淡出與持續架構式數位論證生物學習研究

Abstract

本研究以論證理論為研究設計的主軸，設計淡出架構論證及持續架構論證兩種教學模式。期望探討線上淡出架構論證與持續架構論證教學模式，對學生在理論性概念與假設性概念論證之生物概念的學習成效與論證能力的影響。 研究採準實驗設計法，研究設計將常態分班之四班國二學生分為兩組，分別進行淡出架構論證教學模式61人與持續架構論證教學模式63人。兩組進行為期八周的線上生物論證學習，這兩組同時進行生物的理論性概念及假設性概念的論證。生物理論性概念包括生殖與遺傳、光合作用與呼吸作用，生物假設性概念包括演化及生態，共計四個單元。比較兩組學生在理論性及假設性生物概念測驗、生物二階層概念測驗及生物主題相依論證測驗，同時收集學生線上論證歷程，並進行質性分析。 結果顯示兩組學習模式在生物概念測驗及生物二階層概念測驗後測結果上，並無顯著差異，但是在延宕測驗中，淡出架構論證表現高於持續架構論證組並達顯著差異，顯示淡出架構論證概念有較好的保留結果。在生物主題相依論證測驗中，顯示學生的科學概念及科學論證能力表現，均是假設性概念顯著優於理論性概念。而線上論證的歷程中，顯示持續架構論證組較淡出架構論證組產生較多的正確科學概念。在假設性概念中，無論是持續架構論證或是淡出架構論證，皆產生較多的正確概念。此外，持續架構論證組產生論證要素中的依據、支持、反駁的次數皆顯著優於淡出架構論證組，而不論哪一組在假設性概念中產生的論證次數也較理論性概念多。在假設性概念中，除了論證要素中的宣稱，持續架構論證組會比淡出架構論證組產生較多的論點。在持續架構論證組中，學生在假設性概念會比理論性概念產生較多的論述。在淡出架構論證組中，學生會在理論性概念中產生比假設性概念較多的依據和反駁論述。

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of fade-out and prolonged structural argumentation-based digital biology teaching on 8th grade students learning outcomes. It includes students’ biological concept learning performance and biological content dependent argumentation ability involving these theoretical and hypothetical biology concepts. The quasi-experiment design was adopted in this study. There are four classes of 8th grade students participated in this study. Two classes were randomly assigned into prolonged structural argumentation component (63 students), while the others were assigned into fade-out structural argumentation component (61 students).All student were received argumentation-based biological digital learning lessons involving theoretical and hypothetical biology concepts for eight weeks. Two units of theoretical biology concepts include reproduction and genetic、photosynthesis and respiration, and the other two units of hypothetical biology concepts include evolution and ecology concepts. Both groups were administered a pre- and post- biology conceptual test and two-tier test and a biology content-dependent argumentation ability test. In addition , the qualitative data of the students online learning progresses for biology conceptions , argumentation ability, argumentation content and frequency were also collected. Results showed that is no significance difference was observed between two groups in their post-test of biology conceptual achievement and two-tier test; however, the fade-out structural argumentation group outperformed in the retention test of biology conceptual achievement and two-tier test. For biology-dependent argumentation ability test, it dedicated that student’s scientific concept and scientific argumentation ability significantly performed better in hypothetical concepts than to the theoretical concepts. The result of online argumentation process shows that prolonged structural argumentation group produced more correct scientific concepts than to the fadeout group. For the hypothetical concepts, it was found that students produced more correct concepts regardless prolong or fade-out learning. On the other hand, prolonged structural argumentation group generated significantly greater amount of arguments of warrant, backing and rebuttal than to the fade-out group. In addition, students produced more arguments while involves with hypothetical concepts than to the theoretical concepts. For hypothetical concepts, the prolonged argumentation group students generated greater amount of arguments except claim than to the fade-out group. For the prolonged group, students generated more arguments while involves with hypothetical than to the theoretical concepts. For the fade-out group, students generated greater amount of warrant and rebuttal while involves with theoretical concepts than to the hypothetical concepts.