（專題）臺灣公民科技素養、科學興趣及科學參與之探討
作者:國立中山大學通識教育中心王薪惠、國立中山大學通識教育中心林煥祥、國立中山大學教育研究所洪瑞兒
卷期：63卷第4期
日期：2018年12月
頁碼：229-259
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0008
摘要：
本研究目的在探討臺灣公民科技素養、科學興趣和科學議題參與之交互作用，並以分層隨機抽樣選取年滿18～70歲公民共計1,831人為研究樣本，填答信度與效度良好之公民科技素養試題。為瞭解臺灣民眾科技素養及科學興趣狀況，首先以極端組群法將公民的科技素養及科學興趣依據分數高低區分為四類組：「高科技素養、高科學興趣組」、「高科技素養、低科學興趣組」、「低科技素養、高科學興趣組」及「低科技素養、低科學興趣組」。再以百分比同質性檢定比較不同性別、年齡層及學歷在這四組的分布差異，發現「高科技素養、高科學興趣組」男性公民比例顯著高於女性公民、年齡層較輕、具大學畢業以上學歷；而「低科技素養、低科學興趣組」則是女性公民比例顯著高於男性公民、年齡層較高、具中學以下學歷。接著以單因子變異數分析比較四類組公民在科學參與度之差異，發現「高科技素養、高科學興趣組」公民的整體科學參與頻率最高；而「低科技素養、高科學興趣組」公民為「科技議題活動參與」涉入程度最高。這些結果顯示高科學興趣的公民對科學及科技議題的參與度較為積極。因此本研究建議，提升未來公民科技素養當務之急宜先培養公民科學興趣，進一步鼓勵其科學議題之參與度，養成終身學習的習慣。
關鍵詞：2015年臺灣公民科技素養調查、科學參與、科學興趣
《詳全文》
參考文獻：
- 內政部統計處（2018）。107年5月臺灣人口數性別概況。取自https://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/chart.aspx 【Department of Statistics, Ministry of the Interior Republic of China. (2018). Gender profile of Taiwan population in May, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/chart.aspx】
- 行政院主計總處（2017）。105年受僱員工動向調查統計結果。取自https://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=41848&ctNode=5624 【Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, Executive Yuan. (2017). The 2016 results of employees survey. Retrieved from https://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=41848&ctNode=5624】
- 江淑琳、張瑜倩（2016）。更民主的科學溝通：科學類博物館實踐公眾參與科學之角色初探。傳播研究與實踐，6（1），199-227。doi:10.6123/JCRP.2016.008 【Chiang, S.-L., & Chang, Y.-C. (2016). More democratic science communication: Exploring the role of science museums engaging the public with science. Journal of Communication Research and Practice, 6(1), 199-227. doi:10.6123/JCRP.2016.008】
- 杜文苓（2010）。環評決策中公民參與的省思：以中科三期開發爭議為例。公共行政學報，35，29-60。doi:10.30409/JPA 【Tu, W.-L. (2010). Reflection on public participation in the environmental impact assessment: Environmental disputes over the 3rd stage of central Taiwan science park development. Journal of Public Administration, 35, 29-60. doi:10.30409/JPA】
- 李文旗、張俊彥（2005）。中學生應達到的地球科學素養？─中學地科老師的觀點。師大學報：科學教育類，50（2），1-27。doi:10.6300/JNTNU.2005.50(2).0 【Lee, W.-C., & Chang, C.-Y. (2005). Taiwan’s secondary school teachers’ expectations with regard to the earth science literacy of their students. Journal of Taiwan Normal University: Mathematics & Science Education, 50(2), 1-27. doi:10.6300/JNTNU.2005.50(2).01】
» 展開更多
- 內政部統計處（2018）。107年5月臺灣人口數性別概況。取自https://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/ chart.aspx 【Department of Statistics, Ministry of the Interior Republic of China. (2018). Gender profile of Taiwan population in May, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.moi.gov.tw/stat/chart.aspx】
- 行政院主計總處（2017）。105年受僱員工動向調查統計結果。取自https://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ ct.asp?xItem=41848&ctNode=5624 【Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics, Executive Yuan. (2017). The 2016 results of employees survey. Retrieved from https://www.dgbas.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=41848&ctNode=5624】
- 江淑琳、張瑜倩（2016）。更民主的科學溝通：科學類博物館實踐公眾參與科學之角色初探。傳播研究與實踐，6（1），199-227。doi:10.6123/JCRP.2016.008 【Chiang, S.-L., & Chang, Y.-C. (2016). More democratic science communication: Exploring the role of science museums engaging the public with science. Journal of Communication Research and Practice, 6(1), 199-227. doi:10.6123/JCRP.2016.008】
- 杜文苓（2010）。環評決策中公民參與的省思：以中科三期開發爭議為例。公共行政學報，35，29-60。doi:10.30409/JPA 【Tu, W.-L. (2010). Reflection on public participation in the environmental impact assessment: Environmental disputes over the 3rd stage of central Taiwan science park development. Journal of Public Administration, 35, 29-60. doi:10.30409/JPA】
- 李文旗、張俊彥（2005）。中學生應達到的地球科學素養？─中學地科老師的觀點。師大學報：科學教育類，50（2），1-27。doi:10.6300/JNTNU.2005.50(2).01 【Lee, W.-C., & Chang, C.-Y. (2005). Taiwan’s secondary school teachers’ expectations with regard to the earth science literacy of their students. Journal of Taiwan Normal University: Mathematics & Science Education, 50(2), 1-27. doi:10.6300/JNTNU.2005.50(2).01】
- 吳坤璋、黃台珠、吳裕益（2005）。影響中小學學生科學學習成就的因素之比較研究。教育心理學報，37（2），147-171。doi:10.6251/BEP.20051115 【Wu, K.-C., Huang, T.-C., & Wu, Y.-Y. (2005). A comparative study of factors affecting science learning achievement of students in different grade levels. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 37(2), 147-171. doi:10.6251/BEP.20051115】
- 佘曉清、林煥祥（主編）（2017）。PISA 2015臺灣學生的表現。新北市：心理。 【She, H.-C., & Lin, H.-S. (Eds.). (2017). Taiwan student performance in PISA 2015. New Taipei City, Taiwan: Psychological.】
- 胡瑞萍、林陳涌（2002）。寫作與科學學習。科學教育月刊，253，2-18。 【Hu, R.-P., & Lin, C.-Y. (2002). Writing and learning of science. Science Education Monthly, 253, 2-18.】
- 章英華、傅仰止（2006）。臺灣社會變遷基本調查計畫第五期第一次調查計畫執行報告。行政院國家科學委員會專案研究報告（NSC94-2420-H-001-008-B1）。臺北市：中央研究院社會學研究所。 【Chang, Y.-H., & Fu, Y.-C. (2006). Taiwan social change survey, first wave of the fifth phase. National Science Council project report (NSC94-2420-H-001-008-B1). Taipei, Taiwan: Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica.】
- 黃台珠（主編）（2012）。2012年科技與語文素養計畫─公民科技素養調查研究執行報告。高雄市：國立中山大學通識教育中心公民素養推動研究中心。 【Huang, T.-C. (Ed.). (2012). 2012 S&T and language literacy project: Civic technological literacy investigation Kaohsiung, Taiwan: The Research Center for Promoting Civic Scientific Literacy of the Center for General Education, National Yat-sen University.】
- 黃孝宗、蔡俊彥、黃台珠（2013）。公民科學家意象與參觀博物館對科學研究利益知覺之影響。教育科學研究期刊，58（3），1-22。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2013.58(3).01 【Huang, H.-T., Tsai, C.-Y., & Huang, T.-C. (2013). Influence of citizens’ images of scientists and museum visits on the benefit perception of scientific research. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 58(3), 1-22. doi:10. 6209/JORIES.2013.58(3).01】
- 黃俊儒（2015）。你讀到什麼科學？─科學新聞閱讀回憶診斷工具發展與評析。教育科學研究期刊，60（2），139-166。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(2).05 【Huang, C.-J. (2015). What science have you read? Developing and investigating a diagnostic tool for evaluating science news reading memory. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 60(2), 139-166. doi:10.6209/ JORIES.2015.60(2).05】
- 黃俊儒、簡妙如（2008）。「科學家發明了什麼？」─解析學生對於科學新聞中的科技產物意象。科學教育學刊，16（4），415-438。doi:10.6844/NCKU.2010.01611 【Huang, C.-J., & Jian, M.-J. (2008).“What have scientists created?” − Students’ image toward technology when they read science news reports. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 16(4), 415-438. doi:10.6844/NCKU. 2010.01611】
- 傅仰止、張晉芬（2007）。臺灣社會變遷基本調查計畫第五期第二次調查計畫執行報告。行政院國家科學委員會專案研究報告（NSC95-2420-H-001-006-B1）。臺北市：中央研究院社會學研究所。 【Fu, Y.-C., & Chang, C.-F. (2007). Taiwan social change survey, second wave of the fifth phase. National Science Council project report (NSC95-2420-H-001-006-B1). Taipei, Taiwan: Institute of Sociology, Academia Sinica.】
- 蔡俊彥（主編）（2015）。2015年臺灣公民科學素養概況。高雄市：國立中山大學通識教育中心公民素養推動研究中心。 【Tsai, C.-Y. (Ed.). (2015). Overview of 2015 Taiwan public science literacy. Kaohsiung, Taiwan: The Research Center for Promoting Civic Scientific Literacy of the Center for General Education, National Sun Yat-sen University.】
- 魏惠娟、陳冠良、李雅慧（2014）。活躍老化高齡教育課程架構與評析：規範性需求的觀點。中正教育研究，13（1），45-88。doi:10.3966/168395522014061301002 【Wei, H.-C., Chen, G.-L., & Lee, Y.-H. (2014). The framework of active aging curriculum for education of the elderly and its evaluation: Normative needs perspective. Chung Cheng Educational Studies, 13(1), 45-88. doi:10.3966/168395522014061301002】
- Agrawal, A. (2001). Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Development, 29(10), 1649-1672. doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(01)00063-8
- Ainley, M., Hidi, S., & Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning, and the psychological processes that mediate their relationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 545-561. doi:10.1037/ 0022-0663.94.3.545
- Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2009). Introducing a fifth pedagogy: Experience-based strategies for facilitating learning in natural environments. Environmental Education Research, 15(2), 243-262. doi:10.1080/13504620802711282
- Beetlestone, J. G., Johnson., C. H., Quin, M., & White, H. (1998). The science center movement: Contexts, practice, next challenges. Public Understanding of Science, 7(1), 5-22. doi:10.1177/ 096366259800700101
- Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A. W., & Feder, M. A. (Eds.). (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
- Billett, S. (2002). Toward a workplace pedagogy: Guidance, participation, and engagement. Adult Education Quarterly, 53(1), 27-43. doi:10.1177/074171302237202
- Bonney, R., Phillips, T. B., Ballard, H. L., & Enck, J. W. (2016). Can citizen science enhance public understanding of science? Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 2-16. doi:10.1177/096366 2515607406
- Carrion, M. L. (2018). “You need to do your research”: Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology. Public Understanding of Science, 27(3), 310-324. doi:10.1177/09636625177 28024
- Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54(1), 1-22. doi:10.1037/h0046743
- Chang, M., Singh, K., & Mo, Y. (2007). Science engagement and science achievement: Longitudinal models using NELS data. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(4), 349-371. doi:10.1080/ 13803610701702787
- Chen, H.-T., Wang, H.-H., Lu, Y.-Y., Lin, H.-S., & Hong, Z.-R (2016). Using a modified argument-driven inquiry to promote elementary school students’ engagement in learning science and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 38(2), 170-191. doi:10. 1080/09500693.2015.1134849
- Conrad, C. C., & Hilchey, K. G. (2011). A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: Issues and opportunities. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 176(1-4), 273-291. doi:10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5
- Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers. Psychological Issues, 1, 1-171.
- Falk, J. H. (2002). The contribution of free-choice learning to public understanding of science. Interciencia, 27(2), 62-65.
- Falk, J. H., & Needham, M. D. (2013). Factors contributing to adult knowledge of science and technology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(4), 431-452. doi:10.1002/tea.21080
- Falk, J. H., Storksdieck, M., & Dierking, L. D. (2007). Investigating public science interest and understanding: Evidence for the importance of free-choice learning. Public Understanding of Science, 16(4), 455-469. doi:10.1177/0963662506064240
- Falkner, K., & Palmer, E. (2009). Developing authentic problem solving skills in introductory computing classes. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 41(1), 4-8. doi:10.1145/1539024.1508871
- Fiorino, D. J. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology & Human Values, 15(2), 226-243. doi:10.1177/016224399001500204
- Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the face of power. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
- Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50. doi:10.2307/ 3151312
- Fortmann, L. (2008). Participatory research in conservation and rural livelihoods: Doing science together. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
- Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. doi:10.3102/ 00346543074001059
- Grant, J. (1994). The drama of democracy: Contention and dispute in community planning. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
- Greenfield, T. A. (1997). Gender-and grade-level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education, 81(3), 259-276. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199706)81:3<259::AID-SCE1> 3.0.CO;2-C
- Henriksen, E. K., & Frøyland, M. (2000). The contribution of museums to scientific literacy: Views from audience and museum professionals. Public Understanding of Science, 9(4), 393-415. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/9/4/304
- Hidi, S., Berndorff, D., & Ainley, M. (2002). Children’s argument writing, interest and self-efficacy: An intervention study. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 429-446. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(01) 00009-3
- Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
- Hisschemöller, M., & Midden, C. J. H. (1999). Improving the usability of research on the public perception of science and technology for policy-making. Public Understanding of Science, 8(1), 17-33. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/8/1/002
- Hong, Z.-R (2010). Effects of a collaborative science intervention on high achieving students’ learning anxiety and attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(15), 1971-1988. doi:10.1080/09500690903229304
- Hong, Z.-R, & Lin, H.-S. (2011). An Investigation of students’ personality traits and attitudes toward science. International Journal of Science Education, 33(7), 1001-1028. doi:10.1080/09500693. 2010.524949
- Hong, Z.-R, & Lin, H.-S. (2013). Boys’ and girls’ involvement in science learning and their self-efficacy in Taiwan. International Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 272-284. doi:10.1080/ 00207594.2011.628673
- Hong, Z.-R, Lin, H.-S., Chen, H.-T., Wang, H.-H., & Lin, C.-J. (2014). The effects of aesthetic science activities on improving at-risk families children’s anxiety about learning science and positive thinking. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 216-243. doi:10.1080/ 09500693.2012.758394
- Hong, Z.-R, Lin, H.-S., & Lawrenz, F. P. (2012). Effects of an integrated science and societal implication intervention on promoting adolescent’s positive thinking and emotional perceptions in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 329-352. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011. 623727
- Hong, Z.-R, Lin, H.-S., Wang, H.-H., Chen, H.-T., & Yang, K.-K. (2013). Promoting and scaffolding elementary school students’ attitudes toward science and argumentation through a science and society intervention. International Journal of Science Education, 35(10), 1625-1648. doi:10. 1080/09500693.2012.734935
- Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
- Hynd, C., Holschuh, J., & Nist, S. (2000). Learning complex scientific information: Motivation theory and its relation to student perceptions. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16(1), 23-57. doi:10.1080/105735600278051
- Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort? Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55-65. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2004.00346.x
- Jenkins, E. W. (1999). School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(7), 703-710. doi:10.1080/095006999290363
- Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2003). Student motivation in co-operative groups: Social interdependence theory. In R. M. Gillies & A. F. Ashman (Eds.), Cooperative learning: The social and intellectual outcomes of learning in groups (pp. 136-176). New York, NY: Routledge Falmer.
- Johnson, H., & Wilson, G. (2000). Biting the bullet: Civil society, social learning and the transformation of local governance. World Development, 28(11), 1891-1906. doi:10.1016/ S0305-750X(00)00069-3
- Jones, D., & Stein, J. K. (2005). The flandrau science center front-end evaluation (Unpublished technical report). Institute for Learning Innovation, Annapolis, MD.
- Kind, P., Jones, K., & Barmby, P. (2007). Developing attitudes towards science measures. International Journal of Science Education, 29(7), 871-893. doi:10.1080/09500690600909091
- Kolstø, S. D. (2000). Consensus projects: Teaching science for citizenship. International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 645-664. doi:10.1080/095006900289714
- Lin, H.-S., Lawrenz, F., Lin, S.-F., & Hong, Z.-R (2013). Relationships among affective factors and preferred engagement in science-related activities. Public Understanding of Science, 22(8), 941-954. doi:10.1177/0963662511429412
- Loyens, S. M. M., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Schmidt, H. G. (2008). Relationships between students’ conceptions of constructivist learning and their regulation and processing strategies. Instructional Science, 36(5-6), 445-462. doi:10.1007/s11251-008-9065-6
- Lui, A. K., Kwan, R., Poon, M., & Cheung, Y. H. Y. (2004). Saving weak programming students: Applying constructivism in a first programming course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 36(2), 72-76. doi:10.1145/1024338.1024376
- Maienschein, J. (1998). Scientific literacy. Science, 281(5379), 917. doi:10.1126/science.281. 5379.917
- McCallie, E., Bell, L., Lohwater, T., Falk, J. H., Lehr, J. L., Lewenstein, B. V., …Weihe, B. (2009). Many expert, many audiences: Public engagement with science and informal science education. Paper presented at the conference of the Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE), Washington, DC.
- Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical review. Daedalus, 112(2), 29-48.
- Miller, J. D. (1987). Scientific literacy in the United States. In D. Evered & M. O’Connor (Eds.), Communicating science to the public (pp. 19-40). London, UK: Wiley.
- Miller, J. D. (1996). Scientific literacy for effective citizenship. In R. E. Yager (Ed.), Science/ technology/society as reform in science education (pp. 185-204). New York, NY: State University Press of New York.
- Miller, J. D. (1998). The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7(3), 203-223. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/7/3/001
- Miller, J. D. (2000). The development of civic scientific literacy in the United States. In D. D. Kumar & D. E. Chubin (Eds.), Science, technology, and society: A sourcebook on research and practice (pp. 21-47). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
- Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: What we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13(3), 273-294. doi:10. 1177/0963662504044908
- Miller, J. D. (2010a). Civic scientific literacy: The role of the media in the electronic era. In D. Kennedy & G. Overholser (Eds.), Science, technology, and the media (pp. 44-63). Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
- Miller, J. D. (2010b). The conceptualization and measurement of civic scientific literacy for the twenty-first century. In J. Meinwald & J. G. Hildebrand (Eds.), Science and the educated American: A core component of liberal education (pp. 241-255). Cambridge, MA: American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
- Miller, J. D. (2012). The sources and impact of civic scientific literacy. In M. W. Bauer, R. Shukla, & N. Allum (Eds.), The culture of science: How the public relates to science across the globe (pp. 217-240). New York, NY: Routledge.
- Miller, J. D. (2016). Civic scientific literacy in the United States in 2016. Retrieved from https:// smd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/science-red/s3fs-public/atoms/files/NASA%20CSL%20in%202016%20Report_0_0.pdf
- Miller, J. D., Pardo, R., & Niwa, F. (1997). Public perceptions of science and technology: A comparative study of the European Union, the United States, Japan, and Canada. Bilbao, Spain: Fundación BBV.
- Miller, S., Caro, P., Koulaidis, V., de Semir, V., Staveloz, W., & Vargas, R. (2002). Benchmarking the promotion of RTD culture and public understanding of science. Brussels, Belgium: Commission of the European Communities.
- National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
- National Science Board. (2016). Science and engineering indicators 2016. Retrieved from https://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2016/nsb20161.pdf
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2006). Student questionnaire for PISA 2006. Paris, France: Author.
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2009). OECD science, technology and industry scoreboard 2009. Paris, France: Author. doi:10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2009-en
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 assessment framework: Key competencies in reading, mathematics and science. Paris, France: Author.
- Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London, UK: Nuffield Foundation.
- Rudolph, J. L. (2005). Inquiry, instrumentalism, and the public understanding of science. Science Education, 89(5), 803-821. doi:10.1002/sce.20071
- Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002). Overview of self-determination theory: An organismic- dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 3-33). Rochester, NY: The University of Rochester Press.
- Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse: Assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(8), 909-921. doi:10.1002/tea.20327
- Shein, P. P., Li, Y.-Y., & Huang, T.-C. (2015). The four cultures: Public engagement with science only, art only, neither, or both museums. Public Understanding of Science, 24(8), 943-956. doi:10.1177/0963662515602848
- Stine-Morrow, E. A. L., & Parisi, J. M. (2011). The adult development and cognition and learning. In K. Rubenson (Ed.), Adult learning and education (pp. 41-46). Saint Louis, MO: Academic Press.
- Stocklmayer, S. M., Rennie, L. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 1-44. doi:10. 1080/03057260903562284
- Tett, L., & St. Clair, R. (2011). Adult literacy education. In K. Rubenson (Ed.), Adult learning and education (pp. 100-105). Saint Louis, MO: Academic Press.
- Tsai, C.-Y., Li, Y.-Y., & Cheng, Y.-Y. (2017). The relationships among adult affective factors, engagement in science, and scientific competencies. Adult Education Quarterly, 67(1), 30-47. doi:10.1177/0741713616673148
- Tytler, R., Symington, D., & Smith, C. (2011). A curriculum innovation framework for science, technology and mathematics education. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 19-38. doi:10. 1007/s11165-009-9144-y
- United Nations Environment Programme. (2012). Report of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Retrieved from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/2012/ session-11-UNEP.pdf
- Wang, H.-H., Chen, H.-T., Lin, H.-S., Huang, Y.-N., & Hong, Z.-R (2017). Longitudinal study of a cooperation-driven, socio-scientific issue intervention on promoting students’ critical thinking and self-regulation in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), 2002-2026. doi:10.1080/09500693.2017.1357087
- Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131-175. doi:10.3102/00346543072002131
- Woods-McConney, A., Oliver, M. C., McConney, A., Schibeci, R., & Maor, D. (2014). Science engagement and literacy: A retrospective analysis for students in Canada and Australia. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1588-1608. doi:10.1080/09500693.2013. 871658
- Wu, K.-C., Shein, P. P., Tsai, C.-Y., Chou, C.-Y., Wu, Y.-Y., Liu, C.-J., …Huang, T.-C. (2012). An investigation of Taiwan’s public attitudes toward science and technology. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(1), 1-21. doi:10.1080/21548455.2011.613643
- Yang, K.-K., Hong, Z.-R, Liu, M.-C., & Lin, H.-S. (2015). Exploring the role of visitors’ self-identity in marine museum learning. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 5(4), 375-393. doi:10.1080/21548455.2015.1046152
- Yearley, S. (2006). Bridging the science-policy divide in urban air-quality management: Evaluating ways to make models more robust through public engagement. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 24(5), 701-714. doi:10.1068/c0610j
- Yearley, S., Cinderby, S., Forrester, J., Bailey, P., & Rosen, P. (2003). Participatory modelling and the local governance of the politics of UK air pollution: A three-city case study. Environmental Values, 12(2), 247-262. doi:10.3197/096327103129341315
Journal directory listing - Volume 63 (2018) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【63(4)】December (Special Issue: The Concepts and Practices for Achieving Literacy)
(Special Issue) Exploring Taiwan Citizens’ Scientific Literacy, Interest in, and Engagement in Learning Science
Author: Hsin-Hui Wang (Center for General Education, National Sun Yat-sen University), Huann-Shyang Lin (Center for General Education, National Sun Yat-sen University), Zuway-R Hong (Institute of Education, National Sun Yat-sen University)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 63, No.4
Date：December 2018
Pages：229-259
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0008
Abstract：
This study explored Taiwan citizens’ scientific literacy, interest in, and engagement in learning science. By using the stratified random sampling strategy, 1,831 citizens in the age group of 18-70 years were selected to respond to a questionnaire survey along with a paper-pencil test. For exploring the relationship between Taiwan citizens’ scientific literacy and their interest in science, the participants were divided into four groups on the basis of their scores for scientific literacy and interest in science. According to the essential results, the high scientific literacy and high science interest (HH) group was mainly represented by males, young citizens, and citizens with higher educational degrees. Conversely, the low scientific literacy and low science interest (LL) group was dominated by females, elderly citizens, and citizens with only a secondary school diploma. Among the four groups, citizens in the HH and LH groups exhibited higher frequency of engagement in science activities. Finally, citizens with high science interest tended to be enthusiastic in learning science and technology. This study contributed a novel insight that the interest in learning science plays a critical role in promoting adults’ engagement in learning science. Future studies are recommended for focusing on the citizens in the LH group to investigate how high engagement in learning science influences their scientific literacy.
Keywords：2015 Taiwan citizens’ scientific literacy survey, engagement in learning science, interest in learning science