Title

科學探究能力測驗的編製與信、效度考驗

Translated Titles

The Development and Validation of Scientific Inquiry Ability Test

DOI

10.7108/PT.200512.0119

Authors

吳坤璋(Kun-Chang Wu);吳裕益(Yuh-Yih Wu);黃台珠(Iris Tai-Chu Huang)

Key Words

探究 ; 科學探究能力 ; 科學探究能力測驗 ; 驗證性因素分析 ; inquiry ; scientific inquiry ability ; scientific inquiry ability test ; confirmatory factor analysis

PublicationName

測驗學刊

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

52卷2期(2005 / 12 / 01)

Page #

119 - 148

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究主要目的在編製科學探究能力測驗,以評測學生的科學探究能力。本研究以高雄市國小六年級學生二七八人為研究參與對象。全測驗共分為六個分測驗,分別為觀察能力、分析能力、轉化能力、推論思考能力、批判思考能力和創造思考能力分測驗,其Cronbach's α信度依序是.64,.80,.65,.59,.61,.29。學生在本測驗得分和自然科學業成績的相關為.68,高能力組和一般能力學生在本測驗平均得分有顯著差異。以驗證性因素分析檢驗本測驗的因素結構,結果發現理論模式和觀察資料適配度良好,其中創造思考能力分測驗的信度偏低,仍有值得改進的空間。

English Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop a ”Scientific Inquiry Ability Test (SIAT)” that measure students' scientific inquiry ability. The participants included 278 sixth grade students from Kaohsiung city. Six scales were developed: observation ability, analysis ability, transformation ability, inferring thinking ability, critical thinking ability, and creative thinking ability. For each scale, the Cronbach's alpha were .64, .80, .65, .59, .61, .29. There were significant correlations (p<.001) of the SIAT with students' GPA of Nature Subject (r=.68). Average and extraordinary scientific inquiry ability groups showed a significant differences (p<.001) on their SIAT scores. To examine the factor structure by utilizing confirmatory factor analysis, the scientific inquiry ability theoretical model and collected data had reached a good fit. The scale of creative thinking ability needs to be modified further in order to improve the reliability.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 心理學
社會科學 > 教育學
Reference
  1. Amabile, T. M.(1983).The social psychology of creativity.New York:Springer-Verlag.
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)(1993).Benchmarks for science literacy: A project 2061 report.New York:Oxford University Press.
  3. Bagozzi, R. P.,Yi, Y.(1988).On the evaluation of structural equation models.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,16,271-284.
  4. Barton, B.(1998).Practical work in school science: Which way now?.New York:Routledge.
  5. Beyer, B. K.(1988).Developing a thinking skills program.Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
  6. Bruner, J. C.(1969).The Process of education.Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.
  7. Cropley, A. J.(2001).Creativity in education and learning.Sterling, VA:Stylus Publishing.
  8. Cuevas, P.,Lee, D.,Hart, J.,Deaktor, R.(2005).Improving science inquiry with elementary students of diverse backgrounds.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,42(3),337-357.
  9. de Bono, E.(1992).Teach your child how to think.London:Viking.
  10. de Boo, M.(1999).Enquiring children, challenging teaching.Buckingham, MA:Open University Press.
  11. De Vellies, R. F.(1991).Scale development theory and applications.London:SAGE.
  12. Devin, T. G.(1981).Teaching study skills.Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
  13. Ennis, R. H.(1985).Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking.Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Press.
  14. Fleer, M.,Hardy, T.(1996).Science for children: Developing a personal approach to teaching.Sydney:Prentice Hall..
  15. Funk, H. J.,Fiel, R. L.,Okey, J. R.,Jaus, H. H.,Sprague, C. S.(1985).Learning science process skills.Dubuque, Iowa:Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
  16. Gagne, R. M.(1963).The learning requirements for enquiry.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,1,144-153.
  17. Hogan, K.,Fisherkeller, J. E.(2000).Assessing Science Understanding.California:Academic Press.
  18. Kim, M.,Hannafm, M.(2004).Designing online learning environment to support scientific inquiry.The Quarterly Review of Distance Education,5(1),1-10.
  19. Lipman, M.(2003).Thinking in education.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  20. Millar, R.,Gott, R.,Lubben, F.,Duggan, S.(1996).Progression in learning.Clevedon:Multilingual Matters Ltd..
  21. National Research Council (NRC)(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC:National Academic Press.
  22. Ruggiero, V. R.(1988).Teaching thinking across the curriculum.NewYork:Haper & Row.
  23. Schwartz, K. 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 inquiry.Science Teacher Education,88,610-645.
  24. Shulman, L. S.,Tamir, P.(1973).Second Handbook of Research on Teaching.Chicago Rand McNally & Co..
  25. So, W. M. W.(2003).Learning science through investigation: An experience with Hong Kong primary school children.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,1,175-200.
  26. Warwick, P.(2000).Science 3-73: The past, the present, and possible futures.London:Routledge Falmer.
  27. 王克先(1989)。學習心理學。台北市:桂冠。
  28. 余民寧(2002)。教育測驗與評量-成就測驗與教學評量。台北市:心理。
  29. 吳坤璋、洪振方(2004)。以科學探究歷程激發學生創意表現之研究。台北市:國立政治大學創新與創造力研究中心。
  30. 吳明隆(2000)。SPSS統計應用實務。台北市:松崗。
  31. 吳裕益(2004)。線性結構模式的理論與應用
  32. 吳靜吉(2003)。創造力的評量-4P觀點。澎湖市:國立澎湖技術學院。
  33. 林清山(1999)。心理與教育統計學。台北市:東華。
  34. 邱美虹(2000)。概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊,8(1),1-34。
  35. 張玉成(2000)。思考技巧與教學。台北市:心理。
  36. 張春興(1989)。張氏心理學辭典。台北市:東華。
  37. 教育部(2002)。全國第一次科學教育會議資料。台北市:行政院教育部。
  38. 許榮富(1992)。形成假說技能之評量模式及其測量本質的分析研究。師大學報,37,395-457。
  39. 郭生玉(1997)。心理與教育測驗。台北市:精華。
  40. 陳正昌、陳炳林(1994)。SPSS、SAS、BMDP統計軟體在多變量統計上的應用。台北市:五南。
  41. 陳瓊森(1984)。國民中學學生科學方法過程之研究。
  42. 盧秀琴(2004)。中小學「細胞相關課程閱讀理解能力測驗」的發展與效化。國立台北師範學院學學報,17(2),83-114。
  43. 魏明通(1997)。科學教育。台北市:五南。
Times Cited
  1. 邱瑋芸(2008)。高中「新興科學技術」學校本位課程發展與實施之評鑑研究。淡江大學教育科技學系碩士班學位論文。2008。1-131。 
  2. 楊詩敏(2008)。高中科學探究教學之個案研究:以一個新興科技探究模組課程實施為例。淡江大學教育科技學系碩士班學位論文。2008。1-179。 
  3. 吳珮嘉(2011)。高中學生生命科學實驗設計能力之研究。臺灣師範大學生命科學研究所學位論文。2011。1-159。
  4. 鄭嘉凱(2011)。網頁式科學探究評量實驗編輯系統之研製。中央大學資訊工程學系碩士在職專班學位論文。2011。1-106。