探討高中學生於建模導向科學探究之學習成效

The Study of Investigating High School Students' Learning Performance Under the Instruction of Model-Based Inquiry

10.6173/CJSE.201912_27(4).0001

蔡哲銘(Che-Ming Tsai)；邱美虹(Mei-Hung Chiu)；曾茂仁(Mao-Ren Zeng)；謝東霖(Tung-Lin Hsieh)

建模 ； 探究與實作 ； 模型 ； Modeling ； Inquiry and Practice ； Model

科學教育學刊

27卷4期（2019 / 12 / 01）

207 - 228

繁體中文

本研究旨在探討在建模導向科學探究的教學策略下，高一學生的學習成效。學生在經過3週建模教學之後，再利用3週時間進行開放式問題的探究教學。學習成效的評估從學生對模型本質認識的變化、建模能力測驗的表現，以及探究的實作作品進行分析。結果顯示：一、學生在教學前後對於模型本質的認識有顯著差異。二、學生在建模能力測驗中對於模型選擇及模型建立歷程的表現較佳，對於模型效化及模型應用歷程則表現較差。三、分析學生作品發現，對於開放式探究，學生能夠掌握選擇正確變因，並且能透過實作找到變因之間的定性關係，但是距離科學社群能夠形成模型解釋實作成果仍有差距。值得注意的是，在建模能力測驗上，模型效化的結果顯示有雙峰現象，模型效化等級較高的學生在模型本質問卷的表現優於等級較低的學生，由此推測若要在模型效化達到較高等級，學生對於模型本質須要有較好的瞭解。臺灣在2019年實施「探究與實作」課程，本研究發現，高一學生受限於數學及建模能力尚未成熟，對於變因複雜的開放式問題探究，無法完成整體探究歷程。建議採用引導式的探究取代開放式探究，讓學生針對變因較單純之現象進行建模。同時建議應協助教師對於模型的認識與增能，以協助培育學生的建模與探究能力。

This study aims to investigate 10th grade school students' learning performance from using model-based inquiry instruction. After three weeks of modeling-based instruction, students were engaged in model-based inquiry with open-ended questions for another three weeks. Students' learning performance was analyzed via assessing changes of their (1) epistemological view of models, (2) performance in a modeling ability test, and (3) work collected from practice. Results show (1) a significant difference in students' epistemological view of models after instruction; (2) better performance on model selection and modeling construction processes; however, relatively poor performance in model validation and model application; (3) from their product of inquiry activities, students were found to select the correct variables and find the qualitative relationship among variables. There is still a gap that exists in the students' understanding before they form their models and explain the results of their actual work comparable to the way members of the scientific communities explain their results. A noteworthy finding is that a bimodal distribution exists in the model validation section on the modeling ability test. By comparing their responses on two questionnaires, the authors find that students who were ranked higher in their model validation performed better on questionnaire items related to the epistemological view of models. Therefore, investigators inferred from these results that students need a better epistemological view of models, in order to rank higher in model validation of the modeling competence.

1. 張志康,邱美虹(2009)。建模能力分析指標的發展與應用─以電化學為例。科學教育學刊，17(4)，319-342。
   連結：
2. Bernardini, C.(Ed.),Tarsitani, C.(Ed.),Vicentini, M.(Ed.)(1995).Thinking physics for teaching.New York, NY:Plenum.
3. Cheng, M.-F.,Lin, J.-L.(2015).Investigating the relationship between students’ views of scientific models and their development of models.International Journal of Science Education,37(15),2453-2475.
4. Chiu, M.-H.,Lin, J.-W.(2019).Modeling competence in science education.Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research,1
5. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: D.C. Heath.
6. Gibson, H. L.,Chase, C.(2002).Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science.Science Education,86(5),693-705.
7. Gobert, J. D.,Buckley, B. C.(2000).Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education.International Journal of Science Education,22(9),891-894.
8. Grosslight, L.,Unger, C.,Jay, E.,Smith, C. L.(1991).Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,28(9),799-822.
9. Halloun, I. A.(1996).Schematic modeling for meaningful learning of physics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,33(9),1019-1041.
10. Halloun, I. A.(2006).Modeling theory in science education.Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Springer.
11. Hansen, M.(2002).Defining inquiry.The Science Teacher,69(2),34-37.
12. Harrison, A. G.,Treagust, D. F.(2000).Learning about atom, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry.Science Education,84(3),352-381.
13. Jong, J.-P.,Chiu, M.-H.,Chung, S.-L.(2015).The use of modeling-based text to improve students’ modeling competencies.Science Education,99(5),986-1018.
14. Justi, R.,Gilbert, J. K.(2002).Philosophy of chemistry in university chemical education: The case of models and modelling.Foundations of Chemistry,4,213-240.
15. Justi, R.,Gilbert, J. K.(2000).History and philosophy of science through models: Some challenges in the case of ‘the atom'.International Journal of Science Education,22(9),993-1009.
16. Justi, R.,Gilbert, J. K.(2003).Teachers’ views on the nature of models.International Journal of Science Education,25(11),1369-1386.
17. Krajcik, J.,Blumenfeld, P. C.,Marx, R. W.,Bass, K. M.,Fredricks, J.,Soloway, E.(1998).Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students.Journal of the Learning Sciences,7(3-4),313-350.
18. Namdar, B.,Shen, J.(2015).Modeling-oriented assessment in K-12 science education: A synthesis of research from 1980 to 2013 and new directions.International Journal of Science Education,37(7),993-1023.
19. National Research Council(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
20. National Research Council(2000).Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
21. Next Generation Science Standards. (2013). Get to know the standards. Retrieved March 12, 2015, from http://www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards
22. Schwarz, C. V.,Reiser, B. J.,Davis, E. A.,Kenyon, L.,Achér, A.,Fortus, D.(2009).Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,46(6),632-654.
23. Schwarz, C. V.,White, B. Y.(2005).Metamodeling knowledge: Developing students’ understanding of scientific modeling.Cognition and Instruction,23(2),165-205.
24. Sins, P. H. M.,Savelsbergh, E. R.,van Joolingen, W. R.,van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M.(2009).The relation between students’ epistemological understanding of computer models and their cognitive processing on a modelling task.International Journal of Science Education,31(9),1205-1229.
25. Treagust, D. F.,Chittleborough, G.,Mamiala, T. L.(2002).Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science.International Journal of Science Education,24(4),357-368.
26. Van Driel, J. H.,Verloop, N.(2002).Experienced teachers’ knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modelling in science education.International Journal of Science Education,24(12),1255-1272.
27. White, B. Y.,Frederiksen, J. R.(1998).Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students.Cognition and Instruction,16(1),3-118.
28. 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.
29. Windschitl, M.,Thompson, J.,Braaten, M.(2008).Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations.Science Education,92(5),941-967.
30. 吳百興,張耀云,吳心楷(2010)。科學探究活動中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊，56，53-74。
31. 邱美虹(2008)。模型與建模能力之理論架構。科學教育月刊，306，2-9。
32. 邱美虹(2016)。科學模型與建模：科學模型、科學建模與建模能力。臺灣化學教育，11
33. 邱美虹,劉俊庚(2008)。從科學學習的觀點探討模型與建模能力。科學教育月刊，314，2-20。
34. 洪振方(2003)。探究式教學的歷史回顧與創造性探究模式之初探。高雄師大學報，15，641-662。
35. 國家教育研究院(2018年11月2日)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校—自然科學領域。查詢日期：2018年11月20日，檢自https://www.naer.edu.tw/ezfiles/0/1000/attach/63/pta_18538_240851_60502.pdf
36. 劉俊庚(2011)。臺北市，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所。
37. 劉湘瑤(2016)。科學探究的教學與評量。科學研習，55(2)，5-11。
38. 謝州恩,吳心楷(2005)。探究情境中國小學童科學解釋能力成長之研究。師大學報：科學教育類，50(2)，55-84。
39. 鐘建坪(2010)。引導式建模探究教學架構初探。科學教育月刊，328，2-18。

1. 洪菁穗,吳心楷(2022)。高中科學教師對「探究與實作」課程的概念：課程特徵、挑戰、教學目標與教學活動。科學教育學刊，30(1)，1-26。
2. (2024)。探討繪圖導向科學建模教學對國小六年級學童模型建立及系統思考能力影響之研究。科學教育學刊，32(1)，33-61。