探究式教學對學童科學論證能力影響之探究__臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

來源文獻資料
摘要
外文摘要
引文資料

題名：	探究式教學對學童科學論證能力影響之探究
書刊名：	科學教育學刊
作者：	李松濤／林煥祥／洪振方
作者(外文)：	Lee, Sung-tao／Lin, Huann-shyang／Hung, Jeng-fung
出版日期：	2010
卷期：	18:3
頁次：	頁177-203
主題關鍵詞：	科學論證能力；探究式教學；控制變因；推理；Science argumentation ability；Inquiry teaching；Control of variables；Reasoning
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(5) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:4 共同引用:0 點閱:50

本研究的目的是以「探究式教學」作為實驗處理來探討國小學童科學論證能力的變化情形。研究設計以準實驗研究法進行，邀請南部某國小二班共六十一位五年級學童參與。研究工具以自行發展之科學論證能力測驗為主。研究結果顯示，探究式的教學效果對於學生科學論證能力表現的影響是緩慢而漸進的，其影響在一學期後就可以在迴歸分析的結果中被發現。其次，雖然二班學生的科學論證能力在一學年期間都有顯著的成長，但是實驗組的幅度大於控制組，表示除了生理發展因素之外，「探究式教學」可以有效地影響學生的科學論證能力表現。最後，就能力表現的內容來看，「探究式教學」可以在「推理題」與「控制變因題」上讓學童有比較好的能力成長。

以文找文

The purpose of this study was to explore the development of children’s science argumentation abilities under the treatment of inquiry teaching. A quasi-experimental design was used and sixty-one elementary students were invited to participate. The effects of inquiry teaching compared to a traditional science teaching approach were assessed using self-developed science argumentation tests. The results indicated that the two teachers’ influences on children’s science argumentation ability were gradual and the net impacts of their teaching were identified in the regression analysis after six months. In addition, although both classes exhibited significant growth in their science argumentation abilities, the experimental group outperformed their counterparts. It was implied that inquiry teaching can gradually influence children’s argumentation performances. Lastly, the test items showed that inquiry teaching can be most helpful for children’s reasoning and learning about variable control.

以文找文

期刊論文
1.	李松濤、林煥祥、洪振方(20071200)。運用視覺敘事法探討科學教師的教學決策--一位自然領域國教輔導員的個案研究。高雄師大學報. 自然科學與科技類，23，77-98。延伸查詢
2.	Zohar, A.、Nemet, F.(2002)。Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics。Journal of Research in Science Teaching，39(1)，35-62。
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。
4.	Chin, C.、Brown, D. E.、Bruce, C. B.(2002)。Student-generated questions: a meaningful aspect of learning in science。International Journal of Science Education，24(5)，521-549。
5.	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。
6.	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。
7.	Sadler, T. D.、Fowler, S. R.(2006)。A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation。Science Education，90(6)，986-1004。
8.	Flick, L. B.(2000)。Cognitive scaffolding that fosters scientific inquiry in middle level science。Journal of Science Teacher Education，11(2)，109-129。
9.	Schwartz, R. S.、Lederman, N. G.、Crawford, B. A.(2004)。Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry。Science Education，88(4)，610-645。
10.	Zimmerman, C.(2007)。The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school。Developmental Review，27(2)，172-223。
11.	Kuhn, D.(1989)。Children and adults as intuitive scientists。Psychological Review，96(4)，674-689。
12.	Van Zee, E. H.(2000)。Analysis of a student-generated inquiry discussion。International Journal of Science Education，22(2)，115-142。
13.	Pine, J.、Aschbacher, P.、Roth, E.、Jones, M.、McPhee, C.、Martin, C.(2006)。Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in textbook and inquiry curricula。Journal of Research in Science Teaching，43(5)，467-484。
14.	Anderson, R. D.(2002)。Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry。Journal of Science Teacher Education，13(1)，1-12。
15.	Gibson, H. L.、Chase, C.(2002)。Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students' attitudes toward science。Science Education，86(5)，693-705。
16.	Driver, R.、Newton, P.、Osborne, J.(2000)。Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms。Science Education，84(3)，287-312。
17.	Duschl, R. A.、Osborne, J.(2002)。Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education。Studies in Science Education，38(1)，39-72。
18.	Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P.、Rodríguez, A. B.、Duschl, R. A.(2000)。"Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics。Science Education，84(6)，757-792。
19.	Kuhn, D.(1992)。Thinking as argument。Harvard Educational Review，62(2)，155-179。
20.	Abd-El-Khalick, F.、BouJaoude, S.、Duschl, R.、Lederman, N. G.、Mamlok-Naaman, R.、Hofstein, A.、Niaz, M.、Treagust, D.、Tuan, Hsiao-Lin(2004)。Inquiry in science education: International perspectives。Science Education，88(3)，397-419。
21.	Rennie, L. J.(2005)。Science awareness and scientific literacy。Teaching Science，51(1)，10-14。
22.	Siegel, H.(1995)。Why should educators care about argumentation?。Informal Logic，17(2)，159-176。
23.	Stewart, J.,、Rudolph, J. L.(2001)。Considering the nature of scientific problems when designing science curricula。Science Education，85(3)，207-222。
24.	Tomkins, S. P.,、Tunnicliffe, S. D.(2001)。Looking for ideas: Observation, interpretation and hypothesis-making by 12-year-old pupils undertaking science investigations。International Journal of Science Education，23(8)，791-813。
25.	Tretter, T. R.,、Jones, M. G.(2003)。Relationships between inquiry-based teaching and physical science standardized test scores。School Science and Mathematics，103，345-350。
26.	Cartier, J. L.,、Stewart, J.(2000)。Teaching the nature of inquiry: Further developments in a high school genetics curriculum。Science and Education，9(3)，247-267。
27.	Galotti, K. M.(1989)。Approaches to studying formal and everyday reasoning。Psychological Bulletin，105(3)，331-351。
28.	Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Nagarajan, A.,、Day, R. S.(2002)。“It’s harder than we thought it would be”: A comparative case study of expert-novice experimentation strategies。Science Education，86(2)，219-243。
29.	Holyoak, K. J.,、Spellman, B. A.(1993)。Thinking。Annual Review of Psychology，44，265-315。
30.	Klaczynski, P. A., Gordon, D. H.,、Fauth, J.(1997)。Goal-oriented critical reasoning and individual differences in critical reasoning biases。Journal of Educational Psychology，89(3)，470-485。
31.	Lee, S. T.,、Lin, H. S.(2005)。Using argumentation to investigate science teachers’teaching practices: The perspective of instructional decisions and justifications。International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education，3(3)，429-461。
32.	Wilkening, F.,、Sodian, B.(2005)。Scientific reasoning in young children: Introduction。Swiss Journal of Psychology，64(3)，137-139。

圖書
1.	Johnson-Laird, P. N.、Byrne, R. M. J.(1991)。Deduction。Hillsdale, NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum。
2.	Billig, M.(1987)。Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology。Cambridge University Press。
3.	Wiersma, W.(1995)。Research Methods in Education: An Introduction。Boston：Allyn and Bacon。
4.	Lemke, Jay L.(1990)。Talking science: Language, learning, and values。Ablex。
5.	Kuhn, Deanna(1991)。The skills of argument。Cambridge University Press。
6.	教育部(1998)。國民教育階段九年一貫課程總綱綱要。台北市：教育部。延伸查詢
7.	National Research Council(1996)。National Science Education Standards。Washington, DC：National Academy Press。
8.	National Research Council(2000)。Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards。Washington, DC：National Academy Press。
9.	Toulmin, Stephen Edelston(1958)。The Uses of Argument。Cambridge University Press。
10.	Perkins, D. N., Farady, M.,、Bushey, B.(1991)。Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence。Informal reasoning and education。Hillsdale, NJ。
11.	Shapiro, B.(1998)。Reading the furniture:The semiotic interpretation of science learning environments。International handbook of science education。Dordrecht, NL。
12.	Swartz, R.(2001)。Infusing critical and creative thinking into content instruction。Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (3rd ed.)。Alexandria, VA。
13.	Taylor, C.(1996)。Defining science。Madison, WI：University of Wisconsin Press。
14.	Adey, P., Robertson, A.,、Venville, G.(2001)。Let’s think! A programme for developing thinking in five and six years olds。London。
15.	Ericsson, K. A.,、Hastie, R.(1994)。Contemporary approaches to the study of thinking and problem solving。Thinking and problem solving。New York。
16.	Fuller, S.(1997)。Science。Buckingham, UK：Open University Press。
17.	Gribble, J., Briggs, S., Black, P.,、Abell, S. K.(2002)。Questioning。Dilemmas of science teaching。London。
18.	Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P.,、Erduran,S.(2008)。Argumentation in science education: An overview。Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research。London。
19.	Kuhn, D.(2002)。What is scientific thinking and how does it develop?。Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development。Oxford。
20.	Manktelow, K. I.(1999)。Reasoning and thinking。Hove, UK。
21.	Voss, J. F.、Perkins, D. N.、Segal, J. W.(1991)。Informal reasoning and education。Hillsdale, NJ：Erlbaum。

圖書論文
1.	Tweney, R. D.(1991)。Informal reasoning in science。Informal reasoning and education。Hillsdale, NJ：Erlbaum。
2.	Kuhn, D.、Franklin, S.(2006)。The second decade: What develops (and how)。Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2. Cognition, perception and language。Hoboken, NJ：Wiley。

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	應用差異化教學策略實施國小跨年級自然教學之研究
2.	培育研究生設計跨領域的「探究與實作」教案加強簡單論證
3.	以科學新聞融入教學提升中學生自我效能及論證能力之探討
4.	運用專業成長活動促進高職教師探究教學知覺轉變之個案研究

1.	議題式行動導向科學教學之設計與實踐
2.	合作式推理教學對學童論證能力之影響
3.	翻轉教室融入論證探究教學模式之發展與學生成效評估—以遺傳單元為例
4.	論證為主的探究教學模式對六年級學童探究學習影響之研究
5.	5E探究式教學對國小學童在情境興趣、決策能力與動作技能之效應

無相關書籍

無相關著作

1.	奈米科技教育融入課程實施的支持系統研究

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫