從澳門某所中學的科學教育實踐案例探討學校多元評量實施的過程

Through a Case Study of Science Education of a Macao School Examining Processes of Implementation of Multiple Assessment

10.6173/CJSE.202012/SP_28.0003

麥瑞琪(Soi-Kei Mak)；張國祥(Kwok-Cheung Cheung)；楊文佳(Man-Kai Ieong)；薛寶嫦(Pou-Seong Sit)

Rubrics評分規準 ； 多元評量 ； 科學教育 ； 核心素養 ； 學習進程 ； Rubrics Assessment Scale ； Multiple Assessment ； Science Education ； Core Literacy ； Learning Progression

科學教育學刊

28卷S期（2020 / 12 / 01）

457 - 482

繁體中文

本研究旨在以澳門一所進行校本科學課程開發且以素養教育為導向的中學為研究案例，探討素養導向之科學教育多元評量的關鍵特徵，以及在現有的評量基礎上如何基於評分規準（rubrics）的評量設計，來驗證學習指標與學生基本能力的評量方法和具體步驟，使能客觀地評價學生之學習進程是否達到課程標準所訂定之學力水平，從而為改進學校教學、完善教育政策提供依據，並豐實學校多元評量的內涵。同時，通過研究案例學校實施多元評量的過程，本文分析歸納出教師實施多元評量時須兼備「量」和「質」的特點，即評量要能重視對師生雙方的回饋、具有前瞻性、可為學生學習架設鷹架，這樣才能促進學生更好地往下一學習階段發展，終極目的是邁向學習成功。

Based on a case study conducted in a secondary school in Macao that practices literacy-based school education and promotes school-based science curriculum development, this study sought to investigate the essential characteristics of multiple assessment in literacy-oriented science education. Based on the current foundation of assessment, the methods and procedures of how rubrics assessment scales can be designed and utilized to verify learning objectives and students' basic competencies in science were the focus of examination in this study. These methods and procedures are able to evaluate objectively whether a student's learning progression can achieve the academic standards as laid down in the curriculum standards, resulting in enrichment of multiple assessment in school and providing evidence for informed policy making regarding school improvement and instructional effectiveness. This case study renders readers opportunities to understand the processes pertaining to the implementation of multiple assessment. Additionally, analysis of these processes allows investigators to understand that multiple assessment possess dual characteristics of ＂quantity＂ and ＂quality.＂ Suggestions forwarded in this study are that investigators using multiple assessment should pay attention to the reciprocal feedback between students and their teachers, and be forward-looking and provide scaffolding support for students to learn better. The ultimate aim of multiple assessment is to guide students to progress to the next stage of learning or development, and migrate closer to success in learning.

1. 林怡呈, Y.-C.,吳毓瑩, Y.-Y.(2008)。多元評量的活化、迷思、與神話—教學歷程的個案研究。課程與教學，11(1)，147-172。
   連結：
2. 林曉雯, S.-W.,陳佩君, P.-C.(2005)。科學教學評量的反思與實踐：教師行動研究。科學教育學刊，13(1)，1-27。
   連結：
3. 靳知勤, C.-C.(2007)。科學教育應如何提升學生的科學素養—臺灣學術精英的看法。科學教育學刊，15(6)，627-646。
   連結：
4. Black, P.,Harrison, C.,Lee, C.,Marshall, B.,Wiliam, D.(2004).Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom.Phi Delta Kappan,86(1),8-21.
5. Black, P.,Harrison, C.,Lee, C.,Marshall, B.,Wiliam, D.(2003).Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice.Buckingham, UK:Open University Press.
6. Black, P.,Wiliam, D.(2010).Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom as-sessment.Phi Delta Kappan,92(1),81-90.
7. Black, P.,Wiliam, D.(1998).Assessment and classroom learning.Assessment in Education,5,7-74.
8. Bredekamp, S.(Ed.)(1987).Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8.Washington, DC:National Association for the Education of Young Children.
9. Brookhart, S. M.(2013).How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
10. Colorin, C. (n.d.). Using informal assessments for English language learners. Retrieved May 10, 2020, from http://www.colorincolorado.org/educators/assessment/informal
11. Earl, L. M.(2003).Assessment as learning: Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning.Thousand Oaks, CA:Corwin Press.
12. Earl, L. M.(2013).Assessment for learning; assessment as learning: Changing practices means changing beliefs.Assessment and Learning,2,1-5.
13. Gardner, J.(Ed.)(2006).Assessment and learning.London, UK:Sage.
14. Herman, J. L.,Aschbacher, P. R.,Winters, L.(1992).A practical guide to alternative assessment.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
15. Little, D. (2006). Grading with rubrics: Developing a fair and efficient assessment tool. Re-trieved May 10, 2020, from https://ira.virginia.edu/sites/ias.virginia.edu/files/trc_gradingrubric.pdf
16. Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (2013). TIMSS 2015 assessment frameworks. Retrieved May 10, 2020, from http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/downloads/T15_Frameworks_Full_Book.pdf
17. National Research Council(2012).A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas.Washington, DC:National Academies Press.
18. National Research Council(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC:National Academic Press.
19. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2016).PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematics and financial literacy.Paris, France:Au-thor.
20. Ramsden, P.(2003).Learning to teach in higher education.London, UK:Routledge.
21. Rychen, D. S.,Salganik, L. H.(2001).Defining and selecting key competencies.Göttingen, Germany:Hogrefe & Huber.
22. Stevens, D.,Levi, A.(2005).Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning.Sterling, VA:Stylus.
23. Stiggins, R. J.,Arter, J. A.,Chappuis, J.,Chappuis, S.(2004).Classroom assessment for student learning: Doing it right—Using it well.Portland, OR:ETS Assessment Training Insti-tute.
24. Taggart, G. L.(2005).Rubrics: A handbook for construction and use.Lanham, MD:Rowman & Littlefield.
25. Thier, M.,Daviss, B.(2002).The new science literacy: Using language skills to help students learn science.Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.
26. Wolfe, E. W.,Chiu, C. W.(1999).Measuring change across multiple occasions using the Rasch Rating Scale Model.Journal of Outcome Measurement,3(4),360-381.
27. Yore, L. D.,Pimm, D.,Tuan, H. L.(2007).The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,5,559-589.
28. 吳璧純, P.-c.(2017)。素養導向教學之學習評量。臺灣教育評論月刊，6(3)，30-34。
29. 吳璧純, P.-c.(2013)。從三種評量類型看多元評量的意義。新北市教育，8，20-24。
30. 李川, C.,劉克文, K.-W.(2016)。中小學科學教育改革的熱點與趨勢。中小學管理，5(4-7)，4-7。
31. 李春密, C.,趙芸赫, Y.(2017)。STEM相關學科課程整合模式國際比較研究。比較教育研究，39(5)，11-18。
32. 辛濤(2017年2月4日)。建立科學評價體系營造良好育人生態。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/moe_2082/zl_2017n/2017_zl06/201702/t20170205_295750.html。[Xin, T. (2017, February 4). Jianli kexue pingjia tixi Yingzao lianghao yuren shengtai. Re-trieved May 1, 2020, from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/moe_2082/zl_2017n/2017_zl06/201702/t20170205_295750.html]
33. 辛濤, T.,張彩, C.(2018)。中小學教育質量綜合評價改革的現況與前瞻。中國教育學刊，8，37-41。
34. 房湘雲, S. W.(2013)。促進中文科讀寫教學的評估實踐。評估與學習，2，94-99。
35. 侯傑泰(2015年11月18日)。侯傑泰：監測或不監測？—上海臺灣經驗。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自http://www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/~kthau/web/articles/Hau2015TSAShanghaiTaiwanMingPaoDailyNews20151118.pdf。[Hau, K.-T. (2015, November 18). Kit-Tai Hau: Jiance huo bujiance?—Shanghai Taiwan jingyan. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from http://www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/~kthau/web/articles/Hau2015TSAShanghaiTaiwanMingPaoDailyNews20151118.pdf]
36. 國家教育研究院(2014年11月28日)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：總綱。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自https://www.naer.edu.tw/upload/1/16/doc/288/%E5%8D%81%E4%BA%8C%E5%B9%B4%E5%9C%8B%E6%95%99%E8%AA%B2%E7%A8%8B%E7%B6%B1%E8%A6%81%E7%B8%BD%E7%B6%B1.pdf。[National Academy for Educational Research. (2014, November 28). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education: General guidelines. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.naer.edu.tw/upload/1/16/doc/288/%E5%8D%81%E4%BA%8C%E5%B9%B4%E5%9C%8B%E6%95%99%E8%AA%B2%E7%A8%8B%E7%B6%B1%E8%A6%81%E7%B8%BD%E7%B6%B1.pdf]
37. 國民中小學多元評量案例=Guomin zhongxiaoxue duoyuan pingliang anli
38. 張淑賢, R.(2014)。促進學習的評估原則及指標。評估與學習，3，15-21。
39. 張華, H.(2016)。論核心素養的內涵。全球教育展望，45(4)，10-24。
40. 教育局(2017)。評估素養及學校評估政策。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/tc/curriculum-development/renewal/Guides/SECG%20booklet%204_ch_20180831.pdf。[Education Bureau. (2017). Assessment literacy and school assessment policy. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/tc/curriculum-development/renewal/Guides/SECG%20booklet%204_ch_20180831.pdf]
41. 教育暨青年局(2017年6月)。《本地學制正規教育學生評核制度》諮詢總結報告。查詢日期：2020年6月1日，檢自http://202.175.82.54/dsej/edulaw/201706/concluding_report_c.pdf。[Education and Youth Affairs Bureau. (2017, June). Bendi xuezhi zhenggui jiaoyu xuesheng pinghe zhidu zixun zongjie baogao. Retrieved June 1, 2020, from http://202.175.82.54/dsej/edulaw/201706/concluding_report_c.pdf]
42. 莫慕貞, M. C.(2016)。促進學習的評估：理念與實踐。Xia-odong zhuanti jiangzuo 2015/16 xuenian—Ruhe chixu tisheng xue yu jiao xiaoneng?，香港=Hong Kong:
43. 郭重吉, C.-J.(2012)。中小學科學教育的推展。科學發展，474，66-70。
44. 郭重吉, C.-J.,張惠博, H.-P.(2005)。從政策層面評述國際間科學教育的改革。科學教育月刊，284，23-35。
45. 陳健生, J. K.-S.,甘國臻, K. J.,霍秉坤, P.-K.(2010)。「促進學習的評估」改革：學校的實施與挑戰。課程研究，4(4)，69-88。
46. 陳琦媛, C.-Y.(2017)。運用rubrics評量核心素養。臺灣教育評論月刊，6(3)，87-90。
47. 曾淑惠, S.-H.(2015)。翻轉教學的學習評量。臺灣教育評論月刊，4(4)，8-11。
48. 黃淑玲, S.-L.(2013)。從知識到可觀察的能力：評估學習成效的策略與建議。評鑑雙月刊，44，16-23。
49. 褚宏啟, H.(2016)。核心素養的國際視野與中國立場—21世紀中國的國民素質提升與教育目標轉型。教育研究，11，8-18。
50. 劉曼君, M.(2014)。學生學習成果之評量及評分量表rubrics之使用。評鑑雙月刊，48，54-56。
51. 劉堅, J.(2013)。新世紀課程變革：親歷者的視角。北京大學教育評論，11(4)，2-20。
52. 歐用生, Y.-S.(2003).課程典範再建構.高雄市=Kaohsiung, Taiwan:麗文文化=Liwen Cultural.
53. 蔡清田, C.-T.,陳伯璋, P.-C.,陳延興, Y. H.(2014)。,臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:國家教育研究院=National Academy for Educational Research。
54. 課程發展議會(2017)。科學教育：學習領域課程指引(小一至中六)。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自https://www.edb.gov.hk/attachment/tc/curriculum-development/kla/science-edu/SEKLACG_CHI_2017.pdf。[Curriculum Development Council. (2017). Science education: Key learning area curriculum guide (primary 1–secondary 6). Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.edb.gov.hk/attach-ment/tc/curriculum-development/kla/science-edu/SEKLACG_CHI_2017.pdf]
55. 課程發展議會(2002)。學校評估政策—評估實施方式的轉變。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自https://cd1.edb.hkedcity.net/cd/TC/Content_2909/html/chapter05.html。[Curriculum Development Council. (2002). School policy on assessment—Changing assessment practices. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://cd1.edb.hkedcity.net/cd/TC/Con-tent_2909/html/chapter05.html]
56. 澳門中華教育會(2016)。《本地學制正規教育學生評核制度》諮詢文本集思會意見書。查詢日期：2020年5月1日，檢自https://www.edum.org.mo/feature/new--5。[The Chinese Educators Association of Macau. (2016). Bendi xuezhi zhenggui jiaoyu xuesheng pinghe zhidu zixun wenben jisihui yijianshu. Retrieved May 1, 2020, from https://www.edum.org.mo/feature/new--5]
57. 澳門特別行政區政府(2015年7月20日)。本地學制正規教育基本學力要求。查詢日期：2020年6月18日，檢自https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2015/29/regadm10_cn.asp。[Macao SAR Government. (2015, July 20). Bendi xuezhi zhenggui jiaoyu jiben xueli yaoqiu. Retrieved June 18, 2020, from https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2015/29/regadm10_cn.asp]
58. 澳門特別行政區政府(2017年6月26日)。第55/2017號社會文化司司長批示。查詢日期：2020年6月18日，檢自https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2017/26/despsasc_cn.asp#56。[Macao SAR Government. (2017, June 26). Di 55/2017 hao Office of the Secretary for Social Affairs and Culture sizhang pishi. Retrieved June 18, 2020, from https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2017/26/desp-sasc_cn.asp#56]
59. 澳門特別行政區政府(2006年12月26日)。非高等教育制度綱要法。查詢日期：2020年6月18日，檢自https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2006/52/lei09_cn.asp。[Macao SAR Government. (2006, December 26). Feigaodeng jiaoyu zhidu gangyaofa. Re-trieved June 18, 2020, from https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2006/52/lei09_cn.asp]
60. 澳門特別行政區政府(2014年6月30日)。本地學制正規教育課程框架。查詢日期：2020年6月18日，檢自https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2014/26/regadm15_cn.asp。[Macao SAR Government. (2014, June 30). Bendi xuezhi zhenggui jiaoyu kecheng kuangjia. Retrieved June 18, 2020, from https://bo.io.gov.mo/bo/i/2014/26/regadm15_cn.asp]
61. 羅耀珍, Y. C.(2008).促進學習的評估.香港=Hong Kong:香港大學出版社=Hong Kong University Press.
62. 蘇淑英, R.(2014)。落實多元評量於課堂教學中。語言之道，3，78-81。