地球科學系(含 海洋環境科技研究所)
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/59
本系設立的宗旨,首在養成學生具備地球科學五大學術領域–地質學、大氣科學、海洋科學、天文學和地球物理–充分之本職學能;本系的教育目標,則首重致力培養有志從事地球科學之專精人才,以培育優秀之地球科學研究人才和實務工作的專業人才為主軸,並以培養優良的中學地球科學師資為輔。特別是在國內各地球科學相關系所中,本系是唯一同時涵蓋五大地球科學研究領域,並擁有師範大學在科學教育專業基礎的高等學術機構,此為本系之特色。若志在從事中等學校地科教學,本系亦可提供地科教學知能和教育專業知識,充分培育健全之地球科學師資。
在課程上,為營造更優質的學習與研究環境,本系已適度調整原以師資培育目標為主的舊有課程架構,整合各地球科學次領域之基礎課程,降低本系必、選修課程之比例,大幅減少各次領域之必修課程學分,以增加學生在各次領域課程選修之自由度及彈性,進而充分落實各次領域之專業進階課程。此外本系並積極鼓勵學生,實際參與實驗、撰寫論文、從事專題計畫研究等,以豐富其研究經驗,訓練學生使其具備獨立研究之精神與能力。經由選修本系提供之更多進階專業課程,進而厚植學生之理論基礎、充實其專業背景,並強化其選定目標次領域之學術養成和專業訓練;連同充足的研究經驗,本系學生的未來發展,將更具時代性與面對挑戰時的競爭力,進一步達到「博而精、廣而深」的終極目標。近來本系更積極增聘優秀外籍專任師資,以全英語教學方式授課,期能增加學生之國際觀與國際競爭力。
本系在碩、博士班研究所的教育上,採一系多所之架構,除地球科學研究所外,還包括海洋環境科技研究所。本系研究所的研究重點與發展方向,首在地球科學各領域之深耕與研究發展,並加強各次領域間之跨學門合作,以進一步提升本系之學術研究及國際化,並為本系學生的訓練和學習,提供全面全方位的考量,以訓練學生從容面對多變的世界,因應未來的挑戰。
News
Browse
Search Results
Item 以巢狀概念模式探究高中生之科學學習–科學認識觀、後設認知知覺、科學學習概念及其科學評量概念(2009) 李旻憲; Min-Hsien LeeThe purpose of this study was to deeply investigate students’ nested ecology regarding science learning from multidimensional perspectives (i.e., the interrelations among scientific epistemological beliefs, metacognition, conceptions of learning science, and conceptions of science assessment). To this end, this study performed the quantitative method to initially explore the interrelations among scientific epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness, and conceptions of learning science. Then, the qualitative method was conducted to deeply investigate the interplays among scientific epistemological beliefs, conceptions of learning science, and conceptions of science assessment and to clarify the nested ecology model. In addition, the role of metacognitive awareness on scientific epistemological beliefs and conceptions of learning science and science assessment were discussed through both quantitative and qualitative results. The quantitative part of the study was conducted with a sampling pool of 240 tenth graders. And, those students’ responses from three questionnaires were used to yield some quantitative indicators (i.e., scientific epistemological beliefs, metacognitive awareness, and conceptions of learning science) and to clarify the interplay between those variables. In general, the quantitative results revealed that students having more sophisticated scientific epistemological beliefs tended to show higher metacognitive awareness while learning science and to express more constructivist-oriented conceptions of learning science. In particular, as long as the students have more sophisticated beliefs about the justification of knowledge; they may tend to express much higher metacognitive awareness and to embrace the constructivist conceptions of learning science. For qualitative part of study, 60 representative students selected from the sampling pool were deeply interviewed about their scientific epistemological beliefs (including beliefs about the nature of knowledge and beliefs about the nature of knowing), conceptions of learning science, and conceptions of science assessment. This study found that most selected students expressed the empiricist beliefs about the nature of knowledge. Through the phenomenographic analyze of selected students’ interview responses, seven categories of conceptions of learning science (i.e., memorizing, preparing for tests, practicing the experiments, the increase of knowledge, applying, understanding, and seeing in a new way) and six categories of conceptions of science assessment (i.e., reproducing knowledge, rehearsing, revealing the learning status, improving learning, applying, and the justification of knowledge) were identified in this study. Moreover, the qualitative results seemed to reveal that, on the one hand, the selected students’ beliefs about the nature of knowing seemed to have greater power to explain students’ conceptions of learning science than their beliefs about the nature of knowledge. On the other hand, their beliefs about the nature of knowledge seemed to more relate to their conceptions of science assessment. This study also implied that students expressing more mature conceptions of learning science tended to hold more cohesive conceptions of science assessment. Furthermore, the qualitative part of this study identified three major forms of students’ nested ecology regarding learning science, that is the complete, partial, and divergent nested ecology. In particular, nearly half of 60 representative students were categorized as the complete nested ecology.Item 高一地球科學教室學習環境之初探(2004) 李旻憲; Min-Hsien LeeThe chief purpose of this study is to explore the classroom learning environment (LE) at secondary school, includes students’ preference toward classroom LE which focusing on students’ viewpoints (perceptions and fitness) and specifically dealing with student-centred and teacher-centred orientation by an alternative, transverse or macrocosmic standpoint. A pre-test post-test survey design involving 1,234 students from 34 classes enrolled in a compulsory earth science course at 14 schools was adopted. Each student responded to the earth science classroom learning environment instrument (ESCLEI) and completed the earth science learning outcomes questionnaire (ESLOQ) in summer semester from September 2003 to February 2004. We used a class as the unit of analysis in this study. The results showed that students’ preferred and perceived (actual) classroom LEs are much more oriented toward teacher-centred setting then toward the student-centred setting in both pre- and post-test, in spite of the preferred classroom LEs revealed by students’ responses on both subscales are quite similar to each other. The classroom LEs settings are chiefly teacher-centred oriented, although students were also fond of the student-centred settings and it still had a certain extent gap between their preferred and actual (perceived) classroom LEs. Students’ preferred classroom LEs on both subscales tend to regress when they were taught during a semester and their perceived (actual) classroom LEs on teacher-centred orientation have a similar outcome. It is worthy noted that students perceived (actual) much more student-centred oriented classroom LE when they were taught during a semester. Moreover, students’ person-LE fitness (PEF) on both subscales tend to regression when they were taught during a semester, especially in student-center. Results form the simple correlation (r) revealed that there were some positive relationship between classroom climate vector in student-center (CVS) and the diversities of leaning outcomes (i.e. attitude and achievement), and were no significant relationship between CVT and the diversities of learning outcomes. It seem to indicate that the diversities of learning outcomes were tended to increase which if teacher didn’t fitted for students’ perceptions on student-centred orientations in light of current study. Overall, this study revealed the present structure of classroom LE at the secondary school earth science classroom, and it also revealed students’ perceptions and the fitness in classroom LE. Principals and supervisors may use it to help teacher improve their classroom environments. It is noted, however, that there were some relationships between CV and diversity of learning outcomes; it still needed some further investigations to interpret the data given form present study.