跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(35.172.223.30) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/07/25 12:35
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

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:郭幸宜
研究生(外文):Hsing-i Kuo
論文名稱:應用探究鷹架之自我評量策略對大學普通生物實驗課程學生科學探究能力之影響
論文名稱(外文):The influence of using scaffold and self-assessment stratagem on colledge students'' scientific-inquiry ability in general biology experiment curriculum
指導教授:趙大衛趙大衛引用關係黃台珠
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立中山大學
系所名稱:生物科學系研究所
學門:生命科學學門
學類:生物學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2004
畢業學年度:92
語文別:中文
論文頁數:108
中文關鍵詞:科學探究能力評分規準自我評量
外文關鍵詞:self-assessmentscientific-inquiry abilityscoring rubrics
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:8
  • 點閱點閱:222
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:12
本研究的主要目的在探討使用「科學探究能力評分規準」作為實驗課程的學習鷹架並據以進行自我評量策略對學生科學探究能力的影響。研究採準實驗研究設計方式,以某大學普通生物實驗課程兩個班級學生分別作為實驗組及對照組。實驗組在本研究的教學策略下進行探究式實驗,對照組則進行傳統實驗課程,在每次實驗後對學生的成果報告進行評分並收集相關質性資料,比較兩組學生科學探究能力表現之差異,並分析實驗組自我評量情形以及學生學習感受問卷,以瞭解策略使用狀況。另外,進一步探討學習動機對學習成效的影響。
本研究的主要結果摘要如下:
1. 在此策略下,學生在「問題的形成」、「步驟的完備性」、「數據的適切性」、「數據的組織」、「數據的轉換」、「檢視與評估」等六個分項能力上達到顯著差異,主要屬於「溝通與傳達」及「科學探究的本質」兩個層面。
2. 質性資料方面,可看出實驗組學生在四個探究能力向度上呈現階段性的改變,逐漸能提出自己的探究問題,且會試著將實驗結果作轉換以增進科學研究的溝通傳達。
3. 教師評分與學生自評分數的相關性有逐漸上升的趨勢,但有效自評與無效自評學生的學習成效並未達顯著差異。
4. 近八成學生認同自我評量策略,認為有助於科學探究能力的提升,但有少數學生有適應上的困難或是覺得時間及自我能力限制其表現。而在學生學習動機分項中,對課程的「科學學習價值」以及「態度」兩分項的得分與探究能力表現達顯著相關,影響學生在此策略下的學習成效。
The main purpose of this study was to explore the influence of using "scientific inquiry ability scoring rubric" to be the learning scaffold and self-assessment stratagem in experiment curriculum on students'' scientific inquiry ability. A quasi-experimental study was implemented in a university for one semester. Of the two classes participated in this study, one received the designed teaching stratagem and the other the traditional experiment curriculum. Students'' reports were scored and sufficient data of quality were collected after each experiment to test the differences of the two classess, further analysed the self-assessment data and learning-questionnaire to assess students’ perceptions. In addition, the influence of students'' motive on learning was also investigated.

The results obtained from this study are summarized as follows:

1. Among six abilities studied those belonging to "Nature of scientific inquiry" and "Communication"(”forming a question”, ”the completeness of procedures”, ”the sufficiency of data”, “the organization of data”, “transferring data”, “reviewing and evaluating”)had a greater progress under this stratagem.
2. Students changed step by step on four inquiry-ability dimensions (i.e., bring up self inquiry questions, try to transfer data to improve science communication etc.) during this investigation period.
3. The correlation between assessments of teachers'' and those of students'' increased gradually, but there was no significant difference in performance between hit and miss self-assessors.
4. Students had positive attitudes toward the self-assessment questionnaire. About 80﹪students accepted that using the rubrics was beneficial for learning."Attitude" and "Science Learning Value" are the two items of students'' motive that showed significant relation with their learning effects.
第一章 緒論
第一節 研究背景與動機---------------------------------------7
第二節 研究目的與問題---------------------------------------10
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 實驗課程的角色與發展---------------------------------11
第二節 科學探究能力的內涵-----------------------------------15
第三節 實作評量與自我評量-----------------------------------23
第三章 研究方法
第一節 研究架構---------------------------------------------27
第二節 研究流程---------------------------------------------28
第三節 研究對象與課程安排-----------------------------------30
第四節 研究者的角色-----------------------------------------32
第五節 研究工具---------------------------------------------33
第六節 資料收集與分析---------------------------------------45
第四章 結果與討論
第一節 學生科學探究能力的初始表現---------------------------47
第二節 兩組學生科學探究能力表現的差異-----------------------54
第三節 實驗組學生在課程中的改變情形-------------------------63
第四節 自我評量分析與學生學習感受---------------------------73
第五節 學習動機對學習成效的影響-----------------------------80
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論-------------------------------------------------85
第二節 建議-------------------------------------------------92
參考文獻
中文部份-----------------------------------------------------94
英文部份-----------------------------------------------------94
附錄------------------------------------------------------------98
一、中文部分
王美芬和熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北市:心理出版社。
江蓓蒂(1990)。中美初級中學自然科學教科書之分析與比較。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心。
林秀蓁(1995)。一位國中理化教師實驗室之教學與經營。國立高雄師範大學碩士論文。
教育部(1996)。高級中學課程標準。台北市:正中書局。
教育部(2000)。國民教育階段九年一貫課程綱要總綱。台北市:教育部。
黃啟淵(1992)。探究國中生參與化學專題研習活動中的表現----個案研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
郭重吉和江武雄(1995)。如何實行符合建構主義理念的教學-以國中理化為例。八十三學年度中區國中數理學科概念改變教學策略研習手冊。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所。
陳雪瑜(1996)。教師改變與自我評量:一位國中理化教師的詮釋性研究。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
張惠博(1993)。邁向科學探究的實驗教學。教師天地,62,12-20。
張麗麗(2002a)。評量改革的應許之地,虛幻或真實?-談實作評量之作業與表現規準。教育研究月刊,93,76-86。
張麗麗(2002b)。從分數的意義談實作評量效度的建立。教育研究月刊,98,76-86。
蘇麗涼(2002)。國中理化實施探究導向教學對學生學習成效影響之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
鄭麗華(2001)。以探究式實驗活動提升國二學生參與實驗活動及過程技能之行動研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
劉宏文(2001)。高中生進行開放式科學探究活動之個案研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
顏瓊芬(2000)。職前生物教師進行開放式科學探究過程之研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文。
桂怡芬、吳毓瑩(1997)。自然科實作評量的效度探討。教育測驗新近發展趨勢學術研討會論文集,29-50。國立台南師範學院。

二、英文部分
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, D.C.: AAAS Press.
Arter, J. (1999). Teaching about performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 18(2), 30-43.
Black, P.&William,D. (1998) Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education, 5(1), 7–74.
Boud, D. (1995) Enhancing Learning through Self Assessment. (London, Kogan Page).
Butler, D. L. & Winne, P. H. (1995) Feedback and self-regulated learning: a theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65 (3), 245–281.
Bybee, R. W., & DeBoer, G. E. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. In D. L.Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning , 357-388. National Science Teachers Association.
Collins, H. M. (1985). Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. London: Sage.
Collete, A. T. & Chiappetta, E. C.(1994).Science instruction in the middle and science school, 3rd, 27-47. Columbas U.S.A:Merrill.
Friedler, Y., & Tamir, P. (1984). Teaching and learning in high school laboratory classes in Iarael. Review on Science Education, 15, 86-96.
Friedler, Y. , & Tamir, P. (1990). Life in science laboratory classroom at secondary level. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.). The student laboratory and science curriculum , 337-354. London: Rutledge.
Garnett, Patrick. J., Garnett, Pamela. J., & Hackling, M. W. (1995).Refocussing the chemistry lab: A case for laboratory-based investigations. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 41(2), 26-32.
Goodrich, H. (1997). Understanding rubrics. Educational Leadership, 54(4), 14-17.
Goodrich Andrade, H. (2000). Using rubrics to promote thinking and learning. Educational Leadership, 57(5), 13-18.
Hackling, M. W., & Garnett, P. J. (1991). Primary and secondary students’ attainment of science investigation skills. Research in Science Education, 21, 161-170.
Hackling, M. W.& Fairbrother, R. W. (1996). Helping students to do open investigations in Science. Australian Science Teacher Journal, 42,26-33.
Harris, M. (1997). Self-assessment of language learning in formal settings. ELT Journal, 51(1), 12-20.
Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Winters, L. (1992). A practical guide to alternative assessments. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70, 33-40.
Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Toward a more critical approaches to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 22, 85-142.
Hodson, D. (1996). Practical work in school science: Exploring some directions for change. International Journal of Science Education,18 (7), 755-760.
Hofstein, A ., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching:Neglected aspects of research. Review of Education Research, 52(2), 201-217。
Hambleton, R. K., (2000). Advances in performance assessment methodology. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(4), 291-293.
Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (1995). Measurement and Assessment in Teaching (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Lloyd, B.W. (1992). The 20th century general chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 69, 866-869.
Lunetta, V. N. , & Hofstein, A. (2003). The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty -First Century. Science Education, 88 (1), 28-27
Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory: historical perspectives and contemporary teaching. In K. Tobin & B. Fraser (Eds.), International handbook of science education , 249-262.
Lucas, K., & Roth, W .M. (1996).The nature of scientific knowledge and student learning : Two longitudinal case studies. Review in Science Education, 26(1), 103-127.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Oregon Department of Education:2002-2003 Scienctific Inquiry Test Scoring Guide.
Opitz, M., & Glazer, S. M. (1995). Self-assessment and learning centers: Do they go together? Teaching Pre K-8, 25(4), 104-106.
Orsmond, P., & Merry, S. (1997). A study in self-assessment: Tutor and students’ perceptions of performance criteria. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(4), 357-369.
Orsmond, P., Merry, S., & Reiling, K. (2000). The use of student derived marking criteria in peer and self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(1), 23-28.
Paris, S.G., & Ayres, L. R. (1994). Becoming reflective students and teachers with portfolios and authentic assessment. Washington: American Psychological Association.
Roth, W.-M. (1994). Experimenting in a constructivist high school physics laboratory. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 31, 197-223.
Roeber, E. D. (1990). Performance assessment: A national perspective. Policy Briefs Numbers 10 & 11. Special Double Issue. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 370980)
Schwab, J. & Herron, R. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. Schwab (Ed.) The teaching of Science , 1-103. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Simon, S.A., & Jones, A.T. (1992). Open work in science: A Review of existing practice. London: King''s College London.
Sullivan, K. & Hall, C. (1997). Introducing students to self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(3), 289-305.
Stiggins, R. J. (1997). Student-involved classroom assessment (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Merrill.
Tamir, P. (1990). Practical work in school science. An analysis of current practice. In B. Woolnough (Ed.), Practical science:13-20. Open University Press.
Tobin, K. G. (1990). Research on Science Laboratory Activities: In Pursuit of Better Question to Improve Learning. School Science and Mathematics , 90(5), 403-418.
Trowbridge, L. S. & Wbyee, R. W. (1986). Becoming a secondary school science teacher. New York:Merrill.Press.
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
White, R. T. (1996). The Link between the Laboratory and Learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 761-774.
Woolnough, B., & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical work in science. London: Cambridge University Press.
Woolnough, B. E. (1991). Practical science: The role and reality of practical work in school science. Open University Press.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top