科學探究與實作課程的發展、實施與評量：以實驗室中的科學論證為核心之研究

The Development, Implementation and Assessment of a Scientific Inquiry and Practice Curriculum: The Scientific Argumentation in the Laboratory

張珮珊(Pei-Shan Chang) ； 賴吉永(Chi-Yung Lai) ； 溫媺純(Meichun Lydia Wen)

《科學教育學刊》 25卷4期 (2017/12) Pp. 355-389

https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2017.2504.03

摘要

本研究目的為發展一符應核心素養之科學探究與實作課程，並探討學生科學論證與科學概念的學習成效。本課程以酵素為主題，參照十二年國教自然領綱(草案)的學習內容，藉逆向課程設計含實驗任務的四大探究單元，期望學生透過探究實作來探索知識的建構、理解寫作在知識轉化與科學社群溝通的重要性，故以啟發式科學寫作(Science Writing Heuristics, SWH)協助學生運用「酵素概念暨科學論證寫作簿」發展基於證據的科學論證。本研究採單組前、後測(成就測驗)設計，藉「酵素概念成就測驗」瞭解學生科學概念理解情形，並以「勾選式論證寫作評分表」評量其論證表現，再藉逐步迴歸分析來預測論證寫作品質的最佳指標，以期提升論證教學與評量之效益。研究發現，18位高中生的酵素概念學習顯著進步(p ＜ .001)，且四次科學論證寫作表現良好，皆達優良論證寫作標準。然而，學生論證表現存在顯著的個別差異。低論證表現組學生的各論證向度表現受探究任務影響大，但整體而言，在「問題」、「主張」向度均有進步，且概念理解表現與高論證表現組學生相當。此外，預測各次論證寫作品質的最佳指標有「主張─證據關係」、「主張」與「證據」，然整體寫作品質的最佳預測指標仍為「證據」。最後根據研究發現，提出教學與研究建議。

關鍵字

科學探究與實作課程 ； 科學寫作 ； 科學論證

並列摘要

The aims of this study were to develop a scientific inquiry and practice curriculum corresponding with core literacy, and to investigate students' conceptual learning and performance of scientific argumentation in laboratory contexts. Based on Grade 1-12 Curriculum Guidelines for Nature Science Discipline, we developed the curriculum, which included four inquiry enzyme experiments through Backward Design. The learning outcome we expected was that students could explore the construction of knowledge through practicing and understanding the importance of writing in the scientific community. Therefore, we employed the Science Writing Heuristic approach to guide students' scientific argumentation in the ＂Enzyme Concept & Scientific Argumentation Writing Journal.＂ Achievement test and check-type argumentative writing evaluation sheets were adopted to evaluate the results. Step-wise multiple regression analyses were conducted to determine important argument components. The results indicated that 18 participants from a senior high school in Southern Taiwan did excellently on the conceptual achievement test (p ＜ .001) and written argumentation, which suggested that this curriculum could help students develop their scientific concepts and scientific argumentation. However, there were distinct differences between individuals' argumentative performances. Compared to the stable performance across written argumentation of high argumentation performance group, the performance of low argumentation group was affected by the inquiry tasks. But overall, the ＂question,＂ ＂claim＂ argument components and the concepts of enzyme were improved in low performance group. Furthermore, the predictive components of argumentative writing quality were ＂claim-evidence relationship,＂ ＂claim,＂ and ＂evidence.＂ Taken as a whole, the ＂evidence＂ component was the most important predictor for overall argumentative writing. Last, we provided teaching and research suggestions according to our results.

並列關鍵字

Scientific Inquiry and Practice Curriculum ； Science Writing ； Scientific Argumentation

參考文獻

佘曉清編、林煥祥編(2017)。PISA 2015臺灣學生的表現。臺北市:心理。

李明昆、洪振方(2010)。國三學生對探究性科學問題提問之研究。臺北市立教育大學學報。41(2)，111-148。

何宗穎、王敏男、謝佩妤、郭幸宜、趙大衛、黃臺珠(2013)。大學普通生物學實驗課程應用探究鷹架自我評估策略對學生探究能力表現之影響。科學教育學刊。21(4)，401-429。

林志能、陳玲君、洪振方(2010)。高一學生多變因因果推理與論證能力之相關研究。教育實踐與研究。23(2)，1-36。

林宗進、林樹聲、陳映均(2010)。大學生對基因改造作物議題的認知與論證能力之研究。科學教育學刊。18(3)，229-252。