另有概念與科學教學：非科學背景小學科學教師之個案研究

Abstract

本研究以一位非科學背景的小學科學教師為個案，旨在探討其另有概念與科學教學之間的關係。本研究採取質性研究的方法，透過晤談、課室觀察、課堂錄影、田野筆記、問卷調查等方式進行資料的蒐集，首先找出個案教師對「空氣與燃燒」教學單元的另有概念為何，再進一步分析其另有概念對其教學模式與教學表徵的關係，最後，透過「空氣與燃燒」二階段試題測驗與開放式問答題測驗之結果，分析個案教師的教學對其學生的概念理解之影響。本研究主要的研究發現為： 一、個案教師對不同的燃燒主題(燃燒的定義、氧氣的角色、火焰(溫度/顏色)、生成物與反應物)，持有不同程度的另有概念類別，且其另有概念會隨著教學時程(準備階段、實際教學階段、回顧階段)而逐漸朝符合當代科學觀點的方向改變，但其概念改變並無法達到革命性的改變。 二、個案教師仰賴其一般教學知識來建構其學科教學知識，並依此進行科學教學，導致其教學模式與教學表徵具有以下問題：個案教師的教學表徵多為教科書內容的複製與再現，缺乏對教學情境的考量與彈性；個案教師的另有概念會影響其教學表徵的正確性，無法協助學生建構符合當代科學社群觀點的科學概念。 三、學生在教師的教學後，對於燃燒的另有概念多屬較低層次的直覺和質變類別，此可能因具有另有概念的個案教師無法覺察學生的另有概念，亦無法提供學生適當的鷹架，導致學生的理解程度受限於其本身的另有概念，而未能建構出符合當代科學觀點的理解。 根據本研究的研究發現，研究者分別對非科學背景教師的師資培育與專業發展，提出具體的省思與建議，以期望各層級能重視相關的小學科學教育問題。

The main purpose of this case study was to investigate the instructional practice of an elementary science teacher whose major was not science at college. More specifically, this study aimed at exploring the teacher’s alternative conceptions of air and combustion, and the relationships among his alternative conceptions, his instructional representations and his students’ understanding of air and combustion. To accomplish the purpose, this study used the qualitative research approach for data collection and analysis. The data were collected through in-depth interviews, classroom observations, and open-ended comprehension tests. In addition, this study used the content analysis technique to find out the patterns of the teacher and his students’ alternative conceptions, and used the constant comparison method to discover the relationships among the teachers’ alternations, his instructional representations and his students’ understanding of air and combustion. The results of this study indicated that, firstly, the elementary science teacher held multiple alternative conceptions in different sub-topics of air and combustion, such as the definition of combustion, the role of oxygen in combustion, the nature of flame, and the products of combustion. Although the teacher’s alternative conceptions had been slightly changed along with his instructional experience, the changes were just fragmentary and could not help him achieve a comprehensive or “revolutionary” understanding of combustion. Secondly, the teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge was constructed mainly from his general pedagogical knowledge, but not from subject matter knowledge and knowledge of students. Therefore, he used only general pedagogical strategies for teaching science, mostly by going through the textbook via teacher-centered lectures. Accordingly, the teacher’s instructional representations were just like a series of oral and pictorial copies of the textbook, without any adjustment or revision to meet the students’ needs. Moreover, the teacher’s alternative conceptions might be conveyed through his instructional representations, and these representations might keep his students’ from acquiring scientifically accepted conceptions. Lastly, after finishing the lesson, the students’ understandings of air and combustion were mostly categorized into two alternative conceptions, “intuition” and “transmutation.” Given that the teacher himself had some “intuitive” alternative conceptions, he might not be able to identify his students’ intuitive conceptions as “alternative.” Consequently, he could not provide scaffolding for helping his students clarify or change their alternative conceptions. Based on these findings, some suggestions were provided for science teacher education and future studies.