TEACHING SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION SKILLS IN SCIENCE STUDIES: DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?
TEACHING SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION SKILLS IN SCIENCE STUDIES: DOES IT MAKE A DIFFERENCE?
复制标题
在科学研究中教授科学交流技能：有什么不同吗？
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Z. Scherz
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
O. Spektor;B. Eylon;Z. Scherz
本研究探讨了“科学传播”（SC）技能指导对学生在科学素养评估任务中表现的影响。我们提出了一个技能教学的通用模型，其特点是明确和螺旋式教学、融入内容学习、多个科学主题的实践以及表演任务的应用。该模型通过一个教学计划进行应用，该计划侧重于以下学习技能：信息检索、科学阅读和写作、听力和观察、数据表示和知识呈现。在 7 至 8 年级，160 名学生学习了整个课程或其组成部分之一：SC 技能的结构化教学 (SI) 或表演任务 (PT)。对照组的 42 名学生没有接受 SC 技能的指导。学生的表现通过问卷和复杂的任务进行评估，衡量学生的科学内容知识、SC 技能和最终产品的质量。结果表明，学习整个课程或其其中一个组成部分的学生在所有类别中的得分都高于对照组学生。高成就者只能从该计划的一个组成部分中受益：结构化指导（SI）或从实践中学习（PT）。然而，他们很难自发地获得 SC 技能。低成就者和中等成就者需要 SC 计划的两个组成部分来提高他们的表现。结果表明，如果没有计划的干预，SC 技能的自发获得只能在有限的程度上发生。系统的技能教学可以产生显着的效果。将技能的明确指导融入科学主题、在不同背景下实施技能的机会、表演任务作为“学习评估”的作用——所有这些特征对于提高学生的科学素养都是重要且必要的。我们的通用技能教学模型可以应用于其他高阶技能的教学。它的应用可以实现科学教育的中心目标：培养学生掌握科学知识。
This study explores the impact of ‘Scientific Communication’ (SC) skills instruction on students’ performances in scientific literacy assessment tasks. We present a general model for skills instruction, characterized by explicit and spiral instruction, integration into content learning, practice in several scientific topics, and application of performance tasks. The model was applied through an instructional program that focuses on the following learning skills: information retrieval, scientific reading and writing, listening and observing, data representation, and knowledge presentation. Throughout the 7th–8th grades, 160 students learned the whole program or one of its components: structured instruction (SI) of SC skills, or performance tasks (PT). A comparison group of 42 students did not receive instruction of SC skills. Students’ performances were assessed through a questionnaire and a complex task that measured students’ scientific content knowledge, SC skills, and the quality of the final products. Results indicated that students who learned the whole program or one of its components achieved higher scores in all categories than the comparison group students. High achievers can benefit from just one component of the program: either structured instruction (SI) or learning from practice (PT). However, they can hardly acquire SC skills spontaneously. Low and average achievers require both components of the SC program to improve their performances. Results show that without planned intervention, the spontaneous attainment of SC skills occurs only to a limited extent. Systematic teaching of skills can make a significant difference. The explicit instruction of skills integrated into scientific topics, the opportunities to implement the skills in different contexts, the role of performance tasks as ‘assessment for learning’—all these features are important and necessary for improving students’ scientific literacy. Our general model of skills instruction can be applied to the instruction of other high-order skills. Its application can lead to the realization of the central goal of science education: literate students possessing scientific knowledge.