• 作者： 王澄霞
• 作者服務機構： 國立台灣師範大學化學系
• 中文摘要： 本研究培養教師，使其能透過STS探究實驗設計，開發學生之創造力。著者設計具有彈性的課程架構，包括上述各項創造力要項的五層面與22過程之學習程序，作為主要學習及評量內涵，並設計三層次教師成長方案，用於規劃學習活動。本研究進一步經由課程實驗試教之行動研究、探究：(a)找出創造之表現指標之證據；(b)由上述設計之課程及教師成長方案第一層次而培養教師之有效性。著者設計錨式模組，促使學生以小組及班級合作學習模式，學習基本思考技法：腦力激盪、角色扮演、辯論和畫思考圖等之後分組。各小組確定STS題目、設計探究實驗及鷹架策略，並向全班提出、接受全班的挑戰和批評。帶動小組答覆、辯論和修改。各小組輪流帶動班級活動，將成果以壁報展示，並由全班同學評鑑之。整個過程以直接觀察、錄影記錄、學習歷程檔案、和同儕評量等方法搜集資料。資料經分析後顯示：(1)在流暢性評量方面：(a)每一個人的擴散性思考能力是在正常範圍內；(b)小組及班級學習提升擴散思考。（2)柔軟性思考分為經驗取向、類比、分析、抽向四層面；所有小組以經驗取向思考為主（包含生活及化學之實驗思考，顯示其專業背景）；(3)個案小組之設計，以(a)獨創性、(b)具體性、(c)科學思考、(d)科學技能、（e)吸引注目性及（f）接受性評鑑。全班評定個案小組之設計符合（f）以外的所有基準。這些經驗和成果能促進職前教師之創造力及培養其開發學生之創造力。
• 英文摘要： This study aimed to cultivate the capabilities of teachers in developing student creativity bydesigning STS exploratory experiments. A dynamic curriculum framework was designed including afive-phase learning procedure with 22 processes associated with creativity. The 22 processes includedlearning as well as assessment tasks used in: (a) finding evidence of creativity performance; and (b)evaluating the effectiveness of teacher development. A three-stage teacher development program wasalso designed as a dynamic guideline for planning learning activities. Action research was conductedwith a curriculum experimental trial to develop creativity and evaluate the effectiveness of the frameworkand stage 1 of the teacher development program. Video-based anchors were designed and used for smallgroup and class cooperative learning about basic thinking skills: brainstorming, role playing, debating,and mapping. Each group identified an STS topic, designed an exploratory experiment with scaffoldingstrategies, and presented it to the class for challenge and criticism. The lead group defended, debated,and revised the material. Then, each group took turns leading class activities. The results were displayedas posters, which were evaluated by the class. The whole process was videotaped. Data from directobservation, video-taped records, portfolios, and peer assessments were analyzed. The results were asfollows. (1)Fluency measurement showed (a) Fluency in divergent thinking of individuals was in anormal range. (b) Small group and class learning promoted divergent thinking. (2) Flexibility in thinkingwas analyzed in terms of four dimensions: experience based, analogical, analytical, abstract. For allthe groups, experience based thinking (that related to life and chemistry experiments) was used pre-dominately, reflecting the academic background of the participants, followed by the other dimensionsin decreasing order. (3) The design of the case group was evaluated for (a) originality, (b) tangibility,(c)scientific thinking, (d) scientific skills, (e) dramatic value, and (f) acceptability. The class ruledthat the design met all criteria but (f). The experiences and products substantially improved creativityand professional capabilities of the preservice teachers in developing learners’creativity.
• 中文關鍵字： --
• 英文關鍵字： --