臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：在社會性科學議題情境下應用鷹架教學提升國小六年級學生論證能力
書刊名：科學教育學刊
作者：蘇衍丞／林樹聲 引用關係
作者(外文)：Su, Yen-cheng／Lin, Shu-sheng
出版日期：2012
卷期：20:4
頁次：頁343-366
主題關鍵詞：社會性科學議題；國小六年級學生；論證能力；鷹架教學；Socio-scientific issues；Sixth grade students；Argumentation skills；Scaffolding instruction
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(12) 博士論文(2) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:12
  • 共同引用共同引用:23
  • 點閱點閱:86
本研究旨在以社會性科學議題為情境，應用鷹架教學提升國小六年級學生的論證能力。研究採準實驗研究設計，其中實驗組甲(N = 32)接受口語與寫作鷹架併用的教學，實驗組乙(N = 33)接受只有口語鷹架的教學，控制組(N = 30)則接受一般教學。三組學生於教學前、後分別接受三份社會性科學議題之論證問卷的施測，教學介入持續三週、各六節課。研究結果顯示：教學後，實驗組的後測總分、論點、反論點、補充理由和反駁得分皆顯著高於控制組(p < .01)，且實驗組學生提出的理由較多元且精緻。雖然實驗組甲、乙之間在論證總分和各題得分皆未達顯著差異(p > .05)，但實驗組甲能提出兩個和兩個以上反駁的人數顯著多於實驗組乙(p < .05)。
The purpose of the study was to improve the argumentation skills of a sample of sixth graders through scaffolding instruction in socio-scientific contexts. The study utilized a quasi-experimental design. One experimental group (N = 32) received the instruction with oral and writing scaffoldings. The other experimental group (N = 33) received the instruction with only oral scaffoldings. The control group (N = 30) received traditional instruction that contained no specific scaffolding. Each group subsequently completed three argument questionnaires that involved different socio-scientific contexts at the beginning and the end of the instruction. The teaching intervention was six hours for each group. The results showed that the two experimental groups significantly outperformed the control group in the posttest scores of constructing arguments, counterarguments, supplementary warrants and rebuttals (p < .01). Both experimental groups offered more elaborated and multi-perspective warrants than the control group. There was no statistically significant difference between the two experimental groups in any posttest scores (p > .05). However, more students receiving the instruction with oral and writing scaffoldings constructed at least two more valid rebuttals than those receiving the instruction with only oral scaffoldings could.
期刊論文
1.Clark, D. B.、Sampson, V.(2008)。Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality。Journal of Research in Science Teaching，45(3)，293-321。  new window
2.Martin, A. M.、Hand, B.(2009)。Factors affecting the implementation of argument in the elementary science classroom. A longitudinal case study。Research in Science Education，39(1)，17-38。  new window
3.Sadler, Troy D.(2004)。Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research。Journal of Research in Science Teaching，41(5)，513-536。  new window
4.Osborne, J.、Erduran, S.、Simon, S.(2004)。Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science。Journal of Research in Science Teaching，41(10)，994-1020。  new window
5.Scadamalia, M.、Bereiter, C.(1991)。Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media。The Journal of the Learning Sciences，1(1)，37-68。  new window
6.Driver, R.、Newton, P.、Osborne, J.(2000)。Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms。Science Education，84(3)，287-312。  new window
7.Newton, P.、Driver, R.、Osborne, J.(1999)。The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science。International Journal of Science Education，21(5)，553-576。  new window
8.Zeidler, D. L.、Sadler, T. D.、Simmons, M. L.、Howes, E. V.(2005)。Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education。Science Education，89(3)，357-377。  new window
9.Kuhn, D.(1992)。Thinking as argument。Harvard Educational Review，62(2)，155-179。  new window
10.林樹聲、黃柏鴻(20090400)。國小六年級學生在社會性科學議題教學中之論證能力研究--不同學業成就學生間之比較。科學教育學刊，17(2)，111-133。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.黃柏鴻、林樹聲(20070900)。論證教學相關實證性研究之回顧與省思。科學教育月刊，302，5-20。  延伸查詢new window
12.Simonneaux, L.(2001)。Role-play or debate to promote students’ argumentation and justificationon an issue in animal transgenesis。International Journal of Science Education，23(9)，903-927。  new window
13.Tippett, C.(2009)。Argumentation: The language of science。Journal of Elementary Science Education，21(1)，17-25。  new window
14.Wu, Y. -T.、Tsai, C. -C.(2007)。High school students’ informal reasoning on a socioscientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses。International Journal of Science Education，29(9)，1163-1187。  new window
15.Anderson, R. C.、Chinn, C.、Chang, J.、Waggoner, M.、Yi, H.(1997)。On the logical integrity of children’s arguments。Cognition and Instruction，15(2)，135-167。  new window
16.Belland, B. R.(2010)。Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-based arguments during problem-based learning: The impact of computer-based scaffolds。Educational Technology Research Development，58(3)，285-309。  new window
17.Dawson, V. M.、Venville, G.(2010)。Teaching strategies for developing students' argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics。Research in Science Education，40(2)，133-148。  new window
18.Lin, S.-S.、Mintzes, J. J.(2010)。Learning argumentation skills through instruction in socioscientific issues: The effect of ability level。International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education，5(6)，993-1017。  new window
19.Mason, L.、Scirica, F.(2006)。Prediction of students’ argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding。Learning and Instruction，16(5)，492-509。  new window
20.Means, M. L.、Voss, J. F.(1996)。Who reasons well? Two studies of mformal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels。Cognition and Instruction，14(2)，139-178。  new window
21.Nussbaum, E. M.(2002)。Scaffolding argumentation in the social studies classroom。The Social Studies，93(2)，79-83。  new window
22.Nussbaum, E. Michael、Schraw, Gregory(2007)。Promoting argument-counterargument integration in students' writing。The Journal of Experimental Education，76(1)，59-92。  new window
23.Puntambekar, S.、Kolodner, J. L.(2005)。Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design。Journal of Research in Science Teaching，42(2)，185-217。  new window
24.Sadler, T. D.、Barab, S. A.、Scott, B.(2007)。What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry?。Research in Science Education，37(4)，371-391。  new window
圖書
1.Wray, D.、Lewis, M.(1997)。Extending Literacy: Children Reading and Writing Non-fiction。London：Routledge。  new window
2.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2007)。PISA 2006--Science competencies for tomorrow's world: Volume 1: Analysis。Paris, France：Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development。  new window
3.Toulmin, Stephen E.(1958)。The Use of Argument。Cambridge University Press。  new window
4.Ennis, R. H.(1996)。Critical thinking。Upper Saddle River, New Jersey：Prentice Hall。  new window
5.Vygotsky, Lev Semenovich、Cole, Michael、John-Steiner,‎ Vera、Scribner, Sylvia、Souberman, Ellen(1978)。Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes。Harvard University Press。  new window
6.Simonneaux, L.(2007)。Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts。Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research \\ S. Erduran ; M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.)。Dordrecht, The Netherlands。  new window
7.Tynjala, P.、Mason, L.、Lonka, K.(2001)。Writing as a learning tool. Integrating theory and practice。Dordrecht, The Netherlands。  new window
8.教育部(2008)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要启然與生活科技學習領域。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
9.Grant, M. C.、Fisher, D. B.(2010)。Reading and writing in science: Tools to develop disciplinary literacy。Thousand Oaks, CA。  new window
10.Hand, B. M.、Prain, V.、Yore, L. D.(2001)。Sequential writing tasks’ influence on science learning。Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice \\ P. Tynjala ; L. Mason ; K. Lonka (Eds.)。Dordrecht, The Netherlands。  new window
11.Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P.(2007)。Designing argumentation learning environments。Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research \\ S. Erduran ; M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.)。Dordrecht, The Netherlands。  new window
12.Liakopoulos, M.(2000)。Argumentation analysis。Qualitative researching with text, image and sound: A practical handbook \\ W. B. Martin ; G. George (Eds.)。London。  new window
圖書論文
1.Zeidler, D. L.、Osborne, J.、Erduran, S.、Simon, S.、Monk, M.(2003)。The Role of Argument during Discourse about Socioscientific Issues。The Role of Moral Reasoning on Socioscientific Issues and Discourse in Science Education。Dordrecht：Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
2.Collins, A.、Brown, J. S.、Newman, S. E.(1987)。Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics。Learning, knowing, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser。Hillsdale, NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
3.Collins, A.(2006)。Cognitive apprenticeship。The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences。New York：Cambridge University Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1166（臺灣：1153，外國：13） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1972506 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67775507
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上