研究生: |
吳景達 Wu, Ching-Ta |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
自然科學博物館高中生環境議題探究與實作學習方案發展之研究 Inquiry and Practice Learning on Environmental Issues for High School Students: A Case Study of the National Museum of Natural Science |
指導教授: |
方偉達
Fang, Wei-Ta |
口試委員: |
方偉達
Fang, Wei-Ta 彭立沛 Peng, Li-Pei 張育傑 Chang, Yu-Jie 林于凱 Lin, Yu-Kai 何昕家 Ho, Shin-Jia |
口試日期: | 2022/11/18 |
學位類別: |
博士 Doctor |
系所名稱: |
環境教育研究所 Graduate Institute of Environmental Education |
論文出版年: | 2022 |
畢業學年度: | 111 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 133 |
中文關鍵詞: | 環境議題 、專題導向教學 、二階段引導式探究與實作 |
英文關鍵詞: | environmental issues, project-based learning, inquiry and practice |
研究方法: | 行動研究法 、 準實驗設計法 、 個案研究法 、 半結構式訪談法 |
DOI URL: | http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202205643 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:148 下載:5 |
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 |
本研究係探討在 12 年國教 108 課程綱要開始實施之後,國立自然科學博物館基於教育部重點發展館所之任務,遂以國內高中生為教學對象,發展以環境議題為主題,進行探究與實作的學習方案之理論和實務研究。研究以國立自然科學博物館本館為場域,選擇全球氣候變遷為環境議題教學主題,採取專題導向教學,引領高中學生,透過二階段引導式探究與實作學習歷程,進行議題的理解,並且產生解決議題的行動。研究對象是組隊報名參加「溫室氣體與溫室效應探究與實作」競賽的高中、高職學生,共計有 52 組 131 位學生。為瞭解教學方案的學習成效,本研究以測驗式問卷蒐集參與學生在全球氣候變遷認知的學習成效,從學生在參加研習前的平均得分為 8.14 分,研習後平均得分為 10.11 分,延宕後測平均得分為 10.39 分,可以發現教學方案所提供的全球氣候變遷課程不僅有助於增加學生的認知,亦具有持續性的學習效果。完成探究與實作學歷程的學生共計有16 組 44 位學生,藉由評比學生在參加前發表的探究規畫,和完成後發表的成果報告,發現在學習歷程前後學生在「科學探索」與「結論獨特性」二項有顯著差異,可見教學方案有助於增進學生對探究與實作的學習。另從半結構性訪談發現,有許多組的學生中斷學習歷程是在「發現問題」與「規劃研究」階段,最希望得到的協助是輔導和研究資源的提供,因此研究者發現除了需更進一步的加強探究與實作前的引導培力課程,更建議科博館可以主動將學習方案和學校的多元選修課程、科學性社團活動結合,提供學生更多參與、以及輔導的機會;並結合社會資源,打造媒介和提供學習資源的平台,以協助更多的學生進行探究與實作的學習。
This research was to explore the museum's development of a learning program based on environmental issues for inquiry and implementation with high school students as teaching objects. The research has been devoted at the National Museum of Natural Science (NMNS) as one of the study fields, selecting global climate change as one of the teaching themes on environmental issues, of which adopts project-oriented teaching to lead high school students to understand the issues and generate actions to solve them through a two-stage inquiry and implementation process. The research objects were categorized all high school and vocational students who signed up in teams to participate in the "Greenhouse Gas and Greenhouse Effect Exploration as well as their Implementation" competition, with a total of 52 groups of 131 students. In order to understand the learning effect of all teaching plans, this study has been used questionnaires to collect the scores of environmental literacy related to global climate change upon their participating under their instructor-teachings before and after learning processes. With an average score of 8.14, 10.11, and 10.39 points, it can be found that the global climate change course provided by the teaching program not only helped to increase students' awareness, but also led a sustainable learning effect. There were 16 groups of 44 students who completed the course of inquiry and practice. By comparing the inquiry plans published by the students before participating and, the results reports published after the completion, it was found that before and after the learning process, the scores of all students were represented as the “Scientific Exploration” and "uniqueness of conclusion", which were significantly different. It can be seen that the teaching plan is helpful to enhance students' learning of inquiry and practice. In addition, from the semi-structured interviews, it was found that many groups of students interrupted the learning process in the stages of "discovering problems" and "planning research". To further strengthen the guidance and training courses before the inquiry and practice, it is recommended that the NMNS can actively combine the learning plan with the school's multiple elective courses and scientific community activities, so as to provide students with more opportunities for participation and guidance. This will be combined social resources to create media and provide a platform for learning resources to assist more students in inquiry and practical learning.
于瑞珍(2001)。教育理論在博物館教育上的應用。博物館學季刊,15(2),15-24。
方偉達(2019)。環境教育。臺北市:五南。
方偉達、鄒淑蘭(2009)。公共空間忠誠度研究--以科博館戶外晨間活動者為例。中華人文社會學報。11,46‒70。
方偉達(1998)。綠色新思維--規劃校園理想國。大自然 59,94-99。
方偉達、許韻珣(1998)。教育改革 教室革命 把校園搬入教室--也談校園生態教材園。大自然58,86-91。
方德隆(2000)。九年一貫課程領域之統整。課程與教學季刊,3(1),1‒18。
王儷靜(2013)。重探融入教學之「融入」意涵。女學學誌:婦女與性別研究,32,1‒41。
王一芝(2019年11月5日)。「台灣大學生就像一群死木頭」 108課綱能拯救無動力世代嗎?天下雜誌685期。https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5097562
白佩宜(2009)。探討不同探究式教學法對高一學生科學探究能力成長之影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學地球科學研究所,臺北市。
行政院環境保護署(1997)。全國小小環境規劃師研究報告。臺北市:行政院環境保護署。
行政院環境保護署(1998)。86年度全國績優環保小署長實錄《環保小種子》。臺北市:行政院環境保護署。
何俊青(2004)。九年一貫課程實施的理想與實際-國小教師知覺的觀點。國立臺北師範學院學報,17(1),79-110。
何宗穎、王敏男、謝佩妤、郭幸宜、趙大衛、黃臺珠 (2013)。大學普通生物學實驗課程應用探究鷹架自我評估策略對學生探究能力表現之影響。科學教育學刊,21(4),401-429。
何雅芬、張素真(2017)。總綱種子講師實地宣講問題解析。臺北:國民及學前教育署。
佘曉清、林煥祥編(2017)。PISA 2015臺灣學生的表現。臺北市:心理。
李孟娟(2006)。國小教師重大議題融入教學之課程實踐研究一以環境教育議題為例。未出版碩士論文,國立臺南大學,臺南市。
李暉(2018年9月30日)。新課綱中的科學素養。東華大學教育與潛能開發學系e-news,27。
李真文(2018年9月30日)。淺談108新課綱中的議題教學。東華大學教育與潛能開發學系e-news,27。
吳俊憲、黃政傑(2010)。中小學課程政策改革之研究-九年一貫課程的回顧與前瞻。課程研究,5(2),47-62。
周源本(2007)。探究應用不同「教學法」於WISE課程對國三學生地球科學學習的影響〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學地球科學研究所,臺北市。
林煥祥、洪振方、佘曉清、李松濤、李暉、秦爾聰等(2016,12月)。PISA 2015。發表於 第三十二屆科學教育國際研討會。臺中市:中華民國科學教育學會。
林淑梤(2019)。探討學生科學能力與教師探究教學實務的關係。科學教育學刊, 27(4), 251-274。
林婉琪(2019年6月22日)。課審會審議大會召開 108 年度第 51、52 次會議新聞稿。國民及學前教育署。https://reurl.cc/gvR7YR。
林佳慧、劉欣宜、許碧如(2019)。十二年國教課綱中議題融入課程之實踐。學校行政雙月刊,123,84-98。
邱美虹(2016)。科學模型與建模:科學素養中的模型認知與建模能力。臺灣化學教育, 11。http://chemed.chemistry.org.tw/?p=1418
邱惠妤、鄭辰旋(2017)。羅東自然教育中心一日型方案-「水.危機百科」課程評估。宜蘭大學生物資源學刊,13,44 – 64。
洪詠善、范信賢(2015)。同行-走進十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。新北市:國家教育研究院。
翁榮源、陳定威、施信宏(2006)。引導發現式學習在「環境化學」網站之應用與研究。科學教育月刊,292,39-54。
高翠霞、高慧芬、楊嵐智(2018)。十二年國教議題課程的挑戰-以環境教育為例。臺灣教育評論月刊,7(10), 68-75。
孫燦芬 (2018)。基於“社會性科學議題”情境的科學教學模式初探。地理教學,10, 14-17。
許世璋 (1999)。環保團體成員負責任環境行為的預測變項之比較研究。國科會八十八年度專題研究計畫 NSC 88-2511-S-126-001。
許世璋 (2000)。大學環境教育課程介入研究- 著重大學生環保行動及其相關因素之成效分析。國科會八十九年度專題研究計畫 NSC 89-2511-S-259-001。
許世璋(2001)。環境議題與行動導向的環境教育。九十年度環境教育國際研討會論文彙編, 51-58。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學。
許毅璿(2015)。「超越學校」的教育:以「環境」為本的學習。臺灣博物季刊,34(2), 16-25。
許世璋、黃怡華(2017)。林務局池南自然教育中心環境教育遊戲方案對於六年級生環境素養之成效分析。科學教育學刊,25(2),169-196。
梁明煌、蔡慧君(2000)。教育部國家級環境教育政策與行動中程計畫規劃。教育部環保小組。
梁介川(2016)。高中生與大學生對氣候變遷之認知與態度之差異性研究--以彰化女中與大葉大學為例。未出版碩士論文,大葉大學,彰化縣。
教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要環境教育議題。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2008a)。國民中小學九年一貫課程網要總綱。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2008b)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要重大議題(環境教育)。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2014)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要。教育部。
教育部(2018)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要-自然科學領域。教育部。
戚居姮(2017)。臺灣高中學生之氣候變遷素養提升研究。未出版碩士論文,國立臺灣大學,臺北市。
國家教育研究院課程及教學研究中心(2015)。核心素養發展手冊。新北市:國家教育研究院。
國家教育研究院(2019)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要-議題融入說明手冊。新北市:國家教育研究院。
黃富順(2002)。成人學習。臺北市:五南。
黃政傑(2005)。社會重大議題的課程融入。取自http://www.yct.com.tw/life/95drum/drum017.doc
黃嘉雄、黃永和(2011)。新興及重大議題課程發展方向之整合型研究報告。臺北市:國立教育研究院籌備處。
黃俊儒、簡妙如(2010)。在科學與媒體的接壤中所開展之科學傳播研究:從科技社會公民的角色及需求出發。新聞學研究,105,127-166。
黃話雯、蔡燿隆(2015)。濕地保育一日營對國中學生濕地保育知識、態度之學習成效評估。雙溪教育論壇 4 , 57-75。
陳桂香(2007)。實施探究教學對國二學生科學學習成效之影響。未出版碩士論文,國立彰化師範大學,彰化市。
陳祈伶(2015)。實施探究教學對七年級自然與生活科技低成就生科學學習動機科學學習參與影響之研究。未出版碩士論文,國立彰化師範大學,彰化市。
張淑涵(2008)。融入對話的探究教學對國中學生學習動機和學習成就影響之行動研究。未出版碩士論文,國立彰化師範大學,彰化市。
張嘉育、葉興華(2010)。中小學課程政策之整合研究-子計畫(二)學校本位課程與重大議題探究。未出版,新北市:國家教育研究院。
張子超(2017)。議題教育的意義與課程融入──以環境教育為例。教育脈動,11,23-30。http://pulse.naer.edu.tw/Home/Content/f37f19e3-7295-459a-a9d5-ed309f87048d
張珮珊、賴吉永、溫媺純(2017)。科學探究與實作課程的發展、實施與評量:以實驗室中的科學論證為核心之研究。科學教育學刊,25(4),355-389。
陳志銘,2012年10月,問題導向學習,圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典,國家教育研究院。https://terms.naer.edu.tw/detail/1678753/
陳毓凱和洪振方(2007)。兩種探究取向教學模式之分析與比較。科學教育月刊,305,4-19。
靳玉樂(2001)。探究教學論。重慶市:西南師範大學出版社。
葉明政(2014)。國小教師對重大議題課程政策之個案釋意分析。課程與教學季刊,17(4),173-206。
楊冠政 (2002)。環境倫理—環境教育的終極目標。環境教育學刊,1,1-11。
楊嵐智、高翠霞 (2019)。環境教育議題融入課程的回顧與展望。教育研究與發展,15(2),1-26。DOI 10.3966/181665042019061502001
賓靜蓀(2017)。臺灣學生缺乏探究力,親子天下雜誌,86,60-63。
潘慧玲(2001)。九年一貫課程中兩性教育議題的融入與轉化。載於洪久賢、湯梅英主編,兩性與人權教育(頁27‒50)。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學。
潘慧玲、張嘉育 (2019)。十二年國教課綱中議題教育實施的途徑與作法。學校行政雙月刊,123,3-19。
鄭鈺燕(2009)。我國大學生對於溫室效應導致氣候變遷的相關知識、態度與行為意向之調查研究。未出版碩士論文,國立高雄師範大學,高雄市。
歐用生、李建興、郭添財、黃嘉雄(2010)。九年一貫課程實施現況之評估。未出版,行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究報告(RDEC-RES-098-026),臺北市:研考會。
蔡清田(2014)。十二年國教課程綱要核心素養。師友月刊,566,17-22。
蔡執仲、鄭丞棋、鄭瑞洲(2018)。以環境議題為主的暑期營隊活動對國小學童情境興趣表現之探究。環境教育研究,14(1),39-76。doi: 10.6555/JEER.14.1.039
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。
蔡哲銘、邱美虹、曾茂仁和謝東霖(2020)。探討二階段專題導向的探究與實作課程中學生之學習成效。科學教育月刊,431,2-20。
劉潔心、晏涵文(1997)。師範院校環境教育介入研究-著重師院學生負責任環境行為及其相關因素之成效分析。八十六年度環境教育研討會論文彙編,49-70。
劉德祥(2007)。博物館觀眾研究:研究方法回顧。博物館學季刊,21(1),31-43。
劉湘瑤(2016)。科學探究的教學與評量。科學研習, 55(2), 5-11。
劉奇愛(2019)。探討國中低成就生在科學探究活動中之參與樣貌:個案研究。未出版碩士論文,國立彰化師範大學,彰化市。
錢清泓 (2001)。有地無位、有名無實?九年一貫重大議題實施困境之探討。國教學報,13,10-17。
謝莉文(2006)。鷹架式科學探究課程研發與實踐的個案研究〔未出版之碩士論文〕。國立臺灣師範大學地球科學研究所,臺北市。
聯合報,2020年6月20日,政策空轉 壓力倍增 108課綱三年陷五大困境。https://vip.udn.com/newmedia/2022/12-years-education/problem
顏弘志(2004)。從建構主義看探究教學。科學教育研究與發展,36,1-14。
Abd-El-Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R. A., Hofestein, A., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok, R., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H.(2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419.
Bonnie S. S., Robert A. F., Hanly B., Laura G. C., Janet L. M., and Walter W.(2002). Adult Museum Programs. Designing Meaningful Experiences. Oxford: ALTAMIRA PRESS.
Bybee, R. W. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrell, & E. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (20-46). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Burnham, M., & Mitchell, R. (1992). Bioethics-an introduction. Retrieved April 11, 2004, from Woodrow Wilson Biology Institute: http://www.gene.com/ae/AE/AEPC/WWC/1992/bioethic_intro.html
Chen, L. & Xiao, S. (2021). Perceptions, challenges and coping strategies of science teachers in teaching socioscientific issues: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 32, 100377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100377
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218. doi:10.1002/sce.10001
Colburn, A (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42-44.
Crawford, B.A. (2000) Embracing the essence of inquiry: new roles for science teachers. Journal of research in science teaching, 37(9), 631-645.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23, 4.
Edens, K. M. (2000). Preparing problem solvers for the 21st century through Problem-based Learning. College Teaching, 48(2), 55-60.
Fang, W. T. (2020). Envisioning Environmental Literacy- Action and Outreach. Springer, Singapore
Fang, W. T., Hassan A. & LePage B. A. (2022). The Living Environmental Education- Sound Science Toward a Cleaner, Safer, and Healthier Future. Springer, Singapore
Faria, C., Pereira, G., & Chagas, I. (2012). D. Carlos de Braganc¸a, a Pioneer of Experimental Marine Oceanography: Filling the Gap Between Formal and Informal Science Education. Sci & Educ, 21, 813–826. doi: 10.1007/s11191-010-9239-x
Fadel, C., Bialik, M., &Trilling, B. (2015). Four-Dimensional Education: The Competencies Learners Need to Succeed. The Center for Curriculum Redesign, Boston.
Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: an exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453-467.
Genc, M. (2015). The project-based learning approach in environmental education. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 24(2), 105-117. doi: 10.1080/10382046.2014.993169
Gigliotti, L. M. (1990). Environmental education: What went wrong? What can be done? The Journal of Environmental Education, 22 (1), 9-12.
Gutwill, J. P., Allen, S. (2009). Facilitating family group inquiry at science museum exhibits. Published online 28 December 2009 in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). doi: 10.1002/sce.20387
Hammerness, K., Macpherson, A., & Gupta, P. (2016). Developing a Research Agenda Aimed at Understanding the Teaching and Learning of Science at a Natural History Museum. Curator: The Museum Journal, 59(4), 353-367.
Hofstein, A., Mamlok, R.(2001). From petroleum to tomatoes. The Science Teacher, 68(2), 46-48.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54.
Hsu, S.J. & Roth, R.E. (1998). An assessment of environmental literacy and analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behavior held by secondary teachers in the Hualien area of Taiwan. Environmental Education Research, 4, 229-249 .
Hsu, Y. S., Yang, F. Y. & Tsai, M. J.(2008). Scaffolded Inquiry Curriculum for Science Learning. National Association for Research in Science Teaching, USA.
Hungerford, H. R., Litherland, R. A., Peyton, R. B., Ramsey, J. M., Tomera, A. N. and Volk, T. L.(1988). Investigating and evaluating environmental hues and actions skill development modules. Champaign, Stipes.
Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. The Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8-21.
Keys, C.W., & Bryan, L.A. (2000) Co-constructing inquiry-base science with teachers: essential research for lasting reform. Journal of research in science teaching, 38, 6.
Keeves, J. P. & Aikenhead, G. S. (1995). Science curricula in a changing world. In B. J. Fraser & H. J. Walberg. (Eds), Improving Science Education (pp.13-45). National Society for the Study of Education.
Kind, P. M., Kind, V., Hofstein, A., & Wilson, J. (2011). Peer argumentation in the school science laboratory—Exploring effects of task features. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2577-2558.
Klinger, G.(1980). The effect of the instructionalsequence on the environmental action skills of a sample of southern Illinois eighth graders. Master's thesis. Southern Illinois University at Carbon.
Kokotsaki, D. and Menzies, V. and Wiggins, A. (2016) 'Project-based learning: a review of the literature. Improving schools. 19 (3), 267-277.
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 313-350. doi:10.1080/10508406.1998.9672057
Levinson, R. (2006). Teachers’ perceptions of the role of evidence in teaching controversial socioscientific issues. The Curriculum Journal, 17(3), 247-262.https://doi.org/10.1080/09585170600909712
Mao, S. L., Chang, C. Y., & Barufaldi, J. P.(1998). Inquiry teaching and its effects on secondary-school students’ learning of earth science concepts. Journal of Geoscience Education, 46, 363-367.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
Palincsar, A. S., Magnusson, S. J. gutter, & Vincent, M.(2002)supporting guided-inquiry instruction. Teaching exceptional children. 34(3), 88-91.
Polman, J. L. (2000). Designing project-based science: Connecting learners through guided inquiry. Ways of knowing in science series. Williston, VT: Teachers College Press.
Punzalan, C. H. & Escalante, L. M. (2021). Museum Trip to Enrich Environmental Awareness and Education. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 11(1), 13-23.
Ramsey, J. M., Hungerford, H. R. & Tomera, A. N. (1981). The effects of environmental action and environmental case study instruction on the overt environmental behavior of eighth-grade students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 13(1), 24-29.
Ramsey, J. M., & Hungerford, H. R. (1989). The effects of issue investigation and action training on environmental behavior in seventh-grade students. The Journal of Environmental Education, 20 (1), 29-34.
Ramsey, J. M. (1993). The Effects of issue Investigation and Action Training on Eighth-Grade Students' Environmental Behavior, The Journal of Environmental Education, 24(3), 31-36.
Ramsey, J. (1993). The science education reform movement: Implications for social responsibility. Science Education, 77(2), 235-258. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770210
Roth, K., & Garnier, H. (2006). What science teaching looks like: An international perspective. Educational Leadership, 64(4), 16-23.
Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2002). Performance of students in project-based science classrooms on a national measure of achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(5), 410-422.
Selvakumar M., & Storksdieck, M. (2013). Portal to the Public: Museum educators collaborating with scientists to engage museum visitors with current science. Curator: The Museum Journal, 56(1), 69-78.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Song, H.-D., Grabowski, B. L., Koszalka, T. A., & Harkness, W. L. (2006). Patterns of instructional-design factors prompting reflective thinking in middle-school and college level problem-based learning environments. Instructional Science, 34, 63-87. doi: 10.1007/s11251-005-6922-4
Stapp, W. (1969). The concept of environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 1(3), 31-36.
Stradling, R. (1984). The teaching of controversial issues: an evaluation. Educational Reviews, 36(2), 121-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013191840360202
Thomas, K. E.(2000). The benefits of a project approach to automotive instruction. Tech Directions, 59(6), 24-25.
Tuan, N. T.(2004). On the complex problem: a study of interactive management. Kybernetes, 33(1), 62-79.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1978). The World's First Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education in Tbilisi. Columbus, Ohio:ERIC/SMEAC Information Reference Center. ED 179408.
UNESCO (2014). Roadmap for implementing the global action programme on education for sustainable development. Paris, France: Author.
Vartiainen, H. & Enkenberg, J. (2013). Learning from and with museum objects: design perspectives, environment, and emerging learning systems. Education Tech Research 61, 841-862. doi: 10.1007/s11423-013-9311-8
Volk, T., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. (1984). A national survey of curriculum needs as perceived by professional environmental educators. Journal of Environmental Education, 16(1), 10-19.
Walker, J. P., & Sampson, V. (2013). Learning to argue and arguing to learn: Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help undergraduate chemistry students learn how to construct arguments and engage in argumentation during a laboratory course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(5), 561-596.
Welch, W., Klopfer, L., Aikenhead, O., Robinson, J. T.(1981). The role of inquiry in science education: analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65(1), 33-50. 10.1002/sce.3730650106
Winston, B. (1974). The relationship of awareness to concern for the environmental quality among selected high school students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 35, 3412-341 3-A.
Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. J. (2003). Content effects in self-directed inductive learning. Learning and Instruction, 13, 381-402.
Zeidler, D.L., Walker, K.A., Ackett, W.A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20048.