题名

以閱讀科學文本教學模式提升高中生科學能力之探究

并列篇名

Exploration on Enhanced High School Students' Scientific Ability by Reading Scientific Articles

DOI

10.6173/CJSE.202209_30(3).0002

作者

鄭立婷(Li-Ting Cheng)；曾郁然(Yu-Jan Tseng)；林煥祥(Huann-Shyang Lin)；洪瑞兒(Zuway-R Hong)

关键词

科學能力 ； 評估與設計實驗 ； 解釋科學現象 ； 閱讀素養 ； Scientific Ability ； Evaluation and Design Experiment ； Explaining Phenomena Scientifically ； Reading Literacy

期刊名称

科學教育學刊

卷期/出版年月

30卷3期（2022 / 09 / 01）

页次

217 - 239

内容语文

繁體中文
中文摘要

本研究目的在探討閱讀科學文本的教學模式，引導高中學生從閱讀及探究科學文本的歷程中發現問題、設計實驗步驟，進而提升高中生的科學能力。本研究以便利取樣選取研究者所服務南部某社區型高中，35位來自不同社經地位家庭的高中一年級學生，實施六週次十二節「閱讀科學文本」課程。研究者於教學歷程中收集教師的教學內容、課室觀察紀錄、學生上課參與表現及學習單等，再以不斷比較分析法分析獲得的資料，藉以了解學生在閱讀科學文本時是如何從擷取訊息到以科學解釋現象的表現，並探討高中生在設計實驗中，較容易忽略的要素有哪些？而這些被忽略的要素，在同儕及教師提問後，是否能察覺並修正？本研究有四項主要發現：一、多數學生已具備從擷取訊息到解釋科學現象的能力；二、將文字轉換成圖像表徵與提出高層次問題的能力較為薄弱；三、在設計實驗步驟過程，除瞭解需要有「對照組」外，其他實驗要素學生較容易忽略，而多數學生經過同儕及教師提問後，已能察覺應注意而未注意的實驗設計要素；四、「重複實驗」是多數學生最容易忽略的實驗步驟。最後根據本研究結果，提出如何經由閱讀科學文本提升學生科學能力的建議。
英文摘要

The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of a teaching model that integrated scientific reading for secondary school students' science learning. Thirty-five 10th graders were conveniently selected from a senior high school in Southern Taiwan suburban area in which students were from different social-economic families. These students participated in a total of 6-week 12-hour ＂Scientific reading course＂. We collected qualitative data from teaching video, classroom observation, and weekly learning sheets. A constant comparative method was used to analyze the teaching video, observation record, and learning sheets for understanding these participants' performance from extracting information to explaining phenomena scientifically after reading scientific context. The essential findings were: (1) Most of students had an ability that extracting information to explain phenomena scientifically. (2) Students had less abilities on converting symbolic representation into model representation which needs high level thinking skills. (3) Most of students always ignored assigning a control group in an experimental design, but they could notice the missing elements after the teachers' and peer's comments. (4) Repeatable experimental design is an important element that most students forgot to consider. This study provided a fresh insight on conducting scientific reading teaching model to increase students' learning outcome.
主题分类 社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. 仰威融, W.-R.,林淑梤, S.-F.(2020)。運用PISA科學素養評量架構探討國中生物教科書中問題的特徵。教科書研究，3(1)，75-106。
    連結：
  2. 林信志, H.-C.,劉藍芳, L.-F.,洪啟昌, C.-C.(2017)。國小校長專業發展實驗課程之探究：蘇格拉底對話法之應用。教育科學期刊，16(1)，131-156。
    連結：
  3. 邱美虹, M.-H.,林秀蓁, S.-J.(2004)。以CHILDES分析一對一科學教學活動中師生互動共建科學知識的行為表現。科學教育學刊，12(2)，133-158。
    連結：
  4. 鄭可萱, K.-H.,李松濤, S.-T.(2018)。當科學素養與閱讀素養相遇：高中學生科學新聞閱讀策略之實驗研究。教育科學研究期刊，63(4)，157-192。
    連結：
  5. 羅廷瑛, T.-Y.(2015)。溝通式閱讀科學文本教學方案對國小四年級學生科學閱讀表現之影響。新竹教育大學教育學報，32(1)，93-126。
    連結：
  6. Abd-El-Khalick, F.,Boujaoude, S.,Duschl, R.,Lederman, N. G.,Mamlok-Naaman, R.,Hofstein, A.,Niaz, M.,Treagust, D.,Tuan, H.-L.(2004).Inquiry in science education: International perspectives.Science Education,88(3),397-419.
  7. Arnold, J. C.,Kremer, K.,Mayer, J.(2014).Understanding students’ experiments—What kind of support do they need in inquiry tasks?.International Journal of Science Education,36(16),2719-2749.
  8. Arvidsson, T. S.,Kuhn, D.(2021).Realizing the full potential of individualizing learning.Contemporary Educational Psychology,65
  9. Bedford, S.,Legg, S.(2007).Formative peer and self feedback as a catalyst for change within science teaching.Chemistry Education Research and Practice,8(1),80-92.
  10. Boardman, A. G.,Boele, A. L.,Klingner, J. K.(2018).Strategy instruction shifts teacher and student interactions during text-based discussions.Reading Research Quarterly,53(2),175-195.
  11. Bossér, U.,Lindahl, M.(2019).Students’ positioning in the classroom: A study of teacher-student interactions in a socioscientific issue contex.Research in Science Education,49,371-390.
  12. Cheung, D.(2011).Teacher beliefs about implementing guided-inquiry laboratory experiments for secondary school chemistry.Journal of Chemical Education,88(11),1462-1468.
  13. Chi, M. T. H.,Siler, S. A.,Jeong, H.,Yamauchi, T.,Hausmann, R. G.(2001).Learning from human tutoring.Cognitive Science,25(4),471-533.
  14. Claser, B. G.,Strauss, A. L.(1967).The discovery of grounded theory.Aldine.
  15. Cohen, J.(1988).Set correlation and contingency tables.Applied Psychological Measurement,12(4),425-434.
  16. Criswell, B.(2012).Framing inquiry in high school chemistry: Helping students see the bigger picture.Journal of Chemical Education,89(2),199-205.
  17. Crujeiras-Pérez, B.,Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P.(2017).High school students’ engagement in planning investigations: Findings from a longitudinal study in Spain.Chemistry Education Research and Practice,18(1),99-112.
  18. de Jong, T.(2006).Technological advances in inquiry learning.Science,312,532-533.
  19. Deng, Y.,Kelly, G. J.,Deng, S.(2019).The influences of integrating reading, peer evaluation, and discussion on undergraduate students’ scientific writing.International Journal of Science Education,41(10),1408-1433.
  20. Galloway, K. W.,Burns, S.(2015).Doing it for themselves: Students creating a high quality peer-learning environment.Chemistry Education Research and Practice,16(1),82-92.
  21. Gillies, R. M.(2019).Promoting academically productive student dialogue during collaborative learning.International Journal of Educational Research,97,200-209.
  22. Howe, C.,Tolmie, A.,Thurston, A.,Topping, K.,Christie, D.,Livingston, K.,Jessiman, E.,Don-aldson, C.(2007).Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning.Learning and Instruction,17(5),549-563.
  23. Hwang, G.-J.,Lai, C.-L.,Liang, J.-C.,Chu, H.-C.,Tsai, C.-C.(2018).A long-term experiment to investigate the relationships between high school students’ perceptions of mobile learning and peer interaction and higher-order thinking tendencies.Educational Technology Research and Development,66(1),75-93.
  24. King, N.(2012).Doing template analysis.Qualitative organizational research: Core methods and current challenges
  25. Kinneavy, J. L.(1971).A theory of discourse: The aims of discourse.Prentice-Hall.
  26. Lemke, J.(1990).Talking science: Language, learning, and values.Ablex.
  27. Levin, J. R.(1982).Pictures as prose-learning devices.Advances in Psychology,8,412-444.
  28. Liger-Belair, G. (2016)。香檳泡泡的金色魔力(陳義裕譯)。https://reurl.cc/RXoKKz。(原作出版於2003年)[Liger-Belair, G. (2016). The science of bubbly. (Y.-Y. Chen, Trans.). https://reurl.cc/RXoKKz (Original work published 2003)]
  29. Lin, X.,Lehman, J. D.(1999).Supporting learning of variable control in a computer-based bi-ology environment: Effects of prompting college students to reflect on their own thinking.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,36(7),837-858.
  30. National Research Council(2000).Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning.National Academy Press.
  31. National Research Council(2012).Nutrient requirements of swine.National Academies Press.
  32. National Research Council(1996).National science education standards.National Academy Press.
  33. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development(2006).Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006.
  34. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development(2017).PISA 2015 science framework.
  35. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development(2019).PISA 2018 reading framework.
  36. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development(2017).PISA 2015 reading framework.
  37. Reilly, C. M.,Kang, S. Y.,Grotzer, T. A.,Joyal, J. A.,Oriol, N. E.(2019).Pedagogical moves and student thinking in technology-mediated medical problem-based learning: Supporting novice-expert shift.British Journal of Educational Technology,50(5),2234-2250.
  38. Salkind, N.(2010).Encyclopedia of research design.Sage.
  39. Seng, M. G. J.,Hill, M.(2014).Using a dialogical approach to examine peer feedback dur-ing chemistry investigative task discussion.Research in Science Education,44(5),727-749.
  40. Sevian, H.,Talanquer, V.(2014).Rethinking chemistry: A learning progression on chemical thinking.Chemistry Education Research and Practice,15(1),10-23.
  41. Temiz, B. K.,Tasar, M. F.,Tan, M.(2006).Development and validation of a multiple format test of science process skills.International Education Journal,7(7),1007-1027.
  42. Topping, K.(1998).Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities.Review of Educational Research,68(3),249-276.
  43. van Riesen, S. A. N.,Gijlers, H.,Anjewierden, A.,de Jong, T.(2018).The influence of prior knowledge on experiment design guidance in a science inquiry context.International Journal of Science Education,40(11),1327-1344.
  44. Wellington, J.,Osborne, J.(2001).Language and literacy in science education.Open University Press.
  45. Woolley, J. S.,Deal, A. M.,Green, J.,Hathenbruck, F.,Kurtz, S. A.,Park, T. K. H.,Pollock, S. V.,Transtrum, M. B.,Jensen, J. L.(2018).Undergraduate students demonstrate common false scientific reasoning strategies.Thinking Skills and Creativity,27,101-113.
  46. 李暉, H.,郭重吉, C.-J.(2000)。科學話語與科學概念之學習：以國中生理化課學習為例。科學教育，10，3-30。
  47. 佘曉清（編）, H.-C.(Ed.),林煥祥（編）, H.-S.(Ed.)(2017).PISA 2015臺灣學生的表現.心理=Psychological Publishing.
  48. 張芬芬, F.-F.(2010)。質性資料分析的五步驟：在抽象階梯上爬升。初等教育學刊，35，87-120。
  49. 教育部(2014)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：總綱。https://reurl.cc/RXMnRD[Ministry of Education. (2014). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education: General guidelines. https://reurl.cc/RXMnRD]
  50. 教育部(2018)。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。https://bit.ly/3KXEh6r[Ministry of Education. (2018). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education for elementary, junior high schools and general senior high schools—Natural sciences. https:// bit.ly/3KXEh6r]
  51. 陳均伊, J.-Y.(2010)。高中學生參與物理人才培育課程的學習成效之研究。物理教育學刊，11(1)，23-44。
  52. 陳瑞麟, R.-L.(2004).科學理論版本的結構與發展.國立臺灣大學=National Taiwan University.
  53. 黃茂在, M.-T.,陳文典, W.-D.,吳敏而, R.-J.(2012)。科學課堂之探究式教學實踐之關鍵因素探討。「永續教育發展—創新與實踐」2010國際學術研討會：課程與教學論文專輯
  54. 黃鴻博, H.-B.(2018)。科學閱讀的基本理念。讀+科學：科學閱讀教學36問
print cancel