【作者】 杨玉琴；

【导师】 王祖浩；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 学科教育， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 教育的最终的目的是促进学生发展,而能力的发展是其核心内容和主要目标。尽管多年以来,培养能力一直是化学学科教育教学中的重要日标,高考改革也从“知识立意”走向“能力力意”,但由于化学学科能力体系及测评研究的相对滞后,一方面,使得化学学科能力的培养还处于经验总结甚至只停留在“口号”状态,另一方面,也使得对化学学科能力的测量与评价主观性、随意性较强,无法有的放矢。这些都迫切要求我们回答：化学学科能力是什么?化学学科能力究竟由哪些要素所构成?化学学科能力又是如何形成和发展的?如何科学有效地测量和评价化学学科能力?沿着对这些问题的追问,本论文主要分5章展开研究：第1章在对国内外相关文献研究的基础上,建立了本研究的基点。一是如何建构化学学科能力要素。目前对于学科能力要素建构的路径大致有两种,逻辑分析的方法和因素分析的方法。本研究认为,化学学科能力的实质问题是从化学科学的本质问题中派生出来的,所以采用逻辑分析的方法,按化学学科的特殊要求来分析化学学科能力要素；二是如何界定化学学科能力水平。对能力水平的界定也大致存在着2种路径,一种以内容与认知的二维框架建立不同的水平(如布卢姆),另一种是以能力为“经”,以每种能力中所涉及的“变量”的复杂度为“纬”构建能力框架,如PISA。这为本论文的后续研究提供了方向。第2章在厘清相关概念及其关系的基础上,将化学学科能力定位于“在学校化学课程学习活动中所习得并运用的能力”,且属于特殊能力。在综合考察各国(地区)对化学学科能力共同要求的基础上,论文从化学学科的基本问题出发,基于化学学科本质及其特殊要求的分析,将化学学科能力的核心要素确定为“符号表征能力”、“实验能力”、“模型思维能力”和“定量化能力”第3章在综合两种能力水平界定思想的基础上,以“学习进程”理论为指导,结合化学课程的学科传统、国内外课程标准对能力的学段要求以及学生的思维特征等要素,构建化学学科核心能力要素的“学习进程”,明确不同能力水平的学习表现以及相应的知识基础。以此作为后续学科能力测验工具的开发与优化、评分标准的制订与修订、实测结果的分析与讨论的理论依据。“学习进程”是一种假设性理论,需要实证数据的支持。在与第4章、第5章测验数据分析结果的双向互动过程中,化学学科能力的学习进程框架得以不断完善。第4章以Rasch模型原理为理论基础,基于Wilson测量建构“四基石”框架,设计了本研究测验工具开发的程序。根据第3章构建的学习进程框架编制了“符号表征”、“实验认知”、“模型思维”和“定量化”共4份测验卷,每一份测验卷都进行了两轮试测。运用Rasch模型的分析软件Bond&Fox Steps1.0.0对数据统计结果进行建模、分析,检验工具的质量。经检验,4份测验卷具有较高的信度和效度,可用于大样本测试,考察学生的化学学科能力。第5章运用所开发的测验工具,对化学学科能力进行了大样本测试,测验数据进一步验证了测验工具的可靠性和稳定性。通过进一步的数据分析,研究发现化学学科能力的发展存在着年级差异、性别差异以及学校差异。高一到高二年级学生的化学学科能力发展较为缓慢,二者没有显著性差异,而高三学生的化学学科能力显著高于高一和高二。男生的化学学科能力普遍高于女生,不同层次学校学生的化学学科能力也存在着显著差异等。作为一次探索性的研究,本论文虽然获得了一些有价值的成果和结论,如,重新界定了化学学科能力内涵及其核心要素、建立了化学学科能力框架及其发展模型、开发了化学学科能力的测验工具以及揭示了高中生化学学科能力的发展特征等。但不足之处也在所难免,后续的研究方向为学科能力学习进程的再精致研究、基于学科能力诊断的教学改进研究以及不同学科能力的学生化学学习特征研究等。更多还原

【Abstract】 The ultimate goal of our education is promoting students’ self-development, and the development of students’ competence is defined as the core element and major target of the education. Although great efforts have been made in cultivating students’ competence, and the college entrance examination has been transformed from knowledge-orientation to competence-orientation as well, challenges may still arise due to the inadequate research on assessment of the competence in discipline of chemistry (CDC). On the one hand, while people clame that they develope students’ CDC, they do not carry out in-depth practice, on the other hand, the serious subjectivity and randomness lead to aimless assessment of CCDC. The situation brings about the following questions:How to define the CDC? What are components of the CDC? How to develop CDC? How to evaluate CDC? These questions formed the basis for this study, which is divided into5chapters as follows.The first chapter, based on a review of literature at home and abroad, was conducted to establish the theoretical foundation of the study. The theoretical underpinnings presented two aspects:1. How to establish the components of CDC?2. How to identify the level of CDC? In general, the logistic analysis and factor analysis are the major methods of constructing the components of CDC. As the topic of CDC is an extensive aspect of the nature of discipline of chemistry, we analyzed the components of CDC in the way of logistic analysis. We hold that there are two ways of defining the levels of CDC, one is the two-dimensional framework using knowledge and its cognitive levels (e.g. Bloom’s Taxonomy of educational objectives), and the other framework is taking competence as the "longitude" and the complication of the variables in the CDC as the latitude"(e.g. PISA).In the second chapter, CDC was defined as"the competence that students acquire in the learning activities of chemistry curriculum" on the basis of elucidation of relevant conceptions and their relations, and CDC is a kind of special ability. Reviewing the common requirements of the CDC in various countries, we defined the core components of the CDC which consisted of "competence in representation of symbols","competence in experiments","model-based thinking competence" and "quantitative competence"In the third chapter, guided by the theory of learning progression, we analyzed the learning progression of the components of CDC and identified the performance and content knowledge of different levels of CDC based on the two ways of defining the levels of CDC, as well as in the consideration of the tradition of chemistry curriculum, the requirements of competence for grades in the curriculum standards, and the characteristics of students’thinking. The above mentioned analysis supported the development and refinement of the assessment instruments of CDC, the development and revisions of rubrics and analysis and discussion of the findings in empirical studies. Additionally, learning progression is a hypothesis and need to be verified by data.In the forth chapter, in the light of Rasch model and the Wilson’"Four Building Blooks" framework, we designed the procedures of the assessment instrument in the study. We developed four instrument to test students’"competence in representation of symbols","competence in experiments","model-based thinking competence"and "quantitative competence". Each instrument was received two trial tests. In this study, Bond&Fox Steps1.0.0was used to model and analyze the data, and to verify the validation of the instruments. The results demonstrated the good validation and verification of the instruments, and they were appropriate for testing students’ CDC in large scale.In the fifth chapter, we conducted the large scale test to examine four students’ core competencies in chemistry with the instruments. The obtained data further demonstrated the validation and verification of the instruments. The results indicated that there were significant differences between grades, genders and schools in CDC Specially, no significant differences of CDC between students in grade10and11, which suggested that students’CDC increased in a modest way. In contrast, the CDC of grade12was higher than students in both grade10and11. With respect to the gender, we found that the male’s CDC was higher than female’s CDC. The significant difference also existed among different levels of schools.Despite certain limitations, as an exploration, the study gained a series of valuable findings and conclusions. For example, it redefined the definition of the CDC and its components, created the analytical framework and evolution models of the CDC, developed the assessment instruments of the CDC and revealed the characteristics of students’CDC development. The further work will focus on the refined research on the learning progression of the competence in discipline, the improvement of the instruction of the competence in discipline, and learning performance of students with different levels of competence in discipline.更多还原