運用數位論證模式提升學生論證與PISA科學能力之研究

Abstract

運用數位論證模式提升學生論證與 PISA 科學能力之研究 研究生：楊文宗 指導教授：佘曉清 博士 國立交通大學教育研究所碩士班 摘 要 本研究結合數位論證學習的網路環境，針對國中二年級自然與生活科技的理化課程內容，設計小組論證教學模式與個人論證教學模式學習形成科學議題課程，進行實驗比較，期望提升學生PISA科學能力。本研究針對之PISA科學能力包括形成科學議題、解釋科學現象與科學舉證能力。 研究實驗採用實驗研究法之準實驗設計，研究對象為常態分班的國中二年級學生四個班，其中兩個班個人論證為58人，兩個班小組論證60人。兩個組進行論證結合六個主題PISA科學能力的課程，個人論證以數位網路論證介面進行個人論證模式的PISA科學能力學習課程，小組論證以數位網路論證介面進行小組論證模式的PISA科學能力學習課程，比較兩組在理化主題相依二階概念測驗、理化主題相依科學能力測驗和理化主題相依論證能力測驗三個測驗之前測、後測的差異，同時針對兩組的學習歷程進行分析，深入了解學生PISA之科學能力成長比較。 結果顯示，不同數位論證教學模式均能提升學生科學概念的建構和PISA科學能力，但兩組在科學概念建構與科學能力上並未達顯著差異。而理化主題相依論證能力測驗上，不論哪一種數位論證教學模式均能提升學生的論證能力，兩種教學模式在學生科學論證的能力達顯著差異，個人論證教學模式較小組論證教學模式佳。在迴歸分析中發現理化主題相依二階概念後測成績對理化主題相依科學能力後測成績最具解釋力，其次是理化主題相依科學論證後測成績。 其次在數位論證學習歷程方面，顯示科學能力總分上，兩種數位論證的教學模式隨著單元的學習有顯著進步的趨勢，即兩種教學模式對於學生科學能力的學習成效相當，但兩種教學未達顯著。在科學論證總次數上，兩種數位論證教學模式在各單元學習課程中Level 1(概念正確且論證要素部分完整)與Level 2(概念正確且論證要素是完整)的論證總次數表現上的確有差異，個人論證總次數表現比小組論證好。同時在Level 2論證次數的表現上有顯著差異也受教學模式影響。在論證歷程中論證各要素宣稱(C)、依據(W)、支持(B)、反駁(R)，兩組在Level 2論證次數的表現上有顯著差異也受教學模式影響，即個人論證比小組論證表現佳。 本研究顯示，不同數位論證教學模式可提升中學生PISA科學能力，包括形成科學議題、解釋科學現象與科學舉證能力，同時可提升科學概念的建構與論證之能力，同時發現個人論證在論證能力上的提升不論在品質與次數上均顯著優於小組論證。

關鍵字：PISA科學能力、科學論證、網路化學習

Promote students’ argumentation ability and PISA scientific competencies through the use of digital scientific argumentation

Student：Wen-Tsung Yang Advisor：Hsiao-Ching She, Ph.D National Chiao Tung University, Institute of Education Abstract This study aims to to examine the difference in effectiveness between two digital scientific argumentation programs – one with an group argumentation component and one with an self-argumentation component – on 8th students’ physical science argumentation ability and PISA scientific competencies. A quasi-experimental design was used in this study. Two classes of 8th grade students received the on-line group argumentation learning program involving physical science concepts, and the other two classes of 8th grade students received the same on-line self-argumentation learning program, for six weeks. All 118 students were administered the physical science concepts test, physical science concept dependent formulating scientific issue test, and physical science dependent argumentation test before and one week after learning. In addition, both group students’ on-line argumentation, formulating scientific issue process was collected. Results showed that the students of both groups made progress from pre- to post-test on their physical science concepts, physical science concept dependent formulating scientific issue test, and physical science dependent argumentation test. Only the physical science dependent argumentation test shows the significant difference between two on-line argumentation groups. The self-argumentation group significantly outperform than to the group-argumentation group on their argumentation ability. Regression results indicated that hold of physical scientific conceptions is the best predicator for students’ ability of PISA scientific competencies, followed by argumentation ability. The quantity and quality of on-line physical scientific arguments that students generated in a series of argumentation questions improved across the six topics, and the self-argumentation group’s students outperform than to the group-argumentation students. The qualitative results of on-line PISA scientific competencies were equally perform for both groups. This clearly demonstrates that students’ argumentation ability and PISA scientific competencies were both facilitated through receiving either self or group on-line Synchronous Argumentation physical science learning program. More important, the student’s argumentation ability significantly performs better while self-digital argumentation was used, regardless of the quantitative or qualitative data.

Keywords: PISA scientific competencies, scientific proof, network learning