综合和分科科学课程影响下初中生科学素养的比较研究

发布时间：2018-12-23 18:36

【摘要】：我国初中科学课程有综合科学课程和分科科学课程两种不同的课程设置方式。浙江省和江苏省是综合科学课程和分科科学课程实施的范例和典型。无论在科学课程标准还是物理课程标准中,都将培养学生的科学素养作为课程的重要目标。本论文着重研究综合科学课程和分科科学课程对初中生科学素养培养的影响。本研究以文本定性研究和测量工具定量研究为两条主要的研究路线,以分科科学课程中的物理课程和综合科学课程中的物理部分为例,分别分析比较了综合科学课程和分科科学课程的课程标准、教材、课时量的差异,并以浙江省省会杭州和江苏省省会南京各一所学校的一个班级作为研究对象,编制问卷进行调查,随之采用数理统计法分析其学生在科学素养不同维度的差异,得到以下结论。1.科学课程标准和物理课程标准在课程目标、课程内容、实施建议等诸多方面存在高度一致性,但科学课程标准更加体现“综合”的课程理念。2.科学教材的课程内容大部分属于并列式和结合式,与物理教材的差异不明显。3.分科科学课程较综合科学课程在实施时课时量略多。4.科学素养的科学知识维度,选择题部分综合科学课程组略好于分科科学课程组,但差异不明显;问答题部分综合科学课程组明显优于分科课程组。5.科学素养的科学观念维度,科学本质观部分与STS部分综合科学课程组与分科科学课程组均无明显差异。6.科学素养的科学意识和方法维度,科学意识部分,综合科学课程组明显优于分科科学课程组;科学方法部分两组之间不存在明显差异。
[Abstract]:There are two different courses in science curriculum in junior high school in China: integrated science curriculum and multi-subject science curriculum. Zhejiang Province and Jiangsu Province are the examples and examples of the implementation of integrated science curriculum and division science curriculum. In both the science curriculum standard and the physics curriculum standard, the important goal of the curriculum is to cultivate students' scientific literacy. This paper focuses on the impact of integrated science curriculum and branch science curriculum on junior high school students' scientific literacy. In this study, qualitative textual research and quantitative research on measurement tools are the two main research routes, and the physics part of the integrated science curriculum and the physics part of the integrated science curriculum are taken as an example. This paper analyzes and compares the differences in curriculum standards, teaching materials and class hours between the integrated science curriculum and the specialized science curriculum, and takes a class of a school in Hangzhou, the capital of Zhejiang Province, and Nanjing, the capital of Jiangsu Province, as the research objects. The questionnaire was compiled, and then the difference of the students in different dimensions of scientific literacy was analyzed by mathematical statistics, and the following conclusions were obtained. 1. There is a high degree of consistency between the science curriculum standard and the physics curriculum standard in many aspects, such as curriculum objectives, curriculum contents, implementation suggestions, etc. However, the science curriculum standards embody the "comprehensive" curriculum concept more. 2. The course content of science teaching material mostly belongs to the parallel type and the combination type, and does not have the obvious difference with the physics teaching material. 3. Division science curriculum than comprehensive science curriculum in the implementation of the number of hours slightly more. 4. The scientific knowledge dimension of scientific literacy, multiple choice question part of the integrated science curriculum group is slightly better than the division science curriculum group, but the difference is not obvious; the question part of the integrated science curriculum group is obviously better than the branch course group. 5. There is no significant difference between the scientific concept dimension of scientific literacy, the part of scientific essence view and the STS part of the integrated science curriculum group and the division science curriculum group. 6. The scientific consciousness and method dimension of scientific literacy, the part of scientific consciousness, the comprehensive science curriculum group are obviously superior to the division science curriculum group, and there is no obvious difference between the two groups.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：G633.7

【参考文献】