以故事情境策略營造美感體驗對不同學習成就國小學生學習成效之影響研究

The Effectiveness of Science Learning in an Aesthetic Environment With a Story-Telling Strategy for Different Levels of Sixth Grade Achievers

10.6173/CJSE.201809_26(3).0002

靳知勤(Chi-Chin Chin)；楊惟程(Wei-Cheng Yang)

自然科學習動機 ； 低成就生 ； 思考智能 ； 探究教學 ； 情境興趣 ； Motivation of Science learning ； Lower Achievers ； Thinking Ability ； Inquiry-Based Learning ； Situated Interest

科學教育學刊

26卷3期（2018 / 09 / 01）

219 - 239

繁體中文

本研究藉說故事營造美感體驗策略融入探究學習，探討其對不同學習成就學生思考智能、自然科學習動機及學習情境興趣與助益覺知的影響。本研究對象為一班六年級學生（N = 28），從事10週的教學。在教學中將具美學特色的故事融入「天氣的變化」與「大地的奧秘」2個單元。因每單元有3個次單元，故由教學者選擇能夠動手做的次單元發展故事，2個單元共發展4個故事。研究資料蒐集則使用思考知能工作單、自然科學習動機問卷，以及情境興趣問卷。所得資料除了呈現全班的結果外，並以學業成績分為低、中與高三等分之不同學習成就群予以檢視。研究發現全體學生的思考智能顯著提升；除高成就學生外，中與低成就學生亦顯著提升。至於低成就生雖在各次測驗中均顯著低於高、中成就生，惟差距已縮小。全體及高、中、低成就生的自然科學習動機未提升；且在三次測驗中，三組學生間無顯著差異。情境興趣問卷顯示不同學習成就學生的喜好與有幫助的項目，可供未來說故事策略融入探究教學促進不同成就學生學習的設計參考。

This study adopted a story-telling strategy in a 6th-grader science class (N = 28) to create the environment of aesthetics for enhancing their thinking ability, motivation and situated interest to learn science. Besides, the performances of three subgroups, high, middle, and low achievers in this class, were also compared. The instruction lasted for 10 weeks with two learning topics: ＂Change of Weather,＂ and ＂Mystery of Land.＂ Within these topics, 4 stories were developed and taught to students. Research information was from questionnaires, and situated interest feedback worksheets. Findings included: students' thinking ability was enhanced significantly. Not only high achievers, but also middle and low achievers had the similar tendency. Although thinking-ability scores of low achievers were significantly lower than middle and high achievers, the discrepancies between them had been minimized. These three groups did not show significant change in motivation of science learning after this study. In terms of motivation of science learning, no significant improvement was found in whole-class basis and three subgroups. Feedback worksheet revealed students' preference of and benefits from the teaching designs. This study also discussed the implications of the story-telling strategy for enhancing science learning of elementary students.

1. 周淑卿(2010)。學習經驗中美感經驗的性質─藝術與科學課堂的探究。課程與教學季刊，14(1)，19-40。
   連結：
2. 邱奕華、劉湘瑤(2014)。科學史教學對學生科學認識觀與概念學習的影響─不同教學順序的比較。科學教育學刊，22(3)，307-330。
   連結：
3. 鄭瑞洲、洪振方、黃臺珠(2013)。採用多元教學策略的非制式奈米課程對國中生情境興趣之促進。教育實踐與研究，26(2)，1-28。
   連結：
4. Aylett, R.,Louchart, S.,Weallans, A.(2011).Research in interactive drama environments, role-play and story-telling.Interactive Storytelling,7069,1-12.
5. Correa, J. E.,González, O. B.,Weber, M. S.(1991).Story telling in families with children: A therapeutic approach to learning problems.Contemporary Family Therapy,13(1),33-59.
6. Dadejík, O.,Zuska, V.(2010).More than a story: The two-dimensional aesthetics of the forest.Estetika: The Central European Journal of Aesthetics,47(1),27-50.
7. Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: G. P. Putnam.
8. Eisner, E. W.(2002).The arts and the creation of mind.New Haven, CT:Yale University Press..
9. Eisner, E. W.(2002).What can education learn from the arts about the practice of education?.Journal of Curriculum and Supervision,18(1),4-16.
10. Fenner, D. E. W.(2003).Aesthetic experience and aesthetic analysis.The Journal of Aesthetic Education,37(1),40-53.
11. Jacobsen, T.(2006).Bridging the arts and sciences: A framework for the psychology of aesthetics.Leonardo,39(2),155-162.
12. Jung, J. J.,You, E.,Park, S.-B.(2013).Emotion-based character clustering for managing story-based contents: A cinemetric analysis.Multimedia Tools and Applications,65(1),29-45.
13. Kim, T.(Ed.),Kang, J. J.(Ed.),Grosky, W. I.(Ed.),Arslan, T.(Ed.),Pissinou, N.(Ed.)(2012).Computer applications for bio-technology, multimedia, and ubiquitous city.Berlin, Germany:Springer.
14. Kuo, Y.-R.,Tuan, H.-L.,Chin, C.-C.(2018).Examining low and non-low achievers' motivation towards science learning under guided inquiry-based instruction.International Journal of Science and mathematics Education
15. Lau, K.-L.,Chan, D. W.(2007).The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on Chinese reading comprehension among Hong Kong low achieving students.Reading and Writing,20(8),833-857.
16. Levesque, R. J. R.(Ed.)(2012).Encyclopedia of adolescence.New York:Springer.
17. Lin, H.-S.,Hong, Z.-R.,Chen, C.-C.,Chou, C.-H.(2011).The effect of integrating aesthetic understanding in reflective inquiry activities.International Journal of Science Education,33(9),1199-1217.
18. Lin, H.-S.,Hong, Z.-R.,Cheng, Y.-Y.(2009).The interplay of the classroom learning environment and inquiry-based activities.International Journal of Science Education,31(8),1013-1024.
19. Mayer, R. E.(1987).Educational psychology: A cognitive approach.London:Harper Collins.
20. National Research Council(1996).National Science Education Standards.Washington, DC:Author.
21. Oral, S. B.(2013).Can Deweyan pragmatist aesthetics provide a robust framework for the philosophy for children programme?.Studies in Philosophy and Education,32(4),361-377.
22. Oregon Department Education(2005).Oregon Department Education. (2005). Teaching and learning to standards: Science. Salem, OR: Author..
23. Ornstein, A. C.,Hunkins, F. P.(2004).Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues.Boston, MA:Allyn and Bacon.
24. Osborne, J.,Erduran, S.,Simon, S.(2004).Ideas, evidence and argument in Science.London:King's College.
25. Pinar, W. F.(2004).What's curriculum theory?.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Prastacos, G. P.(Ed.),Wang, F.(Ed.),Soderquist, K. E.(Ed.)(2012).Leadership through the classics: Learning management and leadership from ancient east and west philosophy.New York:Springer.
27. Rasmussen, L. B.(2005).The narrative aspect of scenario building-How story telling may give people a memory of the future.AI & Society,19(3),229-249.
28. Reis, S. M.,McCoach, D. B.(2000).The underachievement of gifted students: What do we know and where do we go?.Gifted Child Quarterly,44(3),152-170.
29. Roberts, N.,Stylianides, A. J.(2013).Telling and illustrating stories of parity: A classroombased design experiment on young children's use of narrative in mathematics.ZDM: Mathematics Education,45(3),453-467.
30. Tatarkiewicz, W.,Kasparek, C.(Trans.)(1980).A history of six ideas: An essay in aesthetics.The Hague, The Netherlands:Nijhoff.
31. 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.
32. United Nations Development Programme (2018). What are the sustainable development goals. Retrieved August 21, 2018, from http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals.html
33. 林素卿(2009)。美感經驗對課程美學建構之啟示。東海教育評論，3，43-70。
34. 陳美如(2010)。美學取向的課程與教學。教育研究月刊，191，111-115。
35. 靳知勤、吳靜宜(2017)。國小學生對社會性科學議題學習環境之知覺：個人學習動機、小組合作能力與教室環境知覺。教育學報，45(1)，71-97。

1. 陳薇暄,陳又菱,孫之元(2020)。行動社群應用軟體融入美感教育活動對大學生的美感經驗與情境興趣之影響：以Instagram為例。數位學習科技期刊，12(2)，1-24。
2. 靳知勤(2019)。理科大學生在科學探究文本寫作中之能力覺知與學習表現。科學教育學刊，27(4)，275-297。
3. 靳知勤,陳錦滿(2021)。STS科學讀寫探究對四年級不同程度學生科學學習動機、小組合作及過程技能影響之研究。科學教育學刊，29(1)，25-56。
4. 王本瑛(2022)。「贅詞」出現率作為口語表達能力的一項指標－兼論語用學在語言教學的應用。教育實踐與研究，35(1)，39-73。