臺灣在民國108年正式實施十二年國民基本教育（簡稱108課綱），其中自然科領域新加開一門課程為＜自然科學探究與實作＞，希望學生能統整各科科內與跨科之間的學習內容，並培養學生探索與操作的能力。本研究藉由參考美國新世代科學標準（Next Generation Science Standards，簡稱NGSS）的相關課程與教學的評鑑指標並結合臺灣108課綱的探究與實作精神發展出評鑑＜探究與實作＞的指標，並以兩所高中四位自然科（物理、化學、生物、地球科學）教師為研究對象，探討高中教師如何面對108課綱所帶來的改變與挑戰，以及教師進行探究與實作課程的教學狀況。
主要的研究成果如下：
1. 本研究開發的探究與實作評鑑工具能適切呈現教師教學狀況。
2. 經由教師晤談後發現四位自然科探究與實作教師在設計課程時的出發點不一樣，AB與AC教師依據學科技能作為課程開發主軸，BP和BES教師則是以可實作的活動作為課程主軸。在培養學生探究能力上，B學校的教師在一個單元中讓學生經歷課綱所訂定之探究與實作歷程，A學校的教師則是在單一單元中讓學生培養一個探究能力。
3. 在課室觀察四位自然科探究與實作教師的教學時，發現教師們多半著重於學生執行實作任務，而稍忽略培養學生思考歷程。另外教師較少利用驅動問題引起學生興趣以及運用多元的評量方式檢測學生的學習成果。
藉由上述的研究成果，本文嘗試了解自然科探究與實作重要的課程與教學面向，以及目前探究與實作教師的教學情形。希冀藉此能提供其他自然科探究與實作教師在設計課程或是在教學時有更明確的方向，以達到108課綱的精神。

Taiwan implemented the new 12-year Basic Education Curricula Guidelines in 2018, the biggest change in natural science domain is the new course –scientific inquiry and practice, for high schools in order to help students to integrate learning content within and across different subjects and further cultivate students' inquiry and practice competent. In this study, evaluation tools were developed with the references of Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and combine them with Taiwan’s new curricula’s core values to develop evaluation tools for assessing scientific inquiry and practice. Four senior high school teachers from two different schools were investigated to uncover what the changes are and difficulties that the new curricula brought and teaching effectiveness of scientific inquiry and practice.
The study revealed the following main findings, namely,
1. The developed evaluation tools can be used appropriately topresent the outcomes of scientific inquiry and practice curriculum conducted by four senior high science teachers.
2. Different teacher has different approaches to design and implement their own curricula. AB and AC teachers developed the curricular based on core skills of specific subject skills, while BP and BES teachers developed their curricula from executable aspects to select appropriate topics. The students could take the opportunity to integrate all the steps of inquiry and practice as a whole in a single unit. To cultivate students’ inquiry and practice competent, the teachers in B school provided students with experiencing the the processes of inquiry and practice, described in the national curriculum guidelines, in each unit; the teachers in A school only allowed students to experience one of the steps of inquiry and practice within one unit. The students required the inquiry and practice competence through all the units.
3. In general, the four teachers tented to focus on cultivating the practicing part (hands-on) rather than the inquiry part (minds-on) stated in the curriculum guidelines. The other finding was that teachers did not use driving questions to stimulate students’ learning interest and they were also lacking of using multiple and alternative assessments to assess students’ learning outcomes.
In sum, this thesis provides relevant considerations of evaluating scientific inquiry and practice curricula and implementation. The implication of this study is to support teachers to develop and enhance their competence inscientific inquiry and practice with the explicit framework and tools and then gradually to match the expectations of the12-year Basic Education Curricula Guidelines.

Achieve. (2016). Educators evaluating the quality of instructional products (EQuIP) rubric for science, version 3.0. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/default/files/EQuIP Rubric for Science v3.pdf
Barrow, L. H.(2006). A brief history of inquiry: From Dewey to standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17 (3), 265-278.
BSCS Science Learning. (2018). NextGen TIME. Retrieved from nextgentime.org
Dewey, J. (1910). Science as subject-matter and as method. Science, 31(787), 121-127.
Good, T. L., & Lavigne, A. L. (2017). Looking in classrooms: Routledge.
Harris, C. J., Krajcik, J. S., Pellegrino, J. W., & McElhaney, K.W. (2016).Constructing assessment tasks that blend disciplinary core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and science practices for classroom formative applications. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Minstrell, J.(2000). Implications for teaching and learning inquiry: A summary. Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science, 471-496.
National Research Council (NRC) (1996) National science education standards. National Academy of Sciences.
National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning: National Academies Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., Tsourlidaki, E.(2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47-61.
Stufflebeam, D. L., Madaus, G. F., & Kellaghan, T.(2006). Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (Vol. 49): Springer Science & Business Media.
Urhahne, D., Schanze, S., Bell, T., Mansfield, A., & Holmes, J. (2010). Role of the teacher in computer‐supported collaborative inquiry learning. International Journal of Science Education, 32 (2), 221-243.
李驥、邱美虹 (2019) NGSS 和 12 年國民基本教育中探究、實作和建模的比較與分析. 科學教育月刊, 421, 19-31
邱美虹.(2005). 美國百年科學教育的發展. 教育資料與研究雙月刊, 64, 19-40.
教育部. (2003). 科學教育白皮書. 臺北市: 教育部.
教育部. (2014). 十二年國民基本教育課程綱要. 臺北: 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. 臺北: 教育部.
教育部. (2018）. 國民中學及國民小學實施課程評鑑參考原則。臺北:教育部.
鄭湧涇. (2005). 我國科學教育改革的回顧與展望. 科學教育月刊, 284, 2-35.
賴榮飛. (2019). 國民中小學學校課程評鑑機制之探究與建議. 臺灣教育評論月刊, 8 (8), 43-50.