题名

國小“自然與生活科技”教科書中科學史內容之分析

并列篇名

Analyzing the Historical Content of Elementary Science and Technology Textbooks

DOI

10.7044/NHCUEA.200812.0001

作者

呂紹海(Shao-Hi Li);巫俊明(Chun-Ming Wu)

关键词

自然與生活科技 ; 科學史 ; 教科書 ; 內容分析 ; science and technology ; history of science ; textbook ; content analysis

期刊名称

新竹教育大學教育學報

卷期/出版年月

25卷2期(2008 / 12 / 01)

页次

1 - 31

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

本研究旨在分析目前國內四個主要版本之國小自然與生活科技教科書(南一、康軒、翰林及牛頓)中的科學史內容。爲兼顧分析之廣度及完整性,因此採用Leite於2002年所發展的科學教科書科學史內容分析檢核表做爲分析之主要依據。結果顯示:目前國小「自然與生活科技」教科書中的科學史內容以簡略的傳記資料、科學發現或簡化(線性與直接)的科學演進過程爲主,很少呈現科學家的人性面、科學概念或儀器的真實發展過程及其政治、社會或宗教的背景,加上多數的歷史資訊被定位爲補充內容,讓學生自由選讀,同時很少安排閱讀以外的學習活動,以引導學生思考或探討科學史背後所蘊含的豐富內涵,因此幾乎無法達成課程大綱「使學生得以藉助科學發現過程之了解,體會科學本質及科學探究的方法和精神」之目的。

英文摘要

The purpose of this study was to analyze the historical content of elementary science and technology textbooks. To fully and deeply cover in spread and depth all the aspects that should be considered, the checklist for analyzing the historical content of science textbooks developed by Leite in 2002 was used as the basis of the analysis. The results show the historical information included in the textbooks analyzed is superficial in nature. <||>Biographic data<||> and <||>linear and straightforward<||> types of evolution of science are the most frequent items. The textbooks analyzed seldom present the humanistic element, the real evolution of a science concept or technological device, and the diverse contexts in which the evolution of science occurred. In addition, the textbooks analyzed tend to give a complementary role to the historical content in the teaching of science, and include very few learning activities focusing on the history of science. Thus, the results of the study show the historical content included in the textbooks analyzed can hardly give students an adequate image of science and scientists' work.

主题分类 社會科學 > 教育學
参考文献
  1. Allchin, D.(2003).Scientific myth-conceptions.Science Education,87,329-351.
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science(1989).Science for all Americans.New York:Oxford University Press.
  3. Apple, M. W.(1995).Education and Power.New York:Routledge.
  4. Beaton, A. E.,Martin, M. O. ,Mullis, I. V. S.,Gonzalez, E. J.,Smith, T. A.,Kelly, D. L.(1996).Science achievement in the middle school years: IEA's third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS).Chestnut Hill, MA:Boston College.
  5. Brackenridge, J. B.(1989).Education in science, history of science, and the textbook-necessary vs. sufficient conditions.Interchange,20(2),71-80.
  6. Brush, S.(1974).Should the history of science be rated X?.Science,183,1164-1172.
  7. Brush, S. G.(1989).History of science and science education.Interchange,20(2),60-70.
  8. Conant, J. B.(1951).Science and common sense England.New Haven:Yale University Press.
  9. de Berg, K. C.(1989).The emergence of quantification in the pressure-volume relationship for gases: A textbook analysis.Science Education,73(2),115-134.
  10. Driver, R ,Easley, J.(1978).Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students..Studies in Science Education,5,61-84.
  11. Hodson, D.(2006).Why we shoud prioritize learning about science.Canadian Journal of science, Mathematics and Technology Education,6(3),293-311.
  12. Hodson, D.(1986).Philosophy of science and science education..Journal of philosophy of Education,20(2),215-225.
  13. Jevons, F.(1969).The teaching of science.London:George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
  14. Jones, R. (eds.),M. Shortland(eds.),A. Warwick (eds.)(1989).Teaching the history of science.Basil Blackwell:The British Society for the History of Science.
  15. Klein, M.,S. Brush (Eds.),A. King (Eds.)(1972).History in the teaching of physics.Hanover,NH:University Press of New England.
  16. Leite, L.(2002).History of science in science education: Development and validation of a checklist for analysing the historical content of science textbooks.Science & Education,11,333-359.
  17. Matthews, M.(1994).Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science.New York:Routedge.
  18. McDonald, D.(1989).Implications of spontaneous concepts and the history of science.ERIC.
  19. Memory, D. N.,,Uhlhorn, K.W.(1991).Multiple textbooks at different eadability levels in the science classroom.School Science and Mathematics,91(2),64-72.
  20. Milne, C.(1998).Philosophically correct science stories? Examining the implications of heroic science stories for school science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,35(2),175-187.
  21. Narguizian, P. J.(2002).Los Angeles, California,University of Southern California.
  22. Russell, T.(1981).What history of science, how much and why?.Science Education,65(1),52-64.
  23. Rutherford, F. J.,Holton, G.,Watson, F. G.(1970).The Project Physics Course: Text..New York:Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  24. Sanchez, L.,D. E. Herget (Ed.)(1989).The History and Philosophy of Science in Science Teaching-Proceedings of the First International Conference.Florida:Florida State University.
  25. Schecker, H. P.(1992).The paradigmatic change in mechanics: Implication of historical processes for physics education.Science & Education,1(1),71-76.
  26. Sherratt, W.(1982).History of science in the science curriculum: An historical perspective -Part I.School Science Review,64(227),225-236.
  27. Souque, J. P.(1987).Science education and textbook science.Candian Journal of Education,12(1),74-86.
  28. Steiner, R.(1976).Humanizing chemistry through its history.School Seience and Mathematics,76(1),33-40.
  29. Stinner, A.(2001).Linking 'the book of nature' and 'the book of science': Using circular motion as an examolar beyond the textbook.Science & Education,10,323-344.
  30. Tao, P. K.(2002).A study of students' focal awareness when studying science stories designed for fostering understanding of the nature of science.Research in Science Education,32(1),97-120.
  31. Wandersee, J. H.(1986).Can the history of science help science educatorsanticipate student's misconceptions?.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,23(7),581-597.
  32. Wang, H.(1998).Los Angeles, California,University of Southern California.
  33. 牛頓教科書(2003)。國民小學自然與生活科技。臺北市:牛頓開發教科書股份有限公司。
  34. 巫俊明(1997)。科學史事例對學生科學本質的了解、科學態度、及物理學科成績之影響。中華民國第十三屆科學教育學術研討會-會議手冊及短篇論文彙編,臺北市:
  35. 巫俊明(2002)。運用科學史增進學生對於科學本質的了解。國教世紀,199,61-68。
  36. 南一書局(2005)。國民小學自然與生活科技。臺南市:南一書局企業股份有限公司。
  37. 洪振方(1998)。科學教學的另類選擇:融入科學史的教學。屏師科學教育,7,2-10。
  38. 康軒文教事業(2005)。國民小學自然與生活科技。臺北市:康軒文教事業股份有限公司。
  39. 教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要-然與生活科技學習領域。臺北市:教育部。
  40. 陳勇志、洪木利、林財庫(1998)。現行國中理化教科書的科學史內容之分析。科學與教育學報,2,118-204。
  41. 陳意升(2004)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。新竹市,國立新竹師範學院數理研究所。
  42. 傅麗玉(1996)。化學教學面面觀。臺北市:臺灣師範大學中等教育輔導委員會。
  43. 傅麗玉、張嘉鳳、劉君燦主編(2000)。國小自然科學教科書中科史材料之呈現:七個地區的國小自然科學教科書為例。第五屆科學史研討會論文集,臺北市:
  44. 歐用生、黃光雄、簡茂發主編(1994)。教育研究法。臺北市:師大書苑。
  45. 翰林出版(2005)。國民小學自然與生活科技。臺南市:翰林出版事業股份有限公司。
被引用次数
  1. 陳秋燕,邱瓊芳,吳正己(2021)。高中資訊科技教科書資訊科學史內容分析。科學教育學刊,29(2),167-189。
  2. 陳鈺女盈、巫俊明(2017)。科普讀物閱讀活動對四年級學童的科學家意象之影響。清華教育學報,34(1),33-69。
  3. 賴筱婷,曹雅萍,張均瑋,姚月雲(2019)。從科學史的出發探討自然科學素養導向課程與評量-以高中「莫耳」概念為例。中等教育,70(3),123-134。
  4. 林淑梤,仰威融(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,13(1),75-106。
  5. 劉靜怡、洪振方、李明昆(2011)。科學史融入物理教學對高一女生的科學本質觀與電磁學概念改變之研究。屏東教育大學學報,36(教育),133-168。
  6. 邱美虹,林佳穎,林佳弘(2021)。探討啟聰學校學生持有之科學家意象。特殊教育研究學刊,46(2),31-60。
  7. 顏慶祥,陳世文(2021)。「探究與實作」課程在普通高中自然科學領域實施概況之調查研究。課程與教學,24(4),135-166。
  8. 楊文金,黃仲義,陳世文(2021)。我國國民中小學科學教科書科學詞彙之差異比較。教科書研究,14(1),1-29。
  9. 葉辰楨、陳素芬、張文華、林淑梤(2012)。運用明示和暗示科學本質文本對七年級學生學習演化單元的效益。科學教育學刊,20(4),367-392。
  10. 趙毓圻、熊召弟、于曉平(2011)。臺灣中小學奈米科技實驗教材之內容分析。教育科學研究期刊,56(4),1-42。