高中科學教師「探究與實作」課程的教學概念與評量素養的系列研究

Abstract

本論文旨在調查高中科學教師對於「探究與實作」課程的教學概念、評量素養，及對於科學課程的評量素養現況。本文包含三個研究，研究一探討高中科學教師對於「探究與實作」課程的教學概念，包含課程特徵、挑戰與需求、課程目標與教學活動設計，並分析課程目標與活動設計的交互作用。研究二旨在調查高中科學教師的「探究與實作」課程之評量素養，並分析評量素養元素間的交互作用。在研究一、二也分別探索不同科目、年資及專業成長經驗的教師對於「探究與實作」課程的教學概念及評量素養分布。研究三則開發了科學評量素養問卷，並調查高中科學教師的評量素養現況、評量素養元素間的關係及背景因素的影響。由於研究二、三以Abell與Siegel (2011)的科學教師評量素養模型為基礎，二個研究都包含評量目的、內容、策略與行動。但研究二的評量行動聚焦於評量計分，研究三則加入教師對於教學與學習的概念。40位主要來自於北台灣的高中科學教師參與研究一、二，每科各10人，包含資淺、資深教師各3人及種子教師(即學科中心教師及課綱委員) 4人。這二個質性研究主要以半結構訪談收集資料，並混合資料導向及文獻導向的方式產生編碼架構。研究三為量化研究，採取二階段的分層隨機抽樣，最後得到322份北北基桃公立高中科學教師的有效問卷作為後續分析的基礎。研究一的結果顯示教師對於課程特徵的概念與課綱相符，但忽略科學探查的部分面向。教師雖然肯定課程的價值，但也提出不同層面的挑戰。最常見的挑戰是微觀因素，其次是巨觀及中觀因素。此外，教師賦予探究實作課程多樣化的目標，最常見的目標是提高學習動機、連接科學與生活及了解、執行科學探究等。對於不同的探究階段及活動，教師賦予其特定的教學目標，然而不論是教學目標或活動設計，都忽略分析、詮釋數據及論證與建模。教師設計的探究活動非常多元，包含一般及特定活動。而不同科目、年資、專業成長經驗的教師在探究教學概念上各具特色。在研究二中，教師對於探究實作課程的主要評量目的為形成性目的，總結性次之；其評量內容非常多元，其中「以探究作為結果」的內容比「以探究作為方法」的內容多。教師常用書寫、口語與觀察資料來判斷學生的表現，但較少使用實作模型；其計分標準反映了評量內容及資料類型的多樣化。教師的評量目的、內容及評量策略之間有交互作用，且不同背景因素的教師在評量素養上呈現部分差異。研究三確認了高中科學教師在各評量素養元素的CFA模型。受訪教師持有較強建構概念，最重視診斷性目的，另二種次之；在評量內容及判斷學生表現的資料類型上呈現出多元性。另外，建構概念比傳統概念更能正向預測教師的評量目的、及評量內容與行動的頻率。在背景因素部分，科目與年資在評量素養上的差異分布於不同的評量素養元素。最後，本文提出對應的建議與討論。The purposes of this dissertation were to explore teachers’ conceptions, assessment literacy about “Inquiry and Practice” and science assessment literacy. The series of studies consists of three studies. Study 1 explored teachers’ conceptions about the “Inquiry and Practice” curriculum, including its characteristics, challenges, teaching goals and activities and analyzed the interactions between teaching goals and activities. In study 2, teachers’ assessment literacy about the same curriculum and the interactions among the components of assessment literacy were explored. Furthermore, this dissertation analyzed the distribution of teaching concepts and assessment literacy of teachers with different subjects, teaching and professional development experience in study 1 and 2 respectively. In study 3, a science assessment literacy questionnaire was developed to investigate the science assessment literacy of high school teachers, and to analyze the interrelations among the components of assessment literacy and the effects resulting from background factors. Since study 2 and 3 were theoretically based on the model for science teacher assessment literacy developed by Abell and Siegel (2011), the components of assessment literacy in both studies were assessment purposes, competences assessed, assessment strategies and assessment actions. In Study 2, the assessment action focused on assessment scoring. In Study 3, the construct - conceptions about teaching and learning also included.Forty high school science teachers with relevant experience in inquiry teaching, mainly from northern Taiwan, participated in study 1 and 2. There were 10 teachers in each subject with 3 less-experienced, 3 experienced and 4 “seed” teachers (who were regularly involved in professional development activities). Data were collected from semi-structured interviews of teachers and their background questionnaires. The coding scheme was developed through both data-orienting and theory-orienting approaches. Study 3 used a two-stage stratified random sampling method to collect 322 valid questionnaires from public high school science teachers in four cities in northern Taiwan.Study 1 revealed that teachers’ conceptions of course characteristics were consistent with curriculum guidelines but they ignored some aspects of scientific investigations. Although recognizing the value of this curriculum, teachers also indicated challenges at different levels. The most common challenge were micro-level factors, followed by the macro-level ones. Besides, teachers set multiple goals for inquiry teaching and set specific goals in different phases or activities of inquiry. However, less attention was paid to analyzing and interpreting data, argumentation and modeling regardless of learning goals or activities. The inquiry activities designed by teachers were various, including general and specific activities. Moreover, teachers with different subjects, teaching and professional development experience have their own characteristics in conceptions of inquiry teaching. Study 2 found that the most mention purpose of assessment in inquiry teaching was formative purpose, followed by summative one. The competences assessed were very diverse, and the responces of “inquiry as ends” was more than that of “inquiry as means”. Teachers often use written, oral, and observational data to assess students' performance in science, but rarely use artifacts and models. Teachers' scoring criteria reflected the diversity of competences assessed and data types. Additionally, the noticeable interactions among assessment purpose, competences assessed and assessment strategies were presented. There were also some significant differences among the assessment literacy of teachers with different backgrounds. Study 3 confirmed the CFA models in components of assessment literacy. Teachers in study 3 hold constructivist learning conception, placed emphasis on diagnostic purposes, presented diversity in competences assessed and the types of data used to assess students' performance. Study 3 also identified that constructivist conceptions were more positive predictors of teachers’ assessment purposes, the frequency of assessing different competences and taking actions than traditional conceptions. The differences resulting from subjects and teaching experiences in assessment literacy were distributed in different assessment literacy components. Finally, some suggestions and discussions were provided.