科學教育研究所
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/61
本所於民國75年秋奉教育部核准設立，經當時理學院吳院長京一、與數學系、物理系、化學系、生物系、地球科學系等系主任，以及本校科學教育學者之籌備和規劃，分別於75年成立博士班，於76學年度招收第1屆博士班學生，83年成立碩士班，於84學年度起正式招收第1屆碩士班學生，87年成立教學碩士班，於88學年度招收第1屆教學碩士班學生。
News
Browse
2 results
Search Results
Item 開發科學探究與實作評鑑工具評鑑四位高中自然探究與實作教師教學之成效(2020) 李驥; Lee, Kevin G.臺灣在民國108年正式實施十二年國民基本教育（簡稱108課綱），其中自然科領域新加開一門課程為＜自然科學探究與實作＞，希望學生能統整各科科內與跨科之間的學習內容，並培養學生探索與操作的能力。本研究藉由參考美國新世代科學標準（Next Generation Science Standards，簡稱NGSS）的相關課程與教學的評鑑指標並結合臺灣108課綱的探究與實作精神發展出評鑑＜探究與實作＞的指標，並以兩所高中四位自然科（物理、化學、生物、地球科學）教師為研究對象，探討高中教師如何面對108課綱所帶來的改變與挑戰，以及教師進行探究與實作課程的教學狀況。 主要的研究成果如下： 1. 本研究開發的探究與實作評鑑工具能適切呈現教師教學狀況。 2. 經由教師晤談後發現四位自然科探究與實作教師在設計課程時的出發點不一樣，AB與AC教師依據學科技能作為課程開發主軸，BP和BES教師則是以可實作的活動作為課程主軸。在培養學生探究能力上，B學校的教師在一個單元中讓學生經歷課綱所訂定之探究與實作歷程，A學校的教師則是在單一單元中讓學生培養一個探究能力。 3. 在課室觀察四位自然科探究與實作教師的教學時，發現教師們多半著重於學生執行實作任務，而稍忽略培養學生思考歷程。另外教師較少利用驅動問題引起學生興趣以及運用多元的評量方式檢測學生的學習成果。 藉由上述的研究成果，本文嘗試了解自然科探究與實作重要的課程與教學面向，以及目前探究與實作教師的教學情形。希冀藉此能提供其他自然科探究與實作教師在設計課程或是在教學時有更明確的方向，以達到108課綱的精神。Item Validation of a simulation-based assessment of inquiry abilities(2013-09-07) Wu, P. H.; Wu, H.-K.; Hsu, Y. S.; Hwang, F. K.Students’ fundamental abilities of inquiry are of value in science learning and have been increasingly emphasized as an important component of science education. Some assessments have been developed to measure students’ inquiry abilities, but few of them are simulation-based. To take advantage of the advanced technology, we developed a simulation-based assessment of inquiry abilities (SAIA) that allows students to generate scientific explanations and demonstrate their experimental abilities. This paper describes the validation of the assessment. Data were collected from 48 twelfth grade students at a local high school who were categorized into three groups based on their majored programs. Due to the different learning goals of the programs, students in the three groups were expected to have different levels of inquiry abilities and construct validity was estimated by using the known-groups method. Criterion validity was estimated based on the correlation between SAIA and a validated assessment tool, Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (CTSR). Content validity was investigated by examining the agreement among three experts. The results of the Kruskal-Wallis test and the post hoc analysis showed significant differences among three groups (χ2= 24.79, p < .01) so the construct validity of the assessment for distinguishing between the groups was supported. The content validity was confirmed by a satisfactory level of agreement between the experts with Kappa coefficients of .88 and .96. The criterion-related validity was ensured by a positive significant correlation between SAIA and CTSR (r = .40, p < .01). These results indicated that SAIA is a valid assessment to evaluate high school students’ inquiry abilities.