驗教學對國二學生理化學習動機之影響。科學教育學刊，13，289-315。
    連結：
  11. National Science Teachers Association. (2006). NSTA position statement: Professional development in science education. Retrieved April 29, 2011, from http://www.nsta.org
  12. 國科會高瞻計畫(2007)。第一期高瞻計畫概述。查詢日期：2007年10月1日，檢自http://highscope.ch.ntu.edu.tw/wordpress/?p=5249。
  13. 國科會高瞻計畫(2011)。第二期高瞻計畫徵求書。查詢日期：2012年7月27日，檢自http://tci.ncl.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dnclret&s=id=%22RF10000904574%22.&searchmode=basic&tcihsspage=tcisearch_opt2_search
  14. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: Restatement of the reflective thinking to the educative process.Boston, MA: Health.
  15. Al-Daami, K. K.,Wallace, G.(2007).Curriculum reform in a global context: A study of teachers in Jordan.Journal of Curriculum Studies,39(3),339-360.
  16. Anderson, R. D.(2002).Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry.Journal of Science Teacher Education,13,1-12.
  17. Banerjee, A.(2010).Teaching science using guided inquiry as the central theme: A professional development model for high school science teachers.Science Educator,19(2),1-9.
  18. Barcelos, A. M. F.(2003).Researching beliefs about SLA: A critical review.Beliefs about SLA: New research approaches,Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
  19. Berliner, D. C.(Ed.),Calfee, R. C.(Ed.)(1996).Handbook of educational psychology.New York:MacMillan.
  20. Brown, P.,Friedrichsen, P.,Mongler, L.(2008).2-liter bottles and botanical gardens: Using inquiry to learn ecology.Science Activities,44(4),153-157.
  21. Bruner, J. S.(1960).The process of education.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  22. Bryan, L. A.(2003).Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teacher's belief system about science teaching and learning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,40(9),835-868.
  23. Bybee, R. W.(Ed.)(1985).Science technology society: 1985 yearbook of the national science teachers association.Washington, DC:The Association.
  24. Bybee, R. W.,Taylor, J. A.,Gardner, A.,Scotter, P. V.,Powell, J. C.,Westbrook, A.(2006).The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins, effectiveness, and applications.Colorado Springs, CO:BSCS.
  25. Carin, A. A.,Bass, J. E.,Contant, T. L.(2005).Teaching science as inquiry.Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson.
  26. Chase, C.,Giboson, H. L.(2002).Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students' attitudes toward science.Science Education,86,693-705.
  27. Chester, C.,Quilter, S. M.(1998).Inservice teachers' perceptions of educational assessment.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,33(2),210-236.
  28. Chin, E.-T.,Lin, Y.-C.,Chuang, C.-W.,Tuan, H.-L.(2007).The influence of inquiry-based mathematics teaching on 11th grade high achievers: Focusing on meta-cognition.Proceedings of the 31st conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education,Seoul, Korea:
  29. Crabtree, B. F.(Ed.),Miller, W. L.(Ed.)(1992).Doing qualitative research: Multiple strategies.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
  30. Crawford, B.(2007).Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44(4),613-642.
  31. Dunkhase, J. A.(2003).Coupled-inquiry cycle: A teacher concerns-based model for effective student inquiry.Science Educator,12,10-15.
  32. Espinosa-Bueno, J. S.,Labastida-Pina, D. V.,Padilla-Martínez, K.,Garritz, A.(2011).Pedagogical content knowledge of inquiry: An instrument to assess it and its application to high school in-service science teachers.US-China Education Review,8(5),599-614.
  33. Fry, J.,Klages, C.,Bamhill, A.(2010).A systematic approach to measuring inquiry in teacher education.Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation, and Development,7,37-51.
  34. Gerber, B. L.,Price, C.,Barnes, M.,Hinkle, V.,Barnes, L.,Gordon, P.(2003).Excellence in rural science teaching: Examining elements of professional development models.the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching,Philadelphia, PA.:
  35. Halonen, J. S.,Bosack, T.,Clay, S.,McCarthy, M.,Dunn, D. S.,Hill, G. W.(2003).A rubric for learning, teaching, and assessing scientific inquiry in psychology.Teaching of Psychology,30,196-208.
  36. Hanley, P.,Maringe, F.,Ratcliffe, M.(2008).Evaluation of professional development: Deploying a process-focused model.International Journal of Science Education,30(5),711-725.
  37. Harford, J.,MacRuairc, G.(2008).Engaging student teachers in meaningful reflective practice.Teaching and Teacher Education,24(7),1884-1892.
  38. Jeanpierre, B.,Oberhauser, K.,Freeman, C.(2005).Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers' classroom practices.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,42,668-690.
  39. Jones, S.,Enriquez, G.(2009).Engaging the intellectual and the moral in critical literacy education: The four-year journeys of two teachers from teacher education to classroom practice.Reading Research Quarterly,44(2),145-168.
  40. Karen, G.(2005).Fostering teacher learning through collaborative inquiry.The Clearing House,79(2),88-92.
  41. Kazempour, M.(2009).Impact of inquiry based professional development on core conceptions and teaching practices: A case study.Science Educator,18(2),56-68.
  42. Khishfe, R.,Abd-El-Khalick, F.(2002).Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39,551-578.
  43. Learning, Alberta(2004).Focus on inquiry: A teacher's guide to implementing inquiry-based learning.
  44. Liu, T.-C.,Peng, H.,Wu, W.-H.,Lin, M.-S.(2009).The effects of mobile Natural-science learning based on the 5E learning cycle: A case study.Educational Technology & Society,12(4),344-358.
  45. Marsh, C.(2008).Studies of society and environment: Exploring the teaching possibilities.Sydney, Australia:Prentice Hall.
  46. Merriam, S. B.(2001).Qualitative research and case study applications in education.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
  47. Michael, W. E.,Mark, T. K.(2000).Cognitive psychology.New York:Psychology Press.
  48. National Research Council(2012).A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
  49. National Research Council(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC:National Academic Press.
  50. National Research Council(2000).Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
  51. NGSS Lead States(2013).Next generation science standards: For states, by states.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
  52. Novak, A.(1964).Scientific Inquiry.Bioscience,14,25-28.
  53. Orgill, M.,Thomas, M.(2007).Analogies and the 5E model: Suggestions for using analogies in each phase of the 5E model.The Science Teacher,74,40-45.
  54. Parke, H. M.,Coble, C. R.(1997).Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: A model for transformational science teaching.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,34(8),773-789.
  55. Pataray-Ching, J.,Roberson, M.(2002).Misconceptions about a curriculum as inquiry framework.Language Arts,79(6),498-505.
  56. Pedersen, S.(2003).Motivational orientation in a problem-based learning environment.Journal of Interactive Learning Research,14(1),51-77.
  57. Rowe, K. J.(2003).The importance of teacher quality as a key determinant of students' experiences and outcomes of schooling.ACER Research Conference 2003
  58. Settlage, J.(2007).Demythologizing science teacher education: Conquering the false ideal of open inquiry.Journal of Science Teacher Education,18(4),461-467.
  59. Staer, H.,Goodrum, D.,Hackling, M.(1998).High school laboratory work in Western Australia: Openness to inquiry.Research in Science Education,28(2),219-228.
  60. Sutman, F. X.(1996).Seeking more effective outcomes from science laboratory experiences (grades 7-14): Six companion studies.the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching,Philadelphia, PA.:
  61. Tobin, K. G.(1990).Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better question and answers to improve learning.School Science and Mathematics,90(5),403-418.
  62. Tom, J. M.,Joyce, M. P.,Janet, E.(2013).Problem-based learning as an effective strategy for science teacher professional development.The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas,86,216-223.
  63. Trautmann, N.,MaKinster, J.,Avery, L.(2004).What makes inquiry so hard? (And why is it worth it?).the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching,Vancouver, Canada:
  64. Trowbridge, L. W.,Bybee, R. W.(1990).Becoming a secondary school science teacher.New York:Merrill.
  65. Tuan, H. L.,Chin, C. C.,Shieh, S. H.(2005).The development of a questionnaire to measure students' motivation towards science learning.International Journal of Science Education,27(6),639-654.
  66. Windschitl, M.(2003).Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice?.Science Education,87(1),112-143.
  67. Yin, R. K.(2003).Case study research: Design and methods.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
  68. 王鼎中、丘聖光、林淑玲、梅文慧、林美娟(2009)。創新程式設計課程與教學模式之研發。科學教育月刊，321，2-11。
  69. 朱玉仿(2007)。技職教育改革文獻回顧與前瞻。研習資訊，24(3)，127-134。
  70. 吳武雄、蔡哲銘、邱美虹、常月如、葉昭松(2009)。以建模與認知師徒制開發新興科技融入高中課程之教學研究—臺北市建國高級中學高瞻計畫之總計畫。科學教育月刊，319，2-7。
  71. 吳清基(2009)。,臺北市:立法院。
  72. 李隆盛(2007)。高職品牌需重新定位。師友月刊，485，26-28。
  73. 林永發(2010)。從校本課程到高瞻計畫─麗山高中專業學習社群的經驗分享。中等教育，61(2)，152-165。
  74. 林佳昌、楊子瑩、王國華、林凱胤、余安順、楊秀停(2009)。資訊融入5E探究教學對八年級學生學習成效之行動研究。嘉義大學國民教育研究學報，22，131-157。
  75. 林建隆、徐順益(2007)。國中自然與生活科技教師發展5E探究式光學單元教學模組之研究。物理教育學刊，8(1)，1-16。
  76. 林煥祥、周進洋、李暉、劉聖忠、林素微(2008)。,臺北市:科技部。
  77. 邱榮章(2006)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。彰化市，國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
  78. 柯華葳(2011)。語文課與閱讀能力的培養。教育研究月刊，210，5-14。
  79. 段曉林(2008)。迷人的科學探究教學。中華民國第廿四屆科學教育學術研討會，彰化市:
  80. 紀雅方、溫媺純(2008)。5E學習環融入數學探究教學對國中生學習動機之影響。台灣數學教師電子期刊，13，1-12。
  81. 秦爾聰、林勇吉、林晶珮、段曉林(2009)。實施數學探究教學所遭遇的問題與解決之道：一位七年級數學教師之行動研究。台灣數學教師電子期刊，19，35-58。
  82. 張宇樑(2010)。學習型組織與數學教師專業發展。教育研究月刊，198，103-117。
  83. 張惠博(1993)。邁向科學探究的實驗教學。教師天地，62，12-20。
  84. 張新仁(2008)。從有效教學談中小學教師專業發展評鑑。改寫教師專業發展評鑑的文化故事系列研討會，臺北市:
  85. 張靜儀(1995)。自然科探究教學法。屏師科學教育，1，36-45。
  86. 教育部(2012)。中華民國師資培育白皮書：發揚師道、百年樹人。臺北市:作者。
  87. 教育部技職司(2003)。技職教育改革文獻回顧與前瞻。技術與職業教育，73，1-7。
  88. 曹淇峰、廖家榮、林志弘、邱美嬌、譚利亞、蔡蘊明(2009)。探索式化學實驗課程之開發。科學教育，316，2-8。
  89. 陳木金(2006)。從班級經營策略對教學效能影響看師資培育的實務取向。教育研究與發展期刊，2(1)，33-62。
  90. 陳均伊、張惠博(2008)。一位化學老師實施探究教學的歷程與省思之個案研究─以「火山爆發」教學活動為例。師大學報科學教育類，53(2)，91-123。
  91. 陳均伊、張惠博、張文華(2003)。國中教學模組發展實例：以「鏡」為例。自然與生活科技課程研討會，臺北市:
  92. 陳均伊、張惠博、楊巽斐、鄭一亭(2006)。以學校為本位的合作式專業成長：一位資深教師的教學信念與反思。科學教育月刊，294，2-14。
  93. 黃智皇(2008)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。彰化市，國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
  94. 楊明坤、李建璋、林淑惠、林依柔(2010)。探究式教學融入國小高年級數學領域學習之行動研究─以體積單元為例。屏東教大科學教育，32，39-50。
  95. 蔡清田(2000)。教育行動研究。臺北市:五南。
  96. 鄭嘉裕(2005)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。屏東市，國立屏東教育大學科學教育研究所。
  97. 饒見維(2003)。教師專業發展：理論與實務。臺北市:五南。
被引用次数
  1. 周淑卿,王佩蘭(2020)。科技實作課程發展中教師實務知識建構之個案研究。課程與教學，23(4)，27-57。
  2. (2016)。活動理論觀點下國小師資生數學課程轉化的阻力與助力。教育學報，44(2)，51-79。
print cancel