不同學習領域教師對探究與探究教學的看法與實務-相似與差異

The Views and Practices of Teachers in Different Learning Areas about Inquiry and Inquiry-based Instruction

臺灣的十二年國民基本教育課程綱要將探究納為中小學的核心課程之一，許多前導學校被官方指派發展示範性探究課程。由於探究是一個可同時指涉不同意涵的字詞，教師可能因對探究的認識不一，而在嘗試合作實施探究教學的過程中遭遇困難。發掘探索不同學科背景教師對「探究」概念之差異，使師資培育單位／師資培育相關教師以之規劃合適的教師專業發展活動。本研究旨在探索實際開發示範性課程的情境與過程中，教師對探究與探究教學的看法與實務。我們於一所開發並試行跨學習領域探究課程的前導高中，對課程開發團隊中十一位不同學科背景（歷史、地理、公民、資訊、生物、物理和化學）的教師進行半結構訪談。繼而運用開放編碼技術分析訪談轉錄稿、教案與課室錄影。訪談結果發現，多數教師認為探究是問題解決。然而，自然科學教師視探究為方法，社會科學教師視探究為過程。自然科學教師通常會設計情境，讓學生確認研究問題並執行研究，且認為英文閱讀理解是進行探究的必要技能；時間是其發展課程時的主要考量。社會科學教師傾向於提供問題並引導討論；特定主題的專業諮詢為其進行課程發展之主要需求。課室觀察結果顯示傳統講述平均佔三成以上的課程時間，操作或執行研究是自然科學課程的主要探究活動。研究建議，相關師資培育單位／師資培育相關教師應深化教師探究相關知識，並根據教師持有的學科特質觀點協助他們進行相關專業發展。

 

All elementary, junior high and senior high schools must provide inquiry as one of the core requirements according to the 12-year curriculum for basic education. Several pioneer schools were officially appointed to develop exemplary inquiry courses. On the account of inquiring being a term that connotes different meanings at the same time, teachers may encounter many challenges when they attempt teaching collaboratively due to their different views about inquiry. Exploring different beliefs of teachers teaching different subjects allows educators to provide appropriate professional development activities. This study explored the views and practices of inquiry and inquiry-based instruction of teachers in the context and process of developing exemplary courses. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 11 teachers with different subject backgrounds (history, geography, citizenship, information technology, physics, chemistry, and biology) in a pioneer high school, where cross-learning areas inquiry courses were developed and piloted. We then applied the open coding technique to analyze interview transcripts, teaching plans, and class videos from these teachers. Findings from interviews show that most teachers considered inquiry as a form of problem solving. Nevertheless, natural science teachers viewed inquiry as a process, whereas social science teachers equated inquiry as content. Most natural science teachers preferred offering contextualized learning activities for students to frame research questions and conduct investigations. They also considered reading comprehension in English as the main threshold for retrieving references, and time and equipment were critical factors for curriculum development. Social science teachers usually emphasized providing research questions and guiding a whole-class discussion. Moreover, professional consultation on specific topics was a major demand for curriculum development. The results from classroom observation reveal that teachers spent more than 30% of classroom time on traditional didactic instruction. In addition, carrying out investigations was the main inquiry activities of natural science classes. We suggest that teacher educators should deepen schoolteachers’ epistemic knowledge and provide them with professional development activities in accordance with their views about the peculiarity of the discipline.