|
一、中文文獻
于曉平、吳育雅（2013）。資優女生科學文本閱讀理解歷程之研究。資優教育季刊，128，15-24。
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。
林素秋（2017）。閱讀理解策略教學成效之行動研究：以國小中年級弱勢低閱讀能力學童為對象。師資培育與教師專業發展期刊，10(2)，29-58。
林曉芳（2009）。影響中學生科學素養差異之探討：以臺灣、日本、南韓和香港在PISA2006資料為例。教育研究與發展期刊，5(4)，77-108。
柯華葳（2013）。閱讀是新世紀必要的學習管道。人文與社會科學簡訊，14(4)，4-11。
科技部（2015）。2015年公民科技素養調查結果。2017年12月2日，取自：
https://www.most.gov.tw/folksonomy/detail?subSite=main&article_uid=b5796298-7da2-4653-b1a7-18ca36cdfbfb&menu_id=9aa56881-8df0-4eb6-a5a7-32a2f72826ff&l=CH
高涌泉（2010）。科學教育必須注重閱讀與敘事能力。2018年1月8日，取自：
http://mathmuseum.tw/wp-content/pdf/413_20100714094625.pdf
張復萌（2016）。由口述史看國小自然教科書科學素養內涵。教育脈動，5，1-16。
教育部（2003）。科學教育白皮書。2017年12月15日，取自：
https://www.most.gov.tw/sci/ch/detail?article_uid=cc56396a-3613-42d0-a81b-5f85284cdc47&menu_id=aa20fc35-9772-47b2-b4e2-e39ce049c148&content_type=P&view_mode=listView
教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。2018年2月3日，取自：
https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-7944,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw
符碧真（2014）。閱讀教學之個案研究：中學生提出證據支撐論點轉變的三部曲。市北教育學刊，48，1-31。
陳雅君、洪瑞兒、佘曉清、林煥祥（2016）。臺灣學生科學素養與科學教學者研究成果表現之發展趨勢探討。科學教育學刊，24(4)，333-354。
彭開琼、張佳雯、李瑞生（2017）。OECD國家與臺灣之教育績效比較：以PISA科學素養為例。教育科學研究期刊，62(4)，145-179。
黃明輝（2015）。融入21世紀就業技能的通訊教育－以科學素養為例。全人教育學報，13，35-56。
黃茂在、吳敏而（2016）。科學素養與課程統整。教育脈動，5，1-16。
楊淑萍、林煥祥（2010）。由家庭經濟資源及文化資源探討我國學生在PISA科學、數學素養的表現。科學教育學刊，18(6)，547-562。
楊朝祥（2007）。台灣技職教育變革與經濟發展。2017年12月26日，取自：
http://www.npf.org.tw/2/1733/
蔡清田、陳延興（2013）。國民核心素養之課程轉化。課程與教學，16(3)，59-78。
二、外文文獻
Abersek, M. K. (2008). Science literacy: How to teach? Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 9, 9-16.
Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 545-561. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.545
Ainley, M., Hillman, K., & Hidi, S. (2002). Gender and interest processes in response to literary texts: situational and individual interest. Learning & Instruction, 12(4), 411.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2018). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. Retrieved December, 8, 2017, from:
https://www.aaas.org/program/project2061/publications
Ann Renninger, K. (2000). Chapter 13 - Individual interest and its implications for understanding intrinsic motivation A2 - Sansone, Carol. In J. M. Harackiewicz (Ed.), Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation (pp. 373-404). San Diego: Academic Press.
Arikan, S., Yildirim, K., & Erbilgin, E. (2016). Exploring the relationship among new literacies, reading, mathematics and science performance of Turkish students in PISA 2012. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(4), 573-588.
Atar, H. Y., & Atar, B. (2012). Investigating The Multilevel Effects of Several Variables on Turkish Students Science Achievements on TIMSS. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 11(2), 115-126.
Australian Education Council. Mayer Committee. (1992). Putting general education to work: the key competencies report. [Canberra]: Australian Education Council and Ministers of Vocational Education, Employment and Training.
Bakken, J. P., & Whedon, C. K. (2002). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(4), 229.
Barnard-Brak, L., Stevens, T., & Ritter, W. (2017). Reading and mathematics equally important to science achievement: Results from nationally-representative data. Learning & Individual Differences, 58, 1-9. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2017.07.001
Benware, C. A., & Deci, E. L. (1984). Quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21(4), 755-765.
Best, R. M., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y., & McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep‐level comprehension of science texts: The role of the reader and the text. Topics in Language Disorders, 25(1), 65-83.
Black, A. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self‐determination theory perspective. Science Education, 84(6), 740-756.
Boggiano, A. K., Flink, C., Shields, A., Seelbach, A., & Barrett, M. (1993). Use of techniques promoting students' self-determination: Effects on students' analytic problem-solving skills. Motivation and Emotion, 17(4), 319-336.
Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 683-696.
Cain, K., Oakhill, J., & Bryant, P. (2004). Children's reading comprehension ability: Concurrent prediction by working memory, verbal ability, and component skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 31.
Chang, C. Y., & Cheng, W. Y. (2008). Science Achievement and Students’ Self‐confidence and Interest in Science: A Taiwanese representative sample study. International Journal of Science Education, 30(9), 1183-1200.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd: Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (2007). Rising Above The Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Cook, M. P. (2006). Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Science Education, 90(6), 1073-1091.
Cottrell, K. G., & McNamara, D. S. (2002). Cognitive precursors to science comprehension. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior (Vol. 3). New York: Plenum.
Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1996). Need satisfaction and the self-regulation of learning. Learning & Individual Differences, 8(3), 165.
Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self‐determination theory perspective. Journal of Personality, 62(1), 119-142.
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and Education: The Self-Determination Perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 325.
Dornisch, M., Sperling, R. A., & Zeruth, J. A. (2011). The effects of levels of elaboration on learners’ strategic processing of text. Instructional Science, 39(1), 1-26.
European Communities. (2007). Key Competences for Lifelong Learning: European Reference Framework. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Fang, Z. (2005). Scientific literacy: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Science Education, 89(2), 335-347. doi:10.1002/sce.20050
Fang, Z., & Wei, Y. (2010). Improving Middle School Students’ Science Literacy Through Reading Infusion. Journal of Educational Research, 103(4), 262-273.
Feinstein, N. (2011). Salvaging science literacy (Vol. 95, pp. 168-185): John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Freeman, E. E., Karayanidis, F., & Chalmers, K. A. (2017). Metacognitive monitoring of working memory performance and its relationship to academic achievement in Grade 4 children. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 58-64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.06.003
Gençi, M. (2015). The Effect of Scientific Studies on Students' Scientific Literacy and Attitude. Bilimsel Çalışmaların Öğrencilerin Bilimsel Okuryazarlıklarına ve Fen Bilimleri Dersine Karşı Tutumlarına Etkisi., 34(1), 141-152. doi:10.7822/omuefd.34.1.8
Hall, S. S., Kowalski, R., Paterson, K. B., Basran, J., Filik, R., & Maltby, J. (2015). Local text cohesion, reading ability and individual science aspirations: key factors influencing comprehension in science classes. British Educational Research Journal, 41(1), 122-142. doi:10.1002/berj.3134
Hidi, S. (2006). Interest: A unique motivational variable. Educational Research Review, 1(2), 69-82. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2006.09.001
Hofferber, N., Eckes, A., & Wilde, M. (2014). Effects of Autonomy Supportive vs. Controlling Teachers' Behavior on Students' Achievements. European Journal of Educational Research, 3(4), 177-184.
Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls' interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 447-465.
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The meaning of scientific literacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 4(3), 275-288.
Hurd, P. D. (1958). Science Literacy: Its Meaning for American Schools. Educational Leadership, 16(1), 13-52.
Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82(3), 407-416.
Jalil, P., Abu Sbeih, M., Boujettif, M., & Barakat, R. (2009). Autonomy in Science Education: A Practical Approach in Attitude Shifting Towards Science Learning. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 18(6), 476-486.
Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Halusic, M. (2016). A new autonomy-supportive way of teaching that increases conceptual learning: Teaching in students' preferred ways. The Journal of Experimental Education, 84(4), 686-701.
Kendeou, P., Broek, P., Helder, A., & Karlsson, J. (2014). A cognitive view of reading comprehension: Implications for reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 29(1), 10-16.
Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95(2), 163.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge university press.
Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262-273.
Knain, E. (2006). Achieving science literacy through transformation of multimodal textual resources. Science Education, 90(4), 656-659.
Krapp, A., Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (1992). Interest, learning, and development. The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 3-25). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84(1), 71-94.
Leibham, M. B., Alexander, J. M., & Johnson, K. E. (2013). Science Interests in Preschool Boys and Girls: Relations to Later Self-Concept and Science Achievement. Science Education, 97(4), 574-593.
Leutner, D., Leopold, C., & Sumfleth, E. (2009). Cognitive load and science text comprehension: Effects of drawing and mentally imagining text content. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 284-289.
Linderholm, T., & van den Broek, P. (2002). The effects of reading purpose and working memory capacity on the processing of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 778.
Magliano, J. P., & Millis, K. K. (2003). Assessing reading skill with a think-aloud procedure and latent semantic analysis. Cognition and Instruction, 21(3), 251-283.
Mason, L. H., & Hedin, L. R. (2011). Reading Science Text: Challenges for Students with Learning Disabilities and Considerations for Teachers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice (Wiley-Blackwell), 26(4), 214-222.
McNamara, D. S., & O’Reilly, T. (2009). Theories of comprehension skill: Knowledge and strategies versus capacity and suppression. In A. M. Columbus (Ed.), Progress in Experimental Psychology Research. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29-48.
Minnaert, A., Boekaerts, M., & De Brabander, C. (2007). Autonomy, competence, and social relatedness in task interest within project-based education. Psychological Reports, 101(2), 574-586.
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240.
O’Reilly, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2007). The Impact of Science Knowledge, Reading Skill, and Reading Strategy Knowledge on More Traditional “High-Stakes” Measures of High School Students’ Science Achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 44(1), 161-196. doi:10.3102/0002831206298171
Oakhill, J. V., Cain, K., & Bryant, P. E. (2003). The dissociation of word reading and text comprehension: Evidence from component skills. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18(4), 443-468.
OECD. (2000). Measuring student knowledge and skills: the PISA 2000 assessment of reading, mathematical and scientific literacy. OECD, Paris, France.
OECD. (2006). Assessing scientific, reading and mathematical literacy. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Oliver, C. A., & Fergusson, J. (2007). Astrobiology: A pathway to adult science literacy? Acta Astronautica, 61(7/8), 716-723. doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2006.12.010
Olusola, O. (2013). Perceived competence, teacher autonomy-support and parent attachment as a predictor of students’ academic achievement. European Journal of Business and Social Science, 5(8), 133-140.
Osborne, J. (2002). Science Without Literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 203-218. doi:10.1080/03057640220147559
Ozuru, Y., Dempsey, K., & McNamara, D. S. (2009). Prior knowledge, reading skill, and text cohesion in the comprehension of science texts. Learning and Instruction, 19(3), 228-242.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2008). 21st Century skills, education and competitiveness: A resource and policy guide. Retrieved November, 27, 2017 from:http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/21st_century_skills_education_and_competitiveness_guide.pdf
Patrick, B. C., Skinner, E. A., & Connell, J. P. (1993). What motivates children's behavior and emotion? Joint effects of perceived control and autonomy in the academic domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65(4), 781.
Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and Science: Each in the Service of the Other. Science, 328(5977), 459.
Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. Precursors of Functional Literacy, 11, 67-86.
Pitsia, V., Biggart, A., & Karakolidis, A. (2017). The role of students' self-beliefs, motivation and attitudes in predicting mathematics achievement: A multilevel analysis of the Programme for International Student Assessment data. Learning and Individual Differences, 55, 163-173.
Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education, 50(1), 85-129.
Priest, S. H. (2010). Encyclopedia of science and technology communication. SAGE Publications.
Reeve, J. (2006). Teachers as Facilitators: What Autonomy-Supportive Teachers Do and Why Their Students Benefit. Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 225-236.
Reeve, J., & Jang, H. (2006). What Teachers Say and Do to Support Students' Autonomy during a Learning Activity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 209-218.
Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing Students' Engagement by Increasing Teachers' Autonomy Support. Motivation & Emotion, 28(2), 147-169.
Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2011). Revisiting the Conceptualization, Measurement, and Generation of Interest. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 168-184. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.587723
Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom Emotional Climate, Student Engagement, and Academic Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700-712.
Reynolds, J. A., & Ahern-Dodson, J. (2010). Promoting Science Literacy Through Research Service-Learning--an Emerging Pedagogy With Significant Benefits for Students, Faculty, Universities, and Communities. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(6), 24-29.
Richardson, K., Matthews, C., & Thompson, C. (2008). Linking proportionality across the science and mathematics curricula through science literacy maps. Science Scope, 32(3), 64-71.
Rubini, B., Ardianto, D., Pursitasari, I., & Permana, I. (2016). Identify Scientific Literacy from The Science Teachers’ Perspective. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(2), 299-303.
Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1991). Science for all Americans. Oxford university press.
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000a). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. doi:10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000b). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68.
Rychen, D., & Salganik, L. (2001). Defining and selecting key competences. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe Publishing.
Rychen, D., & Salganik, L. (2003). Key competencies for a successful life and a well functioning society. Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe Publishing.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 299.
Schiefele, U., Krapp, A., & Winteler, A. (1992). Interest as a predictor of academic achievement: A meta-analysis of research. In K. Ann Renninger, Suzanne Hidi, Andreas Krapp, & Ann Renninger (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development. (pp. 183-212). Hillsdale, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Schroeder, M., McKeough, A., Graham, S., Stock, H., & Bisanz, G. (2009). The Contribution of Trade Books to Early Science Literacy: In and Out of School. Research in Science Education, 39(2), 231-250. doi:10.1007/s11165-008-9082-0
Sesma, H. W., Mahone, E. M., Levine, T., Eason, S. H., & Cutting, L. E. (2009). The contribution of executive skills to reading comprehension. Child Neuropsychology, 15(3), 232-246.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy: Rutgers University Press.
Shen, B. S. (1975). Science literacy and the public understanding of science Communication of scientific information (pp. 44-52): Karger Publishers.
Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and Science Achievement: Effects of Motivation, Interest, and Academic Engagement. Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323-332.
Stefanou, C. R., Perencevich, K. C., DiCintio, M., & Turner, J. C. (2004). Supporting Autonomy in the Classroom: Ways Teachers Encourage Student Decision Making and Ownership. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 97-110.
Tas, Y. (2016). The contribution of perceived classroom learning environment and motivation to student engagement in science. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 31(4), 557-577.
Taylor, B. M., Graves, M. F., & van den Broek, P. W. (2000). Reading for Meaning: Fostering Comprehension in the Middle Grades: Teachers College Press.
Thomas, A. E., & Müller, F. H. (2014). Autonomy support: a key for understanding students learning motivation in science? Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 4(1), 43-61.
Tilstra, J., McMaster, K., Van den Broek, P., Kendeou, P., & Rapp, D. (2009). Simple but complex: Components of the simple view of reading across grade levels. Journal of Research in Reading, 32(4), 383-401.
van den Broek, P. (2010). Using texts in science education: Cognitive processes and knowledge representation. Science, 328(5977), 453.
van den Broek, P., & Espin, C. A. (2012). Connecting cognitive theory and assessment: Measuring individual differences in reading comprehension. School Psychology Review, 41(3), 315.
Van Den Broek, P., & Kremer, K. E. (2000). The mind in action: What it means to comprehend during reading. Reading for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades, 1-31.
Van den Broek, P., Rapp, D. N., & Kendeou, P. (2005). Integrating memory-based and constructionist processes in accounts of reading comprehension. Discourse Processes, 39(2-3), 299-316.
Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12-23.
Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. McGraw-Hill Education.
Woolley, G. (2011). Reading comprehension reading comprehension: Assisting children with learning difficulties (pp. 15-34). Netherlands: Springer
Zhihui, F., Mary, J. S., & Beverly, E. C. (2006). Understanding the Language Demands of Schooling: Nouns in Academic Registers. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(3), 247-273. doi:10.1207/s15548430jlr3803_1
|