從實作評量探討小組解構問題發展程序性知識與新課綱核心素養

Developing Performance Assessment of Procedural Knowledge From Deconstruct the Problem and New Course Outline Core Literacy

戴建耘(Chien-Yun Dai) ； 丁淑觀(Shu-Kuan Ting) ； 劉銘恩(Ming-En Liu) ； 黃敦煌(Duen-Huang Huang)

《科學教育學刊》 28卷S期 (2020/12) Pp. 483-507

https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.202012/SP_28.0004

摘要

本文主要從學生實作評量歷程，探討解構問題發展程序性知識，與實作歷程小組成員之間自發互動共好的情況。課程以國中跨領域協同教學設計，研究對象為國中152位學生分40小組，透過五個教學活動來探索學生對問題的解構想法及小組間核心素養形成。不同領域教師協同教學共同備課時討論出實作評量，用座標位置強弱區分發展程序性知識優劣，範圍以III區（優秀）＞ II區（基本、良好）＞ I區（不足、落後），期望學生透過解構問題實作學習表現至少能夠進入座標第II區範圍以上。評量結果進入I區有四組占10.0%；進入II區、III區共有36組占90.0%，學習表現未達教學目標有10.0%。經實作前、後測量發現成績高分群差異性高於成績低分群，男生略高於女生，顯見實作學習力與成績高低有相關，與性別也有差異。另外草圖設計評量，大致具有花燈結構與造形外觀完整以上有97.5%，顯見國中生在圖案設計表現沒有問題。問卷內容以小組之間自發（主動探究、解構問題）、互動（團隊合作、知識分享）與共好（實作歷程、創意設計）相關性，三次徑路迴歸分析，皆達顯著，最後依研究結果提出課程設計與評量形式相互搭配等三項建議。

關鍵字

協同教學 ； 程序性知識 ； 解構問題 ； 實作評量

並列摘要

This study explored the students' practical evaluation process they develop during their use of procedural knowledge during the deconstruction of problems and teamwork. One-hundred fifty-two junior high students volunteered to participate in this investigation. Investigators explored students' problem solving strategies and the construction of procedural knowledge through actual operations. Teachers involved in this study had two goals when preparing lessons: (1) to develop students' procedural knowledge from deconstruct the problems and (2) to engage students in spontaneous self-driven, interactive, and mutually beneficial teamwork. In accordance with the development of procedural knowledge, coordinated assessment levels were defined as zone III ＞ zone II ＞ zone I. Throughout the course of instruction, students' learning objectives were to achieve at least assessment level II or above. Results showed that 10.0% of the participants achieved zone II and 90.0% of the participants achieved zone III. Before and after implementation, the high-score groups had higher discrepancy of scores before and after the actual operation as compared with scores from the low-score groups. Males had higher discrepancy than females. There was a correlation between the learning ability from actual operation and achievement scores. Difference in test scores existed between males and females. Cubic path analysis results showed that the procedure of the actual operations and creative design were significantly positive and correlated with spontaneous initiative, interactive, and mutual benefit. Two suggestions from the mutual match between course design and type of assessment are also put forward.

並列關鍵字

Collaborative Teaching ； Procedural Knowledge ； Deconstruct the Problem ； Performance Evaluation

參考文獻

楊雅茹(2017)。整合概念性與程序性科技知識的實作教學之初探—以機構玩具為例。工程與科技教育學術研討會論文集，6，67-73。doi:10.6571/CETE.2017.05.06 [Yang, Y.-R. (2017). A preliminary study on the integration of conceptual and procedural tech-nological knowledge in hands-on activity: A case study of automata toys. The 6th Conference on Engineering and Technology Education, 6, 67-73. doi:10.6571/CETE.2017.05.06]

仰威融、林淑梤(2020)。運用PISA科學素養評量架構探討國中生物教科書中問題的特徵。教科書研究，13(1)，75-106。doi:10.6481/JTR.202004_13(1).03 [Yang, W.-R., & Lin, S.-F. (2020). Features of grade 7 biology textbook questions explored using the framework for PISA scientific literacy assessment. Journal of Textbook Research, 13(1), 75-106. doi:10.6481/JTR.202004_13(1).03]

曾文鑑、黃秀雯(2019)。適性、合作與對話：學研議教學模式的理論基礎與教學策略。學校行政，122，123-140。doi:10.6423/HHHC.201907_(122).0007 [Tseng, W.-J., & Huang, H.-W. (2019). Adaptability, collaboration and dialogue: Constructing learning, research, and dialogue teaching strategy model theory. School Administrators, 122, 123-140. doi:10.6423/HHHC.201907_(122).0007]

莊佩玲(2002)。發展孩子的真實能力—實作評量的施行與設計。師友月刊，417，38-42。doi:10.6437/EM.200203.0038 [Zhuang. P.-L. (2002). Fazhan haizi de zhenshi nengli—Shizuo pingliang de shixing yu sheji. The Educator Monthly, 417, 38-42. doi:10.6437/EM.200203.0038]

陳美如、郭昭佑(2019)。非學校型態實驗教育之活化教學個案研究：學會學習的系統觀點。課程與教學季刊，22(1)，39-70。doi:10.6384/CIQ.201901_22(1).0003 [Chen, M.-J., & Guo, C.-Y. (2019). A case study of the activated teaching on non-school type experimental education-learning to learn system perspective. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 22(1), 39-70. doi:10.6384/CIQ.201901_22(1).0003]