一、對教學活動的建議
(一)注意評量工具的適當性與難易度
本研究在進行最後一次科學探究學習單的施測時發現，不管 是實驗組或是對照組均呈現退步的狀況，詢問學生後發現均認為 此次的情境對他們較難與生活經驗結合，故覺得較難，再加上本 研究的時間較為短暫，探究能力提升有限，故在教學設計上應注 意。題目的難度是否與接受教學的時間比例相符，避免造成學生 無謂的挫折感。
(二)組成教學團隊
此部分國內較少施行，但可以由同自然領域但不同科別的教師 結合成團隊，探究試題的情境能更加貼近真實的生活。有學者提出 越是貼近真實情境來累積探究經驗，越能夠提升探究能力(曾秀 芬，2008；詹淨如，2012)。
(三)補救教學策略的多元化
本研究礙於時間的關係，故採用的補救策略有限，可結合其 他的教學法，進行更多方面的刺激，也許會加快進步的速度。
如：可進行實作或是分小組進行，或者增加口頭報告的方式。
二、對未來研究的建議
(一)擴大研究樣本
本研究只針對研究者本身任教班級進行研究，從而瞭解評量 回饋教學是否影響科學探究的學習進程，建議未來可擴大研究的 班級及學校或是地區，來進行不同班級、不同區域的比較，可以 更了解科學探究的學習進程與評量回饋教學的影響關係。
108
(二)擴大研究項目
本研究是以整個班級學生為單位進行科學探究能力與學習興 趣變化的研究，當中僅另以高成就及低成就學生進行個別的探 討，但對於性別、家庭背景、居住地或者評量工具的種類等項 目，並未進行探討。此外，科學探究與學習進程或評量回饋教學 與科學探究，這兩兩之間的關係，在國內的研究鮮有所見，建議 未來也可朝這個部分做更深入的討論。
參考文獻
一、 西文文獻
Abd-E1-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naamn, R., Hofstein, A., et al. (2004). Inquiry in science education：Internitional perspectives. Science Edaucation, 88 (3),397-419.
Adadan, E., Trundle, K. C., ＆ Irving , K. E. (2010). Exploring grade 11 students’ conceptual pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of multirepresentational instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 1004-1035.
Ainley, M. D., Hidi, S., ＆ Berndorff, D. (2002). Interest, learning and the psychological processes that mediate their ralationship. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 1-17.
Alonzo, A., ＆ Steedle, J. T. (2009). Developing and assessing a force and motion learning progression. Science Education, 93, 389-421.
Alonzo, A. C. (2010). Considerations in Using Learning Progressions to Inform Achievement Level Descriptions. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 8(4) , 204-208.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061:
Science for all Americans. Washington, D.C. AAAS.
Anderman, E. M., Noar, S. N., Zimmerman, R. S. & Donohew, L. (2004). The need for sensation as a prerequisite for motivation to engage in academic tasks. In Pintrich, P. R. & Maehr, M. L. (Eds.), Motivating Students, Improving Schools:The Legacy od Carol Midgley(pp. 1-26). Amsterdam, London : JAI.
Anderson, C. W., (n.d.) Developing a Multi-year Learning Progression for Carbon Cycling in Socio-Ecological Systems. Submitted to Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Retrieved in September 18, 2008, from
http://edrl.educ.msu.edu/EnvrionmentalLit/publicsite/files/General/ProjectPa
per/608_MulitYear_Carbon_Final.pdf
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
Bell, B., ＆ Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85, 536-553.
Bell, B. (2007). Classroom assessment of science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G.
Lederman (Eds.). Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 965-1006), Mahway, NJ：LEA.
Ben-David, A., & Zohar, A. (2009). Contribution of meta-strategic knowledge to scientific inquiry learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31(12), 1657-1682.
Bentley, D., ＆ Watts, M. (1992). Communicating in school science (pp.1-26).
Lidon：The Falmer Press.
Birenbaum, M. & Cochy, F. J.R.C.(1996). Alternatives in assessment of achievements, learning process, and prior knowledge. Boston: Kluwer academic publishers.
Black, P., Wilson, M., ＆ Yao, S. Y. (2011). Road maps for learning：A guide to thenavigation of learning progressions. Measurement, 9, 721-123.
Bowen, G. M., & Roth, W. -M. (2002). Why students may not learn to interpret scientific inscription. Research in Science Education, 32, 303-327.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.). Classroom lessons：Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp.229-270). Cambridge, MA：MIT Press.
Carpenter, T. P., & Lehrer, R. (1999). Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. In E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg (Eds.), Classrooms tthat promote mathematical understanduig (pp.19-32.) Mahwah, NJ： Erlbaum.
Claesgens, J., Scalise, K., Wilson, M., ＆ Stacy, A. (2009). Mapping student understanding in chemistry：The perspectives on chemists. Science Education, 93, 56-85.
Corcoran, T., Mosher, F.A. & Rogat, A. (2009). Learnning progressions in science：An evidence-based approach to reform [R]. Philaleiphi：
Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Craword, B.A. (2000). Embracing the inquiry：new roles for science teachers.
Joual of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916-937.
Duschl, R., Maeng, S., & Sezen , A. (2011). Learning Progressions and teaching sequences: a review and analysis. Studies in Science Education. 47(2), 123-182.
Duncan, R. G., Ropat, A., & Yarden, A. (2007) Learning Progression in Genetics.
Retrieved on November 16, 2008 from
http://www.project2061.org/publicationa/2061Connections/2007/media/KSId ocs/golanduncan_rogat_yarden_paper.pdf
Duncan, R. G. ＆ Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2009). Learning progressions ：Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 606-609.
Duncan, R. G., Rogat, A., & Yarden, A. (2009). A learning progression for deepening students’ understandings of modern genetics aceoss the 5th-10th grades. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 46(6), 655-674.
Ducan, R. G. ＆ Tseng, K. A. (2011). Designing project –based instruction to foster generative and mechanustic in genetics. Science Education, 95, 21-56.
Duschl, R., Schweingrubr, H., and Shose, A. (Eds) Board on Science Education, Center for Education, & Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals.
Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Egawa, K., ＆ Burke, C. (2000). Inquiry into inquiry：Exploring educational practice. ERIC ED 478851.
Feuerstein, R.（1979）. The Dynamic Assessment of retarded performers：The learning potential assessment device theory, instruments, and techniques.
Glenview， IL：Scott， Foresman and Company.
Finley, F. N. (1983). Science process. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 20(1) , 47-50.
Flowers, C., Browder, D., Wakeman, S., & Karvonen, M. (2007).“Links for Academic Learning: The Conceptual Framework.”National Alternate Assessment Center (NAAC) and the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Foster, W. G. & Heiting, A.W. (1994). Embedded assessment. Science and Children, October, 30-33.
Freidenreich, H. B., Duncan R. G., ＆ Shea, N. (2011). Exploring middle school students’ understanding of three connceptual models in gentics. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 2323-2349.
Friedler, Y. , & Tamir, P. (1990). Life in science laboratory classroom at secondary level. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.). The student laboratory and science curriculum (pp. 337-354). London: Rutledge.
Gagne, R. M. (1963). The learning requirements for enquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1, 144-153.
Gagne,R.M.(1965).The Condition of Learning, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York:Basic Books.
Germann, P. J., Aram, R., & Burke, G. (1996) Identifying patterns and
relationships among the responses of seventh-grade students to the science process skill of designing experiments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 79-99.
Greenfield, T. A. (1997). Gender-and Grade-level differences in science interest and participation. Science Education, 81, 259-276.
Gunckel, K. L., Covitt, B. A., Salinas, I., ＆ Anderson, C. W. (2012). A Learning Progression for Water in Socio-Ecological Systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 843-868.
Haladyna, T., & Olsen, R., & Shaughnessy, J. (1983). Correlations of class attitude toward science. Journal of Sesearch in Science Teaching, 29(4), 311-324.
Hattie, J., ＆ Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.
Haussler, P., Hoffman, L., Langeheine, P., Rost, J. and Sievers, K. (1998). A typology of students' intresent in physics and the distirbution og gender and age within each type. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 223-238.
Hess, K. (2008) .Developing and Using Learning Progressions as a Schema for Measuring Progress. Retrieved on October 4, 2008, from
http://www.nciea.org/publications/CCSSO2_KH08.pdf
Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical consideration. Education Psychology Review, 13(3), 191-208.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127
Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12, 447-465.
Hynd, C., Holchuh, J. & Nist, S. (2000). Learning complex scientific information:
Motivation theory and its relation to student perceptions. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 16, 23-57.
Hui , J., ＆ Charles, A. W., (2012). A Learning Progression for Energy in Socio-Ecological Systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 1149-1180.
Hui, J., ＆ Li, Z., ＆Charles, A. W., (2013). Developing a Fine-Grained Learning Progression Framework for Carbon-Transforming Processes . International Journal of Science Education, 35(10), 1663-1697.
Joson, P., ＆ Tymms, P. (2011). The emergence of a learning progression in middle school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 849-877.
Karin, H. (2008). Developing and Using Learning Progressions as a Schema for Measuring Progress. National Center for the Improvement of Educational Assessment (NCIEA), Dover, NH.
Keeley, P., Eberle, F., & Farrin, L. (2005). Uncovering Student Ideas in Science.
Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Keys, C. W., & Bryan, L. A. (2001). Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Jorunal of Research in Sceince Teaching, 38(6), 631-645.
Krapp, A. (2000). Interest and human development during adolescence: an educational-psychological approach. In J. Heckhausen (Ed.), Motivational psychology of human development (pp. 109-128). London: Elsevier.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (1999). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J.
Minstrell, E. V. Zoo (Eds.). Inquiry into inquiry science learning and teaching. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science Press.
Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lawson, A. E., Karplus, R. ＆ Adi, H. (1978). The acquisition during the secondary school years. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 15, 465-478.
Lederman, N. G. (1998). The state of science education：Subject matter without context. Electornic Journal of Science Education, 3(2). Retruved January 11,2005, from the http：//unr.edu/hpmepage/jcannon/ejse/lederman.htmal Li, J., & Klahr, D. (2006). The psychology of scientific thinking: Implications for
science teaching and learning. In J. Rhoton & P. Shane (Eds.), Teaching science in the twenty-first century (pp. 307-328). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Lisa M. -H. (2002). Defining Inquiry. The Science Teacher, 34-37.
Lee, H. S. ＆ Liu, O. L. (2010). Assessing learning progression of energy concepts across middle school grades：The knowledge integratuon perspective. Science Education, 94, 665-688.
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). Modeling in mathematics and science. In R.
Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology：Education design and cognitive science (pp. 101-169). Mahway, NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Lehrer, R., ＆ Schauble, L. (2012). Seeding Evolutionary Thinking by Engaging Children in Modeling Its Foundations. Science Education, 96, 701-724.
Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory： Historical perspectives and contexts for the contemporary teaching. In K. Tobin, & B. Fraser(Eds.), International handbook of science education. (pp.249-262). The
Netherlands：Kluwer Press.
Master, G. & Forest, M. (1996). Progress Maps. (Part of the Assessment Resource Kit) Melbourne, Australian: The Australian Council for Educational
Research, Ltd. 1-58.
Mitchell, M. (1997, March). Situational interest in the statistics classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL.
Mojan, Mohan, L., Chen, J., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Devrlopung a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systmes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 675-698.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, D. C., National Academy Press.
National Research Council (2006). Systems for state Science Assessment.
Committee on Test Design for K-12 Science Achievement. M. R. Wilson and M. W. Bertenthal, eds. Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for
Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
Washingtion, DC：The National Academies Press.
National Research Council (2007). Taking science to school：Learning and Teaching Science in Grages K-8. Committee on Science Learning,
Kindergarten throught English Grade. R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, &
A. W. Shouse (Eds.). Washington, DC：National Academy Press.
National Science Teachers Association (2005). Scientific Inquiry. From：http：
//www.nsta.org/positionstatement﹠psid=43
Neathery, M. F. (1997). Elementary and secondary students’ perceptions toward science and correlation with gender, ethnicity, ability, grade, and science achievement. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 2 (1). Retrieved from http://ejse.southwestern.edu/article/view/7573/5340.
Norland, F. H., Laswon, A. E. ＆ Bahle, J. B. (1974). A study of levls of concrente and formal resoning ability in disadvantaged. Junior and Senior high school science students. Science Education, 58, 569-575.
Nott, M. (1997). Proudcing the evidence: teacher's initiations into practical work.
Research in science Education, 27(3), 395-409.
OGAP (2008). The Vermont Mathematics Partnership is funded by a grant provided by the US Department of Education-Award Number
S366A020002 – and the National Science Foundation – Award Number EHR- 0227057- January 18, 2008
Otieno, T. N. (1999). The larner and inquiry. ERIC ED 445947.
Petit, M. (2007).“OGAP: VMP’s Ongoing Assessment Project: A Cognitively Based Formative Assessment System in Mathematic.”Presentation at the CCSSO Large—Scale Assessment Conference, Nashville, TN, June 2007.
Plummer, J. D. ＆ Krajcik, J. (2010). Building a learning progression for celestial motion：Elementary levles from an earth-based perspective.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 768-787.
Puckett, M. B. & Black, J. K. (1994). Authentic assessment of the young child—
Celebrating development and learning. (p. 34). New York: Macmillan College Publishing.
Reiser, B., Krajcik, j, Moje, E., Marx, R. (2003). Design strategies for developing science instructional materials. Paper presnted at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching , Philadelphia,PA.
Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S., & Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Renninger, K. A. (2000). Individual interest and development: Implication for theory and practice. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Ed.), Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance (pp.373-404). New York: Academic Press.
Rivet, A. E. ＆ Kastens, K. A. (2012). Developing a Construct-Based
Assessment to Examine Students' Analogical Reasoning around Physical Models in Earth Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(6), 713-743.
Roberts, R., & Gott, R. (2000). Procedural understanding in biology: How is it characterized in texts? School Science Review, 82(298), 83-91.
Rose, C., Minton, L., Arline, C. (2007). Uncovering Student Thinking in Mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Roseman J. E., Caldwell, A., Gogos, A., Kuth, L. (2006) Mapping a Coherent Learning Progreaaion for the Molecular Basis of Heredity. Project 2061, American Association for the Advancement of Science. Available online http://www.project2061.org/publications/articles/paper/narst2006.pdf Salinas, I. (2009). Learning progressions in science education : Two approaches
for development. Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science (LeaPS) Conference, June 2009, Iowa City, IA.
Schiefele, U. (1992). Topic interest and levels of text comprehension. In K. A.
Renninger. Hidi, ＆ A. Krapp (Eds.). The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 151-132). Hillsdale, NJ：Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Ache’r, A., ＆ Fortus, D., Krajck, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific
modeling：Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 632-654.
Shavelson, R. J.t(2009). Reflections on learning progressions. Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science (LeaPS) Conference, June 2009, lowa City, IA.
Shen, B., Chen, A., & Guan, J. (2007). Using achievement goals and interest to predict learning in physical education. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 89-108.
Songer, N. B., Kelcey, B., & Gotwals, A. W. (2009). How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progression focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 46, 610–631.
Songer, N. B. ＆ Gotwals, A. W. (2012). Guiding explanation construction by children at the entry points of learning progressions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 141-165.
Steedle, J. T. ＆ Shavelson, R. J. (2009). Supporting valid interpretations of learning progression level daignoses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 699-715.
Steven, S. Y., Shin, N., Delgado, C., Krajcik, J., Pelleprino, J. (2007). Developing a Learning Progression for the Natture of Matter as it Reates to Nanoscience.
Retrieved on September 30, 2008 from
hi-ce.org/presentations/documents/UM_LP_AERA_2007.pdf
Stevens, S. Y., Delgado, C., ＆ Krajcik, J. (2010). Developing a hypothetical multi-dimensional learning progression for the nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 687-715.
Tai, C., Sheppard, K. (2009). Patterna of Progression in Students' Understanding of Combustion. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Garden Grove, CA.
Tamir, P. ＆ Lonetta, V. N. (1981). Inquiry related tasks in high school science laboratort handbooks. Science Education, 65, 447-484.
Wenning, C. J. (2007). Assessing inquiry skills as a component of scientific literacy. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online, 4(2), 21-24.
Wiggins, G. & Mc Tighe, J. (1998, 2001). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wilson, M. & Bertenahl, M. (Eds). (2005). Systems for State Science Assessment.
Board on Testing and Assessment, Center for Education, National Research Council of the National Academies. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Wilson, M. (2009). Measuring progressions：Assessment stuuctures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46,716-730.
Wolk, S. (2007). Why go to school? Phi Delta Kappan, 88(9), 648–658.
Zion, M., Michalsky, T., & Mevarech, Z. R. (2005). The effects of metacognitive instruction embedded within an asynchronous learning network on scientific
inquiry skills. International Journal of Science Education, 27(8), 957-983.
Zohar, A. (2004). Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students’ learning and teachers’ professional development. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
二、 中文文獻
丁信中（2009）。芬蘭中學生PISA 科學成就優異表現及其相關因素之探 討：2007歐洲科學教育學術參訪反思。科學教育月刊，316，2-19。
王美芬、熊召弟（1995）：國民小學自然科教材教法。台北市：心理。
王佳音（2007）。科學家故事教學對國小五年級學童科學學習興趣與科學家 印象影響之研究。未出版之碩士論文。國立嘉義大學科學教育研究所，
嘉義縣。
方郁斌（2007）。以嵌入式評量融入國小中年級探究教學之行動研究。未出 版之碩士論文。國立屏東教育大學數理教育研究所，屏東縣。
朱經明、蔡玉瑟（2000）。動態評量在診斷國小五年級數學障礙學生錯誤類 型之應用成效。特殊教育研究學刊，18，173-189。
李文德（2003）。國小學生氧化還原概念發展與教學策略研究III。行政院 國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告（編號NSC 91-2522-S-153-003），
未出版。
李文德（2004）。國小學生氧化還原概念發展與教學策略研究IV。行政院 國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告（編號NSC 92-2522-S-153-018），
未出版。
李哲迪（2009）。臺灣國中學生在TIMSS 及PISA 的科學學習成果表現及 其啟示。研習資訊，26（2），73-88。
李哲迪（2009）。臺灣國中學生在TIMSS 及PISA 的科學學習成果表現及 其啟示。研習資訊，26（2），73-88。