本研究主要在以浮力單元為例，在教師與CoSci平台提供鷹架的協助下，以科學模擬融入探究的過程，引導學生建立浮力模型，探討科學模擬融入探究過程對學生學習成效、科學學習概念與科學學習方法的影響。 本研究以準實驗研究法進行，以兩個八年級的班級學生為研究對象，在浮力單元實驗組以科學模擬融入探究過程，控制組以講述式教學為不同教學方式，研究前、後測以問卷收集數據後以ANCOVA分析，並以協同專家訪談與課後回饋，調查學生在活動前後科學學習概念與科學學習方法的影響，並以無母數統計法分析學生學習成效差異。 研究結果包括如下： 1. 採用科學模擬融入探究過程的學生在浮力單元學習成效與講述式教學學生並無顯著差異。 2. 在科學學習概念上實驗組以記憶、計算與練習為學習看法的程度較低，以新的方式看事物的程度較控制組高。 3. 在科學學習方法方面能促進實驗組學生深層動機、深層策略的表現，在淺層動機表現也較控制組表現較高，顯示實驗組學生科學學習方法仍受外在動機影響。 ;Taking buoyancy for an example, with the help of scaffolding provided by teachers and CoSci system in this study, the researcher guides students to establish a buoyancy model by integrating scientific simulation into the process of inquiry, and explores the impact of integrating scientific simulation into the inquiry process on students′ learning outcomes. In this study, the quasi-experimental research method was used to investigate two classes of eighth-grade students. In the experimental group, scientific simulation was integrated into the inquiry process. Oppositely, in the control group, conventional teaching was adopted as the different teaching method. Before and after the study, data were collected by questionnaires and analyzed by ANCOVA. Besides, the researcher investigated the effects of scientific learning concepts and methods before and after activities by applying collaborative expert interviews and after-class student feedback. Then, the study attemped to analyze the differences of students′ learning outcomes with nonparametric statistical analysis. The main findings of this study were as following: 1. In terms of learning buoyancy, there is no significant difference between two groups that using scientific simulation and conventional teaching. 2. As for learning conceptions of science, the experimental group had a worse perception of memory, calculation and practice, but showed a better visual perception for observing things in new ways than the control group. 3. In the part of approaches to learning science, scientific simulation can promote the performance of deep motivation and deep strategy in the experimental group; furthermore, the performance of the surface motivation is also comparatively better than that in the control group. It shows that students in the experimental group are still influenced by external motivation.
