合作論證教學對高中學生論證行為之影響

Abstract

近年來的研究顯示，社會性科學議題論證學習能增進學生的科學知識、促進學生對科學實務的理解；但學生常在論證過程中陷入「輸贏式爭辯」。因此，本研究設計強調合作論證之外顯教學以增進學習者之論證品質，並檢驗其對於學習者論證行為的影響。本研究受試者為高中學生共80名，研究者將受試者隨機分入實驗組、控制組中，並分別對實驗組學生施以「合作論證教學」、對照組學生則施以「傳統論證教學」，接著讓實驗組、控制組學生2人一組，於本研究開發之「線上同步合作論證平台」就「是否支持台灣用核能發電解決供電問題」議題進行進行50分鐘的線上同步論證活動。學生在線上同步合作論證平台中的發言皆被研究者記錄、分類、編碼，並以滯後序列分析技術分析其論證行為。研究結果顯示實驗組學生之論證行為與對照組學生相似。進一步將受試學生分為「高合作品質」以及「低合作品質」兩類，並比較不同合作品質組成之論證小組（高＋高合作品質、高＋低合作品質、低＋低合作品質）的論證行為，可以發現兩位高合作品質學生所組成之論證小組，在線上同步論證過程中會分享更多的知識、想法，並積極共同建構對議題的理解。最後亦對未來之研究方向提供建議。Recent research showed SSI-based argumentation learning activities may benefit learners in their scientific knowledge acquisition and understanding of scientific practice. However, previous research has revealed that learners usually tend to fall into debate-type win-lose situation during argumentation. To improve the quality of students’ argumentation, this study designed an explicit collaborative argumentation instruction and explored its effects on students’ argumentation pattern. A number of 80 high school students participated in this study and they were randomly assigned to the experimental group for “collaborative argumentation instruction” and the control group for “traditional argumentation instruction”. The two groups of students were assigned in dyads and were asked to propose their arguments for 50 minutes. The issue for argumentation in this study is the use of nuclear power for solving the power shortage problem in Taiwan synchronously on a self-developed collaborative argumentation platform. This study also assessed students’ perceived collaboration quality after argumentation. All the students’ arguments were analyzed qualitative and categorized into different categories. Then, argumentation patterns of the two groups of students were analyzed by using Lag-sequential Analysis. Results shows that the students in the experimental group showed similar argumentation patterns as those in the outperformed control group. Besides, this study also found that the dyads with higher perceived collaboration quality had more complex argumentation patterns in which students seemed to have better knowledge and idea sharing and co-construction during online collaborative argumentation process. The implications for future research and teaching practices were discussed.