專題反思教學應用於PM_(2.5)空汙環境行動課程之學習成效研究

Effect of Applying Project-Based Reflective Teaching in Environmental Action Curriculum of PM_(2.5) Air Pollution on Learning Outcome

10.6173/CJSE.202112/SP_29.0004

楊登順(Teng-Shun Yang)；許彩梁(Tsai-Liang Hsu)；劉品君(Pin-Juin Liu)；顏瓊芬(Chiung-Fen Yen)

反思日誌 ； 空氣汙染 ； 專題式學習 ； 環境行動方案 ； 環境素養 ； Reflective Journal ； Air Pollution ； Project-Based Learning ； Environmental Action Project ； Environmental Literacy

科學教育學刊

29卷S期（2021 / 12 / 01）

491 - 516

繁體中文

本研究旨於探討專題反思日誌教學運用於細懸浮微粒（Fine Particulate Matter ≤ 2.5 μm, PM_(2.5)）空汙環境行動方案課程前、後，大學生環境教育目標的學習情形、PM_(2.5)空汙環境素養與環境行動方案課程規劃的變化情形。本研究採單組前後測設計，便利取樣選取臺中市某大學共38位學生作為研究樣本，針對永續環境汙染議題、環境教育目標及公民行動方案，進行9次PM_(2.5)空汙議題反思日誌教學，透過合作學習於課堂上完成小組反思寫作任務。本研究利用自編PM_(2.5)空汙環境素養量表、空汙專題反思作業、校園PM_(2.5)空汙防治行動方案報告、訪談大綱、教學反思為研究工具，蒐集大學生的PM_(2.5)空汙環境素養、環境教育目標理解，及校園環境行動方案課程規劃與執行能力。本研究以描述統計、相依樣本t考驗及內容分析進行資料分析，主要發現如下：一、大學生對於PM_(2.5)的空汙認知、空汙風險感知、空汙防治行為皆有進一步瞭解與認同；二、專題反思日誌教學後，對於提升大學生PM_(2.5)空汙環境素養有顯著幫助；三、反思寫作能幫助大學生更加理解環境教育目標之公民行動技能、並有效規劃與執行環境行動方案。最後，針對上述教學與研究結果提出對於提升大學生環境教育目標理解、PM_(2.5)空汙環境素養及環境行動方案規劃與執行相關議題，進行討論與建議。

The purpose of this research was to explore the efficacy of using Project-Based Reflective Journal Teaching (PBRJT) to promote the development of college students' goal of environmental education and PM_(2.5) (Fine Particulate Matter ≤ 2.5 μm) environmental literacy and investigate the performance of their curriculum planning in environmental action project. This study adopted a single-group pretest-posttest design. A total of 38 undergraduates were selected using convenience sampling from a university in Taichung City. Participants completed 9 reflective journal tasks of PM_(2.5) air pollution issues through cooperative learning. The instruments of PM_(2.5) environmental literacy scale, air pollution reflection worksheet, campus PM_(2.5) prevention action project report and in-depth interview along with teaching reflection were employed to assess the students' performance. Investigators conducted descriptive analyses, t tests and content analyses on the collected data. Research findings revealed improvements in the participants' cognition, risk perception and prevention behaviors of air pollution. The PBRJT significantly improves undergraduates' PM_(2.5) environmental literacy. In addition, this study provides evidence to support that PBRJT significantly improve students' understanding on subgoal of environmental education (citizen action skills) and environmental action ability. The implications of the findings and recommendations for future research are discussed.

1. 周維倫, W.-L.,曾治乾, C.-C.,葉國樑, G.-L.,黃禎貞, J.-J.,石玲如, L.-J.(2018)。高中生細懸浮微粒防治行為意圖及相關因子之研究。科學教育學刊，26(2)，123-147。
   連結：
2. 周鴻騰, H.-T.(2018)。以反思日誌寫作為基礎之永續海鮮議題教學研究。教育理論與實踐學刊，38，1-30。
   連結：
3. 邱素玲, S.-L.,洪福源, F.-Y.(2014)。大學生班級情緒氣氛、學習自我效能、學習倦怠與學習投入關係研究。彰化師大教育學報，25，85-112。
   連結：
4. 徐美苓, M.-L.(2019)。風險感知、價值觀、議題傳播及空汙防制行為意向。新聞學研究，138，25-73。
   連結：
5. 陳麗華, L.-H.(2011)。公民行動取向全球議題課程設計模式與實踐案例。臺灣民主季刊，8(1)，47-82。
   連結：
6. 楊真真, C.-C.,林瓊瑤, C.-Y.,黃琴扉, C.-F.(2019)。國中生空氣汙染環境素養量表之開發編製。臺中教育大學學報：教育類，33(1)，31-55。
   連結：
7. 潘淑蘭, S.-L.,周儒, J.,吳景達, C.-T.(2017)。探究環境素養與影響環境行動之因子：以臺灣大學生為例。環境教育研究，13(1)，35-65。
   連結：
8. 謝百淇, P. P.,陳美智, M.-C.,姜幸鐘, H.-C.(2020)。教師永續發展態度、空汙風險論點與空汙防治行為之關係研究。科學教育學刊，28(2)，169-195。
   連結：
9. 謝百淇, P. P.,曾靜雯, C.-W.,陳繼成, C.-C.,吳景達, C.-T.(2018)。大學生對PM2.5空氣汙染的態度與認知之研究。環境教育研究，14(2)，57-90。
   連結：
10. Archie, M.(2004).Guidelines for the preparation and professional development of environmental educators.Washington, DC:North American Association for Environmental Education.
11. Arnold, G.(2012).Enhancing college students’ environmental sensibilities through online nature journaling.Environmental Education Research,18(1),133-150.
12. Bell, S.(2010).Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future.TheClearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas,83(2),39-43.
13. Blumenfeld, P. C.,Soloway, E.,Marx, R. W.,Krajcik, J. S.,Guzdial, M.,Palincsar, A.(1991).Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning.Educational Psychologist,26(3-4),369-398.
14. Boyes, E.,Myers, G.,Skamp, K.,Stanisstreet, M.,Yeung, S.(2007).Air quality: A comparison of students’ conceptions and attitudes across the continents.Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education,37(4),425-445.
15. Carson, R.(1962).Silent spring.Boston, MA:Houghton Mifflin.
16. Center for Civic Education、吳愛頡（譯）, A.-J.(Trans.)(2020).公民行動方案.臺北市=Taipei,Taiwan:五南=Wu-Nan.
17. Cohen, J.(1988).Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences.Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
18. Cureton, E. E.(1957).The upper and lower twenty-seven per cent rule.Psychometrika,22(3),293-296.
19. Disinger, J. F.,Howe, R. W.(1992).Environmental education research news.Environmentalist,12(1),3-7.
20. Engleson, D. C.(1985).A guide to curriculum planning in environmental education.Madison, WI:Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
21. Engleson, D. C.,Yockers, D. H.(1994).A guide to curriculum planning in environmental education.Madison, WI:Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
22. Granit-Dgani, D.,Kaplan, A.,Flum, H.(2017).Theory-based assessment in environmental education: A tool for formative evaluation.Environmental Education Research,23(2),269-299.
23. Hungerford, H. R.(1992).Investigating and evaluating environmental issues and actions: Skill development modules.Champaign, IL:Stipes.
24. Jensen, B. B.(2002).Knowledge, action and pro-environmental behaviour.Environmental Education Research,8(3),325-334.
25. Kolstø, S. D.(2006).Patterns in students’ argumentation confronted with a risk-focusedsocio-scientific issue.International Journal of Science Education,28(14),1689-1716.
26. Patton, M. Q.(2002).Qualitative research & evaluation methods.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
27. Roth, C. E.(1992).Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s.Columbus, OH:ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
28. Ruland, J. P.,Ahern, N. R.(2007).Transforming student perspectives through reflective writing.Nurse Educator,32(2),81-88.
29. Schön, D. A.(1983).The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action.New York, NY:Basic Books.
30. Shafiei, A.,Maleksaeidi, H.(2020).Pro-environmental behavior of university students: Application of protection motivation theory.Global Ecology and Conservation,22
31. Shamuganathan, S.,Karpudewan, M.(2017).Science writing heuristics embedded in greenchemistry: A tool to nurture environmental literacy among pre-university students.Chemistry Education Research and Practice,18(2),386-396.
32. Siegal, M.,Borasi, R.,Fonzi, J.(1998).Supporting students’ mathematical inquiries throughreading.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,29(4),378-413.
33. Skamp, K.,Boyes, E.,Stanisstreet, M.(2004).Students’ ideas and attitudes about air quality.Research in Science Education,34(3),313-342.
34. Smith-Sebasto, N. J.,D’Costa, A(1995).Designing a Likert-type scale to predict environmentally responsible behavior in undergraduate students: A multistep process.The Journal of Environmental Education,27(1),14-20.
35. Stanfield, R. B.(2000).The art of focused conversation: 100 ways to access group wisdom in the workplace.Gabriola, BC:New Society.
36. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization(1978).,未出版
37. VERBI Software Consult. Sozialforschung GmbH(2020).VERBI Software Consult. Sozialforschung GmbH. (2020). MAXQDA (Version 2020) [Computer software]. Berlin, Germany: Author..
38. 行政院環境保護署（2018年8月1日）。空氣汙染防制法。查詢日期：2021年4月24日，檢自https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=o0020001。[Environmental Protection Administration. (2018, August 1). Air pollution control act. Retrieved April 24, 2021, from https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=o0020001]
39. 劉秀嫚, S.-M.(2012)。民主公民教育的教學實踐：「公民行動方案」的可能性。臺灣教育，673，18-24。
40. 鄭麗瑤, L.-Y.,葉國樑, G.-L.,曾治乾, C.-C.,黃禎貞, J.-J.,葉明祥, M.-H.(2016)。臺北地區某兩所大學學生細懸浮微粒防治行為意圖之研究。健康促進暨衛生教育雜誌，40，1-24。

1. (2024)。用反思5R啟動永續思維－以「深海食堂＿永續海鮮的認識與反省」為例。國立虎尾科技大學學報，38(1)，29-45。