臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

在108 課綱的課程變革下，培養行動力、判斷力、思考力、探索力和好奇心顯得更加重要，學生再也不是寫夠多題目就可以考得好的，教導學生要如何探究、思考就是很重要，因此本研究為探討5Ｅ學習環融入國中數學的可能性，並將研究者經由實施5Ｅ學習環的教學模式的教學歷程中，得到的心得、省思與專業成長做彙整，提供給5Ｅ學習環教學模式融入教學的教師作為參考。
本研究所施行的對象以研究者任教國中的九年級任教班，以九年級下學期第二單元「統計與機率」為教學內容，以5E學習環教學模式進行課程設計。以本研究的教學實踐的過程分析學生的學習單、回饋單和訪談內容，進行質性探討，以及研究者編制的數學學習成就測驗和學者林星秀編製之「數學學習態度量表」進行前測、後測作量化資料的分析，探討5E學習環融入國中數學的實施成效。教學實踐分析結果如下:
一、5E學習環教學模式執行的歷程：
（一）5E學習環教學模式與解決數學問題歷程相輔相成。
（二）問題引導的鷹架是不可或缺的。
（三）差異化分組教學的重要性。
二、5E學習環教學模式的課程實施提升學生的學習動機：
（一）學習態度量表前後測p值<.001達顯著。
（二）學生認為比較貼近學生的生活，讓學生感到有趣。
三、5E學習環教學模式的課程實施提升學生學習成就：
（一）學習成就測驗前後測p值<.001達顯著。
（二）學生認為可以更多思考、且透過操作更暸解四分位數、盒狀圖、機率
的意義、樹狀圖等單元學習目標。
綜上所述的研究結果，研究者提出相關建議，作為未來5E學習環教學模式融入國中數學課程上的教學設計與參考。

With the implement of New Curriculum Guidelines of 12-year Basic Education, it’s becoming more and more important to cultivate students’ ability of activeness, judgement, thinking, exploration, and curiosity. Therefore, students can not get good grades simply by doing a lot of drill and practice. Instead, it’s important to guide students in the practices of inquiry and thinking. This research studied how the 5E Inquiry Teaching Model was integrated in math learning in a junior high school, and offered some relevant suggestions about incorporating the model into the curriculum design in future mathematics courses.
The subjects were the ninth grade class that the researcher have taught. Chapter 2 “Statistics and Probability” in ninth grade’s spring class was used as teaching content, and the course was designed with the 5E Inquiry Teaching Model. Qualitative approach was used to analyze students’ worksheets, feedbacks, and interviews. Quantitative approach was used in the beginning and at the end of the study to evaluate students’ learning achievements and motivations, with the questionnaires designed by the researcher and the scholar Hsing-Hsiu Lin respectively. The main findings of the study are as follows:
1. The process of performing the 5E Inquiry Teaching Model
(1) The 5E Inquiry Teaching Model corresponded with the process of solving
math problems.
(2) Thinking scaffolds were essential.
(3) Grouping for differentiated instruction was important.
2. The 5E Inquiry Teaching Model enhanced students’ learning motivations
(1) The significance was achieved with a p-value less than 0.001 in attitude
scale pre- and post-test.
(2) The students thought the teaching content was close to their lives and this
made them more interested in learning.
3. The 5E Inquiry Teaching Model enhanced students’ learning achievements
(1) The significance was achieved with a p-value less than 0.001 in pre- and
post-academic tests.
(2) The students thought the curriculum helped them think diversely, and with
practices, they could understand better and reached the learning goals of the chapters.
According to the results above, the researcher offered some relevant suggestions about incorporating the 5E Inquiry Teaching Model into the curriculum design for future mathematics curriculum in junior schools.

第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究背景 1
第二節 研究動機與目的 3
第三節 名詞釋義 5
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 探究教學理論 7
第二節 數學探究教學 13
第三節 探究教學模式 16
第四節 5E學習環融入數學探究教學有相關研究 22
第三章 研究方法與步驟 25
第一節 研究場域與對象 25
第二節 研究架構與步驟 27
第三節 資料收集與分析 31
第四章 研究歷程與反思 37
第一節 教學策略的實踐 37
第二節 實施5Ｅ學習環之教學所遇到的問題及解決方法 41
第三節 實施5Ｅ學習環之教學對學習動機的影響 71
第四節 實施5Ｅ學習環教學模式對研究者的省思與成長 75
第五章 結論與建議 78
第一節 結論 78
第二節 建議 81
參考文獻 85
附錄一 參與研究家長同意書 91
附錄二 數學學習態度量表使用同意 92
附錄三 數學學習態度量表 93
附錄四 第一循環數學成就測驗前後測試卷 95
附錄五 第二循環數學成就測驗前後測試卷 96
附錄六 2-1學習單 97
附錄七 2-2學習單 99

丁邦平（2010）。探究式科學教學：類型與特徵。教育研究，10，81-85。
王耀誼(2002)。在主動探究的教學模式中:國中學生資訊素養之表現(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。
林寶山(2003)。實用教學原理。心理。
林晶珮（2007）。透過探究教學培養七年級學生數學解題與溝通能力之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學。
林宏洋(2016)。探究導向教學融入二元一次方程式圖形對七年級學生學習成效的研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學。
林慧貞(2011)。以臆測為中心的探究教學中八年級學生數學解題表現之研究
(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學。
吳惠琪(2018)。電子書融入教學對學生學習成就影響-以國小四年級數學「周長與面積」單元為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學。
郭諭陵（1993）。有效的教學策略舉隅。中等教育，44(3)，100-105。
陳南寧(2019)。探究式教學應用在國小六年級學生數學解題之研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺南大學。
陳珮珊、秦爾聰(2013)。數學探究教學對國中七年級學生數學素養影響之研
究。科學教育月刊，361，37-49。(NSC 100-2511-S-018-020 MY3)
教育部(2014)。十二年國教課程綱要總綱。台北市。
游淑媚(1996)。建構式教學模式和科學教學焦慮感之縱貫研究。中華民國第九屆科學教育學術研討會，國立台中師範學院(臺中市)。
黃家鳴（2005。數學探究的意義和實施。2010 年 10 月 23 日。取自： http://nspm.ilongman.com/news/ppt/ws4/WS$_WONG.ppt
曾嘉建（2013）。RME 融入 5E 探究教學實施於七年級數學課室之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學。
張清濱(2000)。探究教法師友月刊，395，45-49。台北市:師友月刊。
張家銘(2018)。5E探究式教學融入高中數學多元選修之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。
楊德清(2000c)。從教學活動中幫助國小六年級學生發展數字常識能力，國科會 89 年度補助研究計劃。(NSC89-2511-S-415-001)
劉儒德(2005)。探究學習與課堂教學。人民教育出版社。
鄭凱耀(2018)。數學探究式教學對商科高中一年級學習成就及學習動機之行動研究(未出版之碩士論文)。國立彰化師範大學。
顏詩潔(2018)。探究式教學法與講述式教學法對國小五年級學生數學學習成效 之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學。
鍾靜(2015)。探究教學提學童數學概念之深度和廣度。國民教育，55(1)，126-139。
Borasi, R. (1992). Learning mathematics through inquiry. NH: Heinemann.
Bibens, R. F. (2001). Using inquiry effectively. Theory into practice, 19, 87-92.
Barnett, C. (1998). Mathematics teaching cases as catalyst for informed strategic inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 81-93.
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30-33.
Buck, L. B., Bretz, S. L., & Towns, M. H. (2008). Characterizing the level of inquiry in the undergraduate laboratory. J. Coll. Sci. Teach, 38, 52-58.
Brown, N., Wilson, K., & Fitzallen, N. (2007,November). Using an inquiry approach to develop mathematical thinking. [Paper presented] the meeting of AARE 2007 International Educational Conference Fremantle, Adelaide.Australia.
Bybee, R. W., & Landes, N. M. (1988). The biological sciences curriculum study(BSCS). Science and Children, 25(8), 36-37.
Chapman, O. (2007). Preservice secondary mathematics teacher’s knowledge and inquiry teaching approaches. In Woo,JWoo, J. H., Lew, H. C., Park, K.S.& Seo, D. Y.(Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Vol. 2.( pp.97-104). Seoul, Korea: PME
Carter, A. (2004). Autonomy, inquiry and mathematics reform. The Constructivist, 15(1), 1-15.
Gibson, H. & Chase, C. (2002). Longitudinal impact of an inquiry-based science program on middle school students'attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86(5), 693-705.
Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70(256), 33-40.
Hodson, D. (1992). In search of a meaningful relationship: An exploration of some issues relating of integration in science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 14(5), 541-562.
Hammer, D. (1997). Inquiry learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 485-529.
Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(4), 475-509. Whitin, P. (2006). Meeting the challenges of mathematical Teaching and Learning: The Journal of Natural Inquiry and Reflective Practice, 21(1), 59-83.negotiated inquiry.
Jarrett, D. (1997). Inquiry strategies for science and mathematics learing: It’s just good teaching. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
McNeal, B. & Simon, M. A. (2000). Mathematics culture clash: Negotiating new classroom norms with prospective teachers.Journal of Mathematical Behavior,18(4),475-509.
Metzler, M. W. (2011). Instructional models for physical education. Holcomb Hathaway.
National Research Council (1996). National science education standards: observe, interact, change, learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Pizzini, E. L., Shepardson, D. P. & Abell, S. K. (1991). The inquiry level of junior high activities: Implications to science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,28(2), 111-121.
Reys, R. E.; Yang, D. C. (1998). Relationship between computational performance and number sense among sixth-and eighth-grade students in Taiwan. Journal forResearch in Mathematics Education, 29(2), 225-237.
Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergratuate science students' images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201-219.
Siegel, M. , Borasi, R. & Fonzi, J. (1998). Supporting students’ mathematical inquiries through reading. Journal for research in Mathematics Education, 29(4), 378-413.
Suchman, J. R. (1964). The Illinois studies ininquiry training. Journal of Educational Research, 2(3), 230-232.
Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students's cientific explanations. The Journal of Learning Science, 12(1), 5-51.
Smithenry, D. W. (2009). Integrating guided inquiry into a traditional chemistry curricular framework. International Journal of Science Education, 32(13), 1689-1714.
Trowbridge, L. W. & Bybee, R. W. (1990). Becoming a secondary school science teacher (5th ed.). Merrill.
Trundle, K. C., Atwood, R. K., Christopher, J. E., & Sackes, M. (2010). The effect of guided inquiry-based instruction on middle school student' understanding of lunar concepts. Research in Science Education, 40(3),451-478.
Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2000). Matbematics education in tbe Netberlands: A guidedtour. Utrecht, the Netherlands: Utrecht University.
Whitin, P. (2006). Meeting the challenges of negotiated mathematical inquiry. Teaching &. Learning: The Journal of Natural Inquiry and Reflective Practice, 21 (1), 59–83.