（專題）當科學素養與閱讀素養相遇：高中學生科學新聞閱讀策略之實驗研究
作者:臺中市立豐原高級中學鄭可萱、國立臺中教育大學科學教育與應用學系李松濤
卷期：63卷第4期
日期：2018年12月
頁碼：157-192
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0006
摘要：
本研究的目的在於以「科學新聞提問模式」作為高中學生閱讀科學新聞的學習鷹架，藉由閱讀時的自我提問脈絡，在科學新聞文本中找到較為明確的架構與解讀的線索，並藉以判斷科學報導的目的、實驗設計、結果與證據間的邏輯性，以此提升高中學生對於科學新聞的判讀與理解。研究對象為中部某高中一年級兩班學生（實驗組32人，控制組38人）；研究工具為自行發展之「科學新聞提問學習單」及「科學新聞理解測驗」，研究資料蒐集期間為四個月。共變數分析結果顯示，隨著實驗組學生對於自我提問模式的熟悉，三次測驗的素養表現出現成長趨勢；此外，分析結果也發現，本研究設計的「科學新聞提問模式」閱讀策略可提升實驗組學生的素養表現，包括科學素養中的「科學地解釋現象」及「科學地解釋數據與證據」等能力，以及閱讀素養中的「擷取與檢索」、「統整與解釋」、「省思與評鑑」等能力，但對於實驗設計題的學習幫助則不如預期。
關鍵詞：科學素養、科學新聞、閱讀素養
《詳全文》
參考文獻：
- 何宗穎、王敏男、謝佩妤、郭幸宜、趙大衛、黃台珠（2013）。大學普通生物學實驗課程應用探究鷹架自我評估策略對學生探究能力表現之影響。科學教育學刊，21（4），401-429。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2013.2104.02 【Ho, T.-Y., Wang, M. M.-N., Hsieh, P.-Y., Kuo, H.-Y., Chao, D., & Huang, T.-C. (2013). The influence of using scaffolding and self-assessment strategy on college students’ scientific-inquiry ability in a general biology curriculum. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 21(4), 401-429. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2013.2104.02】
- 何宗懿（2015）。閱讀者提問請教文本：試論PISA閱讀素養架構進階之道。教育研究與發展期刊，11（2），1-32。doi:10.3966/181665042015061102001 【Ho, T.-I. (2015). Readers raising questions to consult texts: Discussing the ways for upgrading PISA’s reading literacy. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 11(2), 1-32. doi:10.3966/181665042015061102001】
- 吳百興、張耀云、吳心楷（2010）。科學探究活動中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊，56，53-74。 【Wu, P.-H., Chang, Y.-Y., & Wu, H.-K. (2010). The role of science reasoning in inquiry learning. Research and Development in Science Education Qualterly, 56, 53-74.】
- 李松濤（2017）。大學生對於科學研究資訊的閱讀表現探究：以網路科學新聞為例。中華傳播學刊，12（32），91-128。doi:10.6195/cjcr.2017.32.03 【Lee, S.-T. (2017). A study of college students’ reading performance relating to scientific research information: An example of internet-based science news. Chinese Journal of Communication Research, 12(32), 91-128. doi: 10.6195/cjcr.2017.32.03】
- 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 on PISA 2015. New Taipei City, Taiwan: Psychological.】
» 展開更多
- 何宗穎、王敏男、謝佩妤、郭幸宜、趙大衛、黃台珠（2013）。大學普通生物學實驗課程應用探究鷹架自我評估策略對學生探究能力表現之影響。科學教育學刊，21（4），401-429。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2013.2104.02 【Ho, T.-Y., Wang, M. M.-N., Hsieh, P.-Y., Kuo, H.-Y., Chao, D., & Huang, T.-C. (2013). The influence of using scaffolding and self-assessment strategy on college students’ scientific-inquiry ability in a general biology curriculum. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 21(4), 401-429. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2013.2104.02】
- 何宗懿（2015）。閱讀者提問請教文本：試論PISA閱讀素養架構進階之道。教育研究與發展期刊，11（2），1-32。doi:10.3966/181665042015061102001 【Ho, T.-I. (2015). Readers raising questions to consult texts: Discussing the ways for upgrading PISA’s reading literacy. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 11(2), 1-32. doi:10.3966/181665042015061102001】
- 吳百興、張耀云、吳心楷（2010）。科學探究活動中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊，56，53-74。 【Wu, P.-H., Chang, Y.-Y., & Wu, H.-K. (2010). The role of science reasoning in inquiry learning. Research and Development in Science Education Qualterly, 56, 53-74.】
- 李松濤（2017）。大學生對於科學研究資訊的閱讀表現探究：以網路科學新聞為例。中華傳播學刊，12（32），91-128。doi:10.6195/cjcr.2017.32.03 【Lee, S.-T. (2017). A study of college students’ reading performance relating to scientific research information: An example of internet-based science news. Chinese Journal of Communication Research, 12(32), 91-128. doi: 10.6195/cjcr.2017.32.03】
- 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 on PISA 2015. New Taipei City, Taiwan: Psychological.】
- 柯華葳、幸曼玲、陸怡琮、辜玉旻（2010）。閱讀理解策略教學手冊。臺北市：教育部。 【Ko, H.-W., Shing, M.-L., Lu, I.-C., & Ku, Y.-M. (2010). The handbook for teaching reading comprehension strategy. Taipei, Taiwan: Ministry of Education.】
- 柯華葳、詹益綾、張建妤、游婷雅（2008）。PIRLS 2006報告：臺灣四年級學生閱讀素養。桃園縣：國立中央大學。 【Ko, H.-W., Chan, Y.-L., Zhang, C.-Y., & You, T.-Y. (2008). PIRLS 2006 national report: The reading literacy of elementary school 4th students in Taiwan. Taoyuan, Taiwan: National Central University.】
- 范信賢（2016）。核心素養與十二年國民基本教育課程綱要：導讀《國民核心素養：十二年國教課程改革的DNA》。教育脈動，5，1-7。 【Fan, H.-H. (2016). Core literacy and general curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education: Guide to “national core literacy: The DNA of reform general curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education”. Pulsa of Education, 5, 1-7.】
- 洪振方（2003）。探究式教學的歷史回顧與創造性探究模式之初探。高雄師大學報，15（3），641-662。 【Hung, J.-F. (2003). The historical review of inquiry teaching and preliminary exploration of creative inquiry model. Kaohsiung Normal University Journal, 15(3), 641-662.】
- 徐美苓（2015）。影響新聞可信度與新聞素養效能因素之探討。中華傳播學刊，27，99-136。doi:10.6195/cjcr.2015.27.04 【Hsu, M.-L. (2015). Factors affecting news credibility and efficacy of news literacy. Chinese Journal of Communication Research, 27, 99-136. doi:10.6195/cjcr.2015.27.04】
- 高台茜、康以諾、陳玉葉（2015）。網路課輔中層次性閱讀教學對偏鄉學童閱讀能力影響之研究。教育科學研究期刊，60（4），191-221。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(4).07 【Kao, T.-C., Kang, Y.-N., & Chen, Y.-Y. (2015). Effects of four-level reading instruction for an online tutoring project on promoting the reading ability of rural students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 60(4), 191-221. doi:10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(4).07】
- 國家教育研究院（2015）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要─自然科學領域課程綱要草案。取自https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-10469,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw 【National Academy for Educational Research. (2015). General curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education − Draft outline of the natural sciences curriculum. Retrived from https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/ 15-1000-10469,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw】
- 張玉燕（2004）。批判性思考與語文教學。課程與教學，7（2），41-55。doi:10.6384/CIQ.200404.0041 【Chang, Y.-Y. (2004). Critical thinking on language instruction. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 7(2), 41-55. doi:10.6384/CIQ.200404.0041】
- 張卿卿（2012）。科學新聞資訊呈現形式及其對閱聽眾資訊接收的影響─以科學知識觀點與認知基模理論來探討。科學教育學刊，20（3），193-216。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2012.2003.01 【Chang, C.-C. (2012). Features of science reporting and their influences − An exploration based on structures of scientific knowledge and schema theory. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 193-216. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2012.2003.01】
- 教育部（2002）。媒體素養教育政策白皮書。取自http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~floratien/gen_ whitepaper.files/mediaequipment.pdf 【Ministry of Education. (2002). Media & information literacy clearinghouse. Retrived from http://homepage.ntu. edu.tw/~floratien/gen_whitepaper.files/mediaequipment.pdf】
- 教育部（2014）。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要總綱。取自https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15- 1000-7944,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw 【Ministry of Education. (2014). General curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education. Retrived from https://www.naer.edu.tw/files/15-1000-7944,c639-1.php?Lang=zh-tw】
- 曹博盛（2012）。Bloom認知領域教育目標分類的修訂版應用於數學領域之命題實例。中等教育，63（4），38-65。doi:10.6249/SE.2012.63.4.03 【Tsao, P.-S. (2012). Examples of applying the revison of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives to mathematics assessment items. Secondary Education, 63(4), 38-65. doi:10.6249/SE.2012.63.4.03】
- 陳昇飛（2006）。教師語文教學鷹架之搭建及其教學策略之發展。國民教育研究集刊，15，179-204。doi:10.7038/bree.200612.0179 【Chen, S.-F. (2006). To build scaffoldings in language art classroom and its effects on instruction strategy development. Bulletin of Research on Elementary Education, 15, 179-204. doi:10.7038/bree.200612.0179】
- 陳柏霖、洪兆祥、余民寧（2013）。網路閱讀態度、網路閱讀行為及網路閱讀素養之橫斷面研究。教育科學研究期刊，58（3），23-50。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2013.58(3).02 【Chen, P.-L., Hung, C.-H., & Yu, M.-N. (2013). Cross-sectional study of the relationships among e-reading attitude, e-reading behavior, and e-reading literacy. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 58(3), 23-50. doi:10.6209/JORIES.2013.58(3).02】
- 陳憶寧（2011）。當科學家與記者相遇：探討兩種專業對於科學新聞的看法差異。中華傳播學刊，19，147-187。doi:10.6195/cjcr.2011.19.06 【Chen, Y.-N. K. (2011). When scientists meet journalists: An explorative study on the differences of the two profession’s perceptions of science news. Chinese Journal of Communication Research, 19, 147-187. doi:10.6195/cjcr.2011.19.06】
- 陳瑞麟（2010）。科學哲學：理論與歷史。臺北市：群學。 【Chen, R.-L. (2010). Philosophy of science: A theoretical and historical introduction. Taipei, Taiwan: Socio.】
- 陳豐祥（2009）。新修訂布魯姆認知領域目標的理論內涵及其在歷史教學上的應用。歷史教育，15，1-53。doi:10.6608/THE.2009.015.001 【Chen, F.-S. (2009). The theoretical connotation of the new revision of Bloom’s cognitive domain and application in history teaching. Historical Education, 15, 1-53. doi:10.6608/THE.2009.015.001】
- 黃台珠（主編）（2014）。2012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。 【Huang, T.-C. (Ed.). (2014). Overview of 2012 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.】
- 黃俊儒（2008）。構思科技社會中的即時學習：以學生及專家對於科學新聞文本之理解差異為例。科學教育學刊，16（1），105-124。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2008.1601.03 【Huang, C.-J. (2008). Trying to construct real-time science learning in a technical society: A study of the differences between students and experts when monitoring science news. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 16(1), 105-124. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2008.1601.03】
- 黃俊儒（2017）。以通識教育型塑公民社會：科學新聞識讀課程為例。課程與教學，20（1），45-72。 【Huang, C.-J. (2017). The general education as a way to cultivate a civil society: A media literacy course related to science news as an example. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 20(1), 45-72.】
- 黃俊儒、簡妙如（2006）。科學新聞文本的論述層次及結構分佈：構思另個科學傳播的起點。新聞學研究，86，135-170。 【Huang, C.-J., & Jian, M.-J. (2006). Science news in Taiwan: A study of news discourse and text structure. Mass Communication Research, 86, 135-170.】
- 黃俊儒、簡妙如（2010）。在科學與媒體的接壤中所開展之科學傳播研究：從科技社會公民的角色及需求出發。新聞學研究，105，127-166。 【Huang, C.-J., & Jian, M.-J. (2010). Science communication studies between science and media: The needs and roles of the contemporary public. Mass Communication Research, 105, 127-166.】
- 黃茂在、吳敏而（2016）。科學素養與課程統整。教育脈動，5，1-12。 【Huang, M.-T., & Wu, M.-E. (2016). Scientific literacy and curriculum integration. Pulsa of Education, 5, 1-12.】
- 楊桂瓊、林煥祥、洪瑞兒（2012）。以論證活動探討國小學童論證能力和科學本質之表現。科學教育學刊，20（2），145-170。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2012.2002.02 【Yang, K.-K., Lin, H.-S., & Hong, Z.-R (2012). Exploring the impact of argumentation ability on elementary school students’ understanding of the nature of science. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 145-170. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2012.2002.02】
- 楊桂瓊、陳雅君、洪瑞兒、林煥祥（2015）。新興科技融入探究式教學的成效探討。科學教育學刊，23（2），111-127。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2015.2302.01 【Yang, K.-K., Chen, Y.-C., Hong, Z.-R, & Lin, H.-S. (2015). Exploring the effectiveness of integrating emerging technology into inquiry-based science teaching. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 111-127. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2015.2302.01】
- 楊景盛、董曜瑜、陳秀溶、王國華（2017）。社會性科學議題情境下論證式探究教學與課程對七年級學生科學學習成就、論證能力和科學素養之影響。科學教育學刊，25（S），485-500。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2017.25S.04 【Yang, C.-S., Tung, Y.-Y., Chen, S.-R., & Wang, K.-H. (2017). The effect of argumentation-based inquiry instruction and course in socio-scientific context on 7th grade students’ achievements, argumentation skills and scientific literacy. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 25(S), 485-500. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2017.25S.04】
- 靳知勤（2007）。科學教育應如何提升學生的科學素養─台灣學術精英的看法。科學教育學刊，15（6），627-646。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2007.1506.02 【Chin, C.-C. (2007). A reflection on the science education of Taiwan − The voice from the elites in Taiwan. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 15(6), 627-646. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2007.1506.02】
- 靳知勤、楊惟程、段曉林（2010）。引導式Toulmin論證模式對國小學童在科學讀寫表現上的影響。科學教育學刊，18（5），443-467。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2010.1805.03 【Chin, C.-C., Yang, W.-C., & Tuan, H.-L. (2010). Exploring the impact of guided TAPping scientific reading- writing activity on sixth graders. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 18(5), 443-467. doi:10.6173/CJSE. 2010.1805.03】
- 臺灣PISA國家研究中心（2010）。PISA 閱讀素養應試指南（2010版）。取自http://pisa2015. nctu.edu.tw/pisa/index.php/tw/resource/39-download 【PISA in Taiwan. (2010). PIAS reading literacy exam guide (2010). Retrived from http://pisa2015.nctu.edu.tw/ pisa/index.php/tw/resource/39-download】
- 蔡佩穎、張文華、林陳涌、張惠博 （2013）。不同性別七年級學生論證科學新聞之學習效益。科學教育學刊，21（4），455-481。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2013.2104.04 【Tsai, P.-Y., Chang, W.-H., Lin, C.-Y., & Chang, H.-P. (2013). Gender differences in science news instruction performance. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 21(4), 455-481. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2013.2104.04】
- 蔡佩穎、張文華、林雅慧、張惠博（2012）。初探論證科學新聞對七年級學生生物學習之效益。中等教育，63（1），13-37。doi:10.6249/SE.2012.63.1.02 【Tsai, P.-Y., Chang, W.-H., Lin, Y.-H., & Chang, H.-P. (2012). The effects of arguing-about-mediascience-reports on seventh graders’ learning of biology: A preliminary study. Secondary Education, 63(1), 13-37. doi:10.6249/SE.2012.63.1.02】
- 鄭明長（2012）。批判取向的媒體素養之教學途徑。課程與教學季刊，15（1），67-90。doi:10.6384/ CIQ.201201.0068 【Cheng, M.-C. (2012). Instruction for critical approach on media literacy. Curriculum & Instruction Quarterly, 15(1), 67-90. doi:10.6384/CIQ.201201.0068】
- 謝進昌（2015）。有效的中文閱讀理解策略：國內實徵研究之最佳證據整合。教育科學研究期刊，60（2），33-77。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(2).02 【Hsieh, J.-C. (2015). Effective chinese reading comprehension strategy: Best-evidence synthesis of Taiwanese empirical studies. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 60(2), 33-77. doi:10.6209/JORIES.2015.60(2).02】
- 羅綸新、張正杰、童元品、楊文正（2013）。高中生海洋科學素養及迷思概念評量分析。教育科學研究期刊，58（3），51-83。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2013.58(3).03 【Lwo, L.-S., Chang, C.-C., Tung, Y.-P., & Yang, W.-C. (2013). Marine science literacy and misconceptions among senior high school students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 58(3), 51-83. doi:10.6209/JORIES. 2013.58(3).03】
- 蘇衍丞、林樹聲（2012）。在社會性科學議題情境下應用鷹架教學提升國小六年級學生論證能力。科學教育學刊，20（4），343-366。doi:10.6173/CJSE.2012.2004.03 【Su, Y.-C., & Lin, S.-S. (2012). Improving sixth graders’ argumentation skills through scaffolding instruction in socio-scientific contexts. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 343-366. doi:10.6173/CJSE.2012.2004.03】
- Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843. doi:10.1002/tea.20171
- Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1-39. doi:10.1080/03057260701828101
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Cuccio-Schirripa, S., & Steiner, H. E. (2000). Enhancement and analysis of science question level for middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 210-224. doi:10. 1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200002)37:2<210::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-I
- DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582-601. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-L
- Dimopoulos, K., & Koulaidis, V. (2003). Science and technology education for citizenship: The potential role of the press. Science Education, 87(2), 241-256. doi:10.1002/sce.10054
- Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. doi:10.1002/(CICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3 <287::AID-SCE1>3.3.CO;2-1
- Dymock, S. (2005). Teaching expository text structure awareness. The Reading Teacher, 59(2), 177-181. doi:10.1598/RT.59.2.7
- Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction: Research findings and recommendations. Fullerton, CA: Peter A. Facione.
- Glaser, R. E., & Carson, K. M. (2005). Chemistry is in the news: Taxonomy of authentic news media based learning activities. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1083-1098. doi:10.1080/09500690500069434
- Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Osborne, J., & Wild, A. (2015). Beyond construction: Five arguments for the role and value of critique in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1668-1697. doi:10.1080/09500693.2015.1043598
- Hobbs, R. (1998). The seven great debates in the media literacy movement. Journal of Communication, 48(1), 16-32. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1998.tb02734.x
- Jang, J.-Y., & Hand, B. (2017). Examining the value of a scaffolded critique framework to promote argumentative and explanatory writings within an argument-based inquiry approach. Research in Science Education, 47(6), 1213-1231.
- Jarman, R., & McClune, B. (2002). A survey of the use of newspapers in science instruction by secondary teachers in Northern Ireland. International Journal of Science Education, 24(10), 997-1020. doi:10.1080/09500690210095311
- Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Federico-Agraso, M. (2009). Justification and persuasion about cloning: Arguments in Hwang’s paper and journalistic reported versions. Research in Science Education, 39(3), 331-347. doi:10.1007/s11165-008-9113-x
- Kind, P. M., Kind, V., Hofstein, A., & Wilson, J. (2011). Peer argumentation in the school science laboratory − Exploring effects of task features. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2527-2558. doi:10.1080/09500693.2010.550952
- Kind, P. M., & Osborne, J. (2017). Styles of scientific reasoning: A cultural rationale for science education? Science Education, 101(1), 8-31. doi:10.1002/sce.21251
- Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310. doi:10.1002/sce.1011
- Mauldin, R. F. (2012). A novel approach to teaching scientific reasoning to future journalists: An intellectual framework for evaluating press reports about scientific research. Science Communication, 34(2) 283-291. doi:10.1177/1075547011427976
- McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2010). Critical reading of science-based news reports: Establishing a knowledge, skills and attitudes framework. International Journal of Science Education, 32(6), 727-752. doi:10.1080/09500690902777402
- McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2012). Encouraging and equipping students to engage critically with science in the news: What can we learn from the literature? Studies in Science Education, 48(1), 1-49. doi:10.1080/03057267.2012.655036
- McDonald, L. (2004). Moving from reader response to critical reading: Developing 10-11 year olds’ ability as analytical readers of literary texts. Literacy, 38(1), 17-25. doi:10.1111/j.0034-0472. 2004.03801004.x
- National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 947-967. doi:10.1002/tea.3660310909
- Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. doi:10.1002/sce.10066
- Norris, S. P., Phillips, L. M., & Korpan, C. A. (2003). University students’ interpretation of media reports of science and its relationship to background knowledge, interest, and reading difficulty. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 123-145. doi:10.1177/09636625030122001
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013a). PISA 2015 draft reading literacy framework. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%20 2015%20Reading%20Framework%20.pdf
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013b). PISA 2015 draft science framework. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20 Science%20Framework%20.pdf
- Osborne, J. (2013). The 21st century challenge for science education: Assessing scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 265-279. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2013.07.006
- 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. doi:10.1002/tea.20035
- Pearson, P. D., Moje, E., & Greenleaf, C. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the service of the other. Science, 328(5977), 459-463. doi:10.1126/science.1182595
- Polman, J. L., Newman, A., Saul, E. W., & Farrar, C. (2014). Adapting practices of science journalism to foster science literacy. Science Education, 98(5), 766-791. doi:10.1002/sec.21114
- Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. doi:10.1002/tea.20009
- Tomasek, T. (2009). Critical reading: Using reading prompts to promote active engagement with text. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 21(1), 127-132.
- Tompkins, G. E. (2005). Literacy for the 21st century: A balanced approach (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
- Webb, P. (2010). Science education and literacy: Imperatives for the developed and developing world. Science, 328(5977), 448-450. doi:10.1126/science.1182596
- Yarden, A. (2009). Reading scientific texts: Adapting primary literature for promoting scientific literacy. Research in Science Education, 39(3), 307-311. doi:10.1007/s11165-009-9124-2
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) When Science Literacy and Reading Literacy Meet: Experimental Study of Science News Reading Strategy for High School Students
Author: Ke-Hsuan Zheng (Taichung Municipal Feng Yuan Senior High School), Sung-Tao Lee (Department of Science Education and Application, National Taichung University of Education)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 63, No.4
Date：December 2018
Pages：157-192
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0006
Abstract：
This study proposed a scaffold of a science news questioning model for high school students when they read science news. It is hoped a clear framework and clues for news reading can be facilitated by the self-questioning strategy to judge the purpose, experiment designing, and logical relations between results and evidence. Seventy students (experimental group: 32 and control group: 38) from a senior high school located in Central Taiwan participated in this study. A learning sheet of science news questioning and a comprehension test for science news were developed. The study duration was two months. The analysis of covariance results indicated that the students in the experimental group exhibited steady literacy performance improvement in three tests. Moreover, this self-questioning teaching model is helpful for their scientific literacy performances (i.e., for scientifically explaining the phenomenon and scientifically interpreting data and evidence collected) and reading literacy performances (i.e., accessing, retrieving, integrating, interpreting, reflecting on, and evaluating information). However, this model was not very helpful for designing scientific inquiries.
Keywords：reading literacy, science news, scientific literacy