臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

本研究旨在探討啟發式科學寫作融入國中自然與生活科技的實驗課程中，教師面臨的困難及解決方法；教師使用啟學式科學寫作融入探究情境的實驗活動後，學生探究能力及科學概念的發展情形。本研究係以知識轉換模型、建構主義為理論基礎，使用行動研究法進行研究。本研究以晤談、問卷、科學寫作、回饋單及研究者的反思日誌等研究工具，收集學生在活動過程中的相關數據並進行質性及量性的分析。研究發現：一、啟發式科學寫作可以協助學生發展科學探究的能力，在「發現問題」部份，科學寫作可以協助學生提出問題而不是發現問題；在「提出假設」部份，科學寫作營造實際操作及科學討論的環境以協助學生提出假設；在「實驗設計」部份，科學寫作幫助學生不斷的回顧問題與目的的關係，提供模仿的機會及使用量化的方法進行實驗設計；在「觀察記錄」部份，科學寫作引導學生從閱讀中學習多元的觀察記錄；在「接受或拒絕假設」部份，科學寫作引導學生學習依據證據判斷「接受或拒絕假設」的能力；在「統整探究能力」，科學寫作讓學生體會到探究過程中提出問題、假設、實驗設計、觀察記錄、下結論等是彼此相關的。整體而言，啟發式科學寫作對科學概念發展的影響包含促進學生概念的理解、老師的回饋可以引導學生概念澄清、幫助學生知識建構。另外，文字表達有困難的學生較無法利用科學寫作以表達其概念理解的情形。

This research aims to explore solutions to the problems of one case teacher encounter when implementing the Science Writing Heuristic in junior high school's science and life technology courses. This study is based on knowledge-transforming model and constructivism and it uses in action research. Questionnaires on optical concepts before and after the writing unit, interviews, scientific writing, feedback papers and reflection logs were used to gather data. Data were analyzed using qualitative analyses. The findings of this research were: firstly, scientific writing heuristic can help students develop their inquiry abilities. About discovering problems, scientific writing can help students propose questions but not discover problems. Scientific writing help create a hands-on experience and scientific-discussion environment in order to help students propose hypotheses; Scientific writing help students review relations between questions and objectives, and it provides students opportunities to work cooperatively and to use quantitative methods to conduct experimental design; Scientific writing help students learn a variety of observation recording means through reading; Scientific writing enables students to accept or reject hypotheses according to evidence. Scientific writing make students realize that in the process of exploration, different steps such as proposing research questions, proposing hypotheses, experimenting, observation recording and, making conclusions are all interrelated. Secondly, the impacts of Scientific Writing Heuristic on science concept development include: (a) to improve students' conceptual understanding (b) to clarify students' concepts, and (c) to help students construct their knowledge. Finally, students who have difficulties in writing are unable to describe their understandings scientific concepts by using scientific writing.

目次
中文摘要 Ⅰ
英文摘要 Ⅱ
目次 Ⅲ
表次 Ⅴ
圖次 Ⅵ
附錄次 Ⅶ

第壹章 緒論
第一節 研究背景與動機 1
第二節 研究目的與待答問題 3
第三節 名詞釋義 4
第四節 研究限制 4

第貳章 文獻探討
第一節 啟發式科學寫作的理論基礎 6
第二節 啟發式科學寫作的架構 9
第三節 啟發式科學寫作與科學探究能力 11
第四節 啟發式科學寫作與概念發展 15
第五節 啟發式科學寫作的實徵性研究 24

第參章 研究方法
第一節 研究情境 25
第二節 研究者教學背景與理念 31
第三節 設計與流程 32
第四節 研究工具 35
第五節 資料收集與分析 39

第肆章 結果
第一節 實施啟發式科學寫作時，研究者行動研究的歷程 44
第二節 實施啟發式科學寫作對學生科學探究能力發展的影響 58
第三節 實施啟發式科學寫作時學生的科學概念發展的情形 72

第伍章 結論與討論
第一節 結論與討論 101
第二節 建議 108

參考資料 110

參考資料
一、中文文獻
王敏祝 (2004)：以探究導向教學提昇國中學生學習成效之研究—以「光學」單元為例。國立彰化師範大學數理教學碩士班碩士論文(未出版)。
王美芬、熊昭弟 (1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北：心理出版社。
李永吟 (1994)：合作學習的技術層面。教育研究所集刊，35，153-168頁。
劉祥通、周立勳 (1997)：數學寫作活動—國小數學教學的工具。國民教育研究學報，3，239-262。
胡瑞萍、林陳涌 (2002)：寫作與科學學習。科學教育月刊，253，p2-18。
郭重吉 (1992)：從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。科學發展月刊， 20(5)，548-570。
教育部：九年一貫自然科與生活科技領域課程綱要。http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC/index.php 最近閱讀日期2005/5/8。
陳慧娟 (1998)。科學寫作有效促進概念改變的教學策略。中等教育，49(6)，123-131。
張惠博 (1993)：邁向科學探究的實驗教學。教師天地，62，12-19。
葉家棟 (1995)：國中理化探究式教學法。菁莪，7(3)，6-16。
張靜儀 (1995)：自然科探究教學法。屏師科學教育，1，36-45。
張清濱 (2000)：探究教學法。師友，395，45-49。
黃啟淵 (1997)：從探究技能、專題研習到獨立研究。資優教育的革新與展望(p.377-396)。台北：心理出版社。
楊秀停 (2004)：以合作式行動研究協助國小自然科教師實施探究式教學。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
楊明祥 (2004)：融入概念構圖教學策略於國中光學單元之研究。國立彰化師範大學物理教學碩士班碩士論文(未出版)。
楊榮祥 (1988)：自然科學教學法專輯。台北市：國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心。
鄭麗華 (2002)：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。彰化：國立彰化師大科學教育研究所在職進修專班碩士論文(未出版)。
鄭湧涇、周雪美 (1991)：職前生物教師的生物探討技能。國立臺灣師範大學學報，36，239-265。
蕭登峰 (2003)：探討啟發式科學寫作融入教學對學童科學概念學習與改變之研究－以氧化概念學習為例。嘉義：國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所碩士論文（未出版）。
劉宏文、張惠博 (1997)：建構主義的教學觀與概念改變的教學：以溶液沸點的教學為例。中華民國第十三屆科學教育學術研討會。
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，193，8-24。
劉宏文、張惠博 (2001)：高中學生進行開放式探究活動之個案研究—問題的形成與解決。科學教育學刊，9(2)，169-196。
劉國權、黃萬居 (2000)：科學寫作應用在國小自然科教學之探討。科學教育研究與發展季刊，1-17。
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。國立彰化師大科學教育研究所在職進修專班碩士論文(未出版)。


二、英文文獻
Ambron, J. (1987). Writing to improve learning in biology. Journal of College Science Teaching, 16, 263-266.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillscale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 37 (9), 916-937.
Conner, L. N. (2000). Inquiry, discourse, and metacognition: promoting students’learning in a bioethical context. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA, April.
Connally, P., & Vilardi, T. (1989). Writing to Learn Mathematics and Science. New York: Teachers College Press.
Duschl, R. A. ( 1990).Restructuring science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Elliott, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Bristol: Open University Press.
Fellows, N. J. (1994). A window into thinking: Using students’writing to understand conceptual change learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 985-1001.
Gaskins, I. W., & Guthrie, J. L. (1994). Integrating instruction of science, trading, and writing: goals, teacher development, and assessment . Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 31, 1039-1056.
Green, B. F., McClosky, M., & Caramazza, A. (1985). The relation of knowledge to problem solving, with examples from kinematics. Thinking and Learning Skills. Hillsdale, NJ.
Hand, B. & Yang, E. M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131-149.
Holliday, W. G., Yore, L. D., & Alvermann, D. E. (1994). The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 877-893.
Hand, B., Prain, V., Lawrence, C., & Yore, L.D. (1999). A writing in science framework designed to enhance scientific literacy. International Journal of Science education, 21, 1021-1035.
Keys, C. W. (1994). The development of scientific reasoning skill in conjunction with collaborative writing assignments: An interpretive study of six ninth-grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 1003-1022.
Keys, C. W.(1998). A study of grade six students generating questions and plans for open-ended science investigations. Research in Science Education, 28(3), 301-316.
Keys, C. W. (1999a). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83(2), 115-130.
Keys, C. W. (1999b). Language as an indicator of meaning generation: An analysis of middle school students’written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1044-1061.
Keys, C. W. (2000). Investigating the thinking processes of eighth grade writers during the composition of a scientific laboratory report. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 676-690.
Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084.
Kelly, G. J. & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as socio-cultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 883-915.
Klein, P. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 203-270.
Kovalik, S., & Olsen, K. (1994). ITI: Integrated thematic instruction (3 rd. ed.) From EDRS ERIC ED374894.
Mason, L. & Boscolo, P. (2000). Writing and conceptual change. What changes? Instructional Science, 28, 199-226.
Millar, R., & Driver, R. (1987). Beyond processes. Studies in Science Education, 14, 33-62.
Mills, G.E. (2000). Action research :A guide for the teacher research. London: Prentic-Hall.
McDermott, L. C. (1990). Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics. Physics Today, 37(7), 24-32.
Mason, L. (2001). Introducing talk and writing for conceptual change: A classroom study. Learning and Instruction. 11, 305-329.
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC.
Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1996). Writing for learning in secondary science: Rethinking practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 609-626.
Prawat, R. (1989). Teaching for understanding: Three key attributes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 315,-328.
Pearce, D. J., & Davis, M. D. (1988). Teacher use of writing in the junior high mathematics classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 88(1), 8-10.
Posner, G. J. Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. & Gertzon, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
Paul, R. W. (2000). Critical thinking: Teaching students the logic of writing. Journal of Developmental Education, 23(3), 36-37.
Reif, F. (1987). Interpretation of scientific or mathematical concepts: Cognitive issues and instructional implications. Cognitive Science, 11, 395-416.
Santa, C.M., & Havens, L.T. (1991). Learning through writing. In C.M. Santa & D.E. Alvermann (Eds.), Science learning: Processes and applications (pp.122-133). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Savignon, S. (1991). Communicative language of teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 261-277.
Steuck, K. & Miller, T. (1997). An evaluation of an authentic learning environment for teaching scientific inquiry skills. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1993). Questions and answers about constructivism. In K. Tobin (Ed), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 23-38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wheatley, G.H. (1991). Constructivist perspectives on science and mathematics learning. Science Education, 75, 9-21
Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112-143.