研究生: |
呂建億 Lu, Chien-Yi |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
高中生活科技教師實作教學表徵之研究 A Study on Hands-On Instructional Representation of the Senior High School Living Technology Teachers |
指導教授: |
林坤誼
Lin, Kuen-Yi |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
科技應用與人力資源發展學系 Department of Technology Application and Human Resource Development |
論文出版年: | 2014 |
畢業學年度: | 102 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 535 |
中文關鍵詞: | 實作教學表徵 、知識理解 、設計技能 、製作技能 |
英文關鍵詞: | hands-on instructional representation, knowledge and comprehension, design skills, making skills |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:165 下載:37 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
生活科技課程的實施主要以實作活動為主軸,藉此培育學生的科技素養,然而許多教師在進行實作活動教學時,並無法妥善的運用適切的教學表徵以進行實作活動教學,故本研究主要著重在探究績優高中生活科技教師的實作教學表徵及其影響因素,以作為未來生活科技教師進行實作活動教學的參考。為達此一研究目的,本研究主要挑選六位獲得中華民國工業科技教育學會績優獎的高中生活科技教師為研究對象,並採用紮根理論研究法以進行深入探究,並獲致以下主要結論:(1)績優高中生活科技教師的實作教學表徵:(a)以邏輯思考特質的問題解決、實作解說、隨堂發問為主;(b)以動手實作特質的成品展現為主;(c)以手腦並用特質的合作學習、活動學習單為主。(2)影響績優高中生活科技教師實作教學表徵的因素:(a)以教師為中心的教師自行創造特質、實際生活閱歷為主;(b)以學生為中心的學生先備知識技能、學生特質為主;(c)以師生互動為中心的教師實作教學經驗為主。依據前述研究結論,本研究主要提出以下具體建議:(1)高中生活科技實作活動的教學應強調問題解決、動手實作、以及合作學習等教學表徵,以確實突顯實作活動的特色;(2)高中生活科技教師應加強生活閱歷、形塑自我特質,並以學生為中心落實師生互動的教學,方能有助於落實高中生活科技的實作活動教學;(3)生活科技師資培育機構應可參考本研究的結論,規劃適切的師資培育或在職訓練課程,以培養高中生活科技教師運用適切教學表徵的能力。
The implementation of Living Technology curriculum is focused on the hands-on learning activity for the purpose of developing students’ technological literacy; however, some technology teachers cannot use instructional representation in teaching hands-on learning activity appropriately. This study is focused on exploring outstanding living technology teachers’ hands-on instructional representation and influencing factors for future reference in teaching hands-on learning activity. In order to achieve the purpose, six outstanding living technology teachers, which are won the outstanding teaching award of Taiwan Industrial Technology Education Association, are selected in this study; meanwhile, the grounded theory is employed in this study and the following conclusions are made: (1) Outstanding living technology teachers’ instructional representation: (a) focused on using logical thinking in solving complex problems, explaining by hands-on learning activity, and raising oral quizzes; (b) focused on project-based products with hands-on characteristics; (c) focused on cooperative learning and activity-based learning portfolio with combining hands and brains. (2) The influencing factors of outstanding living technology teachers’ instructional representation: (a) to develop teachers’ creative characteristics and their wide experiences of life; (b) to stimulate students’ prior knowledge and respect their personal characteristics; (c) to focus on the mutual communication between teachers and students in hands-on learning activity. According to previous conclusions, the following suggestions are made: (1) the teaching of hands-on learning activity should be focused on problem solving, hands-on learning, and cooperative learning in order to emphasizing the characteristics of hands-on learning; (2) the senior high school teachers should increase their wide experiences of life, form their personal characteristics, and facilitating the mutual communication between teachers and students for the purpose of implementing the ideal of hands-on learning activity; (3) the living technology teacher education institutions could develop appropriate teacher education or on-job training programs by referring to the results of this study for the purpose of developing senior high school teachers’ competency in using instructional representation in hands-on learning activity appropriately.
一、中文部分
王國華、段曉林、張惠博(1988)。國中學生對科學教師學科教學之知覺。科學教
育學刊,6(4),363-381。
王美芬、熊召弟(1998)。國民小學自然科教材教法。台北:心理。
王雅珍(2001)。高雄市國民中學生活科技課程實施成效之研究。國立高雄師範大
學工業科技教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
方俊明(1993)。認知心理學。台北:水牛城。
朱益賢(2005)。生活科技競賽活動的實施現況與迴響。生活科技教育月刊,
38(4),1-2。
李泳泰(2007)。實作教學對原住民學生科學學習影響之研究-以「竹槍製作」單元
為例。國立高雄師範大學物理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
巫珍宜(2006)。憂鬱症患者在婚姻中的性別權力運作過程。國立彰化師範大學輔
導與諮商研究所博士論文,未出版,彰化。
吳明清(2002)。教育研究-基本觀念與方法分析。台北:五南。
吳宗祐(2003)。工作中的情緒勞動:概念發展、相關變項分析、心理歷程議題探
討。國立台灣大學心理學研究所博士論文,未出版,台北。
吳芝儀(2000)。建構論及其在教育研究上的應用。高雄:麗文。
林進材(1997)。國民小學教師教學思考之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育研究所博
士論文,未出版,台北。
林人龍(1996)。革新國中工藝教學-「生活科技」課程的問題解決教學活動設
計。技職雙月刊,33,55-59。
林曉雯(1994)。國中生物教師教學表徵的詮釋性研究。國立臺灣師範大學科學教
育研究所博士論文,未出版,臺北。
林淑菁(2003)。科學活動推廣現況之個案研究-街頭物理。國立高雄師範大學物
理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
林芬遠、段曉林、孫國燕(1998)。國中生物課教室口語之探究。科學教育學術研
討會,國立高雄師範大學。
周建和(2000)。物理教學回歸生活之希望工程—街頭物理系列。2000物理教學及
示範研討會,逢甲大學。
周卓明(2005)。創意思考訓練。台北:全華。
周曉虹(1995)。社會學習論。臺北:桂冠。
洪郁雯、楊德清(2006)。具體表徵融入數學教學之探究。屏師科學教育,23,
30-38。
施玫君(2000)。職前物理教師教學先前概念之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究
所碩士論文,未出版,彰化。
侯世光(2005)。透過創意設計活動強化生活科技的核心能力。生活科技教育月
刊,38(8),1。
夏應慈(2003)。國小教師在統整課程的教學表徵之研究-以「校園自然生態之
美」為例。國立臺中師範學院自然科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,臺中。
殷宏良(2003)。廚房的科學動手做活動:「電磁爐」與「垂直食鹽水導線」。國
立高雄師範大學物理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
孫春在、林珊如(2007)。網路合作學習。台北:心理。
涂君暐(2005)。內外在動機、創造力工作環境與創造力之相關研究-以第八屆創
思設計與製作競賽之參賽學生為例。國立中央大學學習與教學研究所碩士論文,
未出版,桃園。
徐業良(2007)。機械設計。臺中:滄海。
張振松、黃萬居(2003)。自然科創造性問題解決教學對國小學童創造力及問題解
決能力之研究。屏師科學教育,18,47-58。
張春興(1998)。張氏心理學辭典。台北:東華。
張惠昭(1996)。高中英文教師教學專業知識之探究。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究
所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
張進輔、馮維(2002)。心理學。台北:新文京。
張春興(2002)。教育心理學-三化取向的理論與實踐。台北:東華。
陳龍安(1988)。創造思考教學的理論與實際。台北:心理。
陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。台北:五南。
莊淑如(1997)。證照制度的落實-以德國經驗為借鏡。技術及職業教育,37,
54-56。
許素甘(2004)。展出你的創意:曼陀羅與心智繪圖的運用與教學。臺北:心理。
郭銘哲(2003)。高中生活科技教師教學表徵之個案研究。國立高雄師範大學工業
科技教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
教育部(2009)。普通高級中學生活科技科課程綱要補充說明。Retrieved
Oct,26,2011,from http://www.edu.tw/
files/site_content/B0035/16-「生活科技科」補充說明審查資
料.pdf
教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。台北:作者。
黃能堂(1995)。生活科技教材教法。教育實習輔導季刊,1(5),35-42。
黃永和(1996)。國小實習教師數學科學科教學知識之個案研究。國立新竹師範學
院國民教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,新竹。
黃永和(1997)。教學表徵-教師的教學法寶。國教世紀,178,17-24。
黃國書(2002)。九年一貫課程自然與生活科技領域教師創意微型教學實驗之設計
研究—木材乾餾實驗微型化之設計。國立高雄師範大學化學研究所碩士論文,未
出版,高雄。
黃政傑、林佩璇(2004)。合作學習。台北:五南。
黃達三(1998)。國小教師於科學教育的口語解釋研究。科學教育學刊,6(3),
285-302。
黃瑞琴(1997)。質的教育研究方法。臺北:心理。
黃光雄(2001)。質性教育研究:理論與方法。臺北:揚智。
單文經(1990)。教育專業知識的性質初探。臺北:師大書苑。
彭姌齡、張必隱(2000)。認知心理學。台北:東華。
葉蓉樺(2008)。操作式科學展示對「電與磁」相關概念學習輔助探討:中小學教
師的觀點。物理教育學刊,9(2),35-56。
葉安琦(2000)。促進國小學童創造性問題解決能力的個案研究--發展問題表徵。
國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
劉怡亭(2000)。國中歷史科教師的學科教學知識之探究。國立嘉義大學國民教育
研究所碩士論文,未出版,嘉義。
劉啟正(2005)。動手做實驗的教學對國二學生學習成效影響之研究。國立高雄師
範大學物理研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
蔡儀華(2004)。企業員工知識分享效能之研究-以多元方法設計。國立台北大學
企業管理研究所博士論文,未出版,台北。
蕭顯勝、黃啟彥、游光昭(2006)。網路化科技素養適性測驗系統之建置。國立台
南大學理工研究學報,40(1),1-21。
謝秀月、郭重吉(2001)。國小自然較師科學教學實踐知識與科學教學表徵之個案
研究。科學教育,12,147-163。
謝秀月(2001)。國小自然教師科學教學實踐知識與科學教學表徵之個案研究。國
立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文,未出版,彰化。
謝宗霖(2005)。合作式概念圖學習對高中生數學學習成效研究-以「圓錐曲線」
單元為例。國立高雄師範大學數學研究所碩士論文,未出版,高雄。
謝明同(2001)。情境與空間結構之轉化法則。國立台北科技大學建築與都市設計
研究所碩士論文,未出版,台北。
藍治平、簡秀玲、張永達(2002)。教學表徵多樣化的理論與應用-以國中生物「遺
傳」的概念為例。科學教育月刊,248(4),41-48。
蘇明俊(2006)。幼兒科學遊戲活動A-Z。臺北:湯姆生。
二、外文部份
Arends, R. I. (2004). Learning to teaching ( ed.). New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Atkinson, R. C. & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory:A
proposed system and its control processes. In K.W.
Spence & J.T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of
learning and motivation. London: Academic Press.
Briggs, L. J. (1986). Learning to ask. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Bruner, J. (1984). Vygotsky's zone of proximal
development:The hidden agenda. New Directions for Child
and Adolescent Development, 23, 93-97.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and
action:A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey:prentice-hall, Inc.
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education.Cambridge, MA:
Harvard.
Ball, D. L. (1988). Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical
pedagogy:Examining what prospective researchers bring
with them to teacher education. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Michigan State University.
Black, P., & Harrison, G. (1986). Technological capability.
In A. Cross & R. McCormick(Eds.), Teacnology in schools:
A reader(pp.137-147).Milton Keynes: Open University
Press.
Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W. (1990). The subject-matter
preparation of teachers.In W. R. Houston & J. Sikula
(Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher eduction(pp.437-
449). New York:MacMillan.
Bunker, D., & Thorpe, R. (1982). A model for the teaching of
games in secondary schools. Bulletin of Physical
Education, 18(1), 5-8.
Bellon, J. J., Bellon, E. C., &Blank, M. A. (1992).
Questioning and responding. In J. J. Bellon, E. C.
Bellon &M. A. Blank (Eds.), Teaching from a research
knowledge base: A development and renewal process
(pp.307-401). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Chrysikou, E. G., & Weisberg, R. W. (2005). Following the
wrong footsteps: Fixation effects of pictorial examples
in a design problem-solving task. Journal of
Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition,
31(5), 1134-1148.
Creswell, J. W. (2002). Educational
research:Planning,conducting,and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research. N. J. : Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Dagher, Z. R. (1989). The nature of verbal teacher
explanations in junior high science classrooms. Doctoral
dissertation, The University of lowa.
Duchastel, P., & Walker, R. (1979). Pictorial illustration
in instructional texts. Educational Technology, 19(11),
20-25.
Elkind, D. (2007). The power of play: How
spontaneous,imaginative activities lead to happier,
healthier children. Cambridge, MA:Da Capo Press.
Friedler, Y., & Tamir, P. (1990). Life in science laboratory
classroom at secondary level. In E.Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.),
The student laboratory and science curriculum (pp.337-
354). London: Rutledge.
Grossman, P. L. (1988). A study in contrast:Sources of
pedagogical content knowledge for secondary english.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
Grossman, P. L. (1989). A study in contrast:Sourse of
pedagogical content knowledge for secondary english.
Journal of Teacher Education,40(5), 24-31.
Glass, A. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1986). Cognition. Singapore
McGraw-Hill.
Glaser, B. G.,& Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of
grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research,
Chicago: Aldine.
Grossman, P. L.,Wilson, S. M., & Shulman, L. S. (1989).
Teachers of substance:Subject matter knowledge for
teaching. In Reynold, M. C. (Ed.), Knowledgebase for the
beginning teacher (pp.23-36). Oxyford: Pergamon Press.
Hornby, G. (2009). The effectiveness of cooperative learning
with trainee teachers. Journal of Education for
Teaching, 35(2), 161-168.
Halim, L., & Meerah, S. M. (2002). Science trainee
teachers’pedagogical content knowledge and its influence
on physics teaching.Research in Science & Technological
Education, 20(2), 215-225.
Jansson, D. G., & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation.
Design Studies, 12, 3-11.
Koehler M. J., Mishra, P., & Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the
development of teacher knowledge in a design
seminar:Integrating content,pedagogy and technology.
Computers & Education, 49(3), 740-762.
Kimbell, R., Stables, K., & Green, R. (2002). The nature and
purpose of design and technology. In G. Owen-Jackson
(Ed.), Teaching design and technology in secondary
schools (pp.19-30). Landon: RoutledgeFalmer.
Locke, K. (2001). Grounded theory in management research,
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lewis, T. (2006). Design and inquiry:Bases for An
accommodation between science and technoloy education in
the curriculum? Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
43(3),255-281.
Leinhardt, G., & Greeno, J. G. (1986). The cognitive skill
of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2),
75-95.
Levin, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text
illustrations:A review of research. Educational
Communication & Technology Journal, 30(4),195-232.
Lougran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of
pedagogical content knowledge in science:Developing ways
of articulating and documenting professional practice.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370-391.
Lesh, R. & Post, T. & Behr, M. (1987). Representations and
translations among representations in mathematics
learning and problem solving. In C. Janvier (Ed.),
Problems of representation in the teaching and learning
of mathematics (pp.125-145). New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Martin, J. R. (1970). Explaing,understanding,and teaching.
New York: McGraw-Mill.
Mishler, E. G. (1986). Research interviewing: Context and
narrative. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge in
elementary mathematics. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Stanford University.
Moscardo, G. (1998). Interpretation and sustainable tourism
:Functions, examples and principles. The Journal of
Tourism Studies,9 (1), 2-13.
McCormick, R. (2004). Issues of learning and knowledge in
technology education. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 14(1), 21-44.
Mehmet, A. O., & Charles, D. (2008). Affective benefits from
academic competitions for middle school gifted students.
Gifted Child Today Magazine, 31(2), 48-53.
McDiarmid, G.W., Ball, D. L., & Anderson, C. W. (1989). Why
staying one chapter ahead doesn’t really work: Subject-
specific pedagogy.In M. C. Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge
base for the beginning teacher. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Martin, R., Sexton, C., Wagner,K.,&Gerlovich, J. (1998).
What do you need to know about using questions as a
science teaching tool? In R. Martin, C. Sexton, K.
Wagner, J. Gerovich (Eds.), Science for all children
( ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Polanyi, M. (1962). Personal knowledge:Towards a post-
critical philosophy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Phye, G. D., & Andre T. (1986). Cognitive classroom
learning:Understanding, thinking,and problem solving.San
Diego: Academic.
Peters, J. M. (1990). A study of subject matter knowledge in
the teaching of science. Doctor Dissertation,University
of Pittsburgh.
Reynolds, A. (1992). What is competent beginning teachering?
A review of the literature. Review of Education
Research, 62(1), 1-35.
Rillero, P. (2005). Exploring science with young children.
Scholastic Early Childhood Toda, 19(6), 8-9.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman D. A. (1981). Analogical process
in learning. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills
and their acquisition hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ramani, G. B., & Siegler, R. S. (2008). Promoting broad and
stable improvements in low-income children’s numerical
knowledge through playing number boardgames. Child
Development, 79(2),375-394.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge
growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-
14. Retrieved May 6,2012, from
http://www.fisica.uniud.it/URDF/ masterDidSciUD/
materiali/pdf/Shulman_1986.pdf
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations
of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1), 1-
22.
Satterthwait, D (2010). Why are 'hands-on' science
activities so effective for student learning? The
Journal of the Australian Science Teachers Association,
56(2),7-10.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative
research:Grounded theory procedures and techniques.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin,J. (1998). Basics of qualitative
research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1999). Grounded theory
methodology:An overview, In A.Bryman & R. G. Burgess
(Eds.), Qualitative research, thousand oaks, CA: Sage.
Sterberg, R. S.,&Horvath, J. A. (1995). A prototype view of
expert teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(6), 9-17.
Sheella, M., & Kevin, F. (2004). Problem-based learning.
Proquest Education Journals, 58(10), 15.
Swartz, R. J., & Perkins, D. N. (1990). Teaching thinking:
Issues and approaches. Midwest Publications, Critical
thinking press & software.
Tilden, F. (1957). Interpreting our heritage. Chapel Hill,
NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Tamir, A. (1988). Improved complexity bounds for center
location problems on networks by using dynamic data
structures, SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 1,
377–396.
Tamir, A. (1991). Professional and personal knowledge of
teachers and teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 7(3), 68-263.
Taylor, D. S., & Bogdan, R. (1984). Introduction to
qualitative research methods: The search for meanings.
New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Wilson, S. M., Shulman, L. S.,&Richert, A. E. (1987). 150
different ways of knowing:Representations of knowledge
in teaching. In Calderhead, J. (Ed). Exploring
teachers’ thinking. London: Cassell.