電腦模擬用於評量可能導致的差異—從高中生的科學認識觀與性別來探討
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2007
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
本研究從高中學生的科學認識觀（Scientific Epistemological Views）與性別差異這兩個角度，探討使用電腦模擬進行評量可能導致的差異。受試者來自北、中區五所學校，共583位高二以上的自然組學生。研究使用Tsai& Liu所研發之「多向度科學認識觀問卷」，以五個向度測量學生的科學認識觀，並以「建構主義」和「實徵主義」對科學知識的看法，來描述不同的觀點。本研究發現，高中自然組學生的科學認識觀頗為一致，平均傾向建構觀點，男女生觀點並無差異。
另外本研究設計「一維直線運動線上測驗（ODMOT）」用以評量學生之物理成就表現，此測驗中包含兩種不同試題形式，分別是以文字或靜態圖表呈現的「傳統試題」和以電腦模擬呈現、可供操作的「模擬試題」。研究發現，男生在傳統、模擬試題上的平均得分均高於女生，但當以總分為根據將學生再區分高、中、低三組來比較男女差異，則兩性的得分差異消失，此結果顯示男女生都有能力拿到相同的高分，也可能得到相同的低分；而男女生在這兩種試題形式上的得分差異，其實是來自於人數分佈比例，本研究發現男生本身在高分組的人數分佈比例比低分組高出許多，而女生則是相反狀況。
本研究將科學認識觀問卷分別依照總分與各向度的得分，把前15%的學生歸類為「建構組」，分數後15％為「實徵組」，用以比較科學認識觀和ODMOT的結果。研究發現，這兩組學生在ODMOT的得分幾乎沒有差異；但若比較兩組中男女學生的表現，可發現「實徵組」比「建構組」被檢查出較多的性別差異，並且差異較多表現在「模擬試題」部分，亦即非傳統的「模擬試題」比較容易檢查出性別差異。另外以不同答題型態將ODMOT區別成「概念答題」、「圖表答題」和「計算答題」三種，本研究發現男生在「圖表答題」與「計算答題」（屬於較高階的題目）的分數高過女生，並且也是「實徵組」的男女生被檢查出的差異次數比「建構組」多。
本研究針對使用電腦模擬無法評量出「建構組」與「實徵組」的學習差異作討論，期待日後的研究者可繼續嘗試搭配電腦模擬，發展不限時、需要反思、統整能力的評量方式，進一步評量學生的高階能力，也使建構組的學生能夠展現其特質及學習成效。接著提出若學生的科學認識觀為建構觀點，則可能因此改善男女生在科學成就上的差異；因此建議物理教師在課堂中，使用合適的教學活動（如小組討論）與教學內容（如科學史哲），培養建構的科學認識觀點，藉此拉近男女生之間的差異。
Computer simulations have been used as science teaching or a learning tool. This study is interested in using computer simulations as an assessment tool. We tried to relate the outcome to students’ scientific epistemological views (SEVs), gender difference. There were 583 eleventh or twelfth graders who are interested in the nature science related field joining the study. A multi-dimensions questionnaire, in five dimensions and 35 items, developed by Tsai& Liu was used to assess students’ SEVs. An “one-dimension motion online test (ODMOT)” was developed to assess students’ physical performance. There are two different types of questions (traditional questions and simulation questions) in ODMOT. Traditional questions were text-based which might include some static diagrams. Simulation questions require students to do operation on the computer screen to answer those questions. On average, we found boys gaining higher scores than girls. However, ifwe sub-divided boys and girls into higher, middle and lower score groups. There were no gender differences in each of those sub-groups. It indicated that girls as well as boys are capable of getting the same high score or low score. However, there were higher percentage of boys in the higher-score group, less percentage of girls in the lower-score group, and the percentage of the middle-score group was almost the same for both boys and girls. It is the distribution of boys and girls in different grade group that creates the gender differences. Students were categorized into three groups based on their total scores of all SEV subscales. Students who scored top 15% could be viewed as a “constructivist-oriented group”. Students who could be viewed as a relatively “positivist-aligned group”, had the bottom 15% scores, others were labeled as “average group”. We compared the ODMOT score between “constructivist-oriented group” and “positivist-aligned group”. There is no significant difference in ODMOT scores for students with different SEVs. However, there are gender differences among positivist-aligned group students, especially for scores belonging to simulation questions. ODMOT questions were divided into conceptual, diagram and computational types. We found, boys do better than girls both in diagram and computational questions (higher-level questions). For students in positivist-aligned group, the gender difference becomes even larger. For students with constructivist-oriented orientations, there are less gender differences. We suggest science teachers could develop appropriate pedagogy (e.g. group discuss) or instruction (e.g. introduce history and philosophy of science) to improve the SEVs of students, in order to reduce the gender difference.
Computer simulations have been used as science teaching or a learning tool. This study is interested in using computer simulations as an assessment tool. We tried to relate the outcome to students’ scientific epistemological views (SEVs), gender difference. There were 583 eleventh or twelfth graders who are interested in the nature science related field joining the study. A multi-dimensions questionnaire, in five dimensions and 35 items, developed by Tsai& Liu was used to assess students’ SEVs. An “one-dimension motion online test (ODMOT)” was developed to assess students’ physical performance. There are two different types of questions (traditional questions and simulation questions) in ODMOT. Traditional questions were text-based which might include some static diagrams. Simulation questions require students to do operation on the computer screen to answer those questions. On average, we found boys gaining higher scores than girls. However, ifwe sub-divided boys and girls into higher, middle and lower score groups. There were no gender differences in each of those sub-groups. It indicated that girls as well as boys are capable of getting the same high score or low score. However, there were higher percentage of boys in the higher-score group, less percentage of girls in the lower-score group, and the percentage of the middle-score group was almost the same for both boys and girls. It is the distribution of boys and girls in different grade group that creates the gender differences. Students were categorized into three groups based on their total scores of all SEV subscales. Students who scored top 15% could be viewed as a “constructivist-oriented group”. Students who could be viewed as a relatively “positivist-aligned group”, had the bottom 15% scores, others were labeled as “average group”. We compared the ODMOT score between “constructivist-oriented group” and “positivist-aligned group”. There is no significant difference in ODMOT scores for students with different SEVs. However, there are gender differences among positivist-aligned group students, especially for scores belonging to simulation questions. ODMOT questions were divided into conceptual, diagram and computational types. We found, boys do better than girls both in diagram and computational questions (higher-level questions). For students in positivist-aligned group, the gender difference becomes even larger. For students with constructivist-oriented orientations, there are less gender differences. We suggest science teachers could develop appropriate pedagogy (e.g. group discuss) or instruction (e.g. introduce history and philosophy of science) to improve the SEVs of students, in order to reduce the gender difference.
Description
Keywords
電腦模擬, 科學認識觀, 性別差異, 高中自然組, 物理評量, computer simulations, scientific epistemological views, gender difference, physical assessment