從社會學的觀點來看，科學與數學都是社會實踐所建構的，是社群透過溝通與協商而達成的，這樣的了解與維考斯基的社會學習建構論頗為類似，認為師生的教學互動有助於知識的建構。本研究為了了解九年一貫統整課程裡同一個師生群體在不同學科領域裡的互動情形，採用人種誌研究法，長期觀察小學一年級個案班級在國語、數學、及生活等學科領域在教學互動的話語類型以及過程技能的應用情形。
研究分析所運用的話語編碼有四：引發對方回應的話語編碼為I，回應編為R，評論則為E，宣稱訊息為A。結果顯示，個案班級的話語類型共可分為兩大類，第一類是由教師引發的話語類型，依據話語編碼出現的規律，可再分成八種，分別是IRE，IRE，IRIE，IREA，IRsRtEs，AIRE ，ARnE，以及 IRnIRE；第二類是由學生所引發的話語類型，依照學生的意向可再分為主動引發的模式，以及在無意間引發的偶發事件等兩種。其中IRE最為普遍，除了ARnE及 IRnIRE之外，其餘的話語類型皆普遍地分佈在三領域中，只是分佈的頻率並不相同，並會隨著時間而有所不同。由學生引發的話語類型多集中在少數幾位學生身上，其成功率會隨著時間而增加，代表學生學會在情境裡說話。
在過程技能方面，溝通、觀察、分類、與推理是四種最普遍被應用在三個領域中的探索方式，應用方式有共同的，也有相異的。在教學應用的差異可分為直接應用與間接應用，前者多在生活課，後者則是在數學與國語課中。過程技能教學的直、間接應用導致了八種教學方式的差異，即參與者結構、參與結構、時間分配、感官應用、過程或目的、應用層次、應用順序，以及重覆練習等。
綜合研究結果，本研究建議在教學方面，教師應減低對學生的評論，嘗試新的話語互動方式，讓學生有較多自由表達與評論的機會，並可嘗試委派勝任，鼓勵中低地位的學生發言；在統整課程方面，可多提供問題解決的情境，讓學生有機會將過程能以解題策略應用出來；未來相關的研究可以嘗試了解學生與學生的互動，或小組互動的話語類型，以及此二者與師生互動話語類型的相互關係。

Based on the sociological perspectives, both science and Mathematics are socially constituted practices through communication and negotiation among the members of community. Similar with this idea, Vygotskian learning theory recognizes the interaction between teacher and students benefits the knowledge construction in the classroom. Meanwhile, our recent educational reform tends to have interdisciplinary curriculum in elementary school level. The environment offers this case study to examine how teacher and pupils interact across Mandarin, Mathematical and Life Science lessons. Adopting ethnographical methodology, we intend to observe a first-grade classroom in a natural setting to find their discourse patterns and ways of applying process skills.
Four codes are employed in our analysis when dealing with the interaction corpus. I is initiation, R is response, E is evaluation, and A is announcement. The classification of discourse patterns results in two categories: the first one is for those initiated by teacher, while the second is initiated by students. The teacher-initiated discourse patterns can be further divided into eight subcategoies according to the patterns revealed by the codes. They are IRE, IRE, IRIE, IREA, IRsRtEs, AIRE, ARnE, and IRnIRE. However, intended events and contingent events are the only two models subordinate under the student-initiated category. Among all those models, IRE is the most prevalent; the others are distributed differently in these three kinds of lessons except ARnE and IRsRtEs. The distribution varies not only from models to models but also from time to time. Most of the intended events are initiated by very few of the students. And their initiations can be more easily accepted in the later months of the first semester. It indicates that the students have learned how and when to speak in the context of the class organization.
The comparison of pedagogical application of process skills shows that communicating, observing, classifying, and inferring are the most common inquiry skills across the three kinds of lessons. Some teaching similarities are shared among the lessons, while eight variations are due to explicit or implicit applications of these skills in the class. They are participant structure; participation structure; time distribution; ways of sensation; the objective of interactions; cognition levels; implementation order; and practice patterns.
Pedagogically, our results suggest teacher reduce the evaluation turn which might create more opportunity and room for students to talk publicly. Teacher can also try the assigning competence to encourage middle or low status students to utter in the class. We hope our interdisciplinary curriculum can provide more problem solving contexts to facilitate students the ability of applying process skills as a strategy. Finally, investigating what the discourse patterns are from the students-students interaction and group interaction, even their interrelationships, are expected for the further study.

一、中文部分
方炳林(1975)。課程發展的基礎。國教世紀，十卷十二期，第2~8頁。
方德隆(1999)‧九年一貫課程學習領域之統整‧國立高雄師範大學教育系主辦「迎向千禧年新世紀中小學課程改革與教學創新研討會」會議手冊及論文彙編，p.57-67.
王淑俐(1997)。教師說話技巧-教師口語表達在教學與師生溝通上的運用。台北：師大書苑。
李田英(1990)。由設計科學課程的理論談本次課程改革的一些問題。科學教育月刊，第231期。
李永吟(1998)。認知教學—理論與策略。台北：心理。
李英明(1989)。科學社會學。台北：桂冠。
何寶珠(1990)。科學過程技能教學活動對國一學生之影響：科學過程技能成就水準與科學態度。國立台灣師範大學化學研究所未出版碩士論文。
林明地(2000)。質的研究實例舉隅：校長領導的參與觀察。中正大學教育學研究所主編，質的研究方法。高雄：麗文。
林琴芳(2000)。師生口語溝通之分析。臺北市立師範學院國民教育研究所未出版碩士論文。
林佩璇(2000)。個案研究及其在教育研究上的應用。中正大學教育學研究所主編，質的研究方法。高雄：麗文。
林俊華(1986)。國中學生過程技能學習成就之調查研究。國立台灣師範大學物理研究所未出版碩士論文。
邱美虹(2000)。國民教育階段九年一貫課程綱要「自然科技」領域中「自然科學」課程綱要之評介。科學教育月刊，第231期。
胡幼慧(1996)。多元方法：三角交叉檢視法。胡幼慧主編。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
胡幼慧&姚美華(1996)。一些質性方法上的思考。胡幼慧主編。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
徐宗國(1996)。紮根理論研究法：淵源、原則、技術與涵義。胡幼慧主編。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
郭玉生(1985)。教師行為對學生學習的影響。教師研習簡訊，14期。
單文經(1998)。鷹架支持的譬喻在大班教學上的應用。視聽教育雙月刊，39(6)：1-22。
郭重吉(1987)。我國學生科學過程技能學習成就水準之研究—科學概念在資料處理、解釋和形成假設的應用。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫：NSC-76-001-S-018-05。
教育部(1998)。http://www.edu.tw/
陳秋月(1994)。國小二年級兒童的言談世界：言談內容和參與架構的分析。國立台北師範學院初等教育研究所未出版碩士論文。
畢恒達(1996)。詮釋學與質性研究。胡幼慧主編。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
葉闖(1996)。科學主義批判與技術社會批判。台北：淑馨出版社。
楊文金(1999)。學生像科學家的類比分析。科學史、哲與科學教育學術研討暨研習會論文彙編。國立高雄師範大學主辦。
蔡敏玲(2001)。尋找教室團體互動的節奏與變奏—教育質性研究歷程的展現。台北：桂冠。
黃幸美、江展塏、呂玉英、黃敏晃、鄔瑞香、蔡淑英(1998)。國民小學數學新課程學習方法初探。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
潘志煌(1997)。師生教學互動中的性別差異—國小班級多重個案研究。國立新竹師範學院國民教育研究所未出版碩士論文。
趙金祁(1994)。科學理念衝擊下科學教育再出發芻議。科學教育月刊，第一七五期，第二~七頁。
劉仲冬(1996)。民族誌研究法及實例。胡幼慧主編。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
劉君燦(1999)。科學思想與文化。嘉義：南華管理學院。
傅偉勳(1984)。西洋哲學史。台北：三民。
張景中(1996)。數學與哲學。台北：九章。
嚴祥鸞(1996)。參與觀察法。胡幼慧主編。質性研究—理論、方法及本土女性研究實例。台北：巨流。
Barber, B. (1952). 顧昕譯(1987)。科學與社會秩序。北京：三聯書店。
Blackledge, D., & Hunt, B. (1958)李錦旭譯(1987)。教育社會學理論。台北：桂冠。
Brain, W.R.方祖同譯 (1971)。科學與反科學。科學、文化與社會。台北：水牛。
Cazden, C.B.(1988). 蔡敏玲、彭海燕譯(1998)。教室言談—教與學的語言。台北：心理。
Gagne, E.D., Yekovich, C.W., & Yekovich, F.R.(1986). 岳修平譯(1998)。教學心理學—學習的認知基礎。台北：遠流。
Kline, M. (1971). 方祖同譯。為何要學數學。科學、文化與社會。台北：水牛。
Kuhn, T.S.(1970). 程樹德、傅大為、王道還、錢永祥譯(著)(1994)。科學革命的結構。台北：遠流。
Lindsay, R.B.方祖同譯(1984)。科學與文化。台北：協志。
Mulkay, M. (1979). 蔡振中譯(1991)。科學與知識社會學。台北市：巨流。
Vygotsky, L.S.(1975). 蔡敏玲、陳正乾譯(1997)。社會中的心智—高層次心理過程的發展。台北：心理。
二、英文部分
Agar, M. (1980). The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography. New York: Acdemic Press.
Agar, M. (1994). Language shock: Understanding the culture of conversation. New York: Willaim Morrow & Co.
Akker, Jan Van den. (1998). The science curriculum: between ideals and outcomes. B.J.Fraser and K.G. Tobin (eds). International Handbook of Science education, Great Britain: Kluwer academic publishers.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for All Americans. Washington, DC: Author.
Arca, M., & Vicentini-Missoni, M. (1981). A reflection on some meanings of “Interdisciplinarity” and “Integration among the Sciences.” European Journal of Science Education; v3 n2 p117-26.
Ashley, J.P. & Butts, D.P. (1972). A study of the impact an inservice education program on teacher behavior. In Butts, D.P. (Ed.) Research and Curriculum Development in Science Education. Austin, Tx: University of Texas publications. pp.96-116.
Augoustinos, M., & Walker, Iain. (1995). Social cognition. London: Sage Publications.
Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bakeman, R. & Gottman, J.M. (1986). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Balacheff, N. (1986). Cognitive versus situational analysis of problem-solving behavior. For the Learning of Mathematics, 6(3), 10-12.
Berlin, D.F., & White, A.L. (1998). Integrated science and mathematics education: evolution and implications of a theoretical model. B.J.Fraser and K.G. Tobin (eds). International Handbook of Science education, Great Britain: Kluwer academic publishers.
Bianchini, J.A. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039-1065.
Blosser, P.A.(1973). The Role of the question in the classroom. Handbook of Effective Questioning Techniques. Ohio: Education Associates.
Burr, V. (1995). An introduction to social constructionism. NY: Routledge.
Carlsen, W.S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: a sociolinguistic perspective. Review of educational research, V61, n2, p157-78.
Carlsen, W.S. (1991). Subject-Matter knowledge and science teaching: A pragmatic perspective. Advances in Reaearch on Teaching, Volume 2, p.115-143.
Chierchia, G., and McConnell-Ginet, S. (2000). Meaning and Grammar: an Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge, Mass : MIT Press
Cobb, P., Wood,T., & Yackel, E. (1991). Analogies from the Philosophy and Sociology of Science for Understanding Classroom Life. Science Education. 75(1), pp. 23-44.
Cochran, J.P. (1997). What’s ‘common in a common core: How course structure shapes disciplinary knowledge. Journal of Classroom Interaction. Vol.32,No.2:45-55.
Cohen, E.G. & Lotan, R.A. (1995). Producing Equal-Status Interaction in the Heterogeneous Classroom. American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 32, No.1, pp.99-120.
Cunningham, Christine M. & Helms, Jenifer V. (1998). Sociology of Scinece as a means to a more authentic, inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(5), 483-499.
Dorr-Bremme, D.W. (1982). Behaving and Making sense: Creating social organization in the classroom. Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
Driver R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E. & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher. Vol. 23, n7 p5-12 Oct.
Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Duit, R. (1981). ‘Learning the energy concept in school—empirical results from the Philippines and West Germanay.’ Physics Edcation, 19:59-66.
Eder, D. (1982). Difference in communicative styles across ability groups. In communicating in the classroom. L.C. Wilkinson. (Ed.) New York: Academic Press.
Edwards, A. & Furlong, V.J. (1978). ‘Reflections on the language of teaching’, in Burgess, R. (Ed.) Field methods in the study of education, Lews, Flamer Press.
Edwards, A.D., & Westgate D.P.G. (1986). Investigating Classroom talk. Great Britain: Falmer Kraemer.
Erickson, F. (1977). Some approaches to inquiry in school/community ethnography. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 8(3), p.58-69.
Erickson, F., & Mohatt, G. (1982). Cultural organization of participant structures in two classrooms of Indian students. In F.D. Spindler (Ed.). Doing the ethnography of schooling: Educational anthropology in action. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Erickson, F., & Shultz, J. (1981). When is a context? Some issues and methods in the analysis of social sompetence. In J. Green & C. Wallat (Ed.), The handbook for research on teaching. (pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S.F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scienctific literacy: a re-examination. American Educational Research Journal. Vol. 33, No. 2, p261-295.
Flanders, N.A. (1970). Analyzing Teacher Behavior. Reading Mass: Addison-Wesley.
Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge. Translated from the French by A. M. Sheridan Smith. London : Tavistock
Fleer, Marilyn. (1992). Identifying teacher-child interaction which scaffolds scientific thinking in young children. Science Education. 76(4):373-397.
Gee, J. P. & Green, J. L. (1997). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: a methodological study. Review of Research in Education, Vol.23.
Green, J.L., Dixon, C.N., & Zaharlick, A. (2000). Ethnography as a logic of inquiry. 教室中的師生對話分析研習會手冊: 國立台灣師範大學
Green, J. (2000). Disciplinary knowledge as socially constructed: an example form science and mathematics. 教室中的師生對話分析研習會手冊: 國立台灣師範大學
Guba，E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1984). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park: Sage.
Guba，E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1984).“Computing Paradigms in Qualitative Research.” In Denzin, N.K. & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) Handbook of Qulatative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Pp.105-117.
Hammersley, M. (1990). Reading Ethnographic Research: A critical Guide. London: Longman.
Herrenkohl, L.R., & Guerra. M.R. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction. 16(4), 431-473.
Hess, D.J. (1997). Science Studies-an advanced introduction. New York: New York University Press.
Hicks, D. (1995). Discourse, learning, and teaching. Review of research in education, 21.
Jorgensen, Danny L. (1989). Participant observation: A Methodology for Human Studies. Newbury Park: Sage.
Jones, M.G. & Carter, G. (1994). Verbal and nonverbal behavior of ability –grouped dyads. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6),603-619.
Kraemer, D. (1997). Don't Lecture Me: A Case Study of Performance Pedagogy. English Education, v29 n3 p173-82.
Kipnis N. (1998). A History of Science Approach to the Nature of Science: Learning Science by Rediscovering it. The Nature of Science in Science Education Rationales and Strategies. p.177-196.
Kumaravadivelu, B.(1999). Critical classroom discourse analysis. TESOL Quarterly Vol. 33, No. 3, p453-484.Lemke, J.L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Levision, Stephen C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, M. and Leonard R. (1977). Interaction, conversation, and the development of language. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
MacDonald, R.B. (1991). An analysis of verbal interaction in college tutorials. Journal of Developmental Education, Vol. 15, No. 1
Mehan, H. (1979). Learning Lessons—social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Mehan, H. (1984). Language and schooling. Sociology of Education, vol. 57: 174-183.
Mishler, E.G. (1991). Representing discourse: the rhetoric of transcription. Journal of Narrative and Life history, I(4), 255-280.
Moje, Elizabeth B. (1995). Talking about science: an interpretation of the effects of teacher talk in a high school science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 32 No. 4, 349-371.
Moje, Elizabeth B. (1997). Exploring discourse, subjectivity, and knowledge in chemistry class. Journal of Classroom Interaction, Vol. 32, No.2.
Nersessian, N.J. (1989). Conceptual change in science and in science education. Synthese, 80(1): 121-140.
Ochs, E. (1979). Introduction: What child language can contribute to pragmatics. In E. Ochs & B.B. Schieffelen (Eds.). Developmental Pragmatics (pp1-17). New York: Academic Press.
Ost, D.H. (1975). Changing curriculum patterns in science, mathematics and social Studies. School Science and Mathematics. 75, 48-52.
Padilla, M.J., Okey, J.R., & Dillashaw, F.G. (1983). The relationship between science preocess skill and formal thinking abilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 20(3), 239-246.
Parsons, E.C. (1997). Black high school female’s images of the scientist: expression of culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol., 34. No. 7. pp. 745-768.
Pontecorvo, Clotilde. (1993). Social interaction in the acquisition of knowledge. Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 5, No. 3, p293- 310.
Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., & Gertzog, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scienctific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Scniece education, 66(2), 211-227.
Putney, L., Green, J., Dixon, C., Duran, R.& Yeager, B. (2000). Consequential progressions: Exploring collective-individual development in a bilingual classroom. Constructing Meaning Through Collaborative Inquiry: Vygotskian Perspectives on Literacy Research, Smagorinsky & Lee(Eds.), Cambridge University Press.
Richmond, G. & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classrooms: social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 33, No. 8. pp.839-858.
Roth, W-M., & Bowen, G.M.(1995). Knowing and interaction: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a grade 8 open-inquiry science calssroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13(1), 73-128.
Roth, W-M. & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The development of Science Process skills in Authentic contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 30(2), 127-152.
Rubin, R.L., & Norman, J.T. (1992). Systematic modeling versus the learning cycle: comparative effects on integrated science process skill achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 29(7), 715-727.
Rutherford, J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schwab, J. J. (1964). Structure of the disciplines, Meanings and significances. In G. W. Ford & L. Pugno (Eds.). The structure of knowledge and the curriculum (pp. 6-30). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Snyder, E.E., & Spreitzer, Elmer. (1984). Identity and commitment to the teacher role. Teaching Sociology, Vol.11. 2, January, p151-166.
Snow, C.P. (1959). The two cultures and a second look. London: Cambridge University Press.
Solomon, J., (1993). The Social construction of children’s scientific knowledge. In P.J.Black, & A.M.Lucas (Eds). Children’s Informal Ideas in Science. 85-101, New York: Routledge.
Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinchart & Winstion.
Stodolsky, S. S., Ferfuson,T. L., and Wimpelberg. K. (1981). The recitation persists, but what does it look like? Journal of Curriculum Studies 13:121-130.
Strawitz, B.M. (1989). The effects of testing on science process skill achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 26(8), 659-664.
Tizard, B. (1986). The care of yound children: Implications of recent research. London: Institute of Education, Thomas Coram Research Unit Working and Occasional Papers.
Tobin, K. (1998). Issues and trends in the teaching of science. B.J.Fraser and K.G. Tobin (eds). International Handbook of Science Education. Great Britain: Kluwer academic publishers, 129-151.
Toulmin, S. (1972). Human understanding, Volume 1: The collective use and evolution of concepts. Princetion, NJ: Princetion University Press.
Vosviadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change [special issue]. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
Wandersee, J.H., Mintzes, J.J., & Novak, J.D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. Dorothy L. Gabel (eds). Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. New York : Macmillan.
Woodruff , E., & Meyer, K. (1997). Explanations from intra- and inter-group discourse: Students building knowledge in the science classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 25-39.
Woods, D. R. (1988). PS research, ideas on creating the internal representation, and identifying knowledge structure. Journal of college science teaching, 17(4), 317-321.
Zeitler, W.R. (1981). The influence of the type of practice in acquiring process skills. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 18(3), 189-197.