大學跨領域能力、課程參與和問題覺知關係之研究

A Study of the Relationship Between Undergraduate Students' Interdisciplinary Competence, Interdisciplinary Curriculum Participation, and Social Problem Perceptions

10.6173/CJSE.201812/SP_26.0003

李育諭(Yuh-Yuh Li)；林季怡(Chi-I Lin)

問題覺知 ； 結構方程式模型 ； 跨領域能力 ； 跨領域課程 ； Problem Perception ； Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) ； Interdisciplinarity ； Interdisciplinary Curriculum

科學教育學刊

26卷S期（2018 / 12 / 01）

419 - 440

繁體中文

本文探討跨領域的學習及影響，特別專注於學生問題覺知的提升，主要目在發展學生跨領域能力之測量指標，以及檢視其與問題覺知與跨領域課程參與之關係。跨領域能力量表參考Lattuca, Knight與Bergom（2013）的研究改編，原量表以工程科系學生為對象設計，所以量表設計會以工程領域學生為參考脈絡，改編後量表經效化後，成為適合測量各領域背景學生（不只工程科系）跨領域能力的一般性的量表。本研究亦同時檢試測量學生跨領域課程參與及問題覺知等兩個量表，研究對象為大學生，採用問卷作為資料收集工具。量表先經130位學生預試，作為是否修訂依據，正式施測時，抽取選修大學通識教育課程6班學生進行調查，課程涵蓋科學、社會、文學等領域多元主題。調查時以班級為單位進行調查，最後獲得有效問卷合計400份。資料分析以結構方程式模型（Structural Equation Modelling, SEM）效化測量工具，並建立「跨領域課程參與─跨領域能力─問題覺知」間之關係模型。主要有以下幾點發現：一、改編之跨領域能力量表對臺灣學生有不錯之測量信效度；二、跨領域能力與跨領域課程參與有關；三、跨領域能力與問題覺知有關。研究發現跨領域教育對學生問題覺知的影響是間接的，其影響需透過跨領域能力的提升來產生。研究結果提供大學跨領域教學與研究之參考。

The study, focusing on promoting students' perception of social problems, discussed interdisciplinary learning and its impacts. The major objectives of study included: first, to construct indicators of university students' interdisciplinary competence; second, to investigate the relationship between the participation of interdisciplinary curriculum and the development of students' perceptions of social problems. Lattuca, Knight and Bergom's (2013) interdisciplinary competence scale was employed which initially investigated participants of engineering major background. The research modified and validated Lattuca et al.'s scale to measure students' interdisciplinary competence of different academic disciplines. This study also tested two scales that measured students' participation in an interdisciplinary curriculum and their perceptions of social problems. The participants were university students; questionnaires were used to collect research data. The modified questionnaire was pilot tested by 130 university students. The formal test was conducted in 6 randomly chosen general education courses which covered multi-dimensional subjects including science, sociology, literature, and etc. Four hundred valid questionnaires were collected; the data were analyzed by Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) and the model of ＂participating in an interdisciplinary curriculum-interdisciplinary competence-perceptions of social problems＂ was constructed. The major findings of this study were as follows, first, the interdisciplinary competence scale had high reliability and validity. Second, there was a positive relationship between students' interdisciplinary competence and interdisciplinary curriculum experience. Third, the competence was related to their perceptions of social problems. The findings of this study identified an indirect relation between interdisciplinary learning and students' perceptions of social problems: a learning that was able to make impact on the students' perceptions must be enhanced by the promotion of one's interdisciplinary competence. The findings of this study offered methodology for assessing university students' interdisciplinary competence and their learning outcome and a reference for planning educational goals regarding interdisciplinary learning.

1. Lee, C.-Y.,Chien, C.-F.,Walters, B. G.,Liao, C.-J.,Chen, L.-Y.(2017).College students' learning outcomes in an e-art education.Taiwan Journal of General Education,20,61-97.
   連結：
2. 王惠蓉、羅文星(2014)。跨領域教學在性別教育課程之實踐。通識教育學刊，14，59-86。
   連結：
3. 林季怡、李育諭(2018)。跨領域永續課程提升大學生整體性思考及衝突問題解決能力：以海洋永續教育為例。科學教育學刊，26(1)，1-27。
   連結：
4. 范信賢(2016)。核心素養與十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：導讀《國民核心素養：十二年國教課程改革的DNA》。教育脈動，5，1-7。
   連結：
5. 翁瑞霖(2004)。跨領域通識教育課程開啟數學與音樂的對話。高雄師大學報，16，103-121。
   連結：
6. (2009).Statistical Package for the Social Sciences. (2009). AMOS18.0 [Computer software]. Chicago, IL: Amos Development.
7. Barry, A.,Born, G.,Weszkalnys, G.(2008).Logics of interdisciplinarity.Economy and Society,37(1),20-49.
8. Berrett, D. (2011, January 5). The rise of 'convergence' science. Retrieved January 1, 2019, from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/05/rise-convergence-science
9. Boomsma, A.,Hoogland, J. J.(2001).The robustness of LISREL modeling revisited.Structural equation models: Present and future. A Festschrift in honor of Karl Jöreskog,Lincolnwood, IL:
10. Bozeman, B.,Dietz, J. S.,Gaughan, M.(2001).Scientific and technical human capital: An alternative model for research evaluation.International Journal of Technology Management,22(7-8),716-740.
11. Brassler, M.,Dettmers, J.(2017).How to enhance interdisciplinary competence-Interdisciplinary problem-based learning versus interdisciplinary project-based learning.Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning,11(2)
12. Britton, B. K.(Ed.),Glynn, S. M.(Ed.)(1987).Psychology of reading and reading instruction. Executive control processes in reading.Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
13. Clark, B.,Button, B.(2011).Sustainability transdisciplinary education model: Interface of arts, science, and community (STEM).International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education,12(1),41-54.
14. Frodeman, R.(Ed.),Klein, J. T.(Ed.),Mitcham, C.(Ed.)(2010).The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity.Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.
15. Haines, V. A.,Godley, J.,Hawe, P.(2011).Understanding interdisciplinary collaborations as social networks.American Journal of Community Psychology,47(1-2),1-11.
16. Hooper, D.,Coughlan, J.,Mullen, M.(2008).Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit.Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods,6(1),53-60.
17. Hox, J. J.,Bechger, T. M.(1998).An introduction to structural equation modeling.Family Science Review,11,354-373.
18. Hu, L.-T.,Bentler, P. M.(1999).Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,6(1),1-55.
19. Johnson, L.,Becker, S. A.,Estrada, V.,Freeman, A.(2015).NMC horizon report: 2015 higher education edition.Austin, TX:New Media Consortium.
20. Kellert, S. H.(Ed.)(2008).Borrowed knowledge: Chaos theory and the challenge of learning across disciplines.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
21. Klein, J. T.(2005).Integrative learning and interdisciplinary studies.Peer Review,7(4),8-10.
22. Klein, J. T.(2004).Interdisciplinarity and complexity: An evolving relationship.Emergence: Complexity and Organization,6(1-2),1-9.
23. Klein, J. T.(Ed.)(2010).Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: A model for strength and sustainability.San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
24. Klein, J. T.(Ed.),Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W.(Ed.),Häberli, R.(Ed.),Bill, A.(Ed.),Scholz, R.W.(Ed.),Welti, M.(Ed.)(2001).Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology, and society: An effective way for managing complexity.Basel, Switzerland:Birkhauser Verlag.
25. Kockelmans, J. J.(Ed.)(1979).Interdisciplinarity and Higher Education.University Park, PA:The Pennsylvania State University Press.
26. Krishnan, A.(2009).What are academic disciplines? Some observations on the disciplinarity vs. interdisciplinarity debate.Southampton, UK:ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, University of Southampton.
27. Lattuca, L. R.(2001).Creating interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty.Nashville, TN:Vanderbilt University Press.
28. Lattuca, L. R.,Knight, D. B.,Bergom, I. M.(2013).Developing a measure of interdisciplin- ary competence for engineers.International Journal of Engineering Education,29(3),726-739.
29. Lattuca, L. R.,Knight, D.,Seifert, T. A.,Reason, R. D.,Liu, Q.(2017).Examining the impact of interdisciplinary programs on student learning.Innovative Higher Education,42(4),337-353.
30. Lyall, C.,Meagher, L.,Bandola, J.,Kettle, A.(2015).Interdisciplinary provision in higher education: Current and future challenges.York, UK:Higher Education Academy.
31. McDonald, R. P.,Ho, M.-H. R.(2002).Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses.Psychological Methods,7(1),64-82.
32. Metzger, N.,Zare, R. N.(1999).Interdisciplinary research: From belief to reality.Science,283(5402),642-643.
33. Miles, J.,Shevlin, M.(2007).A time and a place for incremental fit indices.Personality and Individual Differences,42(5),869-874.
34. Moran, J.(2002).Interdisciplinarity.New York:Routledge.
35. National Academy of Engineering(2004).The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
36. Nikitina, S.(2005).Pathways of interdisciplinary cognition.Cognition and Instruction,23(3),389-425.
37. Porter, A. L.,Rafols, I.(2009).Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time.Scientometrics,81(3),719-745.
38. Repko, A. F.(2008).Assessing interdisciplinary learning outcomes.Academic Exchange Quarterly,12(3),171-178.
39. Snow, C. P.(2012).The two cultures.New York:Cambridge University Press.
40. Spelt, E. J. H.,Luning, P. A.,van Boekel, M. A. J. S.,Mulder, M.(2015).Constructively aligned teaching and learning in higher education in engineering: What do students perceive as contributing to the learning of interdisciplinary thinking?.European Journal of Engineering Education,40(5),459-475.
41. Szostak, R.(2007).Modernism, postmodernism, and interdisciplinarity.Issues in Integrative Studies,25,32-83.
42. Tabachnick, B. G.,Fidell, L. S.(2007).Using multivariate statistics.New York:Allyn and Bacon.
43. Weingart, P.(Ed.),Stehr, N.(Ed.)(2000).Practising interdisciplinarity.Toronto, Canada:University of Toronto Press.
44. Weingart, P.(Ed.),Stehr, N.(Ed.)(2000).Practising interdisciplinarity.Vancouver, Canada:University of Toronto Press.
45. Weingart, P.,Stehr, N.(2000).Practising interdisciplinarity.Toronto, Canada:University of Toronto Press.
46. Wheaton, B.,Muthén, B.,Alwin, D. F.,Summers, G. F.(1977).Assessing reliability and stability in panel models.Sociological Methodology,8,84-136.
47. Wickson, F.,Carew, A. L.,Russell, A. W.(2006).Transdisciplinary research: Characteristics, quandaries and quality.Futures,38(9),1046-1059.
48. Zeidler, D. L.,Sadler, T. D.,Simmons, M. L.,Howes, E. V.(2005).Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education.Science Education,89(3),357-377.
49. 辛幸珍(2010)。以問題導向學習（PBL）整合跨領域學習於通識「生命與倫理」課程之教學成效。通識教育學刊，6，89-107。
50. 唐玄輝、蕭貴霙(2009)。跨領域合作下高齡者資訊平台介面的設計與評估。人因工程學刊，10(2)，33-42。
51. 徐淑瑛編(2015)。公民素養：跨領域論述與實務。高雄市:國立中山大學通識教育中心。
52. 國立臺灣師範大學(n.d.)。學分學程。查詢日期：2018年6月14日，檢自http://www.aa.ntnu.edu.tw/6intro/super_pages.php?ID=6intro6
53. 康才媛、林青蓉(2009)。「環境與人」跨領域通識課程之發展經驗整合與成長。通識研究集刊，15，25-60。
54. 教育部(2013)。教育部人才培育白皮書。查詢日期：2019年1月8日，檢自https://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/attach/5/pta_2189_2524507_39227.pdf
55. 蔡明燁編、王驥懋編、唐功培編(2015)。界定跨科際。臺北市:教育部。
56. 蔡清田(2014)。國民核心素養：十二年國教課程改革的DNA。臺北市:高等教育。
57. 鄧運林(2000)。開放學習與自我導向學習。隔空教育論叢，12，25-46。

1. 江右瑜(Chiang, Yu-Yu)(2022)。敘事課程融入跨領域教學之實踐研究－以大學國文「人際關係」單元為例。通識教育學刊。(29)。123-151。