字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  

詳目顯示

以作者查詢圖書館館藏以作者&題名查詢臺灣博碩士以作者查詢全國書目
研究生中文姓名:鄭豪蒂
研究生英文姓名:Cheng, Hao-Ti
中文論文名稱:STEM融入海洋科學議題對國中生學習動機、學習興趣與學習成效影響之研究
英文論文名稱:The Effects of STEM Integrated into Marine Science Issue on Junior High School Students’ Learning Motivation, Learning Interest, and Learning Achievement.
指導教授姓名:張正杰
口試委員中文姓名:教授︰羅綸新
教授︰楊錦潭
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立臺灣海洋大學
系所名稱:教育研究所
學號:1049A003
請選擇論文與海洋研究相關度:直接相關
請選擇論文為:應用型
畢業年度:107
畢業學年度:107
學期:
語文別:中文
論文頁數:134
中文關鍵詞:STEM教育海洋素養學習動機學習興趣學習成效國中
英文關鍵字:STEM educationOcean literacyLearning motivationLearning interestLearning achievementJunior high school
相關次數:
  • 推薦推薦:0
  • 點閱點閱:61
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:5
  • 收藏收藏:0
本研究旨在了解以STEM教育融入海洋科學議題對國中生的學習動機、學習興趣以及學習成效之影響。研究採用準實驗研究法,選取基隆市某公立國中九年級兩班學生為研究對象(共47人),一班為對照組(27人),採用傳統講述式教學法。另一班為實驗組(20人),採用STEM教育教學。兩班均進行六週共12堂課的實驗教學,教學內容為海洋科學議題中的海洋垃圾主題。研究工具為自編之學習動機與學習興趣量表,經驗證性因子分析(Confirmatory factor analysis, CFA)確立信效度。學習動機量表包含注意、相關、信心、滿足四個構面;學習興趣量表包含對海洋的情意感受、對海洋的認知、對海洋科學的行動表現三個構面。研究輔以海洋垃圾知識問卷試題,以及命題式概念圖造句評量,用以上兩者來診斷學生在海洋科學課程的學習成效。研究結果顯示如下:(1)STEM教育組在海洋科學課程的「注意」、「相關」、「滿足」構面及總分的學習動機顯著高於講述式教學組;(2)STEM教育組在海洋科學課程的「對海洋科學情意感受」、「對海洋科學的認知」構面及總分的學習興趣顯著高於講述式教學組;(3)STEM教育組在海洋科學課程的「高層次」構面及總分的學習成效顯著優於講述式教學組,;(4)分析命題式概念圖造句評量,STEM教育組在總分以及「正確性」、「解釋性」、「命題結構」三構面之分數表現優於講述式教學組,且在「知識」構面的成長幅度以及「迷思概念」的下降幅度優於講述式教學組。綜合以上結果,研究者歸納結論並給予具體建議以作為未來海洋科學教育及相關研究之參考。
The purpose of this study is to understand the impact of STEM education on marine science issues on learning motivation, learning interest and learning achievement. The study used quasi-experimental research method. The study objects are the 9th students of 2 similar level classes in a public junior high school in Keelung City (47 students), one class for the control group (27 students), taught by the traditional expository teaching method, another class for the experimental group (20 students), taught by the STEM education. Two classes were conducted for six weeks, a total of 12 experimental teaching lessons, the teaching content was marine debris topic within the marine science issue.
  Research tools were self-compiled learning motivation inventory and learning interest inventory. The learning motivation inventory includes four dimensions: attention, relevance, confidence and satisfaction. In addition, the learning interest inventory includes three dimensions: feelings to the ocean, cognition of the ocean, action of marine science. The study supplemented by the questionnaire about marine debris knowledge, as well as propositional conceptual design sentence assessment, used both to diagnose students' learning achievement in marine science courses.
  The results of the study are as follows: (1) The learning motivation of the "attention", "relevance", "satisfaction" dimensions and the total score of the STEM education group in the marine science course is significantly higher than that of the expository teaching group. (2) The learning interest of the "feelings to the ocean", "cognition of the ocean" dimensions and the total score of the STEM education group in the marine science course is significantly higher than that of the expository teaching group. (3) The learning achievement of the "high level" dimension and the total score of the STEM education group in the marine science course is significantly better than that of the expository teaching group. (4) In the analysis of the propositional concept map, the STEM education group is superior to the expository teaching group in the scores of "accuracy", " depth of explanation ", "complexity" dimensions and the total score, the growth rate of "knowledge" dimension and the decline rate of "myth of mind" dimension are better than those of expository teaching group. Based on the above results, the researchers summarize the conclusions and give specific recommendations as a reference for future marine science education and related research.
謝辭……………………………………………………………………………………i
摘要………………………………………………………………………………….ii
Abstract………………………………………………………………………iii
目錄…………………………………………………………………………...iv
表目錄………………………………………………………………………..vi
圖目錄………………………………………………………………………….viii
第一章 緒論 - 1 -
第一節 前言 - 1 -
第二節 研究目的與問題 - 2 -
第三節 名詞釋義 - 2 -
第四節 研究範圍與限制 - 3 -

第二章 文獻探討 - 6 -
第一節 STEM教育 - 6 -
第二節 海洋科學教育 - 21 -
第三節 學習動機與學習興趣 - 35 -
第四節 命題式概念評量 - 39 -

第三章 研究方法 - 41 -
第一節 研究架構 - 41 -
第二節 研究設計 - 44 -
第三節 研究對象與與實施程序 - 47 -
第四節 研究工具與資料分析 - 48 -
第五節 教學方案設計 - 62 -

第四章 研究結果與結論 - 73 -
第一節 STEM融入海洋科學議題對國中生學習動機之影響 - 73 -
第二節 STEM融入海洋科學議題對國中生學習興趣之影響 - 76 -
第三節 STEM融入海洋科學議題對國中生學習成效之影響 - 79 -

第五章 結論與建議 - 89 -
第一節 研究結論 - 89 -
第二節 研究建議 - 90 -

參考文獻 - 92 -
壹、中文部分 - 92 -
貳、外文部分 - 95 -

附錄 - 102 -
附錄一 學習動機各題目因子負荷量摘要表 - 102 -
附錄二 海洋科學學習動機量表 - 103 -
附錄三 學習興趣各題目因子負荷量摘要表 - 105 -
附錄四 海洋科學學習興趣量表 - 106 -
附錄五 成就測驗正式版 - 107 -
附錄六 講述式教學與STEM教學方案設計對照表 - 119 -
附錄七 教學學習單 139
附錄八 STEM教學方案學生作品摘錄 151
壹、中文部分
中國教育部教育管理信息中心、北京師範大學、北京國信世教信息技術研究院(2017)。中國STEAM教育發展報告-起點篇。中國北京。
石長明(2012)。電腦概念構圖融入國中理化科教學對學生學習成效之影響—以功與能單元為例(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺灣海洋大學,基隆市。
江俊億(2014年1月)。國際與臺灣海洋廢棄物現況。潮境季刊,1,24-27。
余民寧(2006)。影響學習成就因素的探討。教育資料與研究雙月刊,73,11-24。
余民寧(2017)。教育測驗與評量-成就測驗與教學評量(第三版)。新北市:心理。
吳明隆(2009)。SPSS操作與應用:問卷統計分析實務。臺北市:五南。
吳靖國(2009)。海洋教育:教科書、教師與教學。臺北市:五南。
吳靖國(2012)。當前臺灣海洋教育的關鍵問題。臺灣教育評論月刊,1(12),68-69。
吳慧珠、李長燦(2003)。Vygotsky社會認知發展理論與教學應用。載於張新仁、邱上真、張酒雄(主編),學習與教學新趨勢(105-157頁)。臺北市:心理。
吳靜吉、程炳林(1993)。國民中小學生學習動機、學習策略與學業成績之相關。國立政治大學學報,66,13-39。
吳靖國(2008)。中小學教科書海洋概念內容分析類目之建構。當代教育研究,16(3),97-136。
李咏吟、單文經(1995)。教學原理(修訂三版)。臺北市:遠流。
李博宏(2006)。STEM教育中,T&E(科技-工程)課程發展近況。生活科技教育,39(7),108-109。
李琴娟(2003)。遊戲化直笛課程對國小中年級學生直笛學習興趣、直笛成就及音樂成就之影響(未出版之碩士論文)。國立臺北教育大學,臺北市。
周珮儀(2000)。課程統整與課程分化。載於中華民國課程與教學學會(主編),課程統整與教學(3-16頁),臺北市:揚智。
周祝瑛(2011)。台灣海洋教育之回顧與展望。海洋事務與政策評論,創刊號,43-64。
林坤誼(2014)。STEM科際整合教育培養整合理論與實務的科技人才。科技與人力教育季刊,1(1),1。
林俊瑩(2008)。家長對學校滿意度因果模型之建構與檢驗。教育與社會研究,15,23-52。
林達森(2003)。概念圖的理論基礎與運用實務。花蓮師院學報(教育類),17,107-132。
姚經政、林呈彥(2016)。STEM教育應用於機器人教學-以6E教學模式結合差異化教學。科技與人力教育季刊,3(1),53-75。
柳棟、吳俊杰、謝作如、沈涓(2013)。STEM、STEAM課程與可能的實踐路線。中小學訊息技術雜誌,6,39-41。
范斯淳、游光昭(2016)。科技教育融入STEM課程的核心價值與實踐。教育科學研究期刊,61(2),153-183。
國教院(2015)。議題融入課程研修說明及四項重大議題實質內涵。取自http://web.fg.tp.edu.tw/~chincenter/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/議題融入課程研修說明及四項重大議題實質內涵.pdf
張正杰(2015)。影響國中學生海洋科學知識與海洋教育能力指標因素之研究。教育學報,43(2),173-196。
張正杰、楊文正、羅綸新(2014)。高職生海洋科學素養與迷思概念之評量分析。科學教育月刊,371,2-17。
張玉山、楊雅茹(2014)。STEM教學設計之探討:以液壓手臂單元為例。科技與人力教育季刊,1(1),2-17。
張春興(2016)。教育心理學:三化取向的理論與實踐(重修二版)。臺北市:東華。
教育部(2007)。海洋教育政策白皮書。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2008a)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。臺北市:教育部。
教育部(2008b)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要重大議題(海洋教育)。
2008年9月15日,取自 http://www. edu. tw/eje/content. aspx。
許籐繼(2011)。國民小學教師海洋教育能力指標及權重體系建構之研究。教育科學研究期刊,56(3),61-90。
陳均伊、張惠博(2007)。探究導向教學的理論與實務—以 [摩擦力] 單元為例。Chinese Physics,8(1),77-90。
陳秀芬、黃萬居(2007)。國小學童A型行為組型與自然與生活科技領域學習態度與學業成就之相關研究。科學教育研究與發展季刊,46,49-77。
陳孟蘋(2014年1月)。海洋廢棄物的反撲。潮境季刊,1,20-23。
陳孟蘋(2014年1月)。黃色小鴨述說的洋流故事。潮境季刊,1,10-19。
陳冠吟(2015)。STEM取向的科技教育-以鼠夾車為例。科技與人力教育季刊,2(1),63-81。
陳英豪、吳裕益(1994)。測驗與評量。高雄市:復文圖書。
陳維恪(2000)。紐約大學STEM專案的MST課程評介。生活科技教育月刊,33(3),2-9。
游淑媚(1996)。建構式教學模式和科學教學焦慮感之縱貫研究。1996 年中華民國第九屆科學教育學術研討會論文彙編,547-559。
黃子榕、林坤誼(2014)。職前教師於STEM實作課程的知識整合行為研究。科技與人力教育季刊,1(1),18-39。
黃政傑(1997)。教學原理。臺北市:師大書苑。
趙中建(2012年6月15日)。為了創新而教育-科學、科技、工程和數學教育(STEM education):一個值得認識和重視的教育戰略。中國教育報,7版。
蔡依帆、吳心昀(2014)。STEM整合教學活動-空投救援物資。科技與人力教育季刊,1(1),40-54。
簡佑宏、張玉山、簡爾君(2016)。STEM取向準工程課程設計:以二氧化碳賽車單元為例。科技與人力教育季刊,3(1),32-52。
簡茂發(1978)。父母教養態度與小學兒童生活適應之關係。教育心理學報,(11),63-85。
羅希哲、陳柏豪、石儒居、蔡華齡、蔡慧音(2009)。STEM整合式教學法在國民中學自然與生活技術領域之研究。人文社會科學研究,3(3),42-66。
羅希哲、蔡慧音、石儒居、詹爲淵(2010)。網路專題式學習應用於高中女學生STEM知識學習之研究。人文社會科學研究,4(4),115-141。
羅希哲、蔡慧音、曾國鴻(2011)。高中女生STEM網路專題式合作學習之研究。高雄師大學報:教育與社會科學類,30,41-61。
羅綸新、張正杰、童元品、楊文正(2013)。高中生海洋科學素養及迷思概念評量分析。教育科學研究期刊,58(3),51-83。
羅綸新、黃明惠、張正杰(2012)。海洋教育:認識海洋的教與學。臺北市:高等教育。
蘇昕岳(2006)。國小六年級學童對自然與生活科技領域的學習興趣(未出版之碩士論文)。國立嘉義大學:嘉義市。
蘇楓雅(譯)(2013)。環繞世界的小鴨艦隊(原作者:C. Ebbesmeyer, E. Scigliano)。臺北市:天下文化。


貳、外文部分
Ausubel, D., Novak, J. D. and Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology:A Cognitive View, 2nd Edn. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.
Bingolbali, E., Monaghan, J. & Roper, T. (2007). Engineering students’ conceptions of the derivative and some implications for their mathematical education. International Journal of Mathematical Educationin Science and Technology, 38(6), 763–777.
Bosworth, K. (1994). Developing collaborative skills in college students. New directions for teaching and learning, 1994(59), 25-31.
Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Cantrell, P., Pekcan, G., Itani, A., & Velasquez‐Bryant, N. (2006). The effects of engineering modules on student learning in middle school science classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(4), 301-309.
Cava, F., Schoedinger, S., Strang, C., & Tuddenham, P. (2005). Science content and standards for ocean literacy: A report on ocean literacy. College of Exploration, Berkeley.
Cunningham, C. M., & Lachapelle, C. P. (2014). Designing engineering experiences to engage all students. Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices, 117-142.
Dabney, K. P., Tai, R. H., Almarode, J. T., Miller-Friedmann, J. L., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Hazari, Z. (2012). Out-of-school time science activities and their association with career interest in STEM. International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 2(1), 63-79.
Dayton Regional STEM Center. (2011). STEM education quality framework. Retrieved from http://daytonregionalstemcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Final-Framework-copyrighted. Pdf
Dewaters, J. & Powers S. E. (2006). Improving science and energy literacy through project- based K-12 out reach efforts that use energy and environmental themes. Proceedings of the 113th Annual ASEE Conference & Exposition, Chicago, IL.
Donert, K., Fauville, G., Gotensparre, S., Mäkitalo, Å., Van Medegael, L., Zwartjes, L., (2015). Review of marine formal education. EU Sea Change Project.
Ebel, R. L. (1972). Essentials of educational measurement.
English, L. D. (2015). STEM: Challenges and opportunities for mathematics education. In Proceedings of the 39th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 4-18). PME.
Goldsmith, T. E., Johnson, P. J., & Acton, W. H. (1991). Assessing structural knowledge. Journal of educational psychology, 83(1), 88.
Goldsmith, T.E. & Johnson, P.J.(1989). A structural assessment of classroom learning. In R.W. Schvaneveldt(Ed). Pathfinder associative networks: Studies in knowledge organization. Norwood. N.J.:Ablex.
Guest, H., Lotze, H. K., & Wallace, D. (2015). Youth and the sea: Ocean literacy in Nova Scotia, Canada. Marine Policy, 58, 98-107.
Guo, J. L., Fan, C., & Guo, Z. H. (2011). Weblog patterns and human dynamics with decreasing interest. The European Physical Journal B, 81(3), 341.
Harrel, P. E. (2010). Teaching an integrated science curriculum: Linking teacher knowledge and teaching assignments. Issues in Teacher Education, 19(1), 145-165.
Häussler, P., Hoffman, L., Langeheine, R., Rost, J., & Sievers, K. (1998). A typology of students’ interest in physics and the distribution of gender and age within each type. International Journal of Science Education, 20(2), 223-238.
Indiana Department of Education. (2012). High school STEM full implementation. Retrieved from http://www.doe.in.gov/sites/default/files/ccr/high-school-stem-implementationv2.pdf
Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.
Kaiser, J. (2010). The dirt on ocean garbage patches. Science, 328(5985), 1506. doi:10.1126/science.328.5985.1506
Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of
instructional design. Journal of instructional development, 10(3), 2-10.
Kelley, T. R. (2010). Staking the claim for the ‘T’ in STEM. The Journal of Technology Studies, 36(1), 2-11.
Krapp, A., & Prenzel, M. (2011). Research on interest in science: Theories, methods, and findings. International journal of science education, 33(1), 27-50.
Lambert, J. (2005). Students' conceptual understandings of science after participating in a high school marine science course. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(5), 531-539.
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence. Journal of counseling psychology, 31(3), 356.
Lumsden, L. S. (1994). Student Motivation To Learn. ERIC Digest, Number 92.
Markos, A., Boubonari, T., Mogias, A., & Kevrekidis, T. (2015). Measuring ocean literacy in pre-service teachers: Psychometric properties of the greek version of the survey of ocean literacy and experience (SOLE). Environmental Education Research, 23(2), 231-251. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2015.1126807
Markow, P. G., & Lonning, R. A. (1998). Usefulness of concept maps in college chemistry laboratories: Students' perceptions and effects on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(9), 1015-1029.
Merrill, M. D., Tennyson, R. D., & Posey, L. O. (1992). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide. Educational Technology.
Mishra, S. (2005).Roles and competencies of academic counsellors in distance education. Open Learning, 20(2), 147-159.
Moore, T. J., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., & Kersten, J. A. (2015). NGSS and the landscape of engineering in K‐12 state science standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(3), 296-318.
Moundridou, M., & Kaniglonou, A. (2008). Using LEGO MINDSTORMS as an instructional aid in technical and vocational secondary education: Experiences from an empirical case study. In P. Dillenbourg & M. Specht (Eds.), Times of Convergence. Technologies Across Learning Contexts (pp. 312–321). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
National Academy of Engineering, & National Research Council. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Geographic. (2012). One Ocean: A Guide for Teaching the Ocean in Grades 3 to 8. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/one-ocean-teacher-guide/
National Governors Association. (2007). Building a science, technology, engineering and math agenda. Retrieved from http://www.nga.org/files/live/sites/NGA/files/pdf/0702INNOVATION STEM.PDF

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2013). Ocean Literacy: The Essential Principles and Fundamental Concepts of Ocean Sciences for Learners of All Ages. NOAA’s Office of Education.
National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2013). STEM attribute implementation rubric: High school. Retrieved from https://www.ncsmt.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/STEMAttributesRubric_HIGH_v4_Aug2013_v1.pdf

Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.
Nowell, A.R. (2000). “Education in oceanography: History, purpose, and prognosis. In 50 Years of Ocean Discovery”, In Ocean Studies Board National Research Council, National Science Foundation 1950-2000, (pp 195-200), Washington DC, National Academies Press, [Online], Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK208814/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK208814.pdf, [15/8/2015].
Ortiz, A. M., Bos, B., & Smith, S. (2015). The power of educational robotics as an integrated STEM learning experience in teacher preparation programs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(5), 42-47.
Paris, S. G., & Newman, R. S. (1990). Development aspects of self-regulated learning. Educational psychologist, 25(1), 87-102.
Pichel, W. G., Churnside, J. H., Veenstra, T. S., Foley, D. G., Friedman, K. S., Brainard, R. E., ... & Clemente-Colon, P. (2007). Marine debris collects within the North Pacific subtropical convergence zone. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54(8), 1207-1211.
Pintrich, P. R. (1987, April). Motivated learning strategies in the college classroom. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 33.
Pokay, P., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (1990). Predicting achievement early and late in the semester: The role of motivation and use of learning strategies. Journal of educational psychology, 82(1), 41.
Project 2061 (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1989). Science for all Americans: A Project 2061 Report on Literacy Goals in Science, Mathematics, and Technology (Vol. 89). Amer Assn for the Advancement of.
Partnership for 21st Century Skills. http://www.p21.org/
Raju, P. K., & Clayson, A. (2010). The future of STEM education: An analysis of two national reports. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 11(5/6), 25.
Sansone, C., & Smith, J. L. (2000). The" how" of goal pursuit: Interest and self-regulation. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 306-309.
Schnittka, C., & Bell, R. (2011). Engineering design and conceptual change in science: Addressing thermal energy and heat transfer in eighth grade. International Journal of Science Education, 33(13), 1861-1887.
Schunk, D. H. (1986). Verbalization and children's self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 347-369.
Science Foundation Arizona. (2012). The STEM immersion matrix for schools and districts. Retrieved from http://www.paulofreireschool.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/STEM_Matrix. pdf

Sesini, M. (2011). The garbage patch in the oceans: the problem and possible solutions. Columbia University, New York.
Steel, B. S., Smith, C., Opsommer, L., Curiel, S., & Warner-Steel, R. (2005). Public ocean literacy in the United States. Ocean & Coastal Management, 48(2), 97-114.
Stoddart, T., Abrams, R., Gasper, E., & Canaday, D. (2000). Concept maps as assessment in science inquiry learning-a report of methodology. International Journal of Science Education, 22(12), 1221-1246.
Stuart, H. A. (1985). Should concept maps be scored numerically?. The European Journal of Science Education, 7(1), 73-81.
Tindall, T., & Hamil, B. (2004). Gender disparity in science education: The causes, consequences, and solutions. Education, 125(2), 282-296.
Toulmin, C. N., & Groome, M. (2007). Building a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Agenda. National Governors Association.
Trawick, L. (1988). Relationships among Cognitive-Motivational Processes and Academic Performance in Community College Students with a History of Academic Failure.
Trowbridge, L. W., & Bybee, R. W. (1990). Becoming a secondary school science teacher.
Tuan*, H. L., Chin, C. C., & Shieh, S. H. (2005). The development of a questionnaire to measure students' motivation towards science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639-654.
Tytler, R., Symington, D., & Smith, C. (2011). A curriculum innovation framework for science, technology and mathematics education. Research in science education, 41(1), 19-38.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1989). Year 2000 challenges for marine science training and education worldwide. Paris, France: Author.

Yıldırım, A. (1996). Disiplinlerarası öğretim kavramı ve programlar açısından doğurduğu sonuçlar. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12, 89-94.
(此全文20200115後開放外部瀏覽)
電子全文
全文檔開放日期:2020/01/15
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
* *