國小六年級學生對於科學探究本質之認識

本研究探討六年級學生對於科學探究本質的認識情形，透過問卷了解學生對於各個探究本質的認識觀，可用於未來教師修正教學需注意之教學重點。本研究分兩階段，第一階段透過開放性問卷進行，針對211位六年級學生進行施測，透過學生的回答依評分規準進行分析，挑選出合適的受試者進行抽測訪談，進入第二階段透過受測者於問卷上的回答，依其答案之脈絡提問，了解受測者確切的想法，其中訪談的架構透過問卷進行半結構式訪談。本研究所使用Lederman等人 (2014, 2019)所提出的「關於科學探究觀點問卷(Views About Scientific Inquiry questionnaire，簡稱VASI）」，建立8項學生須具備對於科學探究本質的概念。在問卷的修改上以貼近國小六年級學生生活情境為出發點，像是研究者觀察到學生平常有沖泡熱可可的習慣，因此將問卷中輪胎的情境修改為沖泡熱飲，使學生在答題上有更多的共鳴。本研究在「研究結論必須與收集的數據一致」的科學探究觀中是相對成熟的觀點，以38%了解型、37%混合型、24%質樸型分佈比例。而「做解釋是結合收集的數據和已知的知識得出的」以14%了解型、41%混合型及44%質樸型分佈比例及「所有科學研究中沒有一套單一的步驟和順序（無單一科學方法）」以10%了解型、45%混合型、44%質樸型之分佈比例之科學探究觀是相對不成熟的的觀點。此外，研究結果發現，性別差異僅在「探究過程以提問的問題為引導」及「所有做出過程相同的科學家可能不會得出相同的結論」這兩個向度，且女生的觀點較男生成熟。翻閱教科書後發現，多數課本出現固定流程的科學研究方法，與大多數受測者處於混合型或是質樸型的觀點相符合。本研究針對教科書中以傳統驗證假設為目標進行科學探究或是科學實驗的內容提出評論，並建議科學教師在未來的教學上需要著墨設計探究觀點融入教學，並持續進修以建立適當的科學探究本質觀點及教學能力。

關鍵字

科學探究；科學探究本質；自然科學領域

並列摘要

The purpose of this study is to explore sixth-grade elementary school students' understandings of the nature of scientific inquiry. An adapted version of the Views about Scientific Inquiry (VASI) questionnaire was used as the research instrument to examine students' conceptions of each scientific inquiry. The Views about Scientific Inquiry (VASI) questionnaire was developed by Lederman et al. (2014), which established eight essential aspects of scientific inquiry that students need. This research was divided into two parts. First, the questionnaire with open-ended questions was administered to 211 sixth-grade elementary school students. Based on the preliminary analysis of the questionnaire responses, the participants were purposefully selected for the second part of the research. Next, a semi-structured interview was conducted based on the participant's answer to the questionnaire to clarify the participants' conceptions. The findings contribute to discovering vague concepts students have on the nature of scientific inquiry and enabling teachers to modify their teaching. Among the eight aspects of the nature of scientific inquiry. In modifying the questionnaire, the starting point is to be close to the living situation of the sixth grade students in elementary school. For example, the researcher observed that the students usually have the habit of brewing hot cocoa, so they changed the situation of tires in the questionnaire to brewing hot drinks, so that students can answer the questions There are more vibes. students’ views of the aspect of “Research conclusions must be consistent with the data collected” are relatively mature, with the distribution ratio of 38% informed, 37% mixed and 24% naïve. Their views on the aspect of "Explanations are developed from a combination of collected data and what is already known" are relatively immature, with the distribution ratio of 14% informed, 41% mixed and 44% naïve. And "There is no single set and sequence of steps followed in all scientific investigations (i.e., there is no single scientific method)" are relatively immature, with the distribution ratio of 10% informed, 45% mixed and 44% naïve. Furthermore, the research discovered that gender difference only appears in “Inquiry procedures are guided by the question asked” and “All scientists performing the same procedures may not get the same conclusions”, and females are more mature than males. Upon reviewing textbook under 108 Curriculum Guidelines, most textbooks depict fixed procedure for scientific research, which matches the findings that most students’ viewpoints were mixed or naïve. This research intends to criticize the units in current science textbooks that focus mainly on the hypothetic-deductive method of scientific experiments. It also suggests that science teachers should incorporate view about science inquiry in science teaching and improve their own understandings about the nature of scientific inquiry and abilities to teach it through professional development.