以探究式教學法結合PBL於水文學課程之教學實踐

Pedagogical Practices for the Incorporation of Inquiry Teaching with Problem-Based Learning in a Hydrology Course

陳宜清(YI-CHING CHEN)；曾浩瑋(HAO-WEI TSENG)

問題導向學習法（PBL） ； 探究式教學法 ； 水文學 ； 合作學習 ； 小組討論 ； problem-based learning (PBL) ； inquiry teaching ； hydrology ； collaborative learning ； group discussion

科學與工程技術期刊

16卷2期（2020 / 09 / 01）

13 - 26

繁體中文

現今之教學方法需求多元化，「問題導向學習法（PBL）」近來年廣為所用。PBL就是「以學生學習為中心」、「解決問題」、「合作學習」、「小組討論」之整合式教學法。本研究更結合以學生的操作活動之探究式教學，搭配PBL引導學生發現問題、分析問題，並擬定可行的解決方案，獲得結論並驗證之，讓學生從中學得解決問題的技能。而環境及生活就是最好的探索主題，從空氣、水到生態都能探究出重要的科學概念與工程應用，水文氣象與人類生活密切，水文的重要性與實用性容易引發學生「學習」動機。以質性訪談問卷中顯示學生均認為這門課有引導學生做到主動學習；也都認同小組合作及討論能對學生的學習有幫助；也都認同實際動手會獲得探索的樂趣；也都覺得小組探索及討論讓課程更加的有趣；研究發現確實在探究活動及PBL創新教學模式可以改變學生對工程課程學習態度與情緒。以51位修課學生為研究對象，經期中及期末量化成效檢核問卷之統計，在李克特五點量表比較下，學生對課程之評鑑之平均值由3.94提高至4.02；對PBL教學之評鑑之平均值由4.03提高為4.15；而學生個人成長自評之平均值由3.93提高至4.04。各研究面向中，課程設計與個人成長有非常顯著高度相關，而PBL模式、業界教師也是與個人成長有非常顯著之中度相關。以學生誠實自評個人成長分級為積極組及消極組，兩組同學在掌握課程進度和重點、對課程學習動機有提升、有好好課前預習、有全心投入小組討論等面向中對課程及PBL模式皆有高顯著至非常顯著差異，積極組同學在學習成效上是滿意且有收穫的。然而在期中及期末之學習成效比較並無顯著，雖有進步但並不明顯，可能是施測時間相距不遠所致。

Today's educational systems promote the diversification of teaching methods. The problem-based learning (PBL) method has been particularly widely used in recent years. PBL is an integrated learning module focused on student-centered learning, problem solving, collaborative learning, and group discussion. In this study, an inquiry teaching method involving student activities was combined with PBL to help students gain problem-solving skills enabling them to identify and analyze problems, formulate feasible solutions, and draw and verify conclusions. Topics linked to the living environment, such as air, water, and ecology, and human life, such as hydrology and meteorology, were selected for the inquiry teaching intervention because they enabled the introduction of scientific concepts and engineering applications. The practicality of hydrology was expected to increase students' learning motivation. In qualitative interview questionnaires, the students indicated that the course encouraged active learning and that collaborative learning and group discussion also helped their learning. In addition, they enjoyed the hands-on exploration component and found that group exploration and discussion made the course more interesting. These results demonstrate that exploration activities and PBL can change and improve students' learning attitude in engineering courses. The 51 student participants also completed quantitative questionnaires scored on a 5-point Likert scale on learning effectiveness. Between the midterm and final evaluations, the average course evaluation score increased from 3.94 to 4.02, the average teaching evaluation score increased from 4.03 to 4.15, and the average personal growth self-assessment score increased from 3.93 to 4.04. Curriculum design and personal growth were highly significantly correlated. The PBL method, industry teachers, and personal growth were moderately significantly correlated. On the basis of their self-assessment of personal growth, the students were divided into positive and negative groups. The course and PBL models indicated highly to very highly significant between-group differences regarding whether students were focused, kept up with coursework, had improved learning motivation, were prepared for class, and engaged in group discussion. The students in the positive group felt satisfied and rewarded in their learning. Although moderate progress was noted, no significant differences were observed in learning effectiveness between the midterm and final evaluations, perhaps because the time points at which they were taken were too close together.

1. Bereiter, C.,Scardamalia, M.(2010).Can children really create knowledge?.Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology,36(1),1-15.
2. Biggs, J.,Tang, C.(2011).Teaching for Quality Learning at University.UK:Open University Press.
3. Scardamalia, M.(2002).Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge.Liberal Education in a Knowledge Society,Chicago:
4. Yew, E. H. J.,Goh, K.(2016).Problem-based learning: an overview of its process and impact on learning.Health Professions Education,2(2),75-79.
5. 未來 Family 雜誌（105 年 12 月 2 日），想培養出未來的人才，不能不認識 PBL 學習法!（林怡伶記者），109 年3 月 1 日，取自：https://futureparenting.cwgv.com.tw/family/content/index/1973。
6. 未來 Family 雜誌（106 年 6 月 1 日），看見未來教育 21種教室新樣貌（黃啟菱、王惠英記者），109 年 3 月 1 日，取自：https://futureparenting.cwgv.com.tw/family/ content/index/7804。
7. 林明地(2005)。適用於校長專業發展的 PBL 教案設計。教育研究月刊，129，79-91。
8. 張仁家,蕭錫錡,王麒(2014)。當前科技大學工程與技術教育使用教學方法之調查。科技與工程教育學刊，47(1)，21-47。
9. 張靜嚳(1996)。傳統教學有何不妥。建構與教學，4，1-3。
10. 楊建民(2009)。國立屏東教育大學資訊科學系。
11. 葉孋嬋（105 年 6 月 8 日），以探究式學習激發好奇心，科技大觀園，109 年 3 月 1 日，取自 https://scitechvista.nat.gov.tw/c/sWy2.htm.
12. 劉湘瑤(2016)。科學探究的教學與評量。科學研習，55(2)，5-11。
13. 劉鎔毓(2007)。台灣大學生學習經驗與教學方法偏好之研究。高等教育與學生事務論文集，台北:
14. 蔡秉恒(2002)。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所。
15. 鄭博真（編）(2008).大學卓越教學法－原理、方法與實例.台南:中華醫事科技大學教學卓越中心.
16. 蕭錫錡,趙志揚,許世卿,許錫銘,曾世虹,陳婉如(2001)。從專題製作課程論大學工程學生創意思考能力之培養。工業教育學刊，21，15-28。
17. 羅敏輝、李明旭（105 年 4 月 12 日），水與生活：水與氣候，科技大觀園，109 年 3 月 1 日，取自 https://scitechvista.nat.gov.tw/c/s2aP.htm。

1. 蔣世寶(2021)。基於問題導向課程活動之合作學習研究。中科大學報，8(2)，53-78。
2. (2024)。提升學習動機與學習成就的自然科整合教學法。學校行政，153，223-252。