運用SOLO分類法探討科展活動之建模的類型－以八年及物理科展為例

Using SOLO Taxonomy to Explore the Levels of Representation Models in Scientific Inquiry Activities: An exploration based on 8th Grade Physics Fair

鐘建坪(Jing-Ping Jong)；邱美虹(Mei-Hung Chiu)

事後回溯法 ； 建模 ； 科學展覽 ； 模型 ； SOLO分類法 ； ex post facto method ； modeling ； science fair ； SOLO taxonomy ； typology of model

教育實踐與研究

27卷1期（2014 / 06 / 01）

31 - 63

繁體中文

模型與建模為科學實務的中心工作，而中小學科學展覽為最近似科學家的建模活動。本研究採用事後回溯法（Ex Post Facto Study）探討2位立意取樣之八年級學生歷經物理科展建模活動後所建構的模型表徵類型與其表徵模型階層。研究工具主要整合自模型表徵類型（Boulter & Buckley, 2000）與觀察學習表現架構（Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome, SOLO）（Biggs & Collis, 1982）分類階層形成模型種類與階層表。研究結果顯示學生在實驗室情境下建構模型的類型與其發展順序，包括：（1）在相同探究時期，學生可以建構出具體、動作、視覺、語彙與數學等多種具有目的性的模型；而在不同探究時期，學生主要從具體與動作表徵模型開始，接著建構視覺、語彙與數學模型的動態建模歷程，並依據先前建構的表徵模型從單一結構逐漸提升至延伸抽象結構；（2）學生經由不同的探究階段逐漸掌握科展主題探索的變因，包括纏繞物的種類、纏繞圈數、懸掛重量以及摩擦力等而形成自身對於科展主題的概念架構，並向外發展形成各種表徵模型。最後文末依據學生表徵模型建構次序，建議教師在設計實驗為主的探究相關活動時，應著重在具體與動作表徵模型的介紹，再逐步形成視覺與語彙模型表徵模型，最後形成數學模型。

Models play a core role in science. Engaging students in science exhibitions is a way to involve them in modeling activities similar to those practiced by scientists. This study adopted the ex post facto method to investigate the types and hierarchical levels of modeling processes which were present in the scientific inquiry activities of eighth grade students. The authors integrated a typology of models proposed by Boulter and Buckley (2000) and Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy by Biggs and Collis (1982) to evaluate the typology of models used. The results revealed that (1) within the same inquiry phase, students constructed different types of representational models, including concrete, gestural, visual, verbal, and mathematical, each with a specific purpose. In other phases they constructed the same types from models that are uni-structural to ones that are extended and abstract. (2) Through various inquiry phases, the students gradually understood the variables of the project they worked on in order to develop a variety of corresponding representation models. Accordingly, school teachers are recommended to provide a progression of inquiry-based science activities that emphasize on introducing concrete and gestural representational models, forming visual and verbal models, and constructing mathematical models.

1. 毛松霖、張菊秀(1997)。「探究式教學法」與「講述式教學法」對於國中學生地球科學─氣象單元學習成效之比較。科學教育學刊，5(4)，461-497。
   連結：
2. 張志康、邱美虹(2009)。建模能力分析指標的發展與應用─以電化學為例。科學教育學刊，17(4)，319-342。
   連結：
3. 教育部（2003）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要：自然與生活科技學習領域。台北：作者。
4. Biggs, J.,Collis, K.(1982).Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy.New York, NY:Academic Press.
5. Blanchard, M. R.,Southerland, S. A.,Osborne, J. W.,Sampson, V.,Annetta, L. A.,Granger, E. M.(2010).Is inquiry possible in light of accountability? A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction.Science Education,94(4),577-616.
6. Bloom, B. S.(1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives, the classification of educational goals.New York, NY:McKay.
7. Bybee, R. W.(1997).Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices.Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.
8. Carruthers, P.(Ed.),Stich, S.(Ed.),Siegal, M.(Ed.)(2002).The Cognitive Basis of Science.Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.
9. Chinn, C. A.,Malhotra, B. A.(2002).Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks.Science Education,86(2),175-218.
10. Doherty, E. J. S.,Evans, L. C.(1983).Primary independent study.Connecticut, CT:Synergetics.
11. Giere, R. N.(2010).An agent-based conception of models and scientific representation.Synthese,172(2),269-281.
12. Giere, R. N.(1988).Explaining science: A cognitive approach.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
13. Gilbert, J. K.(Ed.),Boulter, C. J.(Ed.)(2000).Developing models in science education.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
14. Harrison, A. G.,Treagust, D. F.(2000).A typology of school science models.International Journal of Science Education,22(9),1011-1026.
15. Krajcik, J.,Czerniak, C. M.,Berger, C. F.(1998).Teaching children science: A project-based approach.Boston, MA:McGraw-Hill.
16. Latour, B.(1990).Drawing things together.Representation in scientific practice,Cambridge, MA:
17. Latour, B.(1987).Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
18. Mcijers, A.(Ed.)(2009).Handbook of the philosophy of technology and engineering sciences.Amsterdam, The Netherlands:Elsevier.
19. Milner-Bolotin, M.(2012).Increasing interactivity and authenticity of chemistry instruction through data acquisition systems and other technologies.Journal of Chemical Education,89(4),477-481.
20. Minogue, J.,Jones, M. G.(2009).Measuring the impact of haptic feedback using the SOLO taxonomy.International Journal of Science Education,31(10),1359-1378.
21. National Research Council(2000).Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
22. Prins, G. T.,Bulte, A. M. W.,van Driel, J. H.,Pilot, A.(2008).Selection of authentic modelling practices as contexts for chemistry education.International Journal of Science Education,30(14),1867-1890.
23. Roth, W. M,McGinn, M. K.(1998).Review of Educational Research,68(1),35-59.
24. Saari, H.,Viiri, F.(2003).A research-based teaching sequence for teaching the concept of modelling to seventh-grade students.International Journal of Science Education,25(11),1333-1352.
25. Schwarz, C. V.,Reiser, B. J.,Davis, E. A.,Kenyon, L.,Acher, A.,Fortus, D.,Krajcik, J.(2009).Designing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners.Journal for Research in Science Teaching,46(6),632-654.
26. Schwarz, C.,White, B.(2005).Meta-modeling knowledge: Developing students' understanding of scientific modeling.Cognition and Instruction,23(2),165-205.
27. Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.),Davidson, J. E.(Ed.)(1995).The nature of insight.Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.
28. van Driel, J. H.,Verloop, N.(1999).Teachers' knowledge of models and modeling in science.International Journal of Science Education,21(11),1141-1153.
29. 周金城(2002)。博士論文(博士論文)。台北，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所。

1. 林靜雯、余阮清(2017)。臺灣四年級與八年級學生於TIMSS 2011試題中建模能力之比較。科學教育學刊，25(4)，331-354。