科學探究式課程著重於引導學生發現問題並培養學生解決問題的能力，是十二年國教自然科學領域所著墨的教育重點。本研究旨於探討科學社團探究式教學對學生探究能力培養的成效，以及探討探究式教學對學生科學學習動機的影響。
研究對象為新北市某國中一、二年級學生共58名，實施為期16週的科學社團探究式課程。學生在教學實驗前後填寫「探究能力問卷」、「學生科學學習動機量表」和「開放式問卷」；研究者使用「教師評定學生探究能力檢核表」檢核學生每週上課學習單。綜合量化與質性資料評估學生探究能力與學習動機的變化情形。
研究結果顯示，大部分的學生會選擇參加科學社團是因為社團有動手操作實驗的機會，也有部分學生覺得科學很有趣才選填此社團。學生喜歡科學實驗，但是對於想要成為科學家或從事科學相關工作的意願非常低。七年級學生在上課之前對「科學」幾乎沒有概念，但是在課程結束後已形成初步慨念，認為科學是實驗、是大自然定理；而八年級學生在上課前已經知道科學是實驗、是大自然定理，課程結束後認為科學是研究大自然的工具也是解決問題的方法。無論是七年級或八年級學生，在課程前對於「科學方法」幾乎沒有概念，課程後則有顯著的改變。
本研究好奇科學社團探究式教學對學生探究能力的影響，以「探究能力問卷」檢測探究能力的改變情形。結果顯示學生在「觀察與紀錄」、「收集資料」、「比較與分類」和「研判與推理」方面有明顯進步，而「歸納與統整」和「傳達」方面則有顯著進步，也就是說科學社團探究式教學對於學生在統整科學知識與表達溝通上是有明顯幫助的。
以「學生科學學習動機量表」檢測科學社團探究式教學對學生科學學習動機的影響。結果顯示，除「學習環境誘因」分數降低之外，其餘分數皆有明顯增加，其中「成就目標」達顯著差異。也就是說，雖然學生在學習過程中感受到來自於教師的壓力，但是在科學活動當中，學生能藉由對於學習任務的挑戰來滿足自己的成就感。
在學生探究能力評估部分，以「教師評定學生探究能力檢核表」檢核學生「科學探究學習單」內容以了解學生探究能力的改變情形。研究結果如下：在「探究問題的形成」部分，隨著探究課程課堂數的增加，學生形成探究問題的能力也逐漸增加，雖然在前兩次探究課程沒有看出顯著改變，但是在課程結束時已有顯著進步。學生在「探究實驗的設計」上，能力隨著探究課程課堂數的增加逐漸增加，雖然在前三次的課程沒有顯著改變，但是能力逐漸提升，一直要到最後一次的課程，學生的實驗設計能力才有顯著提升。而學生在「數據的蒐集與呈現」和「分析與詮釋結果」的能力有顯著的進步。
綜上所述，我們可以說科學社團能有效提升學生的科學學習動機及探究能力。科學社團提供學生更多探究與實作的機會，學生有機會在課程中學習以科學家的方式探索世界。

Inquiry-based instruction has potential to enhance students’ competencies in clarifying and solving problems. The aims of this mixed method study were to examine the effectiveness of applying inquiry-based instruction into an extra-curricular science club, and discuss the impacts on students' science inquiry skills and on students' motivation in learning science.
Fifty-eight seventh and eighth graders participated in this study. The teaching intervention lasted for 16 weeks. Students practiced basic and advanced inquiry skills, and designed to explore local science issues through a series of guided group investigations and discussions. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected. Data sources included pre- and post- tests from the Inquiry Ability Questionnaire (IAQ) (Wang, 2004), the Students' Motivation Towards Science Learning (SMTSL) (Tuan, Chin & Shieh, 2005) and responses on an open-ended questionnaire. Students’ learning sheets were coded by applying the Teaching and Learning to Standards in Science (Oregon Department of Education, 2002), in which, scientific inquiry abilities were conceptualized as posing questions, planning experimenting, collecting and analyzing data, interpretation data, and conclusions.
The results indicate that most students participated in the science club due to the opportunities of experiments, and some students joined because of the interests in science. They like science experiments, but the aspirations in becoming scientists or working in science were compared lower. The conceptions in science were not formed among seventh graders before science courses, but did eighth graders. After science courses, seventh graders conceptualized science as experiments and theorems of nature, moreover, eighth graders considered science as the principle methods in order to inquire the nature and solve the relative problems. No matter whether it was seventh graders or eighth graders, lacking the concepts of scientific methods amid both at the beginning but significantly increased after.
This study is curious how inquiry-based instructions in an extra-curricular science club impact on students' inquiry abilities. The results show that the aspects of induction, integration and communication had made significant progress, that was to say, the inquiry-based instructions were obviously helpful for students to integrate and express scientific knowledge.
Students' motivations in learning science were identified by the Student Motivation Toward Science Learning. The results shown that except the Learning Environment Stimulation the rest scores had rose, furthermore, the score of Achievement Goal had a significant increase. Which is mean although students felt pressure from teacher during the learning process but it was turning to satisfy accomplishment by challenging the science tasks.
The science learning sheets were coded by applying the Teaching and Learning to Standards in Science in order to understand the inquiry abilities of students. The analysis results indicate that the ability of students in posing questions, planning experimenting, collecting and analyzing data, interpretation data, and conclusions were significantly improved.
Combining the findings from analyzing the students’ artifacts and free responses in the open-ended questionnaire, we concluded in this study, the science club can provide students more opportunities to learn the ways how scientists explore the world.

一、中文部分
丁素雯 (2008)。以探究式教學提升學生探究能力與學習動機之行動研究。(碩士)，彰化師範大學，彰化。
毛松霖、張菊秀 (1997)。「探究式教學法」與「講述式教學法」對於國中學生地球科學「氣象」單元學習成效之比較科學教育學刊，5(4)，461-497。
王美芬、熊召弟 (1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北市：心理出版社。
王敏祝 (2004)。以探究導向教學提昇國中學生學習成效之研究—以「光學」單元為例。(碩士)，國立彰化師範大學，彰化。
白佩宜、許瑛玿 (2011)。探討不同探究式教學法對高一生科學探究能力與學習環境觀感之影響。課程與教學季刊14(3)，123-156。
吳百興、張耀云、吳心楷 (2010)。科學探究活動中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊，56，53-74。
洪振芳、賴羿蓉 (1997)。教師對以邏輯實證與後邏輯實證主義科學哲學觀建構之電化電池發展史教材的認識與抉擇。科學教育月刊，5(3) 347-390。
張文哲 (2013)。教育心理學：理論與實際。學富文化。
張惠博 (1993)。邁向科學探究的實驗教學。教師天地，62，12-19。
張靜儀 (1995)。自然科學探究教學法。屏師科學教育，1，36-45。
教育部 (2000)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要自然與生活科技學習領域。台北。
教育部 (2016)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要-自然科學領域(初稿)。台北。
教育部 (2017)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要-自然科學領域課程手冊(初稿)。台北。
教育部 (2018)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要-自然科學領域。台北。
陳淑苾、張文華、陳素芬 (2017)。開放式與結構式探究實驗活動對國小學生教室環境感知的影響。科學教育學刊，25(3)，277-300。
黃欣玲 (2008) 。5E探究式教學對國中學生電學學習情境及學習成就影響之研究. (碩士), 國立彰化師範大學, 彰化。
楊秀停、王國華 (2007)。實施引導式探究教學對於國小學童學習成效之影響. 科學教育學刊，15(4)，439-459。
溫存儒、段曉林 (2007)。探究國一學生科學探究活動之參與內涵及其參與動機之個案研究。科學教育期刊，13。
劉宏文、張惠博 (2001)。高中學生進行開放式探究活動之個案研究－問題的形成與解決。科學教育學刊，9。
歐陽鍾仁 (1987)。科學教育概論。台北市；五南書局。
蔡執仲、段曉林 (2005)。探究式實驗教學對國二學生理化學習動機之影響。科學教育學刊，13(3)，289-315。
蔡執仲、段曉林、靳知勤 (2007)。巢狀探究教學模式對國二學生理化學習動機影響之探討。科學教育學刊，15(2)，119-144。
謝州恩、吳心楷 (2005)。探究情境中國小學童科學解釋能力成長之研究。師大學報：科學教育類，50(2)，55-84。
鐘建坪 (2010)。引導式模型化探究教學架構初探。科學教育月刊，328，2-18。

二、西文部分
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260-267.
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about Inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying Inquiry Instruction: Assessing the Inquiry Level of Classroom Activities. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30-33.
Ben‐David, A., & Zohar, A. (2009). Contribution of meta‐strategic knowledge to scientific inquiry learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(12), 1657-1682.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills, 21, 108-126.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
Bybee, R. W. (2011). Scientific and engineering practices in K-12 classrooms: understanding a framework for K-12 science education. National Science Teachers Association, 78(9), 34-40.
Costenson, K., & Lawson, A. E. (1986). Why isn't inquiry used in more classrooms? The American Biology Teacher, 48(3), 150-158.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teacher, 37(9), 916-937.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
Elliott, E. S., & Dweck, C. S. (1988). Goals: an approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(1), 5-12.
Fradd, S. H., & Lee, O. (1999). Teachers' roles in promoting science inquiry with students from diverse language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 28(6), 14-20+42.
Gallagher, J. J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary school science teachers' knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75(1), 121-133.
Germann, P. J., Aram, R., & Burke, G. (1996). Identifying patterns and relationships among the responses of seventh‐grade students to the science process skill of designing experiments. Journal of Research in Science Teacher, 33(1), 79-99.
Gormally, C., Brickman, P., Hallar, B., & Armstrong, N. (2009). Effects of inquiry-based learning on students' science literacy skills and confidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), Article 16.
Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. The School Review, 79(2), 171-212.
Hofstein, & Lunetta. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(28-54).
Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teacher, 38(6), 631-645.
Kleinginna, P. R., & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981). A categorized list of emotion definitions, with suggestions for a consensual definition. 5(4), 345-379.
Lawson, A. E. (2002). Science Teaching and the Development of Thinking California: Wadsworth Publishing.
Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). “Maestro, what is ‘quality’?”: language, literacy, and discourse in project‐based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(4), 469-498.
National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards: Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Science Teachers Association (2010). Professional development literature and resources. Available online at
http://static.nsta.org/pdfs/ProfessionalDevelopmentLiteratureAndResources.pdf.
Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Achievement motivation: Conceptions of ability, subjective experience, task choice, and performance. Psychological Review, 91(3), 328-346.
Nolen, S. B., & Haladyna, T. M. (1990). Motivation and studying in high school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 115-126.
Rezba, R. J., Auldridge, T., & Rhe, L. (1999). Teaching and learning the basic science skills. Available online at
www.pen.k12.va.us/VDOE/instruction/TLBSSGuide.doc.
Roth, W.-M., Boutonné, S., McRobbie, C. J., & Lucas, K. B. (1999). One class, many worlds. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 59-77.
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific expla-nations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
Schwab, J. J. (1958). The teaching of science as inquiry. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 14(9), 374-379. doi:10.1080/00963402.1958.11453895
Suchman, J. R. (1966). Inquiry Development Program. Chicago: Science Research Associates.
Tuan, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionnaire to measure students’ motivation towards science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 634-659.
Zion, M., Michalsky, T., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2005). The effects of metacognitive instruction embedded within an asynchronous learning network on scientific inquiry skills. International Journal of Science Education, 27(8), 957-983.