跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.238.204.167) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/08/09 22:35
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:張宏嘉
研究生(外文):Chang , Hong - Chia
論文名稱:科學本質轉換至教學之判準、範例與限制
論文名稱(外文):The Criteria、Examples and Constraints of Transforming the Nature of Science to the Teaching Practice
指導教授:洪振方洪振方引用關係
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱:科學教育研究所
學門:教育學門
學類:普通科目教育學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2001
畢業學年度:90
語文別:中文
論文頁數:282
中文關鍵詞:科學本質教學判準教學範例教學限制
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:21
  • 點閱點閱:357
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:72
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
本研究旨在探討科學本質觀轉換至教學實務之教學判準、教學範例、與限制因素,研究以二位具有現代科學本質觀的教師為個案,並探討個案教師將科學本質轉換至教學之教學特質。研究係以McComas, Clough & Almazroa(1998)與黃寶蓉(2000)之研究結果為基礎,進行教學判準的建立及效化,並根據效化過的教學判準進行個案教師教學錄影帶的觀察與分析,以建立教學範例,同時對教學判準與教學範例間再做交叉分析比對,以建立教學評述,最後再針對教學評述的適切性進行評分者信度考驗。研究後期則透過訪談的方式,針對個案教師未於教學中轉換其科學本質觀的原因做一探討,以確定科學本質轉換至教學之限制因素。最後並找出個案教師轉換科學本質至教學之教學特質。
根據研究結果討論與分析,本研究結果如下:(一)在教學判準上,依據14項科學本質敘述,共開發24項教學判準,隨後並建立內容效度,俾以提供研究人員或教師一個檢核科學本質轉換至教學的評判標準。(二)在教學範例上,依據教學判準觀察個案教師之教學影帶,共整理出48個教學範例,這些教學範例也提供了教師轉換科學本質於教學的一個參考架構。(三)在科學本質轉換至教學的限制因素上,兩位個案教師對於小組合作學習與對於運用專業知識在教學單元中設計實驗供學生探究方面,以及對於教學時間的拿捏等都做了討論,顯示在教學時間以及台灣教育體制下的學生特質上,科學本質轉換至教學的確有其限制因素存在。
The purpose of this study is to investigate the criteria, examples, and constraints of transforming the Nature of Science (NOS) to the teaching practice. The process (of this study), based upon the findings of the studies of McComas, Clough & Almazroa (1988) and Huang (2000), explores the case subjects teaching characteristics that developed and verified the teaching criteria. After verifying the criteria, the researcher proceeded to observe and analyze the case subjects teaching videotapes and established the following findings. The teaching commentaries were built up by crossing analysis and comparison between the criteria and all teaching examples. The inter-rater reliability was used to test the suitability of teaching commentaries. The last phase, done through interviews with case subjects, explored the constraints of transforming the NOS to the teaching practice and the case subjects teaching characteristics.
The results indicate that: (1) based upon the fourteen statements of NOS, the researcher developed and verified twenty-four criteria that can provide teachers and researchers a standard to inspect the transformation of NOS to teaching practices; (2) the forty-eight teaching examples were arranged by means of observing the videotapes. They provide a framework of transformation from NOS to teaching practices; (3) the discussion upon cooperative learning instruction, professional knowledge to design experiments for students’ inquiries, and teaching duration indicated that there are some constraints in educational circumstances and students’ characteristics in Taiwan.
目 錄
目 錄 Ⅰ
圖 次 Ⅲ
表 次 Ⅲ
附錄次 IV
中 文 摘 要 V
英 文 摘 要 VI
第壹章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景與研究動機 1
第二節 研究目的與研究問題 3
第三節 名詞解釋 3
第四節 研究範圍 6
第貳章 文獻探討 7
第一節 科學本質在教師教學與學生學習之重要性 7
第二節 科學本質研究的歷史 17
第三節 科學本質與教學實務 51
第參章 研究方法 55
第一節 研究設計的理念與研究流程 55
第二節 研究對象的選取 61
第三節 研究工具 62
第四節 資料收集 65
第五節 資料分析 69
第肆章 結果與討論 72
第一節 科學本質轉換至教學之意涵與判準 72
第二節 教師轉換科學本質於教學之範例與評述-
與教師訪談摘錄之範例 100
第三節 教師轉換科學本質於教學之範例與評述-
與教師訪談摘錄之範例 192
第四節 教師轉換科學本質於教學之範例與評述-
節錄自黃寶蓉研究焦點團體教師之訪談資料 197
第五節 個案教師審查結果 216
第六節 科學本質轉換至教學的限制因素 224
第七節 教師轉換科學本質於教學實務的教學特質 238
第八節 省思:由科學本質轉換的教學實務與由建構主
義取向轉換的教學實務 243
第伍章 結論 248
第一節 研究結果摘要 248
第二節 研究建議 254
參考文獻 258
中文部分 258
英文部分 261
附錄 272
中文部分
丁嘉琦(1999):花蓮縣國小教師科學本質觀點之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
王美芬、熊召弟(1995):國民小學自然科教材教法。心理出版社。
王靜如(1999):國小教師科學本質觀與教學實務。中華民國第十五屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編。
王文科(1998):教育研究法。五南圖書出版公司。
江維信(2000):科學本質課程對師院研究生科學本質觀影響之研究。國立花蓮師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文。
吳明清(1999):教育研究:基本觀念與方法之分析。五南圖書出版公司。
吳淡如(2000):小王子。台北,格林文化。頁57。
李玉貞(2000):光學史融入教學對高中學生科學本質觀及光概念的改變之研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
周新富(1998):提升學習動機的教師行為。教育實習輔導季刊,第4卷第3期。
林千青(1996):國小職前教師與在職教師對科學知識本質了解之研究。國立屏東師範學院初等教育研究所碩士論文。
林心茹(2000):培養反思力。台北,遠流出版公司。頁140-142。
林陳涌(1995a):從經驗證據和科學理論之間的關係來探討自然科實驗教學的意義。科學教育月刊,第184期,頁2-16。
林陳涌(1995b):高中學生對科學本質瞭解之研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(NSC84-2511-S-003-083)。
林陳涌(1996):『了解科學本質量表』之發展與效化。科學教育學刊,第4卷第1期,頁1-58。
林煥祥(1997):科學史融入理化教學的效益評估。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告(NSC84-2511-S-017-005。)。
林麗羨、陳龍川(1996)建構主義教室的呈現。國教天地,第55.56期,頁22-27。
林顯輝(1998):國小自然科師資培育實習教師對科學本質之認知與評量研究(3)。國小自然科師資培育實習模式研討手冊。國立屏東師範學院。
林樹聲(1999):科學素養的省思。科學教育月刊,第222期,16-25。
范毓娟、郭重吉(1995):在國中理化課程中試行建構主義教學之個案研究。科學教育,第6期,頁69-87。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
洪振方(1997):科學史融入科學教學的探討。高雄師大學報,第8期,頁229∼242。
洪振方(2000):建構學習社群及評鑑系統促進數學語自然科學教師素質之研究-建立符合科學本質的教學理論模式。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫進度報告(NSC89-2511-S-017-022)。
翁秀玉(1997):國小自然科教師傳達科學本質之行動研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
翁秀玉、段曉林(1997):科學本質在科學教育上的啟示與作法。科學教育月刊,第201期,頁2-15。
許良榮、李田英(1995):科學史在科學教學的角色與功能。科學教育月刊,第179期。
許玫理(1992):我國國民中學自然科學教師科學本質觀點之調查研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
郭重吉、許玫理(1992):從科學哲學觀點的演變探討科學教育的過去與未來。國立彰化師範大學學報,第3期,頁531-560。
郭重吉(1996):建構論:科學哲學的省思。教育研究雙月刊,第49期,頁16-23。
陳文靜(1999):何不把科學史融入高中基礎理化教材?科學教育月刊,第216期,頁34-42。
陳文靜(2000):原子與電子發展史融入教學對高一學生科學本質觀改變之研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳育瑛(1998):從批判取向的重畫過程精煉融入科學史之教學範例。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳英豪、吳裕益(2000):測驗與評量。高雄:復文圖書出版社。
陳振明(1997):情境式國中理化教學專業知能評鑑工具發展之研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
陳淑媛(1997):融入科學史於高中基礎理化教學之行動研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
梁慧芳(1998):建構主義的觀點如何應用在自然科教學。屏師科學教育,第7期,頁11-21。
張玉成(1983):教師發問技巧。台北:心理出版社。
張世忠(1999):一堂國中理化科之教學觀察、評論和展望。科學教育月刊,第219期。
張巨青、吳寅華(1994):邏輯與歷史─現代科學方法論的嬗變。淑馨出版社。
張美玉(1998):建構取向的科學教室內師生互動實例。科學教育學刊,第6卷第2期,頁149-168。
張惠祝(1999):班級氣氛之演變與有關因素之個案研究。國立中正大學教育學研究所碩士論文。
張惠博(1995):學習的社會層面觀點:科學教師的基本見解。建構與教學,第二期,國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
張鳳琴(1994):高雄地區公立高中學生對科學知識本質之看法。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
黃瑞琴(1994):質的教育研究方法。台北,心理出版社。
黃寶蓉(2000):科學本質在教與學的意涵之研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
熊召弟、王美芬、段曉林、熊同鑫 譯(1996):科學學習心理學。台北:心理出版社。
趙敦華(1991):卡爾.波普。遠流出版社。
劉宏文(1996):建構主義的認識論觀點及其在科學教育上的意義。科學教育月刊,第193期,頁8-25
劉仲康(1999):科學史教材的編寫。1999科學史、哲與科學教育學術研討及研習會論文彙編,頁108∼114。
劉秀芳(1996):國中物理教師教學能力評鑑工具之發展研究-教室觀察及錄影帶情境評鑑工具。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭湧涇、周美雪、張麗珠(1989):職前與在職生物教師對科學本質的了解。中華民國第四屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編,頁257-283。
饒達欽,鄭增財(1997):談教師教學品質。技術及職業教育雙月刊,第42期。
英文部分
Abd-El-Khalick, F, Bell, R., & Lederman, N.G.(1998). The nature of science and instructional practice : Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(1), 417-436.
Abell, S.K., & Smith, D.C.(1994). What is science ?: Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 16(4), 475-487.
Abimbola, I.O.(1983). The relevance of the “new” philosophy of science for the science curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 83(3), 181-192.
Aguirre, J.M., & Linder, C.J.(1990). Student-teachers’ conceptions of science, teaching and learning: A case study in preservice science education. International Journal of Science Education, 12(4), 381-390.
Aikenhead, G.S.(1979). Science: A way of knowing. The Science Teacher , 46(6), 23-25.
American Association for the Advancement of Science.(1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, D.C. : Auther.
American Association for the Advancement of Science.(1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York : Oxford University Press.
Anderson, K.E.(1950). The teachers of science in a representative sampling of Minnesota schools. Science Education, 34(1), 57-66.
Bady, R.A.(1979). Students’ understanding in semester and all-year courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16(1),61-65.
Bateson, D.J.(1990). Science achievement in semester and all-year courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 233-240.
Behnke, F.L.(1961). Reactions of scientists and science teachers to statements bearing on certain aspects of science and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 61, 193-207.
Billeh, V. & Hassan, O.(1975). Factors affecting teachers’ gain in understanding the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 12(3), 105-109.
Bloom, J.W.(1989). Preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of science: Science, theories and evolution. International Journal of Science Education, 11(4), 401-415.
Brickhouse, N.W.(1989). The teaching of the philosophy of science in secondary classroom : Case studies of teachers: personal theories. International Journal of Science Education, (11), 437-449.
Brickhouse, N.W.(1990). Teacher’s beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53.
Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Jay, E., & Unger, C.(1989). “An experiment is when you try it and see if it works”: A study of grade 7 students’ understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 514-529.
Carey, R.L. & Stauss, N.G.(1968). An analysis of the understanding of the nature of science by prospective secondary science teachers. Science Education, 58(4), 358-363.
Carey, R.L. & Stauss, N.G.(1970a). An analysis of the relationship between prospective science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and certain academic variables. Georgia Academic of Science,148-158
Carey, R.L. & Stauss, N.G.(1970b). An analysis of experienced science teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 70, 366-376.
Cobern, W.W.(1989). A comparative analysis of NOSS Profiles on Nigerian and American preservice, secondary science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(6), 533-541.
Collette, A.T., & Chiapetta, E.C.(1994). Science instruction in the middle and science school. (3rd, pp.27-47). Columbas U.S.A.: Merrill.
Clough, M.P.(1994). Diminish students resistance to biological evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 56, 409-415.
Connely, F.M. Washlstrom, M.W. Finegold, M. & Elbaz, F. (1977). Enquiring teaching in science: A handbook for secondary school teachers. Toronto, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Crumb, G.H.(1965). Understanding of science in high school physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(3), 246-250.
Dibbs, D.R.(1982). An investigation into the nature and consequences of teachers implicit philosophies of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of Aston, Birmingham, UK.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young People’s Images of Science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Durkee, P.(1974). An analysis of the appropriateness and utilization of TOUS with special reference to high-ability students studying physics. Science Education, 58(3), 343-356.
Duschl, R.A. & Wright, F.(1989). A case study of high school teachers’ decision-making models for planning and teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 467-502.
Duschl, R.A.(1990). Restructuring science education: The important of theories and their development. New York: Teachers College Press.
Forawi, S.S.(1996). The effects of the interaction of teachers’ understanding of the nature of science, instructional strategy , and textbook on students’ understanding of the nature of science[CD-ROM]. Abstract from: ProQuest: Dissertation Abstracts Item: 9621877.
Gallagher, J.J.(1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75(1), 121-133.
Gennaro, E.O.(1964). A comparative study of two methods of teaching high school biology-BSCS Yellow Version and laboratory blocks with collateral reading. Dissertation Abstracts International, 25, 3996.(University Microfilms No. 64-13, 878)
Germann, P.J. & Aram, R.J.(1996). Student performances on the science process of recording data, analyzing data, drawing conclusion, and providing evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 773-798.
Gruber, H.E.(1963). Science as doctrine or thought? A critical study of nine academic tear institutes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(2), 124-128.
Hammrich, P.L., & Blouch, K.K.(1996). Elementary teachers candidates’ conceptions of the nature of science and science teaching. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 394817)
Helms, J.V.(1996). Speaking of the subject: Science teachers reflect on the nature of science, science teaching, and themselves (professional identity) [CD-ROM]. Abstract from: ProQuest: Dissertation Abstract Item: 9620489.
Hodson, D.(1988). Toward a philosophical more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 19-40.
Hodson, D.(1991). The role of philosophy in science teaching, in M.R Matthews(ed.) History, Philosophy, and Science teaching: Selected reading. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hsueh T.G.(1997). Teachers’ beliefs about the role of social-relevant issue in teaching the nature of science. The Ohio State University Dissertation.
Hurd, P.DeH.(1969). New directions in teaching secondary school science. Chicago, IL, Rand McNally.
Jaffe, B.(1938). The history of chemistry and its place in the teaching of chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 15, 383-389.
Johnson, R.L. & Peeples, E.E.(1987). The role of scientific understanding in college. The American Biology Teacher, 49, 93-96.
Jones, K.M.(1965). The attainment of understanding about the scientific enterprise, scientist, and the aims and methods of science by students in a college physical science course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(1), 47-49.
Jungwirth, E.(1970). An evaluation of the attained development of the intellectual skill needed for “understanding of the nature of scientific enquiry” by BSCS pupils in Israel. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 7(2), 141-151.
Kimball, M.E.(1968). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110-120.
King, B.(1991). Beginning teachers’ knowledge of and attitude toward history and philosophy of science. Science Education, 75, 135-141.
Kleinman, G.(1965). Teachers’ questions and student understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(4), 307-317.
Klopfer, L., & Cooley, W.(1961). The history of science cases for high schools in the development of student understanding of science and scientists. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(1), 33-47.
Koulaidis, V., & Ogborn, J.(1989). Philosophy of science: An empirical study of teachers’ views. International Journal of Science Education, 11(2), 173-184.
Lakin, S and Wellington, J.(1994).Who will teach the “nature of science”?: teachers views of science and their implication for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 16, 175-190
Lantz, O. & Kass, H.(1987). Chemistry teachers’ functional paradigms. Science Education, 71, 117-134.
Lavach, J.F.(1969). Organization and evaluation of an in-service program in the history of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6(2), 166-170.
Lederman, N.G.(1985). Relating teaching behavior and classroom climate to changes in students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Science Education, 70(1), 3-19.
Lederman, N.G., & Druger, M.(1985). Classroom factors related to changes in students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 649-662.
Lederman, N.G., & O’Malley,M.(1985). Students’ perceptions of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74(2), 225-239.
Lederman, N.G., Zeidler, Dana.(1990) . Science Teachers'' Conceptions of the Nature of Science: Do They Really Influence Teaching Behavior? Science Education, 74(2), 225-239.
Lederman, N.G., Zeidler, D.L.(1989). The effect of teachers’ language on students’ conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(9), 771-783.
Lederman, N.G.(1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331-359.
Lederman, N.G.(1995). Translation and Transformation of Teachers'' Understanding of the Nature of Science into Classroom Practice. ( ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO: ED382474).
Lederman, N.G.(1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
Lieu, S.C.(1997). Teacher understanding of the nature of science and its impact on student learning about the nature of science in STS / Constructivist classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of Iowa.
Lin, C.Y.(1994). Perspectives of science teachings, understanding of the nature of science, and attitudes toward science among preservice elementary teachers in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of Iowa.
Lorbach, A.W.(1991). An examination of prospective science teachers’ beliefs about teaching, learning, and the nature of science (teachers’ beliefs). [CD-ROM]. Abstract from: ProQuest: Dissertation Abstract Item: 9209127.
Mackey, L.D.(1971). Development of understanding about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8(1),57-66.
Manuel, D.E.(1981). Reflections on the role of history and philosophy of science in school science education. School Science Review, 62(221), 769-771.
Marble, S.T.(1992). Student descriptions of the nature of science. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 192). (University Microfilms NO.AAC93-0227).
Matthews, M.R.(1994). History, philosophy ,and science teaching: A useful alliance. New York, Routledge.
McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P., & Almazroa, H. (1998a). The nature of science in science eduation : Rationales and Strategies. Science & Technology Education Library, 5, 3-39.
McComas, W.F., Clough, M.P., & Almazroa, H. (1998b). The role and character of nature of science in science education. The Nature of Science in Science Education, 3-39.Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Meichtry, Y.J.(1996). Consensus about the nature of science implications for a preservice elementary science methods course. Paper presented at National Association for Research Teaching, St. Lous, MO.
Miller, P.E.(1963). A comparison of the abilities of secondary teachers and students of biology to understand science. Iowa Academy of Science. 70. 510-513
National Research Council.(1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academic press.
Nussbaun, J.(1998). History and Philosophy of Science and the Preparation for Constructivist Teaching: The Case of Particle Theory. Teaching Science for Understanding. California: Academic press.
Palmquist, B.C.(1993). Preservice teachers’ views of the nature of science during a postbaccalaureate science teaching program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of Minnesota.
Pope, M. & Gilbert, J.(1983). Personal experience and the construction of knowledge in science. Science Education, 67(2), 193-203.
Rubba, P.A., & Anderson, H.(1978). The development an instrument to asses school students’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 62(4), 449-458.
Robinson, J.T.(1969). Philosophy of science: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 99-104.
Scharmann, L.C. & Harris, W.M.(1992). Teaching evolution: Understanding and applying the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 375-388.
Schmidt, D.J.(1967). Test on understanding science: A comparison among school groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5(4), 365-366.
Shulamn, L.S.(1988). A union of insufficiencies : Strategies for teachers assessment in a period of education reform . Educational Ledership, 46(3),36-41.
Smith, F.L. & Anderson, C.W.(1984). Plants as producers: A case study of elementary science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21, 685-698.
Solomon, J., Duveen, J., Scot, L., & McCarthy, S.(1992). Teaching about the nature of science through history: action research in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 409-421.
Songer, N.B., & Linn, M.C.(1991). How do students’ views of science influence knowledge integration ? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 409-421.
Sorensen, L.L.(1966). Change in critical thinking between students in laboratory-centered and lecture-demonstration-centered patterns of instruction in high school biology. Dissertation Abstracts International, 26, 6567A.(University Microfilms No. 66-03,939)
Suchin, V.(1993). Effect of research experience on teachers’ perceptions of the nature science (science training). Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Tamir, P.(1972). Understanding the process of the science by students exposed to different science curricula in Israel. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 9(3), 239-245.
Tamir, P. & Zohar, A.(1991). Anthropomorphism and teleology in reasoning about biological phenomena. Science Education, 75(1), 57-68
Tobin & Tippins.(1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning In the practice of constructivism in science education. edit by Vobin K NW, Washington.
Tobias, S.(1990). They’re not dumb; they are different: stalking the second tier. Tucson, AZ, Research Council.
Trent, J.(1965). The attainment of the concept “understanding science” using contrasting physics courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(3), 224-229.
Troxel, V.A.(1968). Analysis of instructional outcomes of students involved with three sources in high school chemistry. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.
Visavateeranon, S.(1992). Effect of research experience on teachers’ perceptions of the nature of science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , University of Minnesota.
Wandersee, J.H.(1986). Can the history of science help science educators anticipate students’ misconceptions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 581-597.
Wang, J.R.(1995). A case study: an investigation of teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science, science teaching and learning, classroom practices, and other contextual matters. [CD-ROM]. Abstract from: ProQuest: Dissertation Abstract Item: 9542109.
Welch,W.W., & Walberg, H.J.(1968). An evaluation of summer institute programs for physics teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 105-109.
Wilson, L.(1954). A study of opinions related to the nature of science and its purpose in society. Science Education, 38(2), 159-164.
Yager, R.E.(1966). Teacher effects upon the outcomes of science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4(4), 236-242.
Yager, R.E & Blunck, S.M.(1995). Science as a way of knowing. Thrust for Education Leadership, 25(2), 22.
Yager, R.E & Wick, J.W.(1966) Three emphases in teaching biology: A statistical comparison of the results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 4(1), 16-20.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
1. 翁秀玉、段曉林(1997):科學本質在科學教育上的啟示與作法。科學教育月刊,第201期,頁2-15。
2. 洪振方(1997):科學史融入科學教學的探討。高雄師大學報,第8期,頁229∼242。
3. 范毓娟、郭重吉(1995):在國中理化課程中試行建構主義教學之個案研究。科學教育,第6期,頁69-87。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
4. 林樹聲(1999):科學素養的省思。科學教育月刊,第222期,16-25。
5. 饒達欽,鄭增財(1997):談教師教學品質。技術及職業教育雙月刊,第42期。
6. 劉宏文(1996):建構主義的認識論觀點及其在科學教育上的意義。科學教育月刊,第193期,頁8-25
7. 張美玉(1998):建構取向的科學教室內師生互動實例。科學教育學刊,第6卷第2期,頁149-168。
8. 張世忠(1999):一堂國中理化科之教學觀察、評論和展望。科學教育月刊,第219期。
9. 梁慧芳(1998):建構主義的觀點如何應用在自然科教學。屏師科學教育,第7期,頁11-21。
10. 郭重吉(1996):建構論:科學哲學的省思。教育研究雙月刊,第49期,頁16-23。
11. 郭重吉、許玫理(1992):從科學哲學觀點的演變探討科學教育的過去與未來。國立彰化師範大學學報,第3期,頁531-560。
12. 許良榮、李田英(1995):科學史在科學教學的角色與功能。科學教育月刊,第179期。
13. 林陳涌(1996):『了解科學本質量表』之發展與效化。科學教育學刊,第4卷第1期,頁1-58。
14. 林陳涌(1995a):從經驗證據和科學理論之間的關係來探討自然科實驗教學的意義。科學教育月刊,第184期,頁2-16。
15. 周新富(1998):提升學習動機的教師行為。教育實習輔導季刊,第4卷第3期。