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

Promoting Secondary School Students' Science Self-Efficacy and Argumentation Ability with Science News Instruction

10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0004

潘怡如(Yi-Ju Pan)；陳雅君(Ya-Chun Chen)；林煥祥(Huann-Shyang Lin)

科學自我效能 ； 科學新聞 ； 論證能力 ； Self-Efficacy ； Science News ； Argumentation Ability

科學教育學刊

26卷1期（2018 / 03 / 01）

71 - 96

繁體中文

本研究探討透過「科學新聞教學活動」後，學生在論證能力及科學自我效能提升之情形，以及論證能力與科學自我效能之關係。研究工具包括「論證能力測驗」、「科學新聞論證活動學習單」和「科學自我效能量表」。研究對象為屏東縣某公立高中的兩個自然組班級，一個班級為實驗組(N = 29)，實施科學新聞融入教學，另一個班級為對照組(N =29)。研究結果發現：一、實驗組學生在論證能力後測表現顯著優於對照組(F = 49.93, p ＜.001)，並在科學自我效能的後測表現也顯著優於對照組(F = 45.77, p ＜ .001)。二、實驗組學生論證能力成長趨勢由較低層次逐漸發展為較高層次。三、實驗組學生論證能力前後測變化量與科學自我效能前後測變化量具有中度顯著正相關(r = .46, p ＜ .01)

This quasi-experimental study was designed to explore the efficacy of using science news to promote the development of secondary students' argumentation ability and science self-efficacy and investigate the relationship of the two dependent variables. A pre-posttest design was employed to invite one class of 11th grades (N = 29) as the experimental group with 16 lessons argumentation instruction, while another class (N = 29) with the similar backgrounds using traditional instruction served as the comparison group. The instruments of science argumentation ability test, science news argumentation activity worksheet and science self-efficacy questionnaire along with follow-up interviews were used to assess the two group students' performance. Research findings revealed that the experimental group students outperformed those in comparison group in science argumentation ability (F = 49.93, p ＜ .001) and science self-efficacy (F = 45.77, p ＜ .001).The level of experimental group students' argumentation ability have developed gradually from lower level to higher level overtime. In addition, significant correlation existed between the experimental group students' pre-posttest variation scores in the science argumentation ability test and the survey of science self-efficacy questionnaire.

1. 何仕仁、黃台珠、吳裕益(2007)。科學自我效能量表之發展。科學教育學刊，15(6)，613-626。
   連結：
2. 李如偉、蘇明洲、黃湃翔、呂仲誠、高慧蓮(2012)。以科學讀寫模式提升國小學童論證能力之研究。科學教育學刊，20(6)，483-514。
   連結：
3. 李松濤、林煥祥、洪振方(2010)。探究式教學對學童科學論證能力之探究。科學教育學刊，18(3)，177-203。
   連結：
4. 林宗進、林樹聲、陳映均(2010)。大學生對基因改造作物議題的認知與論證能力之研究。科學教育學刊，18(3)，229-252。
   連結：
5. 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：
6. 林靜雯、林錦鴻、陳美蓉(2014)。科學新聞觀點對不同年齡階段女性健康決策之影響—以荷爾蒙療法為例。科學教育學刊，22(3)，281-306。
   連結：
7. 洪振方、林志能(2011)。網路與課室學習環境促進學童論證能力之效益。教育實踐與研究，24(1)，67-106。
   連結：
8. 陳文正、古智雄、許瑛玿、楊文金(2011)。概念卡通論證教學促進學童論證能力之研究。科學教育學刊，19(1)，69-99。
   連結：
9. 陳穎志、曾敬梅、張文華(2010)。探討教師角色在促進國小學童論證表現的改變—以啟發式科學寫作（SWH）教學為情境的四年個案研究。科學教育學刊，18(5)，417-442。
   連結：
10. 黃俊儒、簡妙如(2008)。「科學家發明了什麼？！」—解析學生對於科學新聞中的科技產物意象。科學教育學刊，16(4)，415-438。
    連結：
11. 黃俊儒、簡妙如(2010)。在科學與媒體的接壤中所開展之科學傳播研究：從科技社會公民的角色及需求出發。新聞學研究，105，127-166。
    連結：
12. 黃翎斐、張文華、林陳涌(2008)。不同佈題模式對學生論證表現的影響。科學教育學刊，16(4)，375-393。
    連結：
13. 楊桂瓊、林煥祥、洪瑞兒(2012)。以論證活動探討國小學童論證能力和科學本質之表現。科學教育學刊，20(2)，145-170。
    連結：
14. 楊淑萍、林煥祥(2010)。由家庭經濟資源及文化資源探討我國學生在PISA科學、數學素養的表現科學。科學教育學刊，18(6)，547-562。
    連結：
15. 蔡佩穎、張文華、林陳涌、張惠博(2013)。不同性別七年級學生論證科學新聞之學習效益。科學教育學刊，21(4)，455-481。
    連結：
16. 蔡佩穎、張文華、林雅慧、張惠博(2012)。初探論證科學新聞對七年級學生生物學習之效益。中等教育，63(1)，13-37。
    連結：
17. 蔡佩穎、張惠博、林雅慧、張文華(2010)。小組立場、小組組成及文本特性對於學生論證生殖遺傳新聞之效應。科學教育學刊，18(3)，253-276。
    連結：
18. 蔡俊彥、黃台珠、楊錦潭(2008)。國小學童網路論證能力及科學概念學習之研究。科學教育學刊，16(2)，171-192。
    連結：
19. 鍾昌宏、王國華(2014)。國民中學學生接受不同電腦模擬融入論證式探究的教學模式之學習成效探討—以遺傳單元為例。數位學習科技期刊，6(3)，19-40。
    連結：
20. 蘇衍丞、林樹聲(2012)。在社會性科學議題情境下應用鷹架教學提升國小六年級學生論證能力。科學教育學刊，20(4)，343-366。
    連結：
21. 教育部(2010)。普通高級中學必修科目「基礎化學」課程綱要。查詢日期：2017年7月28日，檢自http://ftp.nssh.ntpc.edu.tw/natural/09-chemi.pdf
22. Kelley, T. L. (1939). The selection of upper and lower groups for the validation of test items. Journal of Educational Psychology, 30(1), 17-24.
23. 教育部(2014)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。查詢日期：2017年7月28日，檢自http://12cur.naer.edu.tw/upload/files/96d4d3040b01f58da73f0a79755ce8c1.pdf
24. Albe, V.(2008).When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students' argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue.Research in Science Education,38(1),67-90.
25. Bandura, A.(1997).Self-efficacy: The exercise of control.New York:W. H. Freeman.
26. Billig, M.(1987).Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology.New York:Cambridge University Press.
27. Britner, S. L.,Pajares, F.(2006).Sources of science self‐efficacy beliefs of middle school students.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,43(5),485-499.
28. Chen, H.-T.,Wang, H.-H.,Lu, Y.-Y.,Lin, H.-S.,Hong, Z.-R.(2016).Using a modified argument- driven inquiry to promote elementary school students' engagement in learning science and argumentation.International Journal of Science Education,38(2),170-191.
29. Chin, C.,Osborne, J.(2010).Students' questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,47(7),883-908.
30. Clark, D. B.,Sampson, V.(2008).Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,45(3),293-321.
31. Cohen, J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Dawes, L.(2004).Talk and learning in classroom science.International Journal of Science Education,26(6),677-695.
33. Dawson, V. M.,Venville, G.(2010).Teaching strategies for developing students' argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics.Research in Science Education,40(2),133-148.
34. Driver, R.,Newton, P.,Osborne, J.(2000).Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms.Science Education,84(3),287-312.
35. Elliott, P.(2006).Reviewing newspaper articles as a technique for enhancing the scientific literacy of student-teachers.International Journal of Science Education,28(11),1245-1265.
36. Erduran, S.(Ed.),Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P.(Ed.)(2007).Argumentation in science education.Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Springer.
37. Erduran, S.,Simon, S.,Osborne, J.(2004).TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse.Science Education,88(6),915-933.
38. Gardner, G. E.,Jones, M. G.,Ferzli, M.(2009).Popular media in the biology classroom: Viewing popular science skeptically.The American Biology Teacher,71(6),332-335.
39. Halkia, K.,Mantzouridis, D.(2005).Students' views and attitudes towards the communication code used in press articles about science.International Journal of Science Education,27(12),1395-1411.
40. Hobbs, R.(2007).Reading the media: Media literacy in the high school English.New York:Teachers College Press.
41. Hong, Z. R.,Lin, H.-S.(2013).Boys' and girls' involvement in science learning and their self‐efficacy in Taiwan.International Journal of Psychology,48(3),272-284.
42. Hong, Z. R.,Lin, H.-S.,Lawrenz, F. P.(2012).Effects of an integrated science and societal implication intervention on promoting adolescents' positive thinking and emotional perceptions in learning science.International Journal of Science Education,34(3),329-352.
43. Jarman, R.,McClune, B.(2007).Developing scientific literacy: Using news media in the classroom.Maidenhead, England:Open University Press.
44. Khishfe, R.(2014).Explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction in the context of socio scientific issues: An effect on student learning and transfer.International Journal of Science Education,36(6),974-1016.
45. Krajcik, J. S.,Sutherland, L. M.(2010).Supporting students in developing literacy in science.Science,328(5977),456-459.
46. Kuhn, D.(2016).A role for reasoning in a dialogic approach to critical thinking.Topoi,37(1),121-128.
47. Lee, W.,Lee, M.-J.,Bong, M.(2014).Testing interest and self-efficacy as predictors of academic self-regulation and achievement.Contemporary Educational Psychology,39(2),86-99.
48. Lin, H.,Lawrenz, F.,Lin, S.,Hong, Z.(2013).Relationships among affective factors and preferred engagement in science related activities.Public Understanding of Science,22(8),941-954.
49. Lin, H.-S.,Hong, Z.-R.,Chen, Y.-C.(2013).Exploring the development of college students' situational interest in learning science.International Journal of Science Education,35(13),2152-2173.
50. Maier, M.,Rothmund, T.,Retzbach, A.,Otto, L.,Besley, J. C.(2014).Informal learning through science media usage.Educational Psychologist,49(2),86-103.
51. McClune, B.,Jarman, R.(2010).Critical reading of science-based news reports: Establishing a knowledge, skills and attitudes framework.International Journal of Science Education,32(6),727-752.
52. McDonald, C. V.(2010).The influence of explicit nature of science and argumentation instruction on preservice primary teachers' views of nature of science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,47(9),1137-1164.
53. Next Generation Science Standards Lead States(2013).Next generation science standards: For states, by states.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
54. Nichols, K.,Gillies, R.,Hedberg, J.(2016).Argumentation-based collaborative inquiry in science through representational work: Impact on primary students' representational fluency.Research in Science Education,46(3),343-364.
55. Norris, S. P.,Phillips, L. M.,Korpan, C. A.(2003).University students' interpretation of media reports of science and its relationship to background knowledge, interest, and reading difficulty.Public Understanding of Science,12(2),123-145.
56. Nussbaum, M.(2002).Education for citizenship in an era of global connection.Studies in Philosophy and Education,21(4-5),289-303.
57. Oliveras, B.,Márquez, C.,Sanmartí, N.(2013).The use of newspaper articles as a tool to develop critical thinking in science classes.International Journal of Science Education,35(6),885-905.
58. Osborne, J.,Erduran, S.,Simon, S.(2004).Ideas, evidence & argument in science: CPD training pack.London:King's College.
59. 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.
60. Sadler, T. D.,Zeidler, D. L.(2009).Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,46(8),909-921.
61. 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.
62. Strauss, A. L.,Corbin, J. M.(1990).Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
63. Taber, K. S.(Ed.),Akpan, B.(Ed.)(2017).Science education.Rotterdam, The Netherlands:Sense.
64. Toulmin, S. E.(1958).The uses of argument.New York:Cambridge University Press.
65. Uçar, F. M.,Sungur, S(2017).The role of perceived classroom goal structures, self-efficacy, and engagement in student science achievement.Research in Science & Technological Education,35(2),149-168.
66. Usher, E. L.,Pajares, F.(2008).Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions.Review of Educational Research,78(4),751-796.
67. Wellington, J.(1991).Newspaper science, school science: Friends or enemies?.International Journal of Science Education,13(4),363-372.
68. 吳明隆、涂金堂(2005)。SPSS與統計應用分析。臺北市:五南。
69. 佘曉清編、林煥祥編(2017)。PISA 2015臺灣學生的表現。新北市:心理。
70. 張緯文、林樹聲(2014)。實施議論文寫作活動提升國小學生論證與寫作能力。科學教育月刊，368，2-19。
71. 張瀞文編、賴彥君編、張巧娟編(2007)。德智體群美五育理念與實踐。臺北市:教育部。
72. 梁茂森(1988)。國中生學習自我效能量表之編制。教育學刊，14，155-192。
73. 黃柏鴻、林樹聲(2007)。論證教學相關實證性研究之回顧與省思。科學教育月刊，302，5-20。
74. 蕭建華、張俊彥(2012)。介入自我效能對不同性別學生「自我學習評估」與「學習成效」之影響—以高一地球科學為例。科學教育月刊，352，28-34。

1. 湯宜佩(Yi-Pei Tang);張文馨(Wen-Hsin Chang);許瑛玿(Ying-Shao Hsu)(2021)。針對高中科學論證教學研究回顧與評析。教育科學研究期刊。66(4)。217-243。