| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立彰化師範大學 === 科學教育研究所 === 101 === This study was to investigate the effects of integrating argumentation-based instruction into Earth Science on 9th grade students' learning. An action research was adopted in the study. The subjects consist of two classes of 9th grade in a junior high school in Taichung city. One class was assigned as the experimental group (33 students) and the other (36 students) as the control group. The experimental group received an argumentation-based instruction, and the control group received traditional instruction. The instructional topics covered three units of current curriculum in Nature and Life Technology, including "Sun -Earth - Moon Model", "Landscape Changes and History of the Earth" and "Natural Disasters." The instruments used to collect data in this study include achievement test, scientific literacy assessment, motivation questionnaire, students’ working sheets, student feedback sheets and teacher reflection journal, etc. Data analysis use statistical programs, such as descriptive statistics, independent sample t-test and dependent samples t-test.
The main findings are as follows:
1. The achievement of students in the experimental group shows a significant difference from those in the control group on topic of the “Sun- Earth - Moon Model” section (t = 2.435, p = <.05), but not on the other two sections.
2.
The motivation of the experimental group shows significant higher than the control group (t = 2.53, p = <.05) after the argumentation-based instruction. Especially in the subscales of "self-efficacy", "active learning strategies", "science learning value," and "Learning environmental stimulation ", increased scores of the experimental group show significant better than the control group.
3. The experimental group outperformed the control group in all aspects of the scientific literacy assessment. (t = 3.564, p = <.01).
4. The difficultiesthe teacher encountered while implementing the argumentation-based instruction on Earth Science include:
(1) Expected learning outcomes do not covered since design of class activities fail to consider students’ background knowledge and argumentation-based instruction purposes.
(2) The teacher faces pressures of time and curriculum schedule constraints due to unfamiliar with argumentation teaching activities,..
(3) Poor qualities of students’ discussions and argumentations due to inappropriate argumentation tasks and issues, which are overestimated the ability of students.
Finally, based on the research results and discussions, some suggestions are provided as a reference for Earth Science teachers to intergrate argumentation-based instrutions to their teaching.
|
|---|
