發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-10 21:36

  本文選題：科學(xué)本質(zhì) + 廣義科學(xué)本質(zhì)　； 參考：《華東師范大學(xué)》2015年博士論文

【摘要】：提高全體學(xué)生的科學(xué)素養(yǎng)是世界各國科學(xué)教育的主要目標(biāo),也是當(dāng)前我國高中科學(xué)課程改革的重要理念�？茖W(xué)本質(zhì)是科學(xué)素養(yǎng)的核心和基礎(chǔ),增進(jìn)學(xué)生對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的理解有利于促進(jìn)學(xué)生科學(xué)素養(yǎng)的提高和發(fā)展。當(dāng)前研究發(fā)現(xiàn)多數(shù)師生持有質(zhì)樸的科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀,究其原因可能是科學(xué)本質(zhì)本身復(fù)雜,也可能是因?yàn)榻炭茣茖W(xué)本質(zhì)表征存在問題。因此,以中美高中生物學(xué)教科書為切入點(diǎn),展開科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征的比較研究具有一定的理論和實(shí)踐意義。本研究的目的是比較中美高中生物學(xué)教科書科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征存在的差異。研究主要采用了內(nèi)容分析法和比較法。根據(jù)PCK理論,課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、教科書、學(xué)生和教師都是科學(xué)本質(zhì)PCK的重要組成部分,為了更好地比較分析教科書對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的表征,有必要先分析課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn),再調(diào)查教師和學(xué)生的科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀點(diǎn)及對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育的態(tài)度。研究分別采用Chiappetta1 (2007)的廣義科學(xué)本質(zhì)框架和Alshamarani2(2008)的狹義科學(xué)本質(zhì)框架分析課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的表征。采用Chen(2006)編制的科學(xué)觀和科學(xué)教育態(tài)度問卷(VOSE),調(diào)查高中師生的科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀和教師的科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育態(tài)度。采用Chiappetta等的廣義科學(xué)本質(zhì)框架,定量分析高中生物學(xué)教科書對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)四要素表征數(shù)量的平衡性。采用Alshamrani(2008)的狹義科學(xué)本質(zhì)內(nèi)涵為框架、Abd-El-Khalick(2008) 3的科學(xué)本質(zhì)評(píng)估標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為工具,定性分析教科書對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征的準(zhǔn)確性。以科學(xué)本質(zhì)與具體內(nèi)容整合視角,分析5個(gè)重要的科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征實(shí)例。本研究的主要研究結(jié)論如下：(1)美國兩個(gè)課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)廣義科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征更為顯性,表征知識(shí)內(nèi)容范圍更廣、STS內(nèi)容更詳細(xì)。中國的兩個(gè)課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)科學(xué)思維和科學(xué)探究表征更詳細(xì)。課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)狹義科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征不夠全面和準(zhǔn)確,多為隱性、理性表征。(2)師生的科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀在很多方面是“混合”觀點(diǎn),少數(shù)是“隱性、理性”觀點(diǎn)。通過t檢驗(yàn),發(fā)現(xiàn)師生科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀沒有顯著區(qū)別。教師對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育態(tài)度多為“隱性、理性”和“混合”觀點(diǎn),與課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對(duì)狹義科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征情況相似。(3)教科書對(duì)廣義科學(xué)本質(zhì)的四要素表征均不平衡,科學(xué)知識(shí)和科學(xué)探究數(shù)量構(gòu)成比較高,科學(xué)思維和科學(xué)技術(shù)社會(huì)(STS)數(shù)量構(gòu)成比較低；χ2檢驗(yàn)判明四本教科書中科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征數(shù)量分布不一致。(4)教科書對(duì)狹義科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征不夠全面、準(zhǔn)確。借助相關(guān)性統(tǒng)計(jì)分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)中國的課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與教科書表征的科學(xué)本質(zhì)有顯著正相關(guān),說明課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)影響教科書對(duì)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的表征。美國課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與教科書科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征無相關(guān)性,但標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之間有相關(guān)性。師生的科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀表現(xiàn)與課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和教科書的科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征有相似性。(5)論文選取某些具體科學(xué)本質(zhì)詳細(xì)分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)教科書對(duì)“科學(xué)方法”、“理論與定律”表征都不夠顯性、理性。分析科學(xué)本質(zhì)與具體科學(xué)內(nèi)容整合方式發(fā)現(xiàn),教科書沒有結(jié)合對(duì)基因功能描述隱性表征科學(xué)暫定性、沒有結(jié)合描述科學(xué)家去表征豐富的科學(xué)本質(zhì)、沒有結(jié)合科學(xué)探究表征多樣的科學(xué)方法和高水平的探究活
[Abstract]:Improve the students' scientific literacy is the main goal of science education around the world, an important concept is the current our country high school science curriculum reform. The essence of science is the core and foundation of scientific literacy, to enhance students' understanding of the nature of science to promote the improvement and development of the scientific literacy of students. The current study found that most teachers and students hold the pristine nature of science the concept, the reason may be the essence of science itself is complex, it may be because the nature of science textbook characterization problems. Therefore, the Sino US high school biology textbooks as the starting point, comparative study on the characterization of the nature of science has certain theoretical and practical significance. The purpose of this study was to compare differences between Chinese and American high school biology textbooks of science the essence of characterization. Research mainly adopts content analysis method and comparative method. According to the PCK theory, curriculum standards, textbooks, students And teachers are an important part of the nature of science PCK, in order to better characterize the comparative analysis of the nature of science textbooks, it is necessary to analyze the curriculum standard, and the views of science investigation of teachers and students and their attitude to the nature of science education. The research by Chiappetta1 (2007) generalized the nature of science and Alshamarani2 framework (2008 the special nature of Science) framework for analysis and characterization of the nature of science curriculum standard. The Chen (2006) preparation of the view of science and science education attitude questionnaire (VOSE), attitude toward the nature of science education survey of the nature of science high school teachers and students and teachers. The concept of the generalized nature of science framework Chiappetta, balance analysis of high school biology textbooks on the number of the four elements of the nature of science. The quantitative characterization of Alshamrani (2008) of the special nature of science connotation as the framework, Abd-El-Khalick (2008) 3 assessment of the nature of Science Evaluation standard for qualitative analysis tools, the accuracy of the nature of science textbook. The characterization of the nature of science and the specific content of the integration perspective, analysis of the 5 important scientific nature characterized examples. The main conclusions of this study are as follows: (1) the two curriculum standards is more dominant on the generalized scientific representation, representation of knowledge scope a broader, more detailed content. STS two curriculum standards China of scientific thinking and scientific inquiry. More detailed characterization of the course standard of narrow sense is not very comprehensive and accurate characterization of the nature of science, more recessive, rational representation. (2) the nature of science and values in many aspects is the "mixed" point of view, the minority is recessive, "rational point of view. Through t test, found no significant difference between teachers and students of the nature of science teachers. For many" hidden nature of science education attitude, rationality "and" mixed "point of view, and the scientific curriculum standard to narrow Similar qualitative characterization. (3) the four elements to characterize the generalized nature of science textbooks are not balanced, scientific knowledge and scientific inquiry number form is relatively high, the scientific thinking and scientific technology society (STS) constitute a relatively low number; 2 test to ascertain four textbooks in the nature of science characterization quantity distribution (4) is not consistent. The special nature of science textbook characterization is not comprehensive, accurate. By means of correlation analysis, found that there was a significant positive correlation Chinese the nature of science curriculum standards and textbook representation, the representation of the nature of science curriculum standard textbook effect. There is no correlation between the United States and the nature of science curriculum standard textbook representation, but there is correlation between the standard representation of scientific nature of science. The essence of teachers and students view and curriculum standards and textbooks are similar. (5) this paper selects some detailed analysis of the nature of science, found on textbooks" The scientific method "," theory and law "are not rational. The explicit characterization and analysis of the nature of science and scientific way of specific content integration, combined with the implicit representation of scientific textbooks do not describe the tentative on gene function, with no description of the nature of science scientists to the characterization of the rich, not with the scientific methods of scientific inquiry and a high level of diversity characterization the inquiry activities

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：G633.91

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 沈?yàn)榛?陳偉壁;;更新觀念 充實(shí)內(nèi)容 變換視角——讀《科學(xué)史十五講》有感[J];歷史教學(xué)(中學(xué)版);2009年06期

2 袁維新;科學(xué)的本質(zhì)與科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育[J];課程.教材.教法;2004年07期

3 陳維霞;陳嫻;;淺談科學(xué)探究中的科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育[J];中小學(xué)教師培訓(xùn);2005年10期

4 梁永平;;對(duì)我國《科學(xué)課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)》中科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育目標(biāo)的反思與建議[J];教育理論與實(shí)踐;2006年12期

5 項(xiàng)紅專;;美國科學(xué)史教育特色——理解科學(xué)本質(zhì)[J];外國中小學(xué)教育;2006年08期

6 陳彥芬;;科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育及其教學(xué)研究與實(shí)踐——以英國國家科學(xué)課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為例[J];衡水學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年04期

7 袁維新;;國外科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育研究及啟示[J];外國中小學(xué)教育;2009年03期

8 賴小琴;;國外科學(xué)本質(zhì)研究述評(píng)[J];廣西教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年01期

9 袁維新;;國外關(guān)于科學(xué)本質(zhì)教學(xué)的研究[J];比較教育研究;2009年01期

10 朱冠章;黃國華;李武鋼;祝偉月;;傳達(dá)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的物理教學(xué)設(shè)計(jì)探討[J];大眾科技;2010年05期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 黃曉;體現(xiàn)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的科學(xué)教學(xué)[D];華東師范大學(xué);2010年

2 嚴(yán)文法;高中生科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀及其影響因素的研究[D];西南大學(xué);2009年

3 牛波;中美高中生物學(xué)教科書科學(xué)本質(zhì)表征的比較研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2015年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 季薛慶;科學(xué)本質(zhì)課堂教學(xué)實(shí)證研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2011年

2 張金運(yùn);科學(xué)本質(zhì)：從哲學(xué)走向課堂[D];南京師范大學(xué);2008年

3 馬俊萍;中學(xué)教師科學(xué)本質(zhì)觀現(xiàn)狀及學(xué)生科學(xué)本質(zhì)提高策略研究[D];陜西師范大學(xué);2011年

4 劉娟;我國初中科學(xué)教材中的科學(xué)史：關(guān)于科學(xué)本質(zhì)的分析[D];廣州大學(xué);2006年

5 張學(xué)敏;高中物理規(guī)律教學(xué)中科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育的研究[D];曲阜師范大學(xué);2014年

6 侯曉梅;提升小學(xué)生科學(xué)本質(zhì)理解的實(shí)踐研究[D];浙江師范大學(xué);2014年

7 柳珊珊;初中理科教科書中科學(xué)史的文本分析[D];南京師范大學(xué);2008年

8 王亮;高中教材中力學(xué)實(shí)驗(yàn)部分科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育研究[D];曲阜師范大學(xué);2012年

9 朱冠章;利用科學(xué)史傳達(dá)科學(xué)本質(zhì)的高中物理教學(xué)研究[D];廣西師范學(xué)院;2010年

10 劉榮發(fā);高中化學(xué)科學(xué)本質(zhì)教育現(xiàn)狀及教學(xué)對(duì)策研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1733015