國小自然科教師學習兩種探究式教學法與抉擇應用

The Primary Science Teachers Learn Two Kinds of Inquiry Teaching Methods and Choice Application

10.3966/207136492021041401001

盧秀琴(Chow-Chin Lu)；劉靜文(Ching-Wen Liu)

探究與實作 ； 探究式教學法 ； PO+E教學法 ； POEST教學法 ； Inquiry-Based Teaching ； Inquiry and Implementation ； PO+E Teaching Method ； POEST Teaching Method

師資培育與教師專業發展期刊

14卷1期（2021 / 04 / 01）

1 - 27

繁體中文

因應12年國教強調探究與實作的改革，本研究以「昆蟲生理學特論」課程培育14位國小自然科教師兩種探究式教學法，探討其學習成效與抉擇應用的考量。本研究培育內容包含：講授昆蟲學理論、探究式教學法理論、示範教學，以及國小自然科教師抉擇一種教學法設計實驗教案與微型教學，並設計戶外教學學習單；本研究使用PO＋E微型教學評量或POEST微型教學評量予以評量，並訪談他們抉擇應用探究式教學法的想法。結果顯示：一、四組使用PO＋E教學法微型教學，三組使用POEST教學法微型教學，評量達到優良等級，表示能掌握探究式教學法的精髓。二、自然科教師學習探究式教學法後，所設計的教案能先鋪陳教學情境，使用簡報建構基本知識後再讓學生預測；其次、設計的實驗包含探究與實作，讓學生根據實驗紀錄去修正預測的錯誤理由。三、自然科教師抉擇PO＋E教學法是因為「科學解釋能力」六格容易撰寫，探討「科學原理」使得科學實驗更有意義。四、自然科教師抉擇POEST教學法是因為能引導學生使用2個實驗證據證明自己的主張，避免淪為主觀。

In response to Taiwan's 12-year Basic Education plan, which emphasizes the reform of inquiry and implementation, this study used an ＂Advanced Entomology Physiology＂ course to train 14 primary science teachers to study two methods of inquiry teaching, where the teachers observed the learning effectiveness of the two methods, and selected the application they felt met their teaching needs. The nurturing contents included: teaching the theory of entomology and two inquiry-based teaching methods, as well as demonstration teaching, then the primary science teachers selected their preferred teaching method to design teaching and micro-teaching plans. This study used the Micro Teaching Assessment of PO+E (MTAP) and the Teaching Assessment of PO+E, as well as scientific explanations with text scaffolding (MTAPS), to evaluate the micro-teaching plans, and interviewed the participants regarding their thoughts. The results, are as follows. First, four groups selected the PO+E teaching method for micro-teaching, while three groups selected the POEST teaching method for micro-teaching. The assessment results achieved the excellent level, indicating that they could master the inquiry teaching methods. Second, after learning the two inquiry teaching methods, the primary science teachers first arranged their teaching situations and constructed lessons regarding the basic required knowledge, and then encouraged the students to predict the outcomes. The teachers found that they could design inquiry guidelines, as implement experiments, and remind students to correct the wrong reasons for their predictions, as based on the experimental records. Third, some primary science teachers selected the PO+E teaching method because the ＂science interpretation ability＂ made it easy to write lesson plans, and the exploration of ＂scientific theory＂ in class made the scientific experiments more meaningful. Fourth, primary science teachers selected the POEST teaching method because they could guide lines for students to apply 2 experimental evidence methods to prove their claims and avoid becoming subjective.

1. 白佩宜, P. Y.,許瑛玿, Y. S.(2011)。探討不同探究式教學法對高一生科學探究能力與學習環境觀感之影響。課程與教學季刊，14(3)，123-156。
   連結：
2. 桑顯舜, H. S.,林淑梤, S. F.(2019)。運用德懷術建立國小教師基本科學能力之評量要項。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，12(1)，29-58。
   連結：
3. 張世忠, S. J.,蔡孟芳, M. F.,陳鶴元, H. Y.(2012)。國中科學教師的學科教學知識與科學教學導向之探討。科學教育學刊，20(5)，413-433。
   連結：
4. 曾崇賢, C. H.,段曉林, H. L.,靳知勤, C. C.(2011)。探究教學的專業成長歷程─以十位國中科學教師的觀點為例。科學教育學刊，19(2)，143-168。
   連結：
5. 盧秀琴, C. C.,谷冰, P.(2019)。比較不同背景的研究生如何設計 PO+E 實驗與微型教學。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，12(1)，1-28。
   連結：
6. 盧秀琴, C. C.,洪榮昭, J. C.,蔡春微, C. W.(2008)。“5 Why”鷹架式提問提升國小學生學習成就與科學探究學習能力之研究～以「如何做麵包？」教學模組為例。科學教育學刊，16(4)，395-413。
   連結：
7. 盧秀琴, C. C.,徐于婷, Y. T.(2016)。國小師資生在自然領域的專業成長～以探究式教學為例。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，9(1)，115-142。
   連結：
8. 顧炳宏, B. H.,陳瓊森, C. S.,溫媺純, M. C. Lydia(2011)。從學生的表現與觀點探討引導發現式教學作為發展探究教學之折衷方案角色的成效─以密度概念為例。科學教育學刊，19(3)，257-282。
   連結：
9. (2011).戶外教育實施指引.
10. Abdi, A.(2014).The effect of inquiry-based learning method on students' academic achievement in science course.Universal Journal of Educational Research,2(1),37-41.
11. American Association for the Advancement of Science=AAAS(1967).Guide for in-service instruction.Washington, DC:AAAS Miscellaneous Publication.
12. Barry, N.(2014).The ITEEA 6E learning by DeSIGN™ model.The Technology and Engineering Teacher,14-19.
13. Berl, W. G.(1968).The 1967 meeting of the AAAS: A retrospect. By see all hide authors and affiliations.Science,159,758-762.
14. Boud, D.,Dunn, J.,Hegarty-Hazel, E.(1988).Teaching in laboratories.Instructional Science,17,191-193.
15. Brown, J. S.,Collins, A.,Duguid, P.(1989).Situated cognition and the cultural of learning.Educational Researcher,18(1),32-42.
16. Bybee, R. W.(2009).The BSCS 5E instructional model and 21st century skills.Workshop on Exploring The Intersection of Science Education and The Development of 21st Century Skills
17. Driver, R.,Asoko, H.,Leach, J.,Mortimer, E.,Scott, P.(1994).Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom.Educational Researcher,23(7),5-12.
18. Edwards, C. H.(1997).Promoting student inquiry.The Science Teacher,64(7),18-21.
19. Gunstone, R. F.,White, R. T.(1981).Understanding of gravity.Science Education,65(3),291-299.
20. Hong, J. C.,Tsai, C. R.,Hsiao, H. S.,Chen, P. H.,Chu, K. C.,Gu, J.,Sitthiworachart, J.(2019).The effect of the "Prediction-observation-quiz-explanation" inquiry-based e-learning model on flow experience in green energy learning.Computers & Education,133,127-138.
21. Jeanpierre, B.,Oberhauser, K.,Freeman, C.(2005).Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers' classroom practices.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,42(6),668-690.
22. Lederman, J. S.,Lederman, N. G.(2005).Developing and assessing elementary teachers' and students' understandings of nature of science and scientific inquiry.Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching,Dallas, Texas:
23. Lu, C. C.(2016).Cultivate elementary school in-service teachers to design experiment course by Prediction-Observation-Explanation (POE) with the theory of scientific explanation.32rd ASET Annual International Conference,Taichung, Taiwan:
24. Lu, C. C.(2018).Strengthen scientific explanation ability: Nurturing the pre-service teachers to design innovative PO+E teaching plan and teaching.2018 International Symposium on Education and Social Sciences (ISESS),Okinawa, Japan:
25. Lu, C. C.(2019).Elementary pre-service teachers applied "POE & scientific explanations with text scaffolding" to design science course plans and teach in the elementary school.2019 The 5th Asia-Pacific Conference on Social Sciences & Management (APCSSM),Seoul, South Korea:
26. McNeill, K. L.,Lizotte, D. J.,Krajcik, J.,Marx, R. W.(2006).Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials.The Journal of the Learning Sciences,15(2),153-191.
27. National Research Council=NRC(2000).Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning.Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
28. Rogoff, B.(1990).Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context.New York, NY:Oxford University Press.
29. Sandholtz, J. H.(2002).In-service training or professional development: Contrasting opportunities in a school/university partnership.Teaching and Teacher Education,18(7),815-830.
30. White, R.,Gunstone, R.(1992).Probing understanding.London, England:Falmer Press.
31. Wu, H. K.,Hsieh, C. E.(2006).Developing sixth graders' inquiry skills to construct explanations in Inquiry-based learning environments.International Journal of Science Education,28(11),1289-1313.
32. Zari, M. P.(2015).Ecosystem processes for biomimetic architectural and urban design.Journal Architectural Science Review,58(2),106-119.
33. 林燕文, Y. W.,洪振方, J. F.(2007)。對話論證的探究中學童論述策略對促進科學概念理解之研究。屏東教育大學學報，26，285-324。
34. 林靜雯, J. W.(2015)。由資深教師與師資生之比較探討科學教師內容知識與教學內容知識之培力。T&D 飛訊，208，1-21。
35. 邱彥文, Y. W.,黃世傑, S. C.,王國華, K. H.(2002)。國中理化課試行 POE 教學之個案研究。科學教育，12，53-69。
36. 邱美虹, M. H.(2000)。概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊，8(1)，1-34。
37. 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。
38. 教育部=Ministry of Education(2019).十二年國小基本教育課程綱要─自然科學領域課程手冊.臺北市=Taipei, Taiwan:教育部=Ministry of Education.
39. 許良榮, L. R.,羅佩娟, P. C.(2009)。以序列性 POE 探究學生的科學解釋能力：以「大氣壓力與表面張力」為例。屏東教大科學教育，30，42-55。
40. 陳竹亭, J. T.(2016)。探究式實事求是的第一步。科學研習月刊，55(2)，2-4。
41. 楊凱悌, K. T.,邱美虹, M. H.,王子華, T. H.(2009)。應用數位影音融入 POE 教學改善國小高年級學童脊椎動物分類另有概念之效益研究。科學教育學刊，17(5)，387-407。
42. 盧秀琴, C. C.,黃奕升, Y. S.(2019)。培育師資生使用PO+E 教學法研發國小奈米科技實驗與教學。教育研究學報，53(2)，31-55。
43. 盧秀琴, C. C.,劉靜文, J. W.(2018)。培育國小在職教師使用不同探究式教學法進行實驗設計與微型教學。第34 屆科學教育國際研討會（2018, ASET），花蓮縣=Hualien, Taiwan:
44. 盧秀琴, C. C.,蔡幸如, H. J.(2019)。培育國小在職教師使用「POE & 科學解釋文字鷹架」設計實驗以因應十二年國教的改革。屏東大學學報教育類，3，145-180。
45. 謝州恩, C. E.,吳心楷, H. J.(2005)。探究情境中國小學童科學解釋能力成長之研究。師大學報：科學教育類，50(2)，55-84。