Title

5E學習環在七年級植物的養分與能量單元的科學興趣與認知診斷

Translated Titles

The Effects of the 5E Learning Cycle on the Scientific Learning Interests and the Diagnosis of Plant Nutrients and Energy Units in the Seventh Grade

Authors

張仁明

Key Words

5E學習環教學 ; 學習成就 ; 科學學習興趣 ; 認知診斷 ; 5E learning cycle teaching ; Learning achievement ; Science learning interest ; Cognition of information

PublicationName

中原大學教育研究所學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2017年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

簡志峰

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

本研究目的在瞭解以建構主義所發展的「5E學習環」教學模式(5E Learning Cycle),在融入基本物質與能量概念於「植物的養分與能量」時,對七年級學生學習成就和科學學習興趣的影響,以及學生訊息處理過程的認知為何,學生對於5E學習環教學的看法與建議,以提供未來欲進行建構取向教學之研究者參考。本研究是以準實驗設計進行研究,以桃園市某私立國中一年級的二個班級為研究對象,其中實驗組與對照組的班級人數皆為45人,實驗組接受5E教學環教學,對照組則接受一般講述式的教學。本研究為期兩週,共六堂課,教學前、後以「植物的養分與能量成就測驗」、「科學學習興趣量表」進行量化分析,並以「二段式認知診斷」瞭解學生訊息處理的認知狀況和半結構式晤談進行質化分析。結果顯示如下: 一、經獨立樣本單因子t檢定分析,p=0.032,顯示接受5E學習環教學的 學生在植物的養分與能量上的學習成效是顯著高於一般傳統式教學 的學生。 二、經獨立樣本單因子t檢定分析,p=0.000,顯示接受5E學習環教學的 學生在科學學習興趣上是顯著高於一般傳統式教學的學生。 三、根據二段式認知診斷的工具,接受5E學習環教學的學生,學習過程 是主動學習去建構自己的知識,知識的獲得是有意義的學習,所以 理解多於記憶。 四、根據質化分析結果指出,學生認為5E學習環教學幫助他們當下就能 理解科學知識,且能與同學互動互助,建立完整知識又能增進同學 彼此情誼,透過手動操作加深印象,多半持正向肯定,缺點就是時 間太短。

English Abstract

The objectives of this study is to understand learning achievement, the science study interest, and the cognition of information processing of seventh graders by conducting basic materials and energy concepts of “Nutrient and Engergy of Plant”.To achieve the goal, the teaching model of “5E learning cycle” that developed from constructivism is employed. The research suggestions received from the experiment of 5E learning cycle are referring to the future researchers who intend to discover the constructivist teaching. The subjects of the quasi-experimental research are from two classes of seventh graders in a Taoyuan private school with 45 students are assigned to constructivist instruction (experiment) group and another 45 to traditional instruction (control) group. The experimental group is instructed via 5E learning cycle, and the control group is instructed via lecturing.The study was conducted for two weeks, total six lessons. The instructments include "Plant Nutrition and Energy Achievement Test", "Science Learning Interest Scale" as quantitative data, and "two-stage cognitive diagnosis" and semi-structured interviews as qualitative data. The findings areas follows: 1.By “Independent-Sample T Test” analysis p=0.032, it indicated that there is a significant difference between experimental and control groups on the learning achievement of “Nutrient and Engergy of Plant.” 2. By “Independent-Sample T Test” analysis p=0.000, it indicated that there is a significant difference between two groups on the learning interests of “Nutrient and Engergy of Plant.” 3.According to the two-stage diagnosis, during the learning process, students in the class of 5E learning cycle constructed their knowledge through self- learning, so the acquisition of knowledge is a meaningful learning and understand more than memory. 4.According to qualitative analysis result, students believe the 5E learning cycle in struction helps them understand the scientific knowledge effectively in the course.The students could establish knowledge by cooperating with classmates and enhanced the peer friendship. Students also liked to do it themselves. However, the time was too short.

Topic Category 人文與教育學院 > 教育研究所
社會科學 > 教育學
Reference
  1. 王慧明(2016)。合作學習運用在國中理化之教學經驗與省思。臺灣教育評論月刊,5(3),p 130-132。
    連結:
  2. 余民寧、韓珮華(2009)。教學方式對數學學習興趣與數學成就之影響:以TIMSS2003 台灣資料為例。測驗學刊,56(1),19-48。
    連結:
  3. 吳坤璋、黃台珠、吳裕益(2005)。影響中小學學生科學學習成就的因素之比較研究。教育心理學報,37(2),147-171。
    連結:
  4. 吳曉清(2016)。Google Classroom融入5E模式對學生的興趣影響之行動研究─以七年級自然與生活科技為例。中原大學教育研究所碩士論文,桃園。
    連結:
  5. 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。
    連結:
  6. 南一書局企業股份有限公司。國中自然與生活科技第一冊(2015)。台南:南一。
    連結:
  7. 南一書局企業股份有限公司。國中自然與生活科技第三冊(2015)。台北:南一。
    連結:
  8. 南一書局企業股份有限公司。國中自然與生活科技第五冊(2015)。台北:南一。
    連結:
  9. 胡瑞萍、林陳涌(2002)。寫作與科學學習。科學教育月刊,253,2-18。
    連結:
  10. 涂志銘、林秀玉、張賴妙理、鄭湧涇(2008)。符合建構理念的教學策略對植物的養分與能量概念學習的成效。科學教育學刊,16(1),75-103。
    連結:
  11. 涂志銘、林秀玉(2008)。符合建構論理念的教學策略對植物的養分與能量概念學習的成效。科學教育學刊,16(1),75-103.
    連結:
  12. 歐建榮(2013)。嵌入數位遊戲於5E學習環教學法對八年級學生學習光學概念之成效評估。臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所在職進修碩士班學位論文,台北。
    連結:
  13. 張春興(1998)。現代心理學。台北:東華書局。
    連結:
  14. 張芳全(2011)。家長教育程度、文化資本、自我抱負、學習興趣與數學成就之關係研究。臺中教育大學學報:教育類,25(1),29-56。
    連結:
  15. 張維倫(2012)。結合合作學習與5E學習環的生物教學。中等教育,63(1),P120 -139。
    連結:
  16. 陳昭吉(2013)。長方形概括底高為模組對平面圖形面積補救教學成效之研究。國立交通大學理學院科技與數位學習學程碩士論文,新竹。
    連結:
  17. 楊坤原、張賴妙理 (2005)。問題本位學習的理論基礎與教學歷程。中原學報,33(2),215-235。
    連結:
  18. 薛韶葳(2009)。國中生學習興趣及其相關因素探討(未出版之碩士論文)。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文,台南。
    連結:
  19. 鄭瑞洲、洪振方、黃台珠(2011)。情境興趣-制式與非正式課程科學學習的交會點。科學教育月刊,340,2-10。
    連結:
  20. 鄭瑞洲、洪振方、黃臺珠(2016)。透過情境興趣教學策略促進高一學生之遺傳學學習。科學教育學刊,24(2),P115 - 137。
    連結:
  21. Atkinson, R. C. & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes, In K.W. Spence & J.T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation. London: Academic Press.
    連結:
  22. Balci, S., Cakiroglu, J., Tekkaya, C. (2006). Engagement, Exploration, Explanation,Extension, and Evaluation (5E) Learning Cycle and Conceptual Change Text as Learning Tools. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 34(3), 199-203
    連結:
  23. Brown, D. E., & Clement, J. (1989). Overcoming misconceptions via analogical reasoning: Abstract transfer versus explanatory model construction. Instructional Science, 18, 237-261.
    連結:
  24. Chen, A., Darst, P. W., & Pangrazi, R. P. (2001). An examination of situational interest and its sources. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 383-400.
    連結:
  25. Chen, Z.,Yanowitz, K.L., & Daehler M.W.(1995).Constraints on accessing abstract source information: Instantiation of principles facilitates children's analogical transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 445-454
    連結:
  26. Dogru-Atay, Pinar Tekkaya, Ceren (2008). Promoting students' learning in genetics With the Learning Cycle. The Journal of Experimental Education Vol. 76, No. 3
    連結:
  27. Driver, R. (1988). Theory into practice 2:A constructivist approach to curriculum develop-ment. In P. Fensham (Ed.), Development and dilemmas in science
    連結:
  28. Finley, F. N., Stewart, J., & Yarroch, W. L. (1982). Teachers' perceptions of important and difficult science content. Science Education, 66(4), 531-538.
    連結:
  29. Gagne, R. M. (1974). Task analysis –Its relation to content analysis. Educational Psychologist, 11, 11-18.
    連結:
  30. Gagne, R. M. & White, R. T. (1974). Past and future research on learning hierarchies.Educational Psychologist, 11(1), 19-28.
    連結:
  31. Miller, G. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
    連結:
  32. Greenfield, T. A. (1997). Gender-and Grade-level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education, 81, 259-276.
    連結:
  33. Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science,13,1-13.
    連結:
  34. Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60, 549-571.
    連結:
  35. Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review, 13(3), 191-209.
    連結:
  36. Hidi, S., Berndorff, D., & Ainley, M. (2002). Children´s argument writing, interest,and self-efficacy: An intervention study. Learning and Instruction, 12, 429-446.
    連結:
  37. Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70, 151-179.
    連結:
  38. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development.Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127
    連結:
  39. Hynd, C., Holschuh, J., & Nist, S. (2000). Learning complex scientific information:Motivation theory and its relation to student perceptions. Reading and Writing
    連結:
  40. Iloughby,T.,Wood, E., Desmarais, S., Sims, S., & Kalra, M. (1997). Mechanisms that facilitate the effectiveness of elaboration strategies. Journal of Educational
    連結:
  41. Krapp, A. (2002). An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to SDT. In E. L. Deci & R. M.
    連結:
  42. Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1995). Effects of organizational signals on text-processing strategies. Journal of Education Psychology, 87, 537-544
    連結:
  43. Lorch, R. F., & Lorch, E. P. (1996). Effects of organizational signals on free recall of expository text. Journal of Education Psychology, 88, 387-48
    連結:
  44. Lumpe, A. T., & Staver, J. R. (1995). Peer collaboration and concept development:Learn-ing about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1),71-98
    連結:
  45. Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook
    連結:
  46. Mitchell, M. (1993). Situational interest: Its multifaceted structure in the secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85,424-436.
    連結:
  47. Muosavi, S. Y., Low R., & Sweller , J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational sychology. 87,319-334
    連結:
  48. Palmer, D. H. (2009). Student interest generated during an inquiry skills lesson.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1-19.
    連結:
  49. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.). Handbook of Self-regulation(pp.13-39). San
    連結:
  50. Schunk, D. H.(1990). Introduction to the special section on motivation and efficacy.Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 1-6.
    連結:
  51. Shen, B., Chen, A., & Guan, J. (2007). Using achievement goals and interest to predict learning in physical education. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 89–108.
    連結:
  52. Silvia, P. J. (2005). What is interesting? Exploring the appraisal structure of interest.Emotion, 5(1), 89-102.
    連結:
  53. Simon, H.A.(1980). “Problem solving and education”. In D.T. Tuma and F. Reif (Eds.), Problem solving and education: Issues in teaching and research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum,.
    連結:
  54. Stavy, R., Eisen, Y., & Yaakobi, D. (1987). How students aged 13-15 understand photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 105-115.
    連結:
  55. Stohr-Hunt, P.M. (1996). An analysis of frequency of hands-on experience and science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 101-109.
    連結:
  56. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
    連結:
  57. Waheed, T., & Lucas, A. M. (1992). Understanding interrelated topics: photosynthesis at age 14 +. [Article]. Journal of Biological Education, 26(3), 193-199.
    連結:
  58. Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D., & Fall, R.(1995).Constructive activity and learning in collaborative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 406-423
    連結:
  59. Wideen, M. F. (1975). Comparison of outcomes for science-A process approach and Traditional science teaching for third, fourth, fifth, and sixth grade classes: A
    連結:
  60. product evaluation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2(1), 31-39.
    連結:
  61. WittrockM. C. (1974). “Learning as a generative process,”. Educational Psychologist,11, 87-95
    連結:
  62. 一、中文部分
  63. 丁群權(2013)。學習環教學對國小五年級學童認知學習之影響—以「聲音與樂器」單元為例。國立屏東教育大學數理教育研究所碩士論文,屏東。
  64. 王雪紛(1997)。我國小高年級學生光合作用學習困難之探究。國民教育研究集刊,3,p217-240。
  65. 王美芬、熊召弟(2005)。國小階段自然與生活科技教材教法。台北:心理。
  66. 王式儀(2015)。5E 學習環模式應用於全球暖化教學之概念、態度、行為意向成效評估。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士班碩士論文,台北。
  67. 中華百科(2014)。興趣。取自http://wikiyou.tw/%E8%88%88%E8%B6%A3/
  68. 尹鄧廣(2005)。簡論初中數學探究性學習興趣的培養。保山師專學報,24(5),97-99。
  69. 古士宏(2006)。以5E學習環發展學校本位課程之行動研究---以蝴蝶生態園為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學數理教育研究所碩士論文,屏東。
  70. 台灣 PISA 國家研究中心(2012)。學生能力國際排名。擷取自
  71. http://pisa.nutn.edu.tw/link_rank_tw.htm
  72. 台灣 PISA 國家研究中心(2012)。台灣PISA2012精簡報告目次。擷取自http://pisa.nutn.edu.tw/download/data/TaiwanPISA2012ShortReport.pdf
  73. 余民寧(2006)。影響學習成就因素的探討。教育資料與研究雙月刊,73,11-24。
  74. 李哲迪(2009)。臺灣國中學生在TIMSS 及PISA 的科學學習成果表現及其啟示。研習資訊,26(2),73-88。
  75. 沈奕樟(2013)。5E學習環教學模式奈米特性教材對高一學生探究能力與學習成效之影響。國立彰化師範大學物理學系碩士論文,彰化。
  76. 吳穎沺(2011)。建構主義。載於黃鴻博(主編),自然與生活科技教材教法頁57-82)。台北市:五南。
  77. 吳麗娟(2001)。國小五年級學童光合作用迷思概念之探討(未出版之碩士論文)。屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文,屏東。
  78. 吳春燕(2007)。大一學生生物探究學習之認知結構之研究。國立臺中教育大學科學應用與推廣學系碩士學位暑期在職進修專班碩士論文,台中。
  79. 何宗穎、鄭瑞洲、謝佩妤、陳東煌、黃台珠(2012)。非制式奈米科學教學提升中小學學生科學學習興趣之研究。科學教育研究與發展季刊,65,1-26 。
  80. 林達森(2004)。併用概念圖於國中學生合作學習歷程之研究。南華通識教育研究,2,39-67。
  81. 唐潔(2005)。激發小學生數學學習興趣的幾點思考。取自
  82. http://www.ejzc.com/show.asp?ArticleID=2 5
  83. 翁姍汶(2016)。以5E學習環設計科學魔術教學之行動研究。國立臺中教育大學教師專業碩士學位學程碩士論文,台中。
  84. 張靜嚳(1996)。「傳統教學有何不妥?」。建構與教學,4。彰化師大科教中心。
  85. 張春興(2013)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論實踐(重修二版)。臺北市:東華。
  86. 陳密桃(2003)。認知負荷理論及其對教學的啟示。教育學刊,21,29-51。
  87. 黃松源、王美芬(2001)。國小自然科建構取向教學之行動實務。口頭發表於中華民國第 17 屆科學教育學術研討會。高雄師範大學科學教育研究所,高雄。
  88. 黃台珠、熊召弟、王美芬、余曉清、靳知勤、段曉林、熊同鑫(譯) (2001)。促進理解之科學教學:人本建構取向觀點。台北:心理出版社。
  89. 葛致容(2009)。新竹縣國中學生科學興趣之調查研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學應用科學系碩士論文,新竹。
  90. 賈馥茗、鍾紅柱(1991)。教育心理學。臺北:心理。
  91. 楊志隆(2010)。以5E學習環教學模式提昇學童科學態度成效之研究。國立屏東師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文。
  92. 鄧滿英(2005)。提高學生學習興趣的重要性及技巧。榆林學院學報,15(5),69-71。
  93. 蔡穎真(2013)。融入基本物質概念的生物課程對國中學生學習的影響。國立台灣師範大學生命科學系碩士論文,台北。
  94. 賴保禎(1997)。興趣測驗在學校輔導之運用。學生輔導,52,101-103。
  95. 劉碧如(2009)。國小六年級學生科學興趣之調查研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立新竹教育大學人資處應用科學系教學碩士班,新竹。
  96. 鍾聖校(1990)。認知心理學.。台北:心理出版社
  97. 鄭嘉裕(2005)。科學探究式教學模組、教學與精緻化之行動研究-以國小中年級「植物的認識與種植」為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東師範學院碩士論文,屏東。
  98. 鄭瑞洲、洪振方、黃台珠(2013)。非制式奈米課程促進國中生情境興趣。教育實踐與研究,26(2),1-28。
  99. 二、英文部分
  100. Alexander, P. A. (1997). Mapping the multidimensional nature of domain learning:The interplay of cognitive, motivational, and strategic forces. Advances in Motivation and Achievement,10, 213-250.
  101. Arnon, D. (1982). Sunlight, earth, life: the grand design of photosynthesis. The Sciences, 22(7), 22-27.
  102. Baron, R. A. (1998).Psychology(4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  103. Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.)(1956).Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals,
  104. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company, Inc.
  105. Bybee, R.W. & Landes, N. M. (1988). The biological sciences curriculum study (BSCS). Science and Children, 25(8), 35-39.
  106. (Spring, 2008), pp. 259-280
  107. education (pp. 133-149). London, New York, Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.
  108. Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science: Hearing children’s question and theories, responding with curricula. Teachers College Press, New York.
  109. Huang, K-J., Lin, T-C., Graf, S., Lin, Y-C. (2008). Embedding mobile technology to outdoor natural science learning based on the 7E learning cycle. J. Luca & E. Weippl (Eds.).Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia,Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2008 (pp. 2082-2086). Chesapeake. VA:AACE
  110. Quarterly, 16,23-57.
  111. Psychology, 89, 682-685
  112. Karplus, R., & Their, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago,IL: Rand McNally.
  113. Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1989). A theory ofinstruction:Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts andthinking skills. NARST Monograph, Number One, National Associationof Research in Science Teaching.
  114. Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 49-63
  115. lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 64-73
  116. Neathery, M. F. (1997). Elementary and secondary students’ perceptions toward science and correlation with gender, ethnicity, ability, grade, and science
  117. achievement. Electronic Journal of Science Education(Online), 2(1). Available:
  118. http://unr.edu/homepage/ jcannon/ ejse/ejsev2n1.html
  119. Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  120. R. Karplus and J. Atkin (1962). "Discovery or Invention?". Science Teacher, 29(5), 45.
  121. Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and development: Implication for theory and practice. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp.373-404).New York: Academic Press.
  122. Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S. & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  123. Schiefele, U. (2001). The role of interest in motivation and learning. In J. Collis & S. Messick (Eds.), Intelligence and personality: Bridging the gap in theory and measurement (pp. 163-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  124. Schraw, G., & Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest:A review of the literature and discussions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 23-52.
  125. Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., & Lehman, S. (2001). Increasing situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 211-224.
  126. Trowbridge, L. W., & Bybee, R. W. (1990). Models for Effective Science Teaching.Becoming a Secondary School Science Teacher (5th ed.). Toronto, London:
  127. Merrill Publishing Company press.
  128. Wilder, M., & Shuttleworth, P. (2005). Cell Inquiry: A 5E Learning Cycle Lesson. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 41(4),37-43