初中课堂科学探究中究竟发生了什么——基于多案例的实证考察

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2018.04.011

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 伴随国际上科学教育新形式的出现，科学探究的理念和实践受到挑战，但科学探究——强调在参与科学实践中发展科学理解，依然是面向21世纪科学教育的基本取向。本研究从学习的社会文化观出发，借助跨文化情境的思考，运用两个相互关联的子研究追踪了我国W市9位初中科学教师的教学过程，勾勒了初中课堂科学探究教学的整体特征，描述了教学现象之下的过程结构和细部特征。研究揭示，当下初中课堂具备了科学探究过程的整体结构，教师主导的群体对话式探究环节显示出一定的有效性，但也落入"有形少实"的困境。从教师角度看，对科学探究教学目标的片面认识、科学探究教学策略和支持工具的匮乏，以及来自评课和培训的外部影响，都可能致其挣扎于困境。

关键词: 科学探究, 科学探究教学, 科学教育变革, 初中

Abstract: The emerging forms of science education in the world have challenged the ideas and practice of scientific inquiry. However, scientific inquiry, aiming at developing students' scientific understanding by their engaging in science practice, is still the essential approach to science education for the 21st century. From the socio-cultural perspective of learning, and using a cross-culturally contextual thinking, the authors conduct two interrelated sub-studies to track the instructional process of nine middle school science teachers in city W. The study describes the overall features of their inquiry-based science teaching, and demonstrates the underlying process structure and detailed characteristics. Moreover, the study reveals that science classroom in middle schools has the general structure of scientific inquiry process, and the teacher-led collective dialogic inquiry-session has shown positive effect, but at the expense of students' active experience and autonomy gen-erally. For teachers, partial understanding of scientific inquiry, lack of pedagogical strategies and tools to support students' inquiries, as well as external influences from organized evaluating-class and trainings, could possibly impede them to conduct an authentic inquiry-based science teaching.

Key words: scientific inquiry, inquiry-based science teaching, science education reform, middle school

裴新宁, 刘新阳. 初中课堂科学探究中究竟发生了什么——基于多案例的实证考察[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(4): 107-121+165+166.

PEI Xinning, LIU Xinyang. What Happens in Scientific Inquiry in Middle School Classroom: An Empirical Study Based on Multiple Cases[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2018, 36(4): 107-121+165+166.

参考文献

马西娅·C.林,巴特-舍瓦·艾伦.(2016).学科学和教科学:利用技术促进知识整合(裴新宁,刘新阳等译).上海:华东师范大学出版社.
教育部.(2011). 初中科学教育标准(修订稿). 北京:北京师范大学出版社.
教育部.(2016).教育信息化"十三五"规划[EB/OL]. (2016-06-07)[2017-05-23].http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A16/s3342/201606/t20160622_269367.html.
李雁冰. (2012).我国科学课程教学的困境与超越.教育研究与实验,(5),69-74.
刘新阳.(2016)."教师-资源"互动视角下的教师教学设计能力研究(博士学位论文). 上海:华东师范大学.
美国国家研究理事会.(1999).美国国家科学教育标准(戢守志等译).科学与技术出版社。
裴新宁.(2005). 面向学习者的教学设计. 北京:教育科学出版社.
裴新宁.(2013). 让学习成功——变构模型及其教学应用.教育生物学杂志,(4), 263-270.
唐小为,丁邦平. (2012). "科学探究"缘何变身"科学实践"?——解读美国科学教育框架理念的首位关键词之变.教育研究(11), 141-145.
赵健,李锋,刘亭亭,吴伟.(2017).创建全球科创中心,上海学生的数字化素养够了吗?——基于PISA2012相关测试结果的分析, 开放教育研究,23(5),30-41.
赵健,裴新宁,冯锐,成佳铭,金莺莲.(2013). 我国教师的专业发展实践及其对学生成绩的影响:基于五城市调研的分析. 全球教育展望,42(2),22-33,53.
周仕东, 郑长龙. (2010). 论实现科学本质教育的前提条件.中国教育学刊,(10), 39-41.
周仕东, 孙景霞, 郑长龙. (2006). 连堂课的科学探究教学实践与反思.中国教育学刊, (11), 48-50.
Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches to learning. In:Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (Eds.). The Nature of Learning:Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD Publishing, 199-225.
Berliner, D C.(2004). Describing the behavior and documenting the accomplishments of expert teachers. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24(3), 200-212.
Clarke, S.N. (2015). The right to speak.In:L.B. Resnick, C.S.C. Asterhan,& S.N. Clarke (Eds.) Socializing Intelligence through Academic Talk and Dialogue. Washington, DC:American Educational Research Association, 167-180.
Coquidé, M., & Pei, X. (2014).Comparing Teacher's Understanding and Enactment about Scientific Investigation in France and in China. Presentation on the 5^thSeminar on French-Chinese Laboratory for Comparing Curricula in Science Education (C2SE), Oct. 20-22. ENS de Lyon, France.
Crawford, B.A. (2014). From inquiry to scientific practices in the science classroom.In:N. G. Lederman, & S. K.Abell(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Vol. Ⅱ. New York:Routledge,515-544.
Engestr m, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work.Ergonomics,43(7), 960-974.
European Commission (2011).Final Report-POLLEN.(2011-04-14)[2017-08-04].Retrieved from:http://cordis.europa.eu/publication/rcn/12661_en.html
European Commission(2013).S-TEAM Report Summary.(2013-06-04)[2016-08-06]. Retrieved from:http://www.s-teamproject.eu.
European Commission(2015). Science Education for Responsible Citizenship.Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union.
Grangeat M. (2013)(Ed.).Les enseignants de sciences face aux démarchesd'investigation:des formations et des pratiques de classe. Grenoble:Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
Greeno, J. G., & Moore, J. L. (1993).Situativity and symbols:response to Vera and Simon. Cognitive Science, 17, 49-60.
Jacobson, M. J., Taylor, C. E.,& Richards, D. (2016).Computational scientific inquiry with virtual worlds and agent-based models:new ways of doing science to learn science.Interactive Learning Environments, 24(8), 2080-2108.
Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry:The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65-83.
Leinhardt G. (1990). Capturing craft knowledge in teaching.Educational Researcher, 19(19), 18-25.
Lotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers' use of inquiry teaching practices.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,44(9), 1318-1347.
Martinand, J.-L. (2003). L'éducation technologique à l'école moyenne en France:problèmes de didactique curriculaire. La revue canadienne de l'enseignement des sciences, des mathématiques et des technologies, 3 (1), 100-116.
Moallem M.(1998). An expert teacher's thinking and teaching and instructional design models and principles:An ethnographic study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(2),37-64.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Science Literacy:Conceptes, Context, and Consequeces. Washington, DC:The National Academies Press.
National Acadmies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Seeing Students Learning Science:Integrating Assessment and Instruction in the Classroom. Washington, DC:The National Acadmies Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (1997). Introducing the National Science Standards. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education:Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC:The National Academies Press.
OECD. (2013). The PISA 2015 Draft Science Framework.(2013-03)[2016-09-10]. Retrieved from:http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Science%20Framework%20.pdf[July 2016].
Olson, S., &. Loucks, S. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards:A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
Tobin, K.(2012).Sociocultural perspectives on science education. In:B. Fraser, K. Tobin, C. McRobbie (Eds.). Second International Handbook of Science Education. Springer, 3-17.

[1]	高屾, 闵文斌, 常芳, 史耀疆. 农村初中生校园欺凌与心理健康的相关性研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(2): 60-67+155.
[2]	陈秋珠. 初中生学业拖延与学业自我效能感关系研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2016, 34(3): 100-106.
[3]	沈玉顺. 中招考试制度改革若干政策问题分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2014, 32(3): 26-30.
[4]	宋林飞. 综合实践课程：初中理科课程的县级综合——以上海市崇明县“三园教学”经验为例[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2000, 18(2): 34-39, 95.