本研究試圖結合專家(中學課程)及大眾媒體觀點(科學新聞)，由一嶄新的面向去定義與評測大眾科學素養。根據九年一貫自然與生活科技教科書末索引的重要科學名詞，利用電腦自動搜尋與詞彙抽取技術，來比對新聞中出現頻率較高之科學詞彙，最後共篩選出95個科學主要詞彙及伴隨詞彙，輔以科學新聞所關注之內容研發量表50題試題，涵蓋含生物領域(45.26%，22題)、地球科學領域（37.9%，19題）、物理領域(11.58%，6題)、化學領域(5.26%，3題)。本研究共有來自國中、高中及大學計1034位學生參與。研究結果顯示：(1) 在台灣的媒體及教科書當中,生物相關的科學詞彙出現率最高,接著依序是地球科學、物理、化學相關領域之詞彙。(2)在此大眾科學素養量表（SLiM）的表現上，男生(M=33.93, SD=7.48)較女生好(M=31.69, SD=7.41) (t=4.24, p=0.000<0.05)。(3)高中生(Mean=37.4, SD=4.1)的SLiM表現顯著好於大學生(Mean = 32.8,SD=5.5)及國中生(Mean = 27.2  8.4)。(4)低媒體使用量之受試者(Mean = 30.8, SD= 6.42)的SLiM表現皆顯著低於中媒體使用量(Mean = 33.2, SD=7.3)及高媒體使用量(Mean = 34.1, SD=8.19)的受試者，但在中媒體使用量及高媒體使用量間沒有顯著差異。(5) 有科學偏好的受試者(M=34.47,SD=7.11)相較於沒有科學偏好的受試者(M=31.83, SD=7.57)在SLiM的表現上明顯較好(t=4.7, p=0.000<0.05)。

The purpose of this study was to develop a new research tool, which combines the views of experts and the general public, for assessing scientific literacy in media (SLiM). A total of 50 multiple-choice items were developed based on the 95 most common scientific terms derived from textbook index(es) and appearing in media, and covering the subjects of biology (45.26%, 22 items), earth science (37.90%, 19 items), physics (11.58%, 6 items) and chemistry (5.26%, 3 items) in Taiwan. A total of 1034 students from three distinct groups (7th graders, 10th graders and　undergraduates) were invited to participate in this study. The reliability of this instrument was 0.86 (KR20). The average difficulty of the SLiM ranged from 0.19 to 0.91, and the discrimination power was 0.1 to 0.59. Our study found that the scientific terms related to biology showed the highest exposure (45.26%) in news and textbooks; the terms related to earth science were second (37.9%), and the terms related to Physics and Chemistry accounted for 11.58% and 5.26% respectively. Results of the SLiM study revealed that: (1) The male group (M=33.93, SD=7.48) received higher SLiM scores than the female group (M=31.69, SD=7.41) (t=4.24, p=0.000<0.05). (2) The 10th graders (Mean = 37.4, SD=4.1) performed better than undergraduates (Mean = 32.8, SD= 5.5) and 7th graders (Mean = 27.2, SD=8.4) with significant differences (p<0.05). (3) There existed significant difference between the low media usage group (Mean = 30.8, SD=6.42), the high media usage group (Mean = 34.1, SD=8.19) and middle media group (Mean = 33.2, SD=7.3). However, the high media usage group and middle media group were not significantly different in their performance on SLiM. (4) The science preference group (M=34.47, SD=7.11) scored higher than the non science preference group (M=31.83, SD=7.57) (t=4.7, p=0.000<0.05). Implications from the current SLiM study are finally discussed.

AAAS. (1989). Project 2061. Science for All American. New York: Oxford University Press.
Abd-El-Khalick, R. (2003). Socioscientific issues in pre-college science classrooms: the primacy of learners' epistemological orientations and views of nature of science. In I. D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education.: The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Adamuti-Trache, M. (2006). Who likes science and why? Individual, family, and teacher effects. Canada: Canadian Council on Learning.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1990). Scientific/technological literacy, critical reasoning, and classroom practice. In I. S. P. N. L. M. Phillips (Ed.), Foundations of literacy policy in Canada: Calgary, Alberta, Canada: Detselig.
Anderson, N. (2010, 0602). OpenStreetMap: Crowdsourcing the world, a street at a time. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/06/01/openstreetmap/index.html?iref=allsearch
Brossard, D., & Shanahan, J. . (2006). Do They Know What They Read? Building a Scientific Literacy Measurement Instrument Based on Science Media Coverage. Science Communication, 28(1), 47-63.
Bybee, R. (1997). Toward an understanding of scientific literacy. In I. W. G. C. Bolte (Ed.), Scientific literacy (pp. 37-68). Kiel, Germany: Leibniz Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften (IPN).
Cannon, R. K., & Simpson, R. D. (1985). Relationships among attitude, motivation, and achievement of ability grouped, seventh-grade,life science students. Science Education, 69(2), 121-138.
Chang, C.-Y., Chen, Y.-L., & Chen, C.-L. D. (2010). Exploring Taiwanese teachers' perceptions toward and knowledge of climatic hazard mitigation. Nat Hazards, 52, 403-429.
Chang, C.-Y., & Cheng, W.-Y. (2008). Science Achievement and Students' Self-confidence and Interest in Science: A Taiwanese representative sample study. International Journal of Science Education, 30(9), 1183-2000.
Chang, C. Y. (2005). Taiwanese science and life technology curriculum standards and earth systems education. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5), 625-638.
Cheng, Y.-J., & Yang, K.-Y. (1998). Attitudes Toward Biology of Junior High School Students. Journal of National Taiwan Normal University, 43(2), 37-54.
Chin, C.-C. (2002a). Scientific Literacy or Not? —Non-science College Students’ Understandings About Greenhouse Effect, Ozone Layer Depletion, and Acid Rain. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 10(1), 59-86.
Chin, C.-C. (2002b). The Validation of the Test of Basic Scientific Literacy for the Use in Taiwan. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 10(3), 287-308.
Chin, C.-C. (2005). First-year Pre-service Teachers in Taiwan—Do they enter the teacher program with satisfactory scientific literacy and attitudes toward science? International Journal of Science Education, 27(13), 1549–1570.
Chiu, M.-H. (2000). An intreduction and comment on New Standards for Science. Science Education Monthly, 228, 2-15.
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37-46.
COHEN, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Conway, M. A., Cohen, G., & Stanhope, N. (1992). Very long-term memory for knowledge acquired at school and university. Applied cognitive psychology 6, 467-482.
Council, N. R. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
de Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., & Batagelj, V. (2005). Exploratory Social Network Analysis with Pajek. Paper presented at the CUP, ESNA page.
DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific Literacy: Another Look at Its Historical and Contemporary Meanings
and Its Relationship to Science Education Reform. JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN SCIENCE TEACHING, 37(6), 582- 601.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people' s images of scince. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Durant, J. R. (1993). What is scientific literacy? In J. R. Durant & J. Gregory (Eds.). London: Science Museum.
Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of Educational Measurement (5th ed). Englewood, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Fischer, E. P. (2002). 在費曼之前-二十世紀的科學簡史: 究竟出版社.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York McGraw-Hill, 2nd ed.
Freedman, M. P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 343-357.
Hazen, R. M. (2002). Why Should You Be Scientifically Literate? , from ActionBioscience http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/hazen.html.
Holbrook, J., & Rannikmae, M. (2009). The Meaning of Scientific Literacy International Journal of Environmental & Science Education 4(3), 275-288.
Huang, C.-J. (2008). Trying to Construct Real-Time Science Learning in aTechnical Society: a Study of the Differencesbetween Students and Experts When MonitoringScience News. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 16(1), 105-124.
Huang, C.-J., & Jian, M.-J. (2006). Science news in Taiwan: A study of news discourse and text structure. Mass Communication Research, 86, 135-170.
Judith L. Meece, E. M. A., Lynley H. Anderman. (2006). Classroom Goal Structure, Student Motivation, and Academic Achievement. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 487-503.
Koballa, T. R., Jr, & Crawley, F. E. (1985). The Influence of Attitude on Science Teaching and Learning. School Science and Mathematics, 85(3), 222-255.
Kolstø, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: tools for dealing with controversial socio-scientific issues. Science Education Monthly, 85(3), 291-310.
Korpan, C. A., Bisanz, G. L., Bisanz, J. &Henderson, J. M. (1997). Assessing literacy inscience: evaluation of scientific news briefs. Science Education, 81, 515-532.
Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Intemet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.
Laugksch, R. D. C. (2000). Scientific Literacy: A Conceptual Overview. Science Education Monthly, 84(1), 71-94.
Lo, P.-H. (2004). A Study of Students' Characteristics along with Achievement of Eighth Graders in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study Repeat (TIMSS 1999): Comparisons among Seven Countries. National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.
MARES, M.-L., CANTOR, J., & STEINBACH, J. B. (1999). Using Television to Foster Children's Interest in Science. Science Communication, 20(3), 283-297.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J., & Chrostowski, S. J. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international science report. Boston, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
Millar, R. (2006). Twenty First Century Science: Insights from the Design and Implementation of a Scientific Literacy Approach in School Science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1499–1521.
Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. The report of a seminar series founded by the Nuffield Foundation. London: Kings college, School of education.
Miller, J. D. (1983). Scientific literacy: A conceptual and empirical overview. Daedalus, 112(2), 29-48.
Miller, J. D. (1998). The mesurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 203-223.
Miller, J. D. (2004). Public understanding of, and attitudes toward, scientific research: what we know and what we need to know. Public Understanding of Science, 13, 273-294.
MOE. (2001). The tentative curriculum guidelines for senior high schools. Taipei: Taiwan: Author.
Noddings, N. (1992). The challenge to care in schools: An alternative approach to education. New York: Columbia University Teachers Press.
Norris, S. P., Phillips, L. M, & Korpan, C. A. (2003). University students' interpretation of media reports of science and its relationship to back ground knowledge, interest, and reading difficulty. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 123-145.
NRC. (1999). National Science Education Standards. Alexandria,Virginia: National Academic Press.
Roe, K., & Muijs, D. (1998). Children and Computer Games-A Profile of the Heavy User European Journal of Communication, 13(2), 181-200.
Rundgren, C. J., Chang Rundgren, S. N., Tseng, Y. H., Lin Pei-Ling, & Chang, C. Y. (accepted). Are You SLiM? – Developing an Instrument for Civic Scientific Literacy Measurement (SLiM) Based on Media Coverage. Public Understanding of Science.
Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2004). Attitudes toward chemistry among 11th grade students in high schools in Greece. Science Education, 88, 535-547.
Semb, G. B., Ellis, J. A., & Araujo, J. (1993). Long-term memory for knowledge learned in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(2), 305-316.
Shamos, M. H. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Steinke, J., Lapinski, M. K., Crocker, N., Zietsman-Thomas, A., Williams, Y., Evergreen, S. H., et al. (2007). Assessing Media Influences on Middle School–Aged Children' s Perceptions of Women in Science Using the Draw-A-Scientist Test (DAST). Science Communication, 29(1), 35-64.
Sutter, J. D. (2010, 0607). 10 things to know about iPhone 4. CNN Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/mobile/06/07/consumer.guide.iphone/index.html?iref=allsearch
Trefil, J. S. (2008). Why Science? : Teachers College Press
Tseng, Y.-H. (1998). Multilingual Keyword Extraction for Term Suggestion. Paper presented at the the 21st International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieva - SIGIR '98.
Tseng, Y.-H. (2002). Automatic Thesaurus Generation for Chinese Documents. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 53(13), 1130-1138.
Tseng, Y.-H., Chang, C.-Y., Rundgren, S.-N. C., & Rundgren, C.-J. (2010). Mining concept maps from news stories for measuring civic scientific
literacy in media. Computers & Education, 55, 165-177.
Yeong-Jing, C., & Kun-Yeng, Y. (1995). The Relationships Between Biology Cognitive Preference and Academic Achievement. Chinese Journal of Science Education, 3(1), 1-21.
王怡琄. (2009). 大學生對科學新聞報導之理解與詮釋. 國立政治大學　台北.
何宗穎, & 黃台珠. (2007). 國民科學素養--資訊來源分析. Paper presented at the 中華民國第二十三屆科學教育學術研討會.
林樹聲. (1999). 科學素養的省思. 科學教育月刊, 222, 16-25.