一位高中化學教師使用建模本位教材的教學歷程之個案研究 ─ 以電化學概念之教學為例

Abstract

本研究為探討一位高中化學教師使用建模本位教材的教學歷程之個案研究─ 以電化學概念之教學為例。以具有科學教育背景的高中化學教師為研究對象，以此教師的四個班級進行教學，分別為建模與模擬組、建模與操作組、一般與模擬組、一般與操作組，以建模教學與一般教學的教學策略，對學生進行電化學概念的教學。從中探討此教師在建模教學的教學歷程中，教師的建模學科教學知識、與其發展的動態過程、以及建模教學與一般教學的學科教學知識之比較，過程將輔以一般教學進行比較。 使用「教學前中後教師晤談問卷」、「教學記錄表」、「學生學習信心/興趣量表與問卷」，在整個教學歷程中進行研究。透過教師、學生、整個情境的各個因素與面向間彼此的交互作用，來探討教師的建模學科教學知識；透過教學推理的理解、轉換、教學、評量、反省、新的理解六個過程，來探討教師的建模學科教學知識發展的動態過程；並以SWOT分析建模教學與一般教學的學科教學知識之比較，輔以學生的情意結果對照比較。 本研究結果，教師的建模學科教學知識與其發展的動態過程，提供一個重要的建模學科教學知識 (M-PCK) 發展範例，教師對於建模教學擁有一定的理論基礎與教學經驗，實踐過程以明確外顯式的建模歷程，配合模型與建模觀點的語言解釋、建模文本、建模教學PPT、開放式Q&A、系統性板書、次微觀影片、與開放性紙筆測驗等呈現，完整進行建模教學，凸顯建模教學的特色。本研究也提出未來建模教學在實踐推廣的建議與方向，期許讓教學與學習，能達到更好的進展。

The purpose of this study was to investigate how a high school chemistry teacher adopting modeling–based instruction for teaching electrochemistry. The teacher with science education background taught electrochemistry to four classes, two modeling groups (one with modeling and simulation, and the other with modeling and hands-on experiment), and two comparative groups without explicit modeling processes (one with modeling and simulation, and the other with modeling and hands-on experiment). The teacher’s modeling pedagogical content knowledge (M-PCK) was investigated and comparisons of the differences of M-PCK among four groups were analyzed. Three instruments were used, namely, questionnaire (pre, mid, and post), "teaching record table", and “questionnaires for students’ confidence and interest in learning”. The design of these instruments was to capture teacher’s concept of modeling-based teaching, interaction between the teacher and the students, and the processes of instruction. The elements for the processes to be analyzed were pedagogical reasoning, comprehension, transformation, instruction, evaluation, reflection and new comprehension. Finally, using SWOT analysis was applied to compare Modeling Teaching and general teaching, combined with the results of the students' affection. The results of this study revealed that the teacher developed her modeling-based teaching knowledge and practice dynamically and gradually. The teacher's teaching model has theoretical basis and herself with teaching experience. The modeling-based instruction provided explicit explanations about the modeling processes, modeling-based text, modeling teaching materials (e.g. PPT), an open-ended Q& A, systematic writing on the blackboard, video clips of sub-microscopic representations, paper and pencil tests, highlighting the characteristics of modeling teaching. In sum, recommendations and implications about implementation of modeling-based instruction in practice are discussed.