(34.201.11.222) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/25 13:57
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:張淑涵
研究生(外文):Shu-Han Chang
論文名稱:融入對談的探究教學對國中學生學習動機和學習成就影響之行動研究
論文名稱(外文):An Action Research of the Influence of Learning Motivation and Learning Achievement to Junior High School Students by Inquiry Instruction of Discourse
指導教授:段曉林段曉林引用關係
指導教授(外文):Hsiao-Lin Tuan
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立彰化師範大學
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:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:165
中文關鍵詞:對談探究教學學習動機學習成就
外文關鍵詞:discourseinquiry instructionlearning motivationlearning achievement
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:17
  • 點閱點閱:585
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:168
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:7
本研究主要目的是探討在自然與生活科技學習領域中實施融入對談的探究教學,對國中學生學習動機和學習成就的影響。研究對象為國一學生,進行為期一年半融入對談的探究教學改進之行動研究。研究資料收集工具有課室錄影錄音、學習單、開放性問卷、學生科學動機量表(SMTSL, Tuan, Chin & Shieh, 2005)、正式及非正式晤談、教師反思日誌等資料,採質量合併的方式進行資料分析。
研究結果發現,實施融入對談的探究教學過程中,研究者遭遇到的困難有:1.如何設計融入對談的探究活動,解決方式為針對迷思概念來設計探究活動,設計「開放式」的問題,並將學生形成的問題、報章雜誌上與日常生活相關的科學話題都成為探究活動的內容。2.如何讓學生在參與探究活動時,對談更熱烈、內容更深入,解決方式為長期訓練學生聽說讀寫的基本能力,教師透過提問開放性問題引導學生說出來,要求學生提出質疑及論點之證據,也給予鼓勵及支持。行動改進後可觀察到學生積極參與課室對談及探究活動,享受到學習樂趣,也會主動建構自己的科學知識。
學習動機的研究結果發現,開放性問卷顯示全班34位學生中,有28位學習動機提昇,5位部分提昇部分降低,1位學習動機沒有改變。學生科學動機量表顯示「自我效能」、「主動學習策略」、「科學學習價值」、「成就目標」、「學習環境誘因」五個向度均呈現先下降後上升的趨勢,「非表現目標導向」呈現先上升後下降、最後又上升的趨勢。學習成就的研究結果發現,研究班級的學習成就呈現逐漸上升的趨勢,尤其是低成就的學生,進步最明顯。學生學習成就的分布,原本是明顯的兩極化,低分群的學生偏多,在長期實施融入對談的探究教學之後,低分群的學生逐漸往中等或中上的成績提升,而高分群的學生則維持穩定不變。
The main purpose of this research was to discuss the influence of learning motivation and learning achievement to junior high school students by inquiry instruction of discourse in the field of Nature and Science Technology. The subjects of this research were 34 seventh grade students and the duration was one and half years. Tools for data collection included video and sound recordings, learning lists, the Students’ Motivation towards Science Learning (SMTSL, Tuan, Chin & Shieh, 2005) questionnaires, opening questionnaires, formal and informal meetings, and teacher’s diary. The collected data were analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative methods.
In this research, the most difficult tasks were found to be 1) the design of the activities of discourse and 2) the management of student discussions so that it is carried out more enthusiastically and in depth. The solutions are as follows: first, design activities that involve “open ended” questions and relate students’ problems with daily life, such as science issues in newspapers and magazines. Second, provide long term training to improve students’ basic abilities of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The teacher may also lead the students by bringing out questions and evidences, while showing them cheering and support. After these were implemented, students would discuss the topics more aggressively and with more interest.
In the research result of learning motivation, it was found that among 34 students, 28 have increased in motivation, 5 decreased, and 1 remain unchanged. The SMTSL questionnaire revealed that five items: self-efficacy, active learning strategy, scientific learning value, achivement goal, and learning environment stimulation- were decreased at first and then increased. For non-performance goal, the trend appeared to be increase-decrease-increase. The result showed that low-achieving students’ learning achievement improved most significantly after the long-term discourse, and were gradually moving toward mid- and mid-high achieving groups. High achieving students’s grades remained relatively steady.
論文目次
目錄次…………………………………………………………… Ⅰ
圖次……………………………………………………………… Ⅲ
表次……………………………………………………………… Ⅳ
附錄次…………………………………………………………… Ⅳ

第壹章 緒論 …………………………………………………………… 1
第一節 研究背景與研究動機…………………………………………… 1
第二節 研究目的與待答問題…………………………………………… 3
第三節 名詞解釋………………………………………………………… 3
第貳章 文獻探討………………………………………………………… 6
第一節 探究式教學法…………………………………………………… 6
第二節 課室對談的意義與內涵………………………………………… 14
第三節 同儕互動和師生互動對課室對談的影響……………………… 20
第四節 學習動機………………………………………………………… 26
第參章 研究方法………………………………………………………… 35
第一節 研究者的背景與理念…………………………………………… 35
第二節 研究對象的選取及背景………………………………………… 36
第三節 研究工具的介紹………………………………………………… 37
第四節 探究活動設計理念……………………………………………… 39
第五節 研究流程………………………………………………………… 40
第六節 資料收集及資料分析…………………………………………… 46


第肆章 研究結果與討論………………………………………………… 50
第一節 實施融入對談的探究教學過程中,研究者所遭遇的困難及行動修正歷程…………………………………………………………… 50
第二節 融入對談的探究教學對學生學習動機的影響……………… 99
第三節 融入對談的探究教學對學生學習成就的影響……………… 131
第伍章 結論……………………………………………………………… 138
第一節 研究結論………………………………………………… 138
第二節 建議……………………………………………………… 142

參考文獻……………………………………………………………… 144
附錄…………………………………………………………………… 155
一、中文部分
毛松霖(1997,12月)。國中學生地球科學觀測資料之解釋能力與概念形成之教學策略研究。論文發表於行政院國家科學委員會舉辦之「國科會八十六年度科學教育研究專題研究計畫成果討論」會,台北。
王美芬、熊召弟(1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理出版。
王國華、段曉林和張惠博(1998):國中學生對科學教師學科教學之知覺。科學教育學刊,6(4),363-381。
李弘善譯(2000)。自主的課堂/Dale Scott Ridley & Bill Walther著。台北:遠流,38-40。
李素卿譯(1999)。當代教育心理學/Tomas L. Good & Jere Brophy著。台北:五南,419-515。
李嘉祥(1998)。合作學習對國中學生生物學習動機之影響。國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄市。
吳淑娟(1999)。國中學生理化科學習動機面貌及影響因素之個案研究。國立彰化師範大學碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
余曉清(1998)。中學科學教學環境中師生互動量表的發展與研究。科學教育學刊,6(4),403-416。
周立勳(1994)。國小班級分組合作學習之研究。國立政治大學博士論文,未出版,台北市。
林雅慧、張文華和林陳涌(2003)。低年級學生參與科學對談之類型。科學教育學刊, 11(1), 51-74。
柯華葳和幸曼玲(1996)。討論過程的互動-年齡與推理能力的影響。皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話會議手冊。台北市立師範學院兒童發展中心。
教育部 (2004)。國民教育階段九年一貫課程。2004 年8 月15 日, 取自http://teach.eje.edu.tw/9CC/index.php。
張春興 (1989)。張氏心理辭典。台北:東華書局。
張春興(1994)。教育心理學—三化取向的理論與實踐。台北:東華。
陳淑敏(1996)。從社會互動看皮亞傑與維高斯基的理論及其對幼教之啟示。皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話會議手冊。台北市立師範學院兒童發展中心。
曾守恆(1997)。「同儕科學家意像」對科學知識重建過程的影響分析。台灣師範大學物理研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
黃台珠、Aldridge J. M. & Fraser B. J. (1998)。台灣和西澳科學教室環境的跨國研究:結合質性與量的研究方法。科學教育學刊,6(4),343-362。
黃忠雄(1997)。國中生「同儕科學家意象」對科學概念合理性判斷的影響。台灣師範大學地球科學研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
黃煜程(2001)。國中理化教師所營造的學習環境對學生成就動機的影響-個案研究。國立彰化師範大學碩士論文,未出版,彰化市。
游麗卿(1996)。Vygotsky 對研究概念發展的啟示。皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話會議手冊。台北市立師範學院兒童發展中心。
楊文金(1997)。社會類別對信念選擇的影響分析。科學教育學刊,5(1),1-21。
楊榮祥(1978)。運用教學目標系統分類與改進教學。科學教育月刊,3,7-14。
歐用生(1989a)。教學方法的新趨勢(上)。教與愛, 24,7-9。
歐用生(1989b)。教學方法的新趨勢(中)。教與愛, 25,15-16。
歐用生(1989c)。教學方法的新趨勢((下)。教與愛, 26。
蔣佳玲和郭重吉(1997)。同儕間科學問題討論中的合作及權力關係。中華民國第十三屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編,627-634。
蔡執仲、段曉林和靳知勤(2007)。巢狀探究教學模式對國二學生理化學習動機影響之探討。科學教育學刊,15(2),119-144。
劉錫麒(1993)。數學思考教學研究。台北:師大書苑。
羅文杰(1998)。兩種「班級結構」分類法在國小「同儕科學家意象」的維度上之比較分析。台灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北市。
二、英文部分
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N.G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88, 397-419.
Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Smallgroup discussion in physics: Peer interaction model in pairs and fours. Journal of Research Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099-1114.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ames, C. (1992) Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational psychology, 84(3), 261-271.
Ayman-Nolley, Saba. (1988). Piaget and Vygotsky on creativity. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, October, 10(4), 107-111.
Basaga, H., Geban, O., & Tekkaya, C. (1994). The effect of the inquiry teaching method on biochemistry and science process skill achievements. Biochemical Education, 22(1), 29-31.
Bentley, D., & Watts, M. (1992). Communicating in school science (pp.1-26). London: The Falmer Press.
Bianchini, J. A. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: Student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039- 1065.
Borich, G. D. (1994). Observation skills for effective teaching. USA: Merrill.
Brophy, J. (1987). Socializing students’ motivation to learn. Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Enhancing motivation, 15, 181-210.
Brown, T.(1988). Why Vygotsky? The role of social interaction in construction knowledge. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, October, 10(4), 111-117.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Canbridge: Harvard University Press.
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy. N.H. Heinemann:Portsmounth.
Bybee, R. W., & Landes, N. M. (1988). The biological sciences curriculum study (BSCS). Science and Children, 25(8), 36-37.
Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61, 157-178
Cohen, E. G. & Lotan, R. A. (1995). Producing equal-status interaction in the heterogeneous classroom. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 99-120.
Damon, W. & Phelps, E. (1989). Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer interaction. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 9-19.
Deal, D., Sterling, D. (1997). Kids ask the best questions. Educational Leadership, 54(6), 61-63.
Doing, B. (1997). What makes scientific dialogue possible in the classroom? Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, U.S.A. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 413 246)
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E. & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific know ledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
Driver, R., Guesue, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Some features of children’s ideas and their implications for teaching. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghein(Eds.), Children’s Ideas in Science (pp. 193-201). Milton Keynes, Cambridge, UK: Open University Press.
Elliot, J. (1991). Action research for educational change. Milton Keynes:Open University Press.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, England:Polity Press.
Fisher, D., Fraser, B., & Cresswell, J. (1995). Using the Questionnaire on Teacher Interaction in the professional development of teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 20, 8-18.
Fiske, J. (1990). Introduction to communication studies. London:Routledge.
Gabel, D. L., Rubba, P. A., & Franz, J. R. (1977). The effect of early teaching and training experiences on physics achievement, attitudes toward science and science teaching, and process skill proficiency. Science Education, 61, 503-511.
Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gallssman, M. (1994). All things being equal: The two roads of Piaget and Vygotsky. Developmental Review, 14(2), 186-214.
Gange, A. (1975). Essentional of learning for instruction. United States of America.
Gee, J. P. (1990). Social linguistics and literacies. London:Falmer.
Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of science enquiry. School Review, 79(2), 171-212.
Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (1992). Understanding interactive behaviors: Looking at six mirrors of the classroom. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.). Interaction in Cooperative Groups: The Theoretical Anatomy of Group Learning (pp.17-35). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Hicks, D. (1995). Discourse, learning, and teaching. Review of Research in Education, 21, 49-95
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 2(2), 201-217.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28-54.
Hogan, K. (1999). Relating students’ personal frameworks for science learning to their cognition in collaborative contexts. Science Education, 83, 1-32.
Jenkins, E. W. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 703-710.
Keller, J. M. & Kopp, T(1987). An application of the ARCS model of motivational design. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional theories in action:Lessons illustrating selected theories and models. Hillsdale. SJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kelly, G. J. & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883-915.
Kempa, R. F. & Ward. J. E. (1975). The effect of different modes of task orientation on observational; attainment in practical Chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Education, 1, 68-76.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in Project-Based Science Classrooms: Initial Attempts by Middle School Students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3 & 4), 313-350.
Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C. M. & Berger, C. F. (1998). Teaching Science in Elementary and Middle School Classrooms. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action. MA: Harvard University Press.
Lee, O., & Anderson, C. W. (1993). Task engagement and conceptual change in middle school science classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 585-610.
Lee, O., & Brophy, J. (1996). Motivational patterns observed in six-grade science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(3), 303-318.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Jenkins, E. W. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 703-710.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th ed.). Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon.
Mattheis, F. E., & Nakayama, G. (1988). Effects of a laboratory-centered inquiry program on laboratory skills, science process skills, and understanding in middle grades students. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED307148)
McClelland, D. C., &Lowell, E. L. (1953). The Achievement Motive. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Moje, E. B. (1995). Talking about science: An interpretation of the effects of teacher talk in a high school science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 349-371.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Orsolini, M., & Pontecorvo, C. (1992). Children’s talk in classroom discussions. Journal of Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 113-136.
Pallrand, G. J. (1996). The relationship of assessment to knowledge development of science education. PhiDelta Kappan, 78(4), 315-318.
Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Polman, J.L.,& Pea R.D.(2001). Transfornative communication as a culture tool for guiding inquiry science. Science Education, 85, 223-238.
Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classroom: Social processes in Small group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839-858.
Rittenhouse, P. S. (1998). The teacher`s role in mathematical conversation: Stepping in and stepping out. In Lampert, M. & Blunk, M. L.(Eds.), Talking mathematics in school studies of teaching and learning(pp. 163-189). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Roth, W. -M. (1995). Authentic school science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Roth, W. -M. (1996). Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: Interactions of context, content, and student responses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 709-736.
Roth, W. -M., & Brown, G. M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13(1), 73-128.
Ryan, R.M., & Deci, E. L.(2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.
Sandoval, W.A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89, 634-656.
Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, B. A., & 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 scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610-645.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
She, H. C. & Fisher, D. (1999a, March). The Validation and use of the TCBQ in studying secondary science classroom interaction and its association with students’ attitudinal and cognitive outcomes in Taiwan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
She, H. C. & Fisher, D. (1999b, April). The development and application of a teacher-student interaction questionnaire in science classes in Taiwan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
Smith, E. L., Blakeslee, T. D., &Anderson, C. W. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual chang learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 111-126.
Solomon, J. (1993). The Social construction of children’s scientific knowledge. In P. J. Black & A. M. Lucas (Eds.), Children’s informal ideas in science (pp.1-19). New York: Routledge.
Solomon, J. (1994). Group discussions in the classroom. In R. Levinson (Ed.). Teaching Science. London: Routledge.
Staer, H., Goodrum, D., & Hacking, M. (1998). High school laboratory work in Western Australia: Openness to inquiry. Research in Science Education, 28(2), 219-228.
Stallings, J. (1980). Allocated academic learning time revisited, or beyond time on task. Educational Researcher, 9, 11-16.
Tjosovold, D. & Marino, P. M. (1977). The effect of cooperation and competition of student reactions to inquiry and didactic science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 14(4), 281-288.
Tobin, K. G., & Capie, W.(1982). Relationships between formal reasoning ability, locus of control, academic engagement and integrated process skill achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 113-121.
Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionnaire to measure students’ motivation towards science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639-654.
Tuan, H.L., Wang, K.H., Chang, H.P., & Treagust, D. (2000). The development of an instrument for assessing students’ perceptions of teachers’ knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 22(4), 385-398.
Tuedge, J., & Rogoff, B. (1989). Peer influence on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian percpective. In M. H. Bornstein & J. S. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in human development (pp.17-40). Jillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
van Dijk, T. A. (1997a). Discourse as structure and process. London:Sage.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. New York: Wiley.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psycholigical precesses. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 21-39.
Weiner, B. (1990). History of motivation research in education. Journal of Education Psychology, 82(4), 616-622.
Welch, W. W., Klopfer, L. E., Aikenhead, G. S., & Robinson, J. T. ( 1981). The role of inquiry in science education: analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65(1), 33-50.
Wellington, J. and Osborne, J. (2001). Language and Literacy in Science Education. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Wubbels, T. & Levy, J. (Eds.). (1993). Do you know what you look like? Interpersonal relationships in education. London, England: Falmer Press.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔