本研究以一系列的合作行動研究，使生手教師(個案教師)能發展其STS(Science/Technology/Society)教師專業能力，著者作為個案教師經由下列四階段發展STS教師專業能力：階段一、參與STS教師研習活動；階段二、經由參加"溫室效應"STS錨式活動發展；階段三、在鷹架學習情境中開發及帶動STS活動發展教師專業能力；階段四、帶動錨式及鷹架式共創活動發展教師專業能力。經由這四個階段，著者以教學者、學習者和研究者的角色，使用教學歷程檔案為學習及評量工具建構STS教師專業能力。本研究結果顯示透過合作行動研究，以四階段的教師專業能力發展方案及建立教學歷程檔案之附加價值法能培育STS教師專業能力。建立教學歷程檔案之附加價值法促使教師自省、自評、自律、自信及願意為自己的學習負責。研究結果發現經過四階段培育之教師能發展學習者之STS素養，進而激發以價值為中心的創造力。因此著者建議應鼓勵教師們經由合作行動研究培育STS教師專業能力。

This thesis is about a series of collaborative action researches for an STS teacher's professional development. The author as the case teacher went through the following four stages. Stage 1: An STS teacher workshop. Stage 2: STS learning under anchored "greenhourse effect" STS activities. Stage 3: Under scaffolded instruction, designing and carrying out "acid rain" STS activities. Stage 4: Under less scaffolded instruction, carrying out the expanded "acid rain" activities which encourage learners' cooperative creation with STS exploratory experiment. Throughout the four stages, the author as learner/teacher/researcher, used portfolio as learning and assessment tools to construct pedagogical content knowledge. The results of this study showed that, through collaborative action researches, the four-stage teacher development program and value-added portfolio building method were able to promote STS teacher's professional capabilities. This value-added method in building portfolio motivated the teacher's self-reflection, self-evaluation and self-regulation, self-confidence and willingness to take charge of his own learning. The teacher in turn was able to promote learner's STS literacy, especially value-centered creativity. The author suggests that teachers should be encourage to promote their professional capabilities through collaborative action researches.

中文部份
王澄霞(1994a)：設計大學 STS 化學通識教育的架構-A Curriculum Framework Design for College-level STS Chemistry. 計畫報告，計畫編號：NSC-83-0111-S-003-013.
王澄霞(1994b)：STS活動中之學與教。科學教育學刊, 3(1), 115-137.
王澄霞(1996a)：化學領域之STS 師資培育課程架構。化學, 54(2)，103-114.
王澄霞(1996b)：建立STS教師專業能力基準：化學領域。計畫報告, 計畫編號： NCS 84-2511-s-003-094.
王澄霞(1997)：STS教師專業成長。科學教育學刊, 5(1), 23-58.
王澄霞和林梅芬（1995, 9月)：學生自製之STS活動：溫室效應。論文發表於第一屆數理教學及師資培育學術研討會。彰化市：國立彰化師範大學。
王澄霞和洪志明等7人(1996)：國中數學及自然科學生活化實驗設計學習模組的研究開發與推廣計畫, 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心編印。
王澄霞和洪志明等9人(1997)：國中數學及自然科學生活化實驗設計學習模組的研究開發與推廣計畫, 國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心編印。
王澄霞和陳國華（1994)：結合科學、技術與環境之學習成就評量。環境教育, 18, 45-50.
王澄霞和游佩琪（1994)：油炸後的食用油該如何處理﹖化學, 52(4), 335-342.
王澄霞、許彩娥和蔡曉信(1994)：國內報章STS議題分析。環境教育, 23, 40-45.
王澄霞和蔡曉信（1994)：以鷹架策略開發STS專業能力的模式。師大學報, 39, 429-454.
王澄霞和劉奕昇（1995)：開發臭氧層破洞STS單元。師大學報, 40, 331-363.
王澄霞和簡佩瑩(1992, 12月)：化學實驗之解析─建構學習法。論文發表於中華民國第八屆科學教育學術研討會。高雄市：國立高雄師範大學。
李佳玲(1995)：國中理化試行合作學習之研究。彰化市：國立彰化師範大學碩士論文(未出版)。
周立勳(1994)：國小班級分組合作學習之研究。臺北市：國立政治大學博士論文(未出版)。
洪志明和鄭淑玲( 1997, 5月)：開發植物色素STS實驗活動單元。論文發表於中華民國STS科學教育研討會。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學。
郭重吉(1992)：從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進。科學發展月刊, 20(5), 548-570.
陳文典(1997)：STS教學教師所需之專業準備。科學教育學刊, 5(2), 167-189.
連啟瑞和盧玉玲(1997)：國小高年級學童對物質類感興趣問題的分析與運用。科學教育學刊, 5(2), 191-218.
許榮富(1991)：從科學、技學與社會的整合談科學教育的未來發展。教師天地, 52, 24-31.
黃政傑和林佩璇(1996)：合作學習。臺北市：五南圖書公司。
黃萬居(1998)：培育能提高國小學生的解決問題能力教師之研究。臺北市立師範學院學報, 29, 227-241.
黃萬居(1997)：國小教師開發「辨認粉末」單元活動之研究。論文發表於中華民國第一屆化學教育學術研討會。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學。
黃鴻博(1998)：在國民小學實施STS教育之合作行動研究。彰化市：國立彰化師範大學博士論文(未出版)。
董奇(1995)：兒童創造力發展心理。臺北市：五南圖書出版公司。
鄭昭明(1997)：創造性思考原則。張昭鼎紀念研討會《科學創意論文集》。
張金淑(1989)：合作學習對學習效果之研究。臺北市：國立政治大學碩士論文(未出版)。
張惠博(1996)：職前科學教師學科教學知識發展之研究。科學教育學刊, 4(1), 59-92.
楊坤原和鄭湧涇(1996)：高一學生認知風格、認知策略與遺傳學學習成就的關係。科學教育學刊, 4(2), 135-159.
楊榮祥(1995)：建構論STS和實際教學?西澳的實驗學校一例。師大科教月刊, 176, 4-17.
甄曉蘭(1995)：合作行動研究-進行教育研究的另一種方式。嘉義師院學報, 9, 299-318.
蘇育任(1997)：運用模組開發活動培育STS教師之可行性研究。科學教育學刊, 5(2), 245-266.
蘇育任(1998)：STS課程理念與教學融入我國國民小學新課程的努力與嘗試。板橋教師研習會研習專刊。臺北縣板橋：國民小學教師研習會。
日文部份
比賀佑典（1996)：以教師的指導訓練促進創造性發展。論文發表於中日技術人力創意發展研習會。臺北市：國立臺灣師範大學。
梅埜 國夫(1993)：STS教育理念理科意味。理科
教育, 11月號Vol.42.
英文部份
Abayomi, B. I. (1988). The effects of concept mapping and cognitive style on science achievement. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49(6), 1420A.
Abbott, J. (1991). The creation of effective modern learning communities: The role of new information and communication technologies. Paper presented at the NATO workshop, The design of constructivist learning environments: Implications for instructional design and the use of technology, Lruvrn, Belgium.
Adamchik, C. F. (1996). The Design and Assessment of Chemistry Portfolios. Journal of Chemical Education, 73, 528-531.
Arnaudin, M. W., Mintzes, J.J., Dunn, C.S. & Shafer, T.H. (1984). Concept mapping in college science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 14(2), 117-121.
Ausubel, D. P.(1963). The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning. New York: Grune & Stration.
Banathy, B. H. (1987). Instrutional systems design. In R. Gagne(ED.), Instructional technology: Foundations. Hillsdale, Nj: LawrenceErlbaum Associates, 85-112.
Barbe, W. B. (1985). Growing Up Learning: The Keys to Your Child's Potential. Washington, D.C.: Acropolis Books, Ltd.
Bar-Lavie, B. Z. (1988). Enhancing meaningful learning in an environmental education program: a case study of a class empowered through the use of Novak's and Gowin's principles of learning how to learn, concept mapping, interviewing, and educating. Dissertation Abstracts International, 48(10), 2590-A.
Barton, J., & Collins, A. (1993). Portfolios in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 44(3), 200-210.
Beyerbach, B. A. (1986). Concept mapping as an approach to assessment of students' representation of structural knowledge. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(9), 2622-A.
Bodolus, J. E. (1987). The use of the concept mapping strategy to facilitate meaningful learning for nine grade students in science. Dissertation Abstracts International, 47(9), 3387-A.
Bowen, C. W. (2000). A Quantitative Literature Review of Cooperative Learning Effects on High School and College Chemistry Achievement. J. Chem. Educ.77(1), 116.
Brandt, R. S. (1986). On creativity and thinking skills: A conversation with David Perkins. Educational Leadership, 43, 12-18.
Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Williams, S. (1990). Anchored instruction:Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix and R.Spiro(Eds.), Cognition,education,and multimedia:Exploring ideas in high technology. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,115-142.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Debating thesituation. Educational Technology, 18, 32-42.
Brown, A. (1992). The cognitive basis of school restructuring. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Butterfield, E. C., & Nelson, G. D. (1989). Theory andpractice of teaching for transfer. Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 37(3), 5-38.
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: The Falmer Press.
Champagne, A. B., Lonitts, B. E., & Calinger, B. J.(Eds.) (1990). This year in school Science 1989 Scientific literacy. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
ChemCom(1988, 1st ed.)(1993, 2nd ed.). Chemistry in the Community, American Chemical Society, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa.
Chiou, G. F. (1992). Suiated learning metaphors and computer-based learning environments. Educational Technology. XXXII(8): 7-11.
CiC. (1994). Chemistry in Context: Apply chemistry to society. American Chemical Society, William C. Brown: Dubuque, Iowa.
Clibum, J. W. (1990). Concept maps to promote meaningful learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 19(4), 212-217.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1990). Congitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L.Resnick(Ed.), Knowing, learing, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 453-494.
Collins, A. (1992). Portfolios: Questions for design. Science Scope, March, 25-27.
Collions, A. (1993). Portfolios for science education: Issues in purpose, structure, and authenticity. Science education, 76(4), 451-463.
Cronin, L. L. (1989). Creativity in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 56(2), 34-36.
Cunningham, D. J. (1991). Assessing constructions and constructing assessments. Educational Technology, May, 13-17.
Curry, K. J. W. (1986). A study of the value of concept mapping for third grade students. Matsters Abstracts International, 24(3), 187.
Dailey, A., Martindale, C., & Borkum, J. (1997). Creativity, Synesthesia, and Physiognomic Perception. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 1-8.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scoti, P. (1994). Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
Duffy, T. M. & Jonassen, D. H.(1991). Constructivism: New Implications for Instructional Technology. Educational Technology, May, 7-12.
Elliott, J.(1991). Action research for educational change. Bucking-ham, UK: Open University Press.
Feldman, A. (1994). Erzberger's dilemma: Validity in action research and science teachers' need to know. Science Education, 78(1), 83-101.
Feldhusen, J. F., & Goh, B. E. (1995). Assessing and accessing creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 8(3), 231-247.
Gable, D., & Bunce, D. (1996). Chemistry Teachers as Researchers: Collaborative Inquiry for Enchanting Teaching and adding to the Knowledge Base. Paper Presented at Annual meeting of national association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, Mo. March 31-April 3, 1996.
Gagne, R. W. (1987). Instructional technology: Foundations. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Harel,l.(1991). Children as designers. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Gardner, D. P. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for education retorm. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing office, p.5
Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). From problem solving to problem finding. In I.A. Taylor & J.W. Getzels (Eds.), Perspectives in creativity (pp.221-246). Chicago, IL: Aldine Publishers.
Guild, P. B., Garger, S. (1985). Marching to Different Drummers. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Surpervision and Curriculum Development.
Guilford, J. P. (1977). Way beyond the IQ. Buffalo, NY: Creative Education Foundation, Inc.
Gunstone, R. F., Slattery, M., Baird, J. R., & Northfield, J. R.(1993). A case study exploration of development in preservice science teachers. Science Education, 77(1), 47-73.
Halpern, D. (1984). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking.
Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
Harms, N. C. (1977). Project synthesis: An interpretative consolidation of research identifying needs in natural science education.(A proposal prepared for the National Science Foundation). Boulder, Co.:University of Colorado.
Hart, E. P., & Robottom, I. M.（1990）. The science-technology-society movement in science education: A critique of the reform process. Journal of research in science teaching. 27(6), 575-588.
Harel, I. (1991). Children as designers. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Heath, P. A. (1992). Organizing for STS Teaching and Learning: The doing of STS, Theory into Practice , Vol xxxI, No.1, Winter.
Hein, G. (1990). The assessment of band-on elementary science programs. Grand Forks, ND: Center for Teaching & Learning, University of North Dakota.
Heinze-Fry, J. A. (1987). Evaluation of concept mapping as a tool for meaningful education of college biology students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 48(1), 95-A.
Hines, J., Hungerford, H., & Tomer, A. (1987). Analysis and synthesis and of research on responsible environmental behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 18(2), 1-8.
Houstom, W. R. (1988). Reflecting on reflection in teacher education. In H. C. Waxman & H. J. Frieberg, Eds., Image of reflection of teacher education. Reston, VA: Association of Teacher Education.
Hurd, P. D. (1991). Why we must transform science education. Educational leadship, October, 39.
Hyerle, D. O. (1996). Thinking Maps: Seeing is Understanding. Educational Leadership, Jan., 85-89.
Johnson, R. T. & Johnson, D. W. (1986). Action research: Cooperative learning in the science classroom, Science and Children, 24(2), 31-33.
Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. (4th Ed.), Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Johnstone, A. H., & Letton, K. M. (1990). Why do practical Work?-A researcher's point of view. International Newsletter on Chemical Education, 34(12), 14-18.
Kitto, J., Lok, D., & Rudowicz, E. (1994). Measuring creative thinking: An activity-based approach. Creativity Research Journal, 7(1), 59-69.
Kumar, D. D. & Chubin, D. E. (2000) STS: Adding Value to Research and Practice. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9(2), 135-139.
Kurfess, J. (1988). Critical thinking: Theory, research, pracitce and possiblilies(Report No. 2).(ASHE-Eric Higher Education Reports).
Kurzmyn, A. J. (1987). Cognitive mapping principles in comprehension strategies. Dissertation Abstracts International, 48(6), 1419-A.
Lehman, J. D., Carter, C., & Kahle, J. B. (1985). Concept mapping, vee mapping, and achievement: results of a field study with black high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 663-673.
Loncaric, L. (1986). The effect of a concept mapping strategy program upon the acquisition of social studies concepts. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46(6), 2006-A.
Lumpe, A. T., Haney, J. J., & Czerniak, C. C. (1998). Science Teacher Beliefs and Intentions to Implement Science-Technology-Society(STS) in the Classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9(1), 1-24.
Mackworth, N. H. (1965). Originality. The American Psychologist, 20, 51-66.
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.
Marzano, R. (1992). Dimensions of learning. Association for supervision and curriculum development. VA, USA.
Maslow, A. H. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van Nostrend.
McLellan, H. (1993). Evaluation in A situated learning environment. Educational Technology, XXXIII, 3, 39-45.
McComas, W. F. （1989）. Sparking creative thinking with STS education: The results of the 1987-88 Chautauqua workshops. Chautauqua Notes, 4(8), 1-2.
Merryfield, M. M. (1991). Science-Technology Society and global perspectives. Theory into Practice, Volume xxx, Number 4, Autumn 1991, pp.289-292.
National Science Teachers Association. (1990). The NSTA position statement on science/technology/society (STS). Washington, D.C.
Noffke, S. E. (1997). Professional, Personal and Political dimension of action research. Review of research in education, 22, 305-342.
Nott, L., Reeve, C., & Reeve, R. (1992). Scoring Rubrics: An Assessment Option. Science Scope, March, 44.
Novak, J. D. (1987). Human constructivism: toward a unity of psychological meaning making. In J. D. Novak, Ed., Proceedings of the Second Internation Strategies in science and Mathematics. Ithaca. NY: 349-350.
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept Mapping : An Useful Tool for Science Education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937-949.
Novak, J. D., Gowin, D. B., & Johansen, G. T. (1983). The use of concept mapping and knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students. Science Education, 67(5), 625-645.
Ohio Department of Education. (1988). New dimensions in science education. Columbus, OH: Author.
Ogawa, M., Kuehn-Ebert, C. & Devito, A. (1991). Differences in Creative Thinking between Japanese and American Fifth Grade Children. Bull. Fac. Educ., Ibaraki Univ.（Edu. Sci.）40: p53-59.
Osborne, R. J. & Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67(4), 489-508.
Pearlman, R. (1991). Restructuring with technology:A tour of schools where it's happening. Technology and Learning, 30-37.
Pedretti, E., & Hodson, D. (1995). From Rhetoric to Action-Implementing STS Education through Action Reeseaarch. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 463-486.
Penick, J. E. (1982). Developing Creativity as a Result of Science Instruction. What Research Says to the Science Teacher.（Vol.4）Washington DC: National Science Teachers Association.
Penick, J. E., & Yager, R.E. (1993). Student growth in creative skills in middle school science. Science Educator, 2(1), 21-27.
Perkins, D. N. (1991). Technology meets constructivism. Educational Technology, May, 18-23.
Peterson, W. A. (1991). The art of creative thinking. CA.: Hay House Inc.
Pines, A. L., & West, L. H. T. (1986). Conceptual Understanding and Science Learning: An interpretion of research within A source of knowleage framework. Seience Education, 70(5), 583-604.
Project 2061, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC.
Rice, D. C., Ryan, J. M., & Samson, S. M. (1998). Using Concept Maps to Assess Student Learning in the Science Classroom: Must Different Methods Compete? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(10), 1103-1127.
Risi, M. (1982). Macroscole: A holistic approach to science teaching. A discussion paper, D-82/2. Science Council of Canada, Ottawa.
Robinson, W. R. (1999). Aview from the Science Education Research Literature: Concept Map Assessment of Classroom Learning. J. Chem. Edu, 76(9), 1179.
Robinson, R., & Stern, S. (1997). Corporate Creativity. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Roger, C. R. (1962). Toward a theory of creativity. In S. J. Parnes and H. F. Harding(Eds.). A sourcebook for creative thinking. New York: Scribner's.
Rosen, W. G. (1989). High-School Biology today and tomorrow. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, April, 26-33.
Sagor, R., & Curley, J.(1991). Collaborative action research: Can it improve school effectiveness? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago IL..
SALTERS, University of York, York, U.K. SATIS, Association for Science Education in Britain, Hatfield,U.K.
Sch"n, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professonals think in action. New York: Basic book
Sharan, S., & Shaulov, A. (1990). Cooperative learning, motivation to learn, and academic achievement. In S. Sharan,.(Ed.), Cooperative learning, (pp.1-22). New York: Praeger Publishers.
Sia, A., Hungerford, H., & Tomera, A. (1986). Selected predictors of responsible environmental behavior: Ananalysis. Journal of Environmental Education, 17(2),31-40.
SIS: Malvern College SIS project, U.K.
SISCON: Leeds College SISCON project, U.K.
Smilansky, J., & Naftali, H. (1986). Inventors versus problem solvers: An empirical investigation. Journal of Creative Behavior, 20(3), 183-201.
Solso, R. L. (1979). Cognitive psychology. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Ind.
SS&C, Scope, Sequence, and Coordination, A Project of the National Science Teachers Association, Washington, DC, 1992.
S-STS, Science through Science/Technology/Society, Pennsylvania State University,1985.
Starr, M. L., & Krajcik, J. S. (1990). Concept maps as a heuristic for science curriculum development: Toward improvement in process and product. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 987-1000.
Sternberg, R. J. (1996). Investing in Creativity: Many Happy Returns. Educational Leadership, Dec.1995/Jan.1996, p80-84.
STSC, Karitann Publishers, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Stuart, H. A. (1985). Should concept maps be scored numerically? European Journal of Science Education, 7, 3-8.
Swanson, D. B., Norman, G. R., & Linn, R. L. (1995) Performance-Based Assessmeent：Lessons Form the Health Professions. Educational Researcher, 24(5), 5-11.
Taylor, P. C.(1996). Action research: Enabling teachers to adopt the role of teacher-researcher. Paper presented at 1996 workshop seminars on research method of science classroom environment, Chang-Hua.
Thier, H. (1991). 2001. Science Scope, 14(4).
Torrance, E. P. (1963). Toward the more humane education of gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 7, 135-145.
Torrance, E. P. (1976). Career education and creativiby -Students of the future. Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 1, 76-91.
Towns, M. H., Kreke, K., & Fields, A. (2000). An Action Research Project: Student Perspective on Small-Group Learning in Chemistry. J. Chem. Edu, 77(1), 111.
Wakefield, J. F. (1992). Creative thinking: Problem solving skills and the arts orientation. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Co.
Waks, L. J. (1992). The responsibility Spiral: A curriculum Framework for STS education. Theory into Practice, Vol xxxI, No.1,pp.13-19.
Wang, C. H. (1993). Improving chemistry experimental learning through process-mapping: Hydrolysis of p-nitroacetanilide, Bull. Taiwan Normal University, 38, 1-20.
Wang, C. H. (1994). A model for Teacher Enhancement Through Instructional Research in STS Unit Development. Educational Technology Research. 17, 45-54, 日本教育工學會, 日本, 東京。
Wang, C. H. (1998). Cultivating Capabilities of Teachers in Promoting Student Creativity: Designing STS Exploratory Experiment. Proceedings of National Science Council, Part D, 8(1), 45-53.
Wang, C. H., & Horng, J. M. (1991). A Design for Implementing Mastery Learning on Sublimation, A Chemistry Experimental Technique. Proceedings of the NSC - Part D, 1(2), 31-41.
Warfield, J. N. (1976). Social system. John Wiely & Sons, New York, 204-284.
Winn, W. D. (1993). Instructional design and situated learning: Paradox or Partnership﹖Educational Technology, 33(3),16-21.
Winn, W. D., & Bricken, W. (1992). Designing virtual worlds for use in mathematics education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R. & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications. Review of Educational Research, 47(1), 1-64.
Yager, R. E. (1990). What we did not learn from the 60s about science curriculum reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 29(8), 905-910.
Yager, R. E. (1991). 訪華講學專輯，國立臺灣師範大學科學教育中心出版。
Yager, R. E. (1992). The constructivist learning model: A must for STS classrooms. ICASE, 14-17.
Yager, R. E. (1993). Science and critical thinking. In J. H. Clarke & A. W. Biddle (Eds.), Teaching critical thinking; Report from across the curriculum, EnglewoodCliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. pp. 264-275.
Yager, R. E., Blunck, S. M., & Ajam, M.（Eds）（1991）. The Iowa Assessment Package for EvaiatopmomFive Domains of Science Education: The University of Iowa. Science Education Center, Iowa City, IA.
Yager, R. E., & Roy, R. (1993). STS: Most pervasive and most radical of reform approaches to science education. ln R. E. Yager (Ed.), What research says to science teacher, Vol. 7(pp.7-13). Washington, DC: National Science TeachersAssociation.
Zoller, U. (1991). Teacher's beliefs and view on selected science-technology-society topic: A probe into STS literacy versus indoctrination. Science Teacher Education, 75(5), 541-542.