高中生在社會性科學議題決策中的反思與評估

Senior High School Students' Reflection and Evaluation of Decision-Making Process Regarding a Socioscientific Issue

10.6173/CJSE.202106_29(2).0002

張文馨(Wen-Xin Zhang)；許瑛玿(Ying-Shao Hsu)

反思 ； 決策能力 ； 社會性科學議題 ； 集群分析 ； Reflection ； Decision-Making Ability ； Socioscientific Issues ； Cluster Analysis

科學教育學刊

29卷2期（2021 / 06 / 01）

113 - 135

繁體中文

本個案研究研發融入後設認知問題的社會性科學議題（Socioscientific Issue, SSI）導向決策課程，並探討高中生的反思與評估表現。研究以便利取樣邀請66位來自臺北市某兩校高中的學生參與。研究資料來自學生在前、後測及學習單的填答內容，透過集群分析、共變異數分析、相依t考驗等統計分析，探討學生在課程中反思與評估能力的表現，以及其對決策能力與決策學習成效的影響。本研究以集群分析，依學生學習單中的反思與評估表現差異，將其分成四組：決策可行性／提出配套組、利弊權衡／提出配套組、利弊權衡／無關回應組、推理合理性／提出配套組。結果發現，利弊權衡／提出配套組、利弊權衡／無關回應組在課程中的從多元面向考量議題、利用補償性方法權衡方案表現顯著高於決策可行性／提出配套組，且這兩組經課程後的決策能力亦有顯著提升。推理合理性／提出配套組課程中的考量多元面向表現顯著優於決策可行性／提出配套組。基於研究結果，本研究建議未來發展後設認知引導問題，需具體引導學生深入反思SSI決策的本質，從決策過程的利弊權衡的角度進行評估與反思，以達到提升學生決策能力之目的。

This study aimed to investigate senior high school students' reflection and evaluation of decision-making toward a Socioscientific Issue (SSI) and how such decision-making influences students' decision-making performance. Researchers developed an SSI-based decision-making curriculum embedded with metacognition prompts as a platform to explore students' reflection and evaluation on their decision-making toward the SSI. Convenient sampling was used to select 66 students from two senior high schools located in Taipei City to take part in this study. Cluster analysis, a one-way analysis of covariance, and a pair t-test were used to analyze students' responses from a pre- and post-test instrument and student worksheet. Major results indicate that students' reflection and evaluation could be clustered into four clusters: (1) a feasibility/ complementary group, (2) a trade-off/complementary group, (3) a trade-off/irrelevant group, and (4) a reasonableness/complementary group. Students in the trade-off/complementary and trade-off/ irrelevant groups showed significantly higher performance in the curriculum than students in the feasibility/complementary group, especially when considering multiple dimensions of the SSI and when using compensatory rules to make a decision. Students in the two groups showed significant progression in their decision-making ability at the end of the instructional treatment in contrast to the students in the feasibility/complementary group and reasonableness/ complementary group. In contrast to the feasibility/complementary group, the reasonableness/ complementary group demonstrated significantly higher performance when considering multiple dimensions of the SSI. These results suggest that the direct and explicit metacognitive prompts were successful in engaging students in deep reflection to elaborate on these students' decision-making abilities, especially to engage students in evaluating and reflecting on the usage of trade-off analysis.

1. Fang, S.-C.,Hsu, Y.-S.(2017).Exploring university students’ group and indicidual socio-scientific decision making with web-based instruction.Chinese Journal of Science Educaion,25(4),391-412.
   連結：
2. 周嵩益, S.-I.,歐陽金樹, C.-S.(2005)。使用試題反應理論來估計消費者的產品知識。體育學報，38(3)，99-108。
   連結：
3. 林昇邦, S.-P.,許瑛玿, Y.-S.(2017)。高中學生決策能力與氣候變遷調適素養改變之教學研究。科學教育學刊，25(S)，413-437。
   連結：
4. Acar, O.,Turkmen, L.,Roychoudhury, A.(2010).Student difficulties in socio-scientific argumentation and decision-making research findings: Crossing the borders of two research lines.International Journal of Science Education,32(9),1191-1206.
5. Betsch, T.,Haberstroh, S.(2005).Current research on routine decision making: Advancesand prospects.The routines of decision making,Mahwah, NJ:
6. Böttcher, F.,Meisert, A.(2013).Effects of direct and indirect instruction on fostering decision-making competence in socioscientific issues.Research in Science Education,43,479-506.
7. Eggert, S.,Bögeholz, S.(2010).Students’ use of decision-making strategies with regard to socioscientific issues: An application of the rasch partial credit model.Science Education,94(2),230-258.
8. Eggert, S.,Ostermeyer, F.,Hasselhorn, M.,Bögeholz, S.(2013).Socioscientific decision making in the science classroom: The effect of embedded metacognitive instructions on students’ learning outcomes.Education Research International,2013
9. Evans, J. S. B. T.(1984).Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning.British Journal of Psychology,75(4),451-468.
10. Evans, J. S. B. T.(2010).Thinking twice: Two minds in one brain.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
11. Fang, S.-C.,Hsu, Y.-S.,Lin, S.-S.(2019).Conceptualizing socioscientific decision making from a review of research in science education.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,17(3),427-448.
12. Grace, M.(2009).Developing high quality decision-making discussions about biological conservation in a normal classroom setting.International Journal of Science Education,31,551-570.
13. Hong, J.-L.,Chang, N.-K.(2004).Analysis of Korean high school students’ decision-making processes in solving a problem involving biological knowledge.Research in Science Education,34,97-111.
14. Hsu, Y.-S.,Lin, S.-S.(2017).Prompting students to make socioscientific decisions: Embedding metacognitive guidance in an e-learning environment.International Journal of Science Education,39(7),964-979.
15. Jho, H.(2015).A literature review of studies on decision-making in socio-scientific issues.Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education,35(5),791-804.
16. Jonassen, D. H.(2012).Designing for decision making.Educational Technology Research and Development,60,341-359.
17. Karisan, D.,Zeidler, D. L.(2017).Contextualization of nature of science within the socioscientific issues framework: A review of research.International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology,5,139-152.
18. Karpudewan, M.,Roth, W. M.(2018).Changes in primary students’ informal reasoning during an environment-related curriculum on socio-scientific issues.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,16,401-419.
19. Klaczynski, P. A.,Cottrell, J. M.(2004).A dual-process approach to cognitive development: The case of children’s understanding of sunk cost decisions.Thinking & Reasoning,10(2),147-174.
20. Kortland, K.(1996).An STS case study about students’ decision making on the waste issue.Science Education,80(6),673-689.
21. Lee, Y. C.,Grace, M.(2012).Students’ reasoning and decision making about a socioscientific issue: A cross-context comparison.Science Education,96,787-807.
22. Lee, Y. C.,Grace, M.,Rietdijk, W.,Lui, Y. C.(2019).A cross-cultural, cross-age, and cross-gender study of Hong Kong and UK secondary students’ decision making about a biological conservation issue.International Journal of Science Education,41,2696-2715.
23. Liu, S. Y.,Lin, C. S.,Tsai, C. C.(2011).College students’ scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in socioscientific decision making.Science Education,95(3),497-517.
24. Meyer, H.(2018).Teachers’ thoughts on student decision making during engineering design lessons.Education Sciences,8(1),9.
25. Papadouris, N.(2012).Optimization as a reasoning strategy for dealing with socioscientific decision-making situations.Science Education,96(4),600-630.
26. Ratcliffe, M.(1997).Pupil decision-making about socio-scientific issues within the science curriculum.International Journal of Science Education,19(2),167-182.
27. Sadler, T. D.(2004).Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41(5),513-536.
28. Svenson, O.(1996).Decision making and the search for fundamental psychological regularities: What can be learned from a process perspective?.Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes,65(3),252-267.
29. Wu, M.,Tam, H. P.,Jen, T.-H.(2016).Educational measurement for applied researchers: Theory into practice.Berlin, Germany:Springer.
30. Wu, Y.-T.,Tsai, C.-C.(2011).High school students’ informal reasoning regarding a socio-scientific issue, with relation to scientific epistemological beliefs and cognitive structures.International Journal of Science Education,33(3),371-400.
31. Wu, Y.-T.,Tsai, C.-C.(2007).High school students’ informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses.International Journal of Science Education,29(9),1163-1187.
32. Zohar, A.,Nemet, F.(2002).Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39,35-62.
33. 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：2021年8月6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 August 6, 2021, 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]
34. 張文馨, W.-X.(2018)。臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育所=National Taiwan Normal University。
35. 張文馨, W.-X.,許瑛玿, Y.-S.,何玉婷, Y.-T.,劉承珏, C.-C.(2021)。張文馨、許瑛玿、何玉婷、劉承珏（2021）。社會性科學議題決策學習模組的發展與成效。稿件審查中。[Zhang, W.-X., Hsu, Y.-S., Ho, Y.-T., & Liu, C.-C. (2021). The development and effect of a SSI-based learning module on students’ decision-making abilities. Manuscript submitted for publication.]。

1. 張文馨(Wen-Xin Zhang);許瑛玿(Ying-Shao Hsu);何玉婷(Yu-Ting Ho);劉承珏(Cheng-Chueh Liu)(2023)。社會性科學議題決策學習模組的成效。教育科學研究期刊。68(1)。167-198。