|
一、中文部分
王獻樟(2021a)。鄉情「化」藝。載於林靜雯(主編)。在地科學宅急便—在地本位科普教案集(頁145-156)。國立台北教育大學。
王獻樟(2021b)。化紙乾坤。載於林靜雯(主編)。在地科學宅急便—在地本位科普教案集(頁162-172)。國立台北教育大學。
毛連塭、郭有遹、陳龍安、林幸台(2000)。創造力研究。心理。
朱光潛(1932)。談美。開明書店。
何智文(2016)。應用Rubrics學習評估模式提昇大學課程教學學用合一之成效研究－以「廣告表達分析」課程為例。大學教學實務與研究學刊，創刊號，1-29。https://doi.org/10.6870/JTPRHE.201612_1(1).0001
何偉雲 (2007年11月28日)。特徵提取與創意思考研究：成果報告精簡版(NSC 95-2511-S-153-003-)。科技部。https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=1250085
余民寧(2011)。教育測驗與評量：成就測驗與教學評量(三版)。心理。
吳清山(2012)。差異化教學與學生學習。國家教育研究院電子報，38。
吳清山(2018)。素養導向教師教育內涵建構及實踐之研究。教育科學研究期刊，63(4)，261-293。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0009
吳清山、林天祐(2009)。教育名詞：偏鄉教育。教育資料與研究，90，177-178。
李乙明(2006)。陶倫斯創造思考測驗圖形版。心理。
李佳茵(2008)。國小高年級學童創意態度量表之編製與常模建立之研究 (未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學。
李坤崇(1999)。多元化教學評量。心理。
李哲迪(2018)。國小數學與教科書學習之學校環境。載於張俊彥(主編)，國家數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查報告(頁382-418)。國立臺灣師範大學。
李暉(2016)。原住民國小科學教師之多元文化專業發展。科學教育學刊，24(S)，449-471。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2016.24S.01
李錫津(1987)。創意思考教學對高職學生創造力發展之影響。(未出版之碩士論文)。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所。
李麗君(2012)。國民中小學教師對弱勢學生低成就之歸因與其補救教學作法關係之研究。αβγ量化研究學刊，4(2)，25-46。
周淑卿(2012)。學習歷程中美感經驗的性質－藝術與科學課堂的探究。課程與教學季刊，014 (1)，19-40。https://doi.org/10.6384/CIQ.201101.0020
周淑卿、王郁雯(2019)。從課程統整到跨領域課程：台灣二十年的論述與問題。教育學報，47(2)，41–59。https://www.hkier.cuhk.edu.hk/journal/document/EJ/EJ_V47N2_41-59.pdf
林文律(2000)。學校行政：理想與實際。學校行政，6，24-37。https://doi.org/10.6423/HHHC.200003.0024
林佳慧(2022)。培育師資生跨領域課程設計知行思。臺灣教育評論月刊，11(4)， 51-56。
林素卿(2009)。美感經驗對課程美學建構之啟示。東海教育評論，3，43-70。http://educator.thu.edu.tw/upload_files/0302.pdf
林樹聲(2006)。科學之美內涵及其教學意見初探。載於中華民國第二十二屆科學教育學術研討會彙編(頁620-626)。國立臺灣師範大學。
林樹聲、任宗浩、李哲迪(2007)。科學之美的內涵及其教學與相關問題。科學教育月刊，299，19-34。https://doi.org/10.6216/SEM.200706_(299).0002
邱兆偉(1992)。美感教育的哲理與實踐。刊載於高雄師大主辦「學校美感教育國際學術研討會」研究論文與研討紀錄(頁125-155)。高雄師範大學。
邱皓政、林碧芳(2016)。孰優、孰弱? 臺灣青少年學生學習成就軌跡之異質性分析。當代教育研究季刊，24(1)，33-79。https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.2016.2401.02
施瑞萍(2002)。試談美感形成的原因，黑龍江教育學院學報，21(3)，63-64。
柳玉清(2016)。大學生專題報告Rubrics之發展與成效評估：以人力資源管理相關課程為例。新竹教育大學教育學報，33(1)，77-108。https://doi.org/10.3966/199679772016063301003
洪詠善(2005)。國小藝術與人文領域「環境藝術」敘事課程行動探究。新竹師院學報，20，131-170。https://doi.org/10.7044/JNHCTC.200506.0131
洪詠善(2011)。科學經驗中想像力的探究：Dewey美學觀點。載於陳伯璋主編，課程美學。五南。
洪榮昭(2020)。創造力與STEAM教育之重要性。中等教育，71(1)，6-9。https://doi.org/10.6249/SE.202003_71(1).0001
徐光台(1999)。建構主義與科學教育進步。歐美研究，29(4)，153-183。http://oz.nthu.edu.tw/~u9733110/pdf_files/Constructivism_and_the_Progress_of_Science_education.pdf
徐宗林(2000年12月)。工具主義。教育大辭書。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1302185/
涂文忠、黃鴻博(2002)。科學創意活動融入國小自然與生活科技課程設計之行動研究。發表於中華民國第十八屆科學教育學術研討會。(彰化師範大學，2002年12月13-14)
高淑清(2001)。在美華人留學生太太的生活世界：詮釋與反思。本土心理學研究，16，225-285。https://doi.org/10.6254/2001.16.225
崔光宙(2000)。美學中人的概念及其教育內涵。載於崔光宙、林逢祺主編，教育美學(頁179-224)。五南。
張世忠(2000)。建構教學－理論與應用。五南。
張明濤(2003)。美的本質探討。2021年06月11日，取自：https://www.lunwendata.com/thesis/2003/9514.html
張俊傑(1992)。建立美育的基本觀念。載於高雄師大主辦「學校美感教育國際學術研討會」研究論文與研討紀錄(p.24-36)。
張春興(1996)。現代心理學。東華書局。
張首映(1988)。西方美學的過去、現在及未來。2021年06月13日，取自：http://theory.people.com.cn/BIG5/n/2013/0723/c367130-22296678.html
張原誠(2015)。 學生美感經驗、創意自我效能與創造力之研究：教師創造力教學的多層次調節式中介效果(未出版之博士論文)。國立台南大學。
張原誠、蕭佳純(2016)。學生美感經驗、創意自我效能與創造力：教師創造力教學有效嗎？ 教育實踐與研究，29(2)，65~104。
張碩宇(2020)。何謂美感教育？美感教育的方式？臺灣教育評論月刊，9(11)， 07-10。http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/9-11/topic/02.pdf
張德銳、李俊達(2011)。教學行動研究對中學教師教學省思影響之研究。教育研究與發展期刊，7(1)，151-178。
張慧娟(2021) 。運用肯定式探詢引領國小師培生自然科教學實習之研究(未出版之博士論文)。國立東華大學。
張靜嚳(1996)。建構教學：採用建構主義如何教學？建構與教學，7。
教育部(2003)。創造力教育白皮書。教育部。
教育部(2013)。「教育部美感教育中長程計畫─第一期五年計畫(103-107年)」。教育部。
教育部(2014)。十二年國教課程綱要總綱。教育部。
教育部(2018)。「教育部美感教育中長程計畫─第二期五年計畫(108-112年)」。教育部。
教育部(2018)。十二年國教課程綱要---自然科學領域。教育部。
莊淑炫(2015)。國小科學教師對美感教學融入科學課程之看法(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺中教育大學科學教育與應用研究所。
郭生玉(2004)。教育測驗與評量。精華書局。
郭昊龍(2004)。杜威：科學教育與人文教育的融合。現代教育科學：高教研究，1，70-72。
陳玉婷(2018年 10 月 1 日)。杜威美感經驗理論運用於幼兒園科學美感主題課程實踐之研究：期末報告(MOST 106-2511-S-343-001-)。科技部。https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=12241328
陳怡倩(2017)。從STEAM的A來看美國STEAM教育。香港美術教育期刊，1，4-9。https://issuu.com/hkseart/docs/2017_1__
陳俊太(2019)。奈米的奇幻旅程—科學與藝術的跨領域學習(PMS107041)：教育部教學實踐研究計畫成果報告。國立交通大學應用化學系。
陳玲璋(2013)。全觀性美感體驗對學校教學意涵之探究。藝術教育研究，25，109-135。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Publication/alDetailedMesh?docid=1680435x-201305-201307010030-201307010030-109-135
陳振明(2004)。影響高一學生科學創造力的因素之研究 (未出版之博士論文)。國立高雄師範大學。
陳惠邦(1998)。教育行動研究。師大書苑。.
陳琦媛(2017)。運用 Rubrics 評量核心素養。臺灣教育評論月刊，6(3)，87-90。http://www.ater.org.tw/journal/article/6-3/topic/16.pdf
陳瓊花(2015)。從視覺形式開啟美感之門。教育脈動電子期刊，2。
湯維玲(2019)。探究美國STEM與STEAM教育的發展。課程與教學，22(2)，49 -77。https://doi.org/10.6384/CIQ.201904_22(2).0003
黃俊儒(2008)。構思科技社會中的即時學習：以學生及專家對於科學新聞文本之理解差異為例。科學教育學刊，16 (1)，105-124。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2008.1601.03
黃俊儒(2018)。猜猜新聞背後是什麼？整合科學與媒體的跨領域教學。科學教育學刊，26(4)，353-375。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201812_26(4).0004
黃政傑(1991)。課程設計。東華書局。
楊文金(2018)。八年級學生科學成就及相關因素探討。載於張俊彥(主編)，國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查 2015 國家報告(284-380頁)。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究中心。
楊正誠(2018)。偏遠地區學校發展與澳洲昆士蘭相關政策案例探討。教育研究月刊，287，99-114。https://doi.org/10.3966/168063602018030287007
楊孝濚(1989)。內容分析。 載於楊國樞、文崇一、吳聰賢、李亦園(主編)， 社會及行為科科學研究法下冊，頁809-831。東華書局。
楊忠斌(2014年5月16日)。自然美感教育的實踐─以一所國小為例：期末報告(NSC101-2410-H018-016)。科技部。https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=2580760
楊忠斌(2017年1月30日)。自然美學運用於自然美感教育的課程設計─以國小五年級「自然與生活科技」為例：期末報告(MOST 103-2511-S-018-025-)。科技部。https://www.grb.gov.tw/search/planDetail?id=8407140
葉玉珠、吳靜吉、鄭英耀(2000)。影響科技與資訊產業人員創意發展的因素之量表發展。師大學報，45(2)，39-63。https://doi.org/10.6300/JNTNU.2000.45(2).03
賈馥銘(1976)。英才教育。開明書局。
靳知勤(2007)。科學教育應如何提升學生的科學素養—台灣學術精英的看法。科學教育學刊，15(6)，627-646。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2007.1506.02
靳知勤(2014)。臺灣需優先解決的科學教育問題--科學與科學學者的觀點。教育學報，42，53~76。https://hkier.cuhk.edu.hk/journal/document/EJ/EJ_V42N1_53-76.pdf
漢寶德(2004)。漢寶德談美。聯經。
甄曉蘭(2004)。課程理論與實務解構與重建。高等教育。
趙惠玲(2016)。跨領域美感課程之理念、類型與發展策略。載於趙惠玲(主編)。薈美‧融藝：跨領域美感課程之理論與實務(頁3-31)。國立臺灣師範大學。
劉世南、郭誌光(2002)：創造力的概念與理論：一個心理構念的反思。發表於創意學術研討會，國立嘉義大學人文藝術學院編，90-114。
潘慧玲(2003)。社會科學研究典範的流變。教育研究資訊，11(1)，115-143。https://cid.ntua.edu.tw/files/潘慧玲.pdf
蔡培村、王美玉(2016)。105 教調 0003 監察院調查報告。取自監察院全球資訊網：http://www.cy.gov.tw/sp.asp?xdUrl=./di/RSS/detail.asp&no=4673
鄭美紅、蘇詠梅(2001)。跨學科課業的評估--建構主義學習觀的啟示。亞太科學教育論壇，2(2)，1-24。https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/v2_issue2/chengmh/index.htm
鄭明憲(2020)。從素養導向藝術教育談藝術素養與跨域學習。教育部中央課程與教學教學輔導諮詢教師團隊—藝術領域電子報2020年12月號，1-6。https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload/Website/1124/WebContent/34014/RFile/34014/93802.pdf
盧姵綺(2019)。STEAM跨領域美感教育專題教學設計之探究。藝術教育研究，37，49~82。https://doi.org/10.6622/RAE.201905_37.0002
蕭佳純(2019)。國內運用創造力教學模式對學生創造力影響之後設分析。特殊教育研究學刊。44(3)，93-120。https://doi.org/10.6172/BSE.201911_44(3).0004
謝甫佩、洪振方(2004)。國小學生科學探究活動的課程設計及實施成果之個案研究。師大學報：科學教育類，49(2)，61-86。http://jntnu.ord.ntnu.edu.tw/Uploads/Papers/634593646953832000.pdf
謝佩芯(2012)。個人設計思考力與團隊創造力之關係以綠色產學活動為例。藝術學報，90，69-88。https://doi.org/10.6793/JNTCA.201204.0069
羅德興、王明雯(2012)。從社會科學研究典範看質性研究的效度。中華科技大學學報，53，105-122。https://doi.org/10.7095/JCUST.201210.0105
二、 英文部分：
Affeldt, F., Tolppanen, S., Aksela, M., & Eilks, I. (2017). The potential of the non-formal educational sector forsupporting chemistry learning and sustainabilityeducation for all students–a joint perspective from two cases in Finland and Germany. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00212A
Akcay, H., Yager, R. E., Iskander, S. M., & Turgut, H. (2010). Change in students’ beliefs about attitudes toward science in grades 6-9. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(1), 1-18. https://www.eduhk.hk/apfslt/download/v11_issue1_files/akcay.pdf
Akerson, V. L., & Volrich, M. L. (2006). Teaching Nature of Science Explicitly in a First-Grade Internship Setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 377–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20132
Allan Feldman (2007) Validity and quality in action research. Educational Action Research, 15(1), 21-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790601150766
Alland, A. Jr. (1977). The artistic animal: An inquiry into the biological roots of art. Anchor Press.
Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(2), 357–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in context: Update to "The Social Psychology of Creativity." Westview Press.
Anderson, T., & Milbrandt, M. K. (2005). Art for life: Authentic instruction in art. McGraw-Hill.
Andrade, H., Hefferen, J., & Palma, M. (2014). Formative assessment in the visual arts. Art Education, 67(1), 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2014.11519256
Anwar, N. P., & Bhutta, S. M. (2014). Students’ attitude towards science in lower secondary classes: Comparison across regions. Journal of Educational Research, 17(1), 77–90.
Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple Intelligences: Seven Ways to Approach Curriculum. Educational Leadership, 52, 26-28.
Baer, J. (1993). Creativity and divergent thinking :a task-specific approach. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Barmby, P., Kind, P. M., & Jones, K. (2008). Examining changing attitudes in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(8), 1075-1093. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701344966
Barrett, M. (1990). Guidelines for evaluation and assessment in art and design education 5–18 years. Journal of Art & Design Education, 9(3), 299–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.1990.tb00482.x
Beattie, D. K. (1997). Assessment in art education. Davis Publications.
Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just Do It? Impact of a Science Apprenticeship Program on High School Students' Understandings of the Nature of Science and Scientific Inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 487–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10086
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72, 30-33.
Bequette, J., & Bequette, M. B. (2012). A Place for Art and Design Education in the STEM Conversation. Art Education, 65(2), 40-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2012.11519167
Blosser, P. E. (1984). Attitude research in science education: Information bulletin. SMEAC Information Reference Center.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introducation to theory and methods. Allyn & Bacon.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Sage Publications, Inc.
Braconier, H. (2012). Reforming education in England. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, 939. OECD.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2012). Thematic analysis. In H. Cooper, P. M. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology, Vol. 2. Research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, neuropsychological, and biological (pp. 57–71). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/13620-004
Brookhart, S. M. (2013). How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Falmer.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1987). What is an Educational Practice? Journal of Philosophy of Education 21(2), 163-175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.1987.tb00155.x
Chang, Y.C. (2017). Construction on Students' Aesthetics Experience Scale. International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online), 10(1), 110-130. https://www.proquest.com/openview/24e87c5ac03e4b60ec90e61af8d90602/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=55118
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Children's responses to anomalous scientific data: How is conceptual change impeded? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 327–343. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.327
Cohen, L., & Manion L. (1989). Research methods in education, (3rd Ed). Routledge.
Costenson, K., & Lawson, A.E. (1986). Why isn’t inquiry used in more classrooms? American Biology Teacher, 48(3), 150-158. https://doi.org/10.2307/4448241
Cropley, A. J. (2000). Defining and measuring creativity: Are creativity tests worth using? Roeper Review, 23, 72-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190009554069
Cropley, A. J. (2001), Creativity in Education and Learning. Kogan Page.
Beck, L. (1992). Book review of Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(1), pp. 93–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1992.11969876
Daker, R. J., Cortes, R. A., Lyons, I. M., & Green, A. E. (2020). Creativity anxiety: Evidence for anxiety that is specific to creative thinking, from STEM to the arts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(1), 42-57. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000630
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3). 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Davison, D. M., Miller, K. W., & Metheny, D. L. (1995). What does integration of science and mathematics really mean? School Science and Mathematics, 95(5), 226-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15771.x
Dewey J. (1948). A comment on the foregoing criticism. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 6(3), 207-209. https://doi.org/10.2307/426477
Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. Minton, Balch.
Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process. D.C. Heath & Co Publishers.
Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. G. P. Putnam’s Sons.
Dewey, J. (1981) Experience and Nature, in: J. Boydston (ed.), John Dewey: The later works1925–1953: vol. 1. 1925. Southern Illinois University Press.
Dorn, C. M. (1998). Mind in art: Cognitive foundations in art education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Drake, S. M. (1993). Planning integrated curriculum: The call to adventure. Alexandria, VA.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Edinger, E. (1968). An outline of analytical psychology. Quadrant, 1, 1-12.
Eisner, E. W. (2004). What Can Education Learn from the Arts about the Practice of Education. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 5(4), 1-13. http://www.ijea.org/v5n4/v5n4.pdf
Elias, P., Jones, P., & McWhinnie, S. (2006). Representation of Ethnic Groups in Chemistry and Physics. The Royal Society of Chemistry and the Institute of Physics.
Ezell, D., Cale, C., Panesar-Aguilar, S. & McCraney, M. (2020). Using Digital Art to Influence Students’ Attitudes in High School Science Classrooms. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 24. Corpus ID: 225556089 https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1263987.pdf
Feist, G. J. (1998). A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), 290–309. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0204_5
Fogarty, R. (1991). How to Integrate the Curricula. IRI/Skylight Publishing.
Fosnot, C. T. (1993). Learning to teach, teaching to learn: The centre for constructivist teaching/teacher preparation project. Teaching Education, 5, 68-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047621930050206
Gainer, R. S., & Child, J. S. (1986). Scientific illustration for the elementary school. Art Education, 39(6), 19-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.1986.11649788
Gallagher, S. A., Stepien, W. J., Sher, B. T., & Workman, D. (1995). Implementing problem-based learning in science classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 95(3), 136-146. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15748.x
Gardner, H. (1988). Creativity: An interdisciplinary perspective. Creativity Research Journal,1, 8–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400418809534284
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences-The theory in practice. Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (Ed.). (1999). Intelligence reframed. Basic Books.
Gardner, P. L. (1975). Attitude to science: A review. Studies in Science Education, 2, 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267508559818
Garner, N., Siol, A. & Eilks, I. (2015). The Potential of Non-Formal Laboratory Environments for Innovating the Chemistry Curriculum and Promoting Secondary School Level Students Education for Sustainability. Sustainability, MDPI, 7(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7021798
George, R. (2006). A cross-domain analysis of change in students' attitudes towards science and attitudes about the utility of science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 571-589. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500338755
Germann, P. J. (1994). Testing a model of science process skills acquistion: An interaction with parents’ education, preferred language, gender, science attitude, cognitive development, academic ability, andbiology knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(7), 749-783. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310707
Girod, M., & Wong, D. (2002). An aesthetic (Deweyan) perspective on science learning: Case studies of three fourth graders. The Elementary School Journal, 102(3), 199-224. https://doi.org/10.1086/499700
Girod, M., Rau, C., & Schepige, A. (2003). Appreciating the beauty of science ideas: teaching for aesthetic understanding. Science Education, 87, 574-587. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1054
Girod, M., Twyman, T., & Wojcikiewicz, S. (2010). Teaching and learning science for transformative, aesthetic experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(7), 14-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9175-2
Glass, D., & Wilson, C. (2016). The art and science of looking: Collaboratively learning our way to improved STEAM integration. Art Education, 69(6), 8-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224822
Glăveanu, V. P. (2018). Educating which creativity? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 25-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.11.006
Glesne, C. (2006)。質性研究導論。(莊明貞、陳怡如，譯)。高等教育。(原著出版於1999)。
Goldberg, M. (2011). Arts Integration: Teaching Subject Matter through the Arts in Multicultural Settings. 4th Edition. Pearson Education.
Guilford, J. P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444-454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
Gullatt, D. E. (2008). Enhancing student learning through arts integration: Implications for the profession. High School Journal, 91(4), 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1353/hsj.0.0001
Guo, C. J. (2007). Issues in science learning: An international perspective. In S. Abell & N. Lederman(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education. (pp. 227-256.). Lawrence ErlbaumAssociates, Inc.
Guyotte, K., Sochacka, N. W., Costantino, T., Walther, J., & Kellam, N. N. (2014). Steam as social practice: Cultivating creativity in transdisciplinary spaces. Art Education, 67(6), 12-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2014.11519293
Hadzigeorgiou, Y. (2016). Imaginative science education: the central role of imagination in science education. Springer International Publishing.
Hadzigeorgiou, Y., & Schulz, R. (2017). What Really Makes Secondary School Students “Want” to Study Physics? Education Science, 7(4), 84-90. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci7040084
Hadzigeorgiou, Y., Anastasiou, L., Prevezanou, B., & Konsolas, M. (2009). A Study of the Effect of Preschool Children’s Participation in Sensorimotor Activities on Their Understanding of the Mechanical Equilibrium of a Balance Beam. Research in Science Education, 39, 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9073-6
Hakstian, A. R. (2001). The measurement and prediction of managerial creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13, 367-384. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_14
Hampden-Thompson, G., & Bennett, J. (2013). Science Teaching and Learning Activities and Students' Engagement in Science. International Journal of Science Education, 35(8), 1325-1343. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.608093
Hayes, A. F. (2005). Statistical methods for communication science. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Hayes, D., Symington, D., & Martin, M. (1994). Drawing during science activity in the primary school. International Journal of Science Education, 16(3), 265-277. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069940160302
Henriksen, D. (2014). Full STEAM Ahead: Creativity in Excellent STEM Teaching Practices. The STEAM Journal, 1(2), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5642/steam.20140102.15
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235-266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
Hocevar, D. (1979). Ideational fluency as a confounding factor in the measurement of originality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71(2), 191-196. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.71.2.191
Hocevar, D., & Bachelor, P. (1989). A Taxonomy and critique of measurements used in the study of creativity. In J. A. Glover, R. R. Ronning, & C. R. Reynolds(Eds.) (1989). Handbook of Creativity, (pp. 53-70). Plenum Press.
Hofstein, R., & Rosenfeld, S. (1996). Bridging the gap between formal and informal science learning. Studies in Science Education, 28, 87–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269608560085
Hunter-Doniger, T. (2018). Art infusion: Ideal conditions for STEAM. Art Education, 71(2), 22-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2018.1414534
Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary Curriculum: Design and Implementation. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Transformation through Language Use: Children’s Spontaneous Metaphors in Elementary School Science. Science & Education, 16 (3-5), 267-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9018-x
Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2015). What difference does art make in science? A comparative study of meaning-making at elementary school. Interchange, 46(4), 323-343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10780-015-9262-6
Jamil, F. M., Linder, S. M., & Stegelin, D. A. (2018). Early childhood teacher beliefs about STEAM education after a professional development conference. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(4), 409-417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0875-5
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2005). Factors influencing elementary school children's attitudes toward science, before, during, and after a visit to the UK National Space Centre. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 53-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20045
Jegede, S. A. (2007). Students’ anxiety towards the learning of chemistry in some Nigerian secondary schools. Educational Research Review, 2, 193-197. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR.9000310
Kant, I. (1914). Critique of Judgement (J. H. Bernard, Trans.). Macmillan.
Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 551–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
Kim, K. H. (2011). The Creativity Crisis: The Decrease in Creative Thinking Scores on the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23(4), 285-295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2011.627805
Kind, P. M., Jones, K., & Barmby, P. (2007). Developing attitudes towards science measures. International Journal of Science Education, 29 (7), 871-893. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600909091
Kraehe, A. M. (2018). Disciplinary borderlands. Art Education, 71(2), 4-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2018.1414528
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. 2nd Ed. Sage.
Krug, Don H., Cohen-Evron, Nurit. (2000). Curriculum Integration Positions and Practices in Art Education. Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 258-75. https://doi.org/10.2307/1320380
LaJevic, L. (2013). The lost and found space of the arts in education. International Journal of Education through Art, 9(1), 41-54. https://doi.org/10.1386/eta.9.1.41_1
Lansing, K. (1969). Art, artists, and art education. McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Lark-Horovitz, B., Lewis, H., & Luca, M. (1967). Understanding children’s art for better teaching. Charles E. Merrill, Inc.
Liao, C. (2016). From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: An art-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Education, 69(6), 44-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873
Lin, H., Hong, Z., Chen, C., & Chou, C. (2011). The effect of integrating aesthetic understanding in reflective inquiry activities. International Journal of Science Education, 33(9), 1199-1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.504788
Lussier, C. (2010). Aesthetic literacy: The gold medal standard of learning excellence in dance. Physical and Health Education Journal, 76(1), 40-44.
Lutz, C. A. (2014). Visual Art Teachers’ Ranges of Understanding and Classroom Practices of Assessment for Student Learning In Visual Art Education. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ohio State University.
Marshall, J. (2010). Five ways to integrate: Using strategies from contemporary art. Art Education, 63(3), 13-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2010.11519065
Martin, B. E., & Brouwer, W. (1991). The sharing of personal science and the narrative element in science education. Science Education, 75(6), 707-722. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730750610
Martin, D.J. (1997). Elementary Science Methods: A Constructivist Approach. Delmar Publishers.
Martin, N. K., Yin, Z., & Baldwin, B. (1998). Construct validation of The Attitudes & Beliefs on Classroom Control Inventory. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 33(2), 6-15. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23870556
Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (2005)。質性研究資料分析(張芬芬譯)。雙葉書廊。(原著出版於1994年)
Nadelson, L. S. & Jordan, J. R. (2012). Student Attitudes Toward and Recall of Outside Day: An Environmental Science Field Trip. Journal of Educational Research, 105(3), 220-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2011.576715
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.
Nelson, P., Martin, S., & Baldwin, V. (1998). Drawing Skills and Science Concepts in Young Children: A Study of Relationships. Studies in Art Education, 39(3), 262-269. https://doi.org/10.2307/1320368
Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1097–1119. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660311005
Ormerod, M. B., Duckworth. D. (1975). Pupils attitudes to science. A review of research NFER. Berkshire.
Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards Science: A Review of the Literature and Its Implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199
Osborne, R.J., & Wittrock, M. (1985). The generative learning model and its implications for learning in science. Studies in Science Education, 12, 59-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268508559923
Patrinos, H.A., Shapiro, J., & Trevino, J.M. (2004). Education for all: Compensating for disadvantage in Mexico. The World Bank.
Peel, R. (2014). Integrating arts in the classroom: A strategic approach to support Common Core State Standards. Delta Journal of Education, 4(1), 63-71.
Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's theory. In P. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's Manual Child Psychology (pp. 61-84). Wiley.
Plucker, J. (1999). Reanalyses of student responses to creativity checklists: Evidence of content generality. Journal of Creative Behavior, 33, 126-137. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1999.tb01042.x
Pluncker, J. A., & Runco, M. A. (1998). The death of creativity measurement has been greatly exaggerated: Current issues, recent advances, and future directions in creativity assessment. Roeper Review, 21, 36-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199809553924
Pugh, K. J., & Girod, M. (2007). Science, Art, and Experience: Constructing a Science Pedagogy From Dewey’s Aesthetics. Journal of Science Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9029-0
Ratnasusanti, H., Ana, A., Nurafiati, P., & Umusyaadah, L. (2018). Rubric assessment on science and creative thinking skills of students. IOP Conference Series. Materials Science and Engineering, 306 012051. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/306/1/012051
Regan, E., & DeWitt, J. (2015). Attitudes, interest and factors influencing STEM enrolment behaviour: An overview of relevant literature. In E. K. Henriksen, J. Dillon, & J. Ryder (Eds.), Understanding student participation and choice in science and technology education (pp. 63–88). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7793-4_5
Rennie, L. J. (2007). Learning science outside of school. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 125–167). Lawrence Erlbaum As-sociates.
Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity, Phi Beta Kappen, 42, 305-310.
Richards, R. (2009)。日常創造力與人類特質新論(賴麗珍譯)。五南。(原著出版於1980)
Rossman, G. B., & Rallis S. F. (1998). Learning in the field: An introduction to qualitative research. Sage Publications.
Rudner, L. M., & Boston, C. (1994). Visual arts education reform handbook: Maintaining a substantive focus: A look at performance assessment for art education. National Art Education Association.
Runco, M. A. (1987). The generality of creative performance in gifted and nongifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(3), 121–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628703100306
Runco, M. A., & Albert, R. S. (1985). The reliability and validity of ideational originality in the divergent thinking of academically gifted and nongifted children. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45, 483-501. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448504500306
Sabol, R. (1997). Stasndardized testing in art education. In La Peierre, S. D. & Zimmerman, E. (Eds.). Research methods and methodologies for art education (pp. 138-148). National Art Education Association.
Scripps, L., & Paradis, L. (2014). Embracing the burden of proof: New strategies for determining predictive links between arts integration teacher professional development, student arts learning, 24 and student academic achievement outcomes. Journal for Learning through the Arts, 10(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.21977/D910119293
Silverstein, L. B., & Layne, S. (2010). What is arts integration? In L. Silverstein, A. L. Duma, and S. Layne (Eds.) Arts Integration Schools: What, Why, and How (Tab 2, pp. 1-7). The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts/Changing Education through the Arts (CETA) program.
Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-grade students' epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 349–422. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1803_3
Sousa, D. A., & Pilecki, T. (2013). From STEAM to STEAM: Using brain-compatible strategies to integrate the arts. Corwin.
Springate, I., Harland, J., Lord, P., & Wilkin, A. (2008). Why choose physics and chemistry? The influences on physics and chemistry subject choices of BME students. The Institute of Physics and the Royal Society of Chemistry. https://www.nfer.ac.uk/media/1618/auc02.pdf
Sternberg, R. J. (1993). Procedures for identifying intellectual potential in the gifted. In: Heller, K.A., Mönks, F.J. & Passow, A.H. (Eds.). International handbook of research and development of giftedness and talent. (pp. 185-207). Pergamon, S.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Successful intelligence. Basic Books.
Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1996). Investing in creativity. American Psychologist, 51(7), 677-688.
Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005). Leveling the field: Using rubrics to achieve greater equity in teaching and assessment. Essays on Teaching Excellence, Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, 17 (1). https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1087&context=edu_fac
Stokrocki, M. (2005). Reconsidering Everyday Assessment in the Art Classroom: Ceramics and Science. Arts Education Policy Review. 107(1). 15-24. https://doi.org/10.3200/AEPR.107.1.15-24
Stolnitz, J. (1960). Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art Criticism. Houghton Mifflin.
Summers, R., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Wang, S. (2018). Development and validation of an instrument to assess student attitudes toward science across grades 5 through 12. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(2), 172-205. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21416
Taggart, G. L. (2005). Rubrics: A handbook for construction and use. Rowman & Littlefield Ed.
Tan, A. G. (2014). Creativity in cross-disciplinary research. In E. Shiu (Ed.), Creativity research: An interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research handbook (pp. 68-85). Routledge.
Torrance, E. P. (1974). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Norms-Technical Manua research edition-verbal tests, forms A and B-figural tests, forms A and B. Personal Press.
Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Hannigan, S. (2020). Expanding the languages of science and how they are learnt. Research in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09952-8
Watson, J, D., & Berry, A. (2003). DNA: The Secret of Life. Alfred A. Knopf.
Wickman, P. O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Woolnough, B. E. (1994). Why students choose physics, or reject it. Physics Education, 29(5), 368-374. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/29/6/006
Yager, R., & McCormack, A. (1989). Assessing Teaching/ Learning Success in Multiple Domains of Science and Science Education. Science Education, 73 (1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730730105
Young, V. M., House, A., Wang, H., Singleton, C., & Klopfenstein, K. (2011). Inclusive STEM schools: Early promise in Texas and unanswered questions. National Research Council.
Zande, V. R. (2017). Design education: Creating thinkers to improve the world. National Art Education Association and Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield.
Zeki, S. (2001). Artistic creativity and the brain. Science, 293(5527), 51-52. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062331
|