運用眼動儀探討大一文理組學生科學素養線上測驗之認知歷程研究

Abstract

本研究旨在探討不同學科背景（文、理）的大學生，在科學素養線上測驗表現有何差異，並探討其科學素養能力表現與眼動歷程之間的關係，此線上測驗可分為三大題型:「辨識科學問題」、「解釋科學現象」、「科學舉證」。此外，研究者也探討「後設認知介入」對學生「科學舉證」表現上的影響。研究對象為北部大學80位一年級學生（文組41人，理組39人），兩組學生皆參與此線上測驗，在測驗過程中，研究者利用「眼動儀」去紀錄學生認知歷程的資料。並在測驗結束後，運用後設認知介入，即給予學生機會去重新檢視在科學舉證題型上，自己作答的眼動歷程記錄，並修改答案。 研究結果顯示，理組學生在三種題型上的學習表現，皆顯著優於文組學生。在科學舉證題型中，經過後設認知的介入，文組與理組的學習表現皆有顯著進步。而在後設認知介入前，理組學生對於作答科學舉證題型的信心程度顯著高於文組學生。由眼動資料顯示理組學生因為花較多時間做深入處理關鍵頁面，以至於有較佳的表現。 眼動資料顯示，文組與理組學生，在後設認知介入後，因為在關鍵區花了較多時間做了更深入的處理，以致在科學舉證題型上，能有顯著的進步表現。而文組與理組學生表現持平，是由於未能針對重要關鍵區去做深入處理。研究證明後設認知的介入，會使文組與理組學生在科學舉證題型上表現進步，為其能有效判別搜尋與整合關鍵訊息，瞭解自己原本未注意的重要關鍵訊息，然後進行監控與自我調節學習，進而提升自己的學習表現。

The purpose of this study was to explore the performance of undergraduate students in two groups (Non-science group: 41 students had a non-science major; Science group: 39 students had a science major) in an online scientific literacy assessment, and collect their eye movement during the process. This assessment consisted of three aspects: (1) identifying scientific questions, (2) explaining scientific phenomena, and (3) using scientific evidence. In addition, the researcher explored the effects of metacognitive intervention on students' performance in using scientific evidence which allowed students to re-examine their eye movement records and modify their previous answers in “using scientific evidence”. The results showed the students in the Science group performed significantly better than their peers in the Non-science group on the all three aspects of the assessment. It also indicated the metacognitive intervention could significantly improve students’ abilities of “using scientific evidence” in both groups. Before the metacognitive intervention, the Science group students had a higher level of self-confidence than their peers in using scientific evidence. The analysis of the eye movement data further showed the Science group had allocated greater attention and deeper processing on critical Web pages, therefore, they significantly outperformed than to the Non-science group on their use of scientific evidence.