師大學報 - 教育科學研究期刊 - 期刊目錄列表 - 66卷(2021) - 【教育科學研究期刊】66(4)十二月刊（本期專題：校園成癮行為暨防制）

以作者名、篇名、關鍵字或DOI查詢

CONTRIBUTORS
NOTICE

[Guide for Submission]

稿約

[Style for Thesis Writing]

論文撰寫體例

[Review of Research Papers]

論文審查要點

[The Copyright]

著作權處理要點

[Flow of Review System]

審查制度流程

[Regulations Governing]

編審委員會設置要點

[Editorial Board]

本年度編審委員

[Advisory Board]

本年度諮詢委員

[Form Download]

相關表單下載

《教育科學研究期刊》「高等教育的教學卓越」專題徵稿(截稿日至2025/09/30) 《教育科學研究期刊》「社會情緒學習｣專題徵稿(截稿日至2024/10/31) 《教育科學研究期刊》「高齡教育」專題徵稿(截稿日至2024/12/31)

期刊目錄列表 - 66卷(2021) - 【教育科學研究期刊】66(4)十二月刊（本期專題：校園成癮行為暨防制）

回上一頁

針對高中科學論證教學研究回顧與評析作者:國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所湯宜佩、國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所張文馨、國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所許瑛玿

卷期：66卷第4期
日期：2021年12月
頁碼：217-243
DOI：https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202112_66(4).0008

摘要：
　　本研究針對高中科學論證教學相關實證研究進行回顧，透過內容分析方法，瞭解論證教學特徵，期能對如何在課室實施論證教學提出具體建議。為蒐集相關實證研究，本研究使用Scopus期刊數據庫搜尋國外文章，並針對臺灣教育領域三本重要的學術期刊進行國內相關文獻的搜尋，且依三項篩選條件進行人工篩選：一、為實證性研究；二、研究對象為高中教師或高中學生；三、有實際教學實施。總共篩選出24篇文章。根據本研究回顧結果建議，論證教學類型大多採沉浸式論證教學，教學活動設計著重於情境布置，營造能讓學生沉浸於論證對話的學習環境中，以提高學生學習動機和學習投入，故建議沉浸式論證教學應強調營造以學生為主的學習環境來增進同儕與師生對話的機會。而結構式論證教學著重嵌入論證框架於活動、學習單或科學寫作來增進學生對論證結構的理解，建議未來研究若強調增進學生論證能力遷移可嵌入明示的論證框架於教學活動中。

關鍵詞：內容分析、科學教育、論證、論證教學

《詳全文》

參考文獻：

洪逸文、湯宜佩（2016）。高中特色課程的開發與實施：以論證課程為例。課程研究，11（3），23-57。https://doi.org/10.3966/181653382016031101002【Hung, Y.-W., & Tang, Y.-P. (2016). Developing and implementing argumentation training curriculum as a high school-based feature curriculum in Taiwan. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 11(3), 23-57. https://doi.org/10.3966/181653382016031101002】
張珮珊、賴吉永、溫媺純（2017）。科學探究與實作課程的發展、實施與評量：以實驗室中的科學論證為核心之研究。科學教育學刊，25（4），355-389。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2017.2504.03【Chang, P.-S., Lai, C.-Y., & Wen, M.-L. (2017). The development, implementation and assessment of a scientific inquiry and practice curriculum: The scientific argumentation in the laboratory. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 25(4), 355-389. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2017.2504.03】
教育部（2018）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要。作者。【Ministry of Education. (2018). Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education. Author.】
黃柏鴻、林樹聲（2007）。論證教學相關實證性研究之回顧與省思。科學教育月刊，302，5-20。https://doi.org/10.6216/SEM.200709_(302).0002【Huang, P.-H., & Lin, S.-S. (2007). Literature review and reflection on the research about argumentation instruction. Science Education Monthly, 302, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.6216/SEM.200709_(302).0002】
潘怡如、陳雅君、林煥祥（2018）。以科學新聞融入教學提升中學生自我效能及論證能力之探討。科學教育學刊，26（1），71-96。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0004【Pan, Y.-J., Chen, Y.-C., & Lin, H.-S. (2018). Promoting secondary school students’ science self-efficacy and argumentation ability with science news instruction. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 71-96. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0004】

» 展開更多

洪逸文、湯宜佩（2016）。高中特色課程的開發與實施：以論證課程為例。課程研究，11（3），23-57。https://doi.org/10.3966/181653382016031101002【Hung, Y.-W., & Tang, Y.-P. (2016). Developing and implementing argumentation training curriculum as a high school-based feature curriculum in Taiwan. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 11(3), 23-57. https://doi.org/10.3966/181653382016031101002】
張珮珊、賴吉永、溫媺純（2017）。科學探究與實作課程的發展、實施與評量：以實驗室中的科學論證為核心之研究。科學教育學刊，25（4），355-389。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2017.2504.03【Chang, P.-S., Lai, C.-Y., & Wen, M.-L. (2017). The development, implementation and assessment of a scientific inquiry and practice curriculum: The scientific argumentation in the laboratory. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 25(4), 355-389. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2017.2504.03】
教育部（2018）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要。作者。【Ministry of Education. (2018). Curriculum Guidelines of 12-Year Basic Education. Author.】
黃柏鴻、林樹聲（2007）。論證教學相關實證性研究之回顧與省思。科學教育月刊，302，5-20。https://doi.org/10.6216/SEM.200709_(302).0002【Huang, P.-H., & Lin, S.-S. (2007). Literature review and reflection on the research about argumentation instruction. Science Education Monthly, 302, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.6216/SEM.200709_(302).0002】
潘怡如、陳雅君、林煥祥（2018）。以科學新聞融入教學提升中學生自我效能及論證能力之探討。科學教育學刊，26（1），71-96。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0004【Pan, Y.-J., Chen, Y.-C., & Lin, H.-S. (2018). Promoting secondary school students’ science self-efficacy and argumentation ability with science news instruction. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 71-96. https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.201803_26(1).0004】
Braaten, M., & Windschitl, M. (2011). Working toward a stronger conceptualization of scientific explanation for science education. Science Education, 95(4), 639-669. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20449
Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336-371. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310376953
Chen, S.-Y., & Liu, S.-Y. (2018). Reinforcement of scientific literacy through effective argumentation on an energy-related environmental issue. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(12), em1625. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/95171
Christenson, N., Chang Rundgren, S.-N., & Zeidler, D. L. (2014). The relationship of discipline background to upper secondary students’ argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44, 581-601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9394-6
Christenson, N., Gericke, N., & Chang Rundgren, S.-N. (2017). Science and language teachers’ assessment of upper secondary students’ socioscientific argumentation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 1403-1422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9746-6
Dawson, V. M., & Venville, G. (2010). Teaching strategies for developing students’ argumentation skills about socioscientific issues in high school genetics. Research in Science Education, 40, 133-148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9104-y
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
Erduran, S., Ardac, D., & Yakmaci-Guzel, B. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Case studies of pre-service secondary science teachers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(2), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75442
Erduran, S., Ozdem, Y., & Park, J.-Y. (2015). Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998-2014. International Journal of STEM Education, 2, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1
Eşkin, H., & Ogan-Bekiroğlu, F. (2008). Investigation of a pattern between students’ engagement in argumentation and their science content knowledge: A case study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(1), 63-70. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75257
Eşkin, H., & Ogan-Bekiroğlu, F. (2013). Argumentation as a strategy for conceptual learning of dynamics. Research in Science Education, 43, 1939-1956. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012- 9339-5.
Faize, F. A., Husain, W., & Nisar, F. (2018). A critical review of scientific argumentation in science education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 475-483. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80353
Forman, E. A., Ramirez-DelToro, V., Brown, L., & Passmore, C. (2017). Discursive strategies that foster an epistemic community for argument in a biology classroom. Learning and Instruction, 48, 32-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.08.005
Grooms, J., Sampson, V., & Enderle, P. (2018). How concept familiarity and experience with scientific argumentation are related to the way groups participate in an episode of argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(9), 1264-1286. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21451
Gultepe, N., & Kilic, Z. (2015). Effect of scientific argumentation on the development of scientific process skills in the context of teaching chemistry. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(1), 111-132. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.234a
Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E.-M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activity in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070252
Hefter, M. H., Berthold, K., Renkl, A., Riess, W., Schmid, S., & Fries, S. (2014). Effects of a training intervention to foster argumentation skills while processing conflicting scientific positions. Instructional Science, 42, 929-947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-014-9320-y
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3-27). Springer.
Katchevich, D., Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2013). Argumentation in the chemistry laboratory: Inquiry and confirmatory experiments. Research in Science Education, 43, 317-345. https://doi/org/10.1007/s11165-011-9267-9
Lewis, J., & Leach, J. (2006). Discussion of socio-scientific issues: The role of science knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11), 1267-1287. https://doi/org/10.1080/09500690500439348
Lin, Y.-R. (2019). Student positions and web-based argumentation with the support of the six thinking hats. Computers & Education, 139, 191-206. https://doi/org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.013
McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203-229. https://doi/org/10.1002/sce.20364
Mendonça, P. C. C., & Justi, R. (2014). An instrument for analyzing arguments produced in modeling-based chemistry lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(2), 192-218. https://doi/org/10.1002/tea.21133
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18290
Nielsen, J. A. (2012). Arguing from Nature: The role of “nature” in students’ argumentations on a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 34(5), 723-744. https://doi. org/10.1080/09500693.2011.624135
Nirwana, F. B., Suyatna, A., & Ertikanto, C. (2018). Development of learning strategy based inquiry to build student argumentation skills. International Journal of Advanced Research, 6(5), 651-657. https://doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/7079
Norris, S., Phillips, L., & Osborne, J. F. (2006). Scientific inquiry: The place of interpretation and argumentation. National Science Foundation.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2011). Argumentation, dialogue theory, and probability modeling: Alternative frameworks for argumentation research in education. Educational Psychologist, 46(2), 84-106. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.558816
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977), 463-466. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
Pimvichai, J., Buaraphan, K., Yuenyong, C., & Ruangsuwan, C. (2019). Development and implementation of the science-technology-society learning unit to enhance grade 10 student’s scientific argumentation. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 20(1), 1-30.
Rossman, G. B., & Yore, L. D. (2009). Stitching the pieces together to reveal the generalized patterns: Systematic research reviews, secondary reanalyses, case-to-case comparisons, and metasyntheses of qualitative research studies. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 575-601). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8427-0_26
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socio scientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217-257. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421
Simonneaux, L. (2008). Argumentation in socio-scientific contexts. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 179-199). Springer.
Solli, A. (2019). Appeals to science: Recirculation of online claims in socioscientific reasoning. Research in Science Education, 51, 983-1013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09878-w
Swanson, L. H., Bianchini, J. A., & Lee, J. S. (2014). Engaging in argument and communicating information: A case study of english language learners and their science teacher in an urban high school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 31-64. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21124
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978051184005
Tsai, C.-Y. (2018). The effect of online argumentation of socio-scientific issues on students’ scientific competencies and sustainability attitudes. Computers and Education, 116, 14-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.08.009
van Lieshout, E., & Dawson, V. (2016). Knowledge of, and attitudes towards health-related biotechnology applications amongst Australian year 10 high school students. Journal of Biological Education, 50(3), 329-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2015.1117511
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952-977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20213
Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Sellings, P. (2013). Explaining Newton’s laws of motion: Using student reasoning through representations to develop conceptual understanding. Instructional Science, 41, 165-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9223-8
Wallon, R. C., Jasti, C., Lauren, H. Z. G., & Hug, B. (2018). Implementation of a curriculum-integrated computer game for introducing scientific argumentation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(3), 236-247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9720-2
Wang, J., & Buck, G. A. (2017). Understanding a high school physics teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge of argumentation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(5), 577-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9476-1
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
Yore, L. D., & Lerman, S. (2008). Metasyntheses of qualitative research studies in mathematics and science education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 217-223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-008-9128-9
Zeidler, D. L. (2014). Socioscientific issues as a curriculum emphasis: Theory, research, and practice. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 697-726). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203097267-45
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008

中文APA引文格式	湯宜佩、張文馨、許瑛玿（2021）。針對高中科學論證教學研究回顧與評析。教育科學研究期刊，66（4），217-243。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202112_66(4).0008
APA Format	Tang, Y.-P., Chang, W.-H., & Hsu, Y.-S. (2021). Review of argumentation instruction in senior high schools. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 66(4), 217-243. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202112_66(4).0008

Journal directory listing - Volume 66 (2021) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【66(4)】December (Special Issue: Addictive Behavior and Prevention and Control on Campus)

Top

Review of Argumentation Instruction in Senior High Schools Author: Yi-Pei Tang (Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University), Wen-Hsin Chang (Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University), Ying-Shao Hsu (Graduate Institute of Science Education, National Taiwan Normal University)

Vol.&No.：Vol. 66, No. 4
Date：December 2021
Pages：217-243
DOI：https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202112_66(4).0008

Abstract：
　　This study aimed to identify the features of argumentation instruction in senior high school classrooms to formulate recommendations for researchers and curriculum developers. Therefore, we searched the Scopus database and three major Taiwan-based journals for relevant studies. In total, 24 articles were selected because they met the three filter criteria of (1) being empirical studies, (2) involving senior-high-school teacher or student participants, and (3) examining classroom teaching practices. The literature review indicates that the immersion-type argumentation instruction attracted the most attention. This type of instruction often establishes an appropriate design-based learning context to enhance students’ engagement and motivation. Several studies indicate that immersing students in a student-centered learning environment can enhance the argument discourse that they engage in with their peers and teachers. The structural-type argumentation instruction stresses the enhancement of students’ understanding of argumentation. Generally, the framework of argumentation is embedded in worksheets and scientific writing activities designed to improve students’ knowledge of the elements of argumentation. These findings highlight the potential of embedding the argumentation framework into teaching activities to improve students’ transfer of learning with respect to argumentation abilities.

Keywords：content analysis, science education, argument, argumentation instruction

本網站獲「科技部人文社會科學研究中心」補助

地址：臺北市大安區和平東路一段162號國立臺灣師範大學圖書館出版中心

電話：(02)7749-5279

CONTRIBUTORSNOTICE

期刊目錄列表 - 66卷(2021) - 【教育科學研究期刊】66(4)十二月刊（本期專題：校園成癮行為暨防制） 回上一頁

針對高中科學論證教學研究回顧與評析 作者:國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所湯宜佩、國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所張文馨、國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所許瑛玿

Journal directory listing - Volume 66 (2021) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【66(4)】December (Special Issue: Addictive Behavior and Prevention and Control on Campus) Top

CONTRIBUTORS
NOTICE

期刊目錄列表 - 66卷(2021) - 【教育科學研究期刊】66(4)十二月刊（本期專題：校園成癮行為暨防制）

回上一頁

針對高中科學論證教學研究回顧與評析作者:國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所湯宜佩、國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所張文馨、國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所許瑛玿

Journal directory listing - Volume 66 (2021) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【66(4)】December (Special Issue: Addictive Behavior and Prevention and Control on Campus)

Top