本研究利用TIMSS 2003的資料，分析我國八年級班級科學平均與學習機會之間的關係，並建立學習機會對班級科學平均成績具有預測力的迴歸模型。
　　結果發現：（一）教師花越少時間在課室管理、提供適當頻率的家庭作業，學業學習時間越長，班級科學平均成績越高；（二）每週一次的評量的班級科學平均成績最高；（三）教學資源多寡對班級科學平均成績無顯著差異；（四）學習環境及氣氛越好，班級科學平均成績越高；（五）家長對學生成就的支持、對學校活動的參與度越高，班級科學平均成績越高；（六）「家長支持」是對班級科學平均成績最具有預測力的因子。
　　建議學校提供足夠的資訊設備並妥善運用、整修老舊危險的建築、加強保全的設立。建議教師加強課室管理的能力、指派頻率適中、完成時間約30~60分鐘的作業、定期考前多安排小考。建議家長支持小孩的學習、多參與學校活動。

In this study, we analyzed the relationship between opportunity to learn and the science achievement of grade 8 students in Taiwan with the database of TIMSS 2003, and established a predictable regression model with factors of opportunity to learn.

　The results showed that: 1) when teachers spent less time on classroom management and assigned homework with appropriate frequency, the academic learning time would be longer and the students would get higher science achievement; 2) the students in the classes with assessments once a week had the highest science achievement; 3) there was no significant relationship between teaching resources and science achievement; 4) the better learning environment and climate was, the higher science achievement; 5) the more parents supported, the higher science achievement; 6) the best item for predicting the science achievement of students was parents’ support.

　There were several suggestions in this study for schools, teachers and parents: schools should provide sufficient information equipment, make the sufficient application, repair old and dangerous buildings and setup security. Teachers should increase their ability in classroom management, assign homework for the students in 30~60 minutes with appropriate frequency and give tests before monthly exam. Parents should apply support for children’s learning and school activities.

一、中文部分：
吳琪玉. (2005). 探討我國八年級學生在TIMSS 1999與TIMSS 2003數學與科學之表現. 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文.
林碧珍和蔡文煥. (2005). TIMSS 2003臺灣國小四年級學生的數學成就及其相關因素之探討. 科學教育月刊, 285, 2-38.
邱美虹. (2005). TIMSS 2003 臺灣國中二年級學生的科學成就及其相關因素之探討. 科學教育月刊, 282, 2-40.
侯怡如. (2003). 由考試文化的角度分析我國學生在TIMSS 1999的答題表現----生命科學部分. 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文.
洪佳慧. (2002). 由教科書內容與性別面向分析我國國二學生在第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查（TIMSS-R）的學習表現-生命科學以及環境與資源議題部分. 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文.
張一誠. (2002). 由我國國中教科書內容分析國二學生在第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查(TIMSS-R)之表現：物理、科學探究與科學本質以及地球科學部分. 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文.
張殷榮. (2001). 我國國中學生在國際測驗調查中科學學習成就影響因素之探討. 科學教育月刊, 244, 5-10.
曹博盛. (2005). TIMSS 2003臺灣國中二年級學生的數學成就及其相關因素之探討. 科學教育月刊, 283, 2-34.
陳立琇. (2006). 我國八年級學生在TIMSS 1999與TIMSS 2003科學成就與學生特質之趨勢研究——以生命科學部分為例. 國立臺灣師範大學生命科學研究所碩士論文.
陳政帆. (2006). 我國八年級學生在TIMSS 2003中之科學自信心、價值觀及課堂活動分析. 國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文.
劉佳容. (2002). 我國國二學生在TIMSS-1999中之理化學習成就分析. 國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文.
鄭士鴻. (2006). 由TIMSS 2003的結果分析各國八年級學生科學學習成就與影響因素以及探討我國不同特質的班級理化課課堂活動. 國立臺灣師範大學化學研究所碩士論文.
顏秀玫. (2004). 我國小學四年級學生在「2003年國際數學與科學教育成就趨勢調查」中科學低分題之分析. 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文.
羅珮華. (2000). 「第三次國際數學與科學教育成就研究後續調查」之抽樣設計. 科學教育月刊, 235, 14-20.
羅珮華. (2003). 從TIMSS 1999探討國二學生的學習成就與學習時間及國家經濟能力之關係. 科學教育月刊, 256, 3-11.
羅珮華. (2004). 從「第三次國際科學與數學教育成就研究後續調查（TIMSS 1999）」結果探討國中學生學習成就與學生特質的關係：七個國家之比較. 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所博士論文.
譚克平. (2006). TIMSS 2003學校問卷調查的分析. 科學教育月刊, 286, 2-23.

二、英文部分：
American Federation of Teachers, Washington D. C. (1999). Lessons from the World: What TIMSS Tells Us about Mathematics Achievement, Curriculum, and Instruction. Educational Issues Policy Brief.
Aronson, J., Zimmerman, J., & Carlos, L. (1999). Improving Student Achievement by Extending School: Is It Just a Matter of Time? San Francisco, CA.: WestEd.
Baratz-Snowden, J. C. (1993). Opportunity to Learn: Implications for Professional Development. Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 311-324.
Benbow, C. P. (1988). Sex Differences in Mathematical Reasoning Ability in Intellectually Talented Preadolescents: Their Nature, Effects, and Possible Causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11, 169-232.
Berry, G. L. (1993). Psychological Services Providers, the Opportunity to Learn and Inner-city Students: Beyond Mere Curricular Reform. Journal of Negro Education, 62(3), 355-363.
California Department of Education (1993). Ensuring Every Student Succeeds: A Report on Opportunity to Learn. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Cheng, S. K., & Seng, Q. K. (2001). Sex Differences in TIMSS Mathematics Achievement of Four Asian Nations. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 27(4), 331.
Cwikla, J. (2002). Teacher Preparation: How Is It Linked to Student Achievement? TIMSS-R Report.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). National Standards and Assessments: Will They Improve Education? American Journal of Education, 102(4), 478-510.
Elliott, M. (1998). School Finance and Opportunities to Learn: Does Money Well Spent Enhance Students' Achievement? Sociology of Education, 71(3), 223.
Elmore, R. F., & Fuhrman, S. H. (1995). Opportunity-to-Learn Standards and the State Role in Education. Teachers College Record, 96(3), 433-458.
Fuhrman, S. H., & Elmore, R. F. (1993). Opportunity to Learn and the State Role: An Ooutline for a Paper: New Brunswick, NJ: Center for policy Research in Education.
Geary, D. C. (1996). Sexual Selection and Sex Differences in Mathematical Abilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(2), 229-284.
Gettinger, M. (1985). Time Allocated and Spent Relative to Time Needed for Learning as Determinants of Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 3-11
Guiton, G., & Oakes, J. (1995). Opportunity to Learn and Conceptions of Educational Equality. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 323-336.
Hammouri, H. (2004). Attitudinal and Motivational Variables Related to Mathematics Achievement in Jordan: Findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Educational Research, 46(3), 241.
Jackson, S. F. (1993). Opportunity to Learn: The Health Connection. Journalof Negro Education, 62(3), 377-393.
Martin, M. O. (2005). TIMSS 2003 User Guide for the International Database. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 Technical Eeport. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 International Science Report: Findings from IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grade. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA),TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, Chestnut Hill,MA.
McDonnell, L. M. (1995). Opportunity to Learn as a Research Concept and a Policy Instrument. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 17(3), 305.
McGuinness, D., & Pribram, H. K. (1979). The Origins of Sensory Bias in the Development of Gender Differences in Perception and Cognition. Cognitive Growth and Development: Essays in Memory of Herbert G. Birch, New York: Brunner/Mazel.
NCEST. (1992). Raising Standards for American Education. A Report to Congress, the Secretary of Education, the National Education Goals Panel, and the American People. Washington, DC: Author.
New York State Education Department (1993). Shaping Opportunity-to- Learn Standards. Albany, NY: Author.
O'Day, J. A., & Smith, M. S. (1993). Systemic Reform and Educational Opportunity. Designing Coherent Education Policy: Improving the System. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Oakes, J. (1989). What Educational Indicators? The Case for Assessing the School Context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(2), 81-199.
Paik, S. J. (2004). Korean and US Families, Schools, and Learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(1), 71.
Porter, A. C. (1993). Opportunity to Learn. Brief No. 7: Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, Madison W. I.
Porter, A. C. (1993). Defininig and Measuring Opportunity to Learn. Madison, WI: Uuiversity of Wisconsin.
Reddy, V. (2005). Cross-National Achievement Studies: Learning from South Africa's Participation in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Compare A Journal of Comparative Education, 35(1), 63.
Schwartz, W., & Eric Clearinghouse on Urban Education, N. Y. (1995). Opportunity to Learn Standards: Their Impact on Urban Students. ERIC/CUE Digest Number 110.
Shearman, J. (1980). Mathematics, Spatial Visualisation, and Related Factors: Changes in Girls and Boys, Grades 8-11. Journal of Educational Psychology, 27, 476-482.
Soh, K. C. (1999). Three G7 and the Little Asian dragons in TIMSS Mathematics at the FourthGrade. The Mathematics Educator, 4(2), 126-137.
South Carolina Department of Education (1993). National Governor's Association Grant to Study and Make Recommendations for School Delivery Standards. Columbia, SC: Author.
SSPEI. (1991). Education Counts: An Indicator System to Monitor the Nation's Educational Health. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Stanley, J. C., Huang, J., & Zu, X. (1986). SAT-M Scores of Highly Selected Students in Shanghai Tested when Less than 13 years old. College Board Review, 140, 10-13,28-29.
Stevens, F. I. (1997). Opportunity To Learn Science: Connecting Research Knowledge to Classroom Practices. Publication Series No. 6. Philadelphia P. A.: Mid-Atlantic Lab. for Student Success.
Stevens, F. I., & Grymes, J. (1993). Opportunity to Learn: Issues of Equity for Poor and Minority Students. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Stevenson, H. W. (1998). A Study of Three Cultures: Germany, Japan and the United States--An Overview of the TIMSS Case Study Project. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(7), 524.
Tang, R. F., Zheng, Q. M., & Wu, S. Q. (1996). Gender and Mathematics Education: A Snapshot of China. Towards Gender Equity in Mathematics Education: An ICMZ Study, 271-276. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Tornroos, J. (2005). Mathematics Textbooks, Opportunity to Learn and Student Achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315.
Traiman, S. (1993). The Debate on Opportunity to Learn Standards. Washington, DC: National Governors' Association.
Vermont Department of Education (undated). Opportunity to Learn Standards. Montpelier, VT: Author.
Wang, D. B. (2004). Family Background Factors and Mathematics Success: A Comparison of Chinese and US Students. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(1), 40.
Wang, J. (1998). Opportunity To Learn: The Impacts and Policy Implications. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 20(3), 137.
Wang, M. C., Haertel, G. D., Walberg, H. J., & Mid-Atlantic Lab. for Student Success, P. P. A. (1997). What Helps Students Learn? Spotlight on Student Success.
Ysseldyke, J. E. (1994). Opportunity-to-Learn Standards. Synthesis Report 14. Saint Cloud State University, M. N: National Center on Educational Outcomes, Minneapolis M. N.National Association of State Directors of Special Education.