高中科學教師參與學習共同體共同備課社群之運作與成效之個案研究

Abstract

本研究目的在探討高中科學教師參與學習共同體共同備課社群的過程，所促發的教師專業成長。本研究採個案研究方法，以學習共同體著重學生學習參與歷程的理念，針對一個共同備課社群、其中的一位個案教師與其學生作為三層次的分析單位，由此展現並詮釋此專業學習社群中的一位教師參與共同備課的教學歷程變化。研究資料包含質性與量化兩部分，結合分析參與觀察紀錄、會議記錄與訪談資料，並探討個案教師的學生在Lawson的科學推理測驗、成就測驗及參與態度問卷結果的關聯性，剖析出個案教師參與學習共同體共同備課社群過程中，專業成長的全貌。

研究結果顯示，參與社群的教師以學習者學習需求為核心而進行課程重組與設計，增能教師對於課程架構、佈題策略、學科知識與實踐科學探究的教師專業；學生於科學推理、成就測驗及學習共同體課程參與的態度三者間的表現並無顯著相關，但因學習共同體的討論課程而能培養學生對科學學習及能力的養成，而教師參酌學生學習表現並以此作為教學調整的依據，反思教學並規劃自己的學習共同體教學。依據研究結果，研究者建議，在教學層面上，科學教師參與學習共同體共同備課過程時，應在備課、觀課或議課階段，更重視學生回饋而做教學專業的判斷，進行教學調整的依據；在研究層面上，後續可進行多重個案的研究，透過跨個案的比較，了解共同備課情境對於不同教師的影響，深入探討教師專業成長及學生科學素養提升情形。

This study attempts to explore a senior high school science teacher’s professional development (PD) in a professional learning community (PLC). This study applies cases study method to explore high school science teachers’ reflective capacity in the PLC by multiple sources of evidence from the teachers and students. Teachers’ notions of learning community (LC), as well as the association among students’ achievement, scientific reasoning and attitude to student learning community (SLC) were investigated to depict the case teacher’s growth. Documents, in-depth interviews, and instructional artefacts from one expert biology teacher were collected and analyzed by a modified theory-based coding scheme; moreover, students’ responses to the Lawson’ s scientific reasoning test, questionnaire of attitudes, and achievement were also analyzed by ANCOVA and correlation. The teacher and students were then interviewed to correspond to their thoughts and actions.

The results indicate that teachers are empowered to curriculum framework, questioning, content knowledge and science inquiry instruction by curriculum co-planning in PLC. There are no relationships among students’ sceinctific reasoning, achievement, and attitudes, but students involving in SLC could better engage in science learning and cultivate abilities by receiving feedbacks. Besides, the teacher will get reflective thinking to LC instruction and adajust the curriculum design of LC according to students’ performance. We suggest that teachers adajust instruction by students’ feedbacks during co-planning process in PLC, and further investigate teachers’ professional development and students’ science literacy by multiple case studies.