理學院

Permanent URI for this communityhttp://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/handle/20.500.12235/3

學院概況

理學院設有數學系、物理學系、化學系、生命科學系、地球科學系、資訊工程學系6個系(均含學士、碩士及博士課程),及科學教育研究所、環境教育研究所、光電科技研究所及海洋環境科技就所4個獨立研究所,另設有生物多樣性國際研究生博士學位學程。全學院專任教師約180人,陣容十分堅強,無論師資、學術長現、社會貢獻與影響力均居全國之首。

特色

理學院位在國立臺灣師範大學分部校區內,座落於臺北市公館,佔地約10公頃,是個小而美的校園,內含國際會議廳、圖書館、實驗室、天文臺等完善設施。

理學院創院已逾六十年,在此堅固基礎上,理學院不僅在基礎科學上有豐碩的表現,更在臺灣許多研究中獨占鰲頭,曾孕育出五位中研院院士。近年來,更致力於跨領域研究,並在應用科技上加強與業界合作,院內教師每年均取得多項專利,所開發之商品廣泛應用於醫、藥、化妝品、食品加工業、農業、環保、資訊、教育產業及日常生活中。

在科學教育研究上,臺灣師大理學院之排名更高居世界第一,此外更有獨步全臺的科學教育中心,該中心就中學科學課程、科學教與學等方面從事研究與推廣服務;是全國人力最充足,設備最完善,具有良好服務品質的中心。

在理學院紮實、多元的研究基礎下,學生可依其性向、興趣做出寬廣之選擇,無論對其未來進入學術研究領域、教育界或工業界工作,均是絕佳選擇。

Browse

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Item
    Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education.
    (ELSEVIER, 2013-03-01) Wu, H.-K.; Lee, S. W.-Y.; Chang, H.-Y.; Liang, J.-C.
    Although augmented reality (AR) has gained much research attention in recent years, the term AR was given different meanings by varying researchers. In this article, we first provide an overview of definitions, taxonomies, and technologies of AR. We argue that viewing AR as a concept rather than a type of technology would be more productive for educators, researchers, and designers. Then we identify certain features and affordances of AR systems and applications. Yet, these compelling features may not be unique to AR applications and can be found in other technological systems or learning environments (e.g., ubiquitous and mobile learning environments). The instructional approach adopted by an AR system and the alignment among technology design, instructional approach, and learning experiences may be more important. Thus, we classify three categories of instructional approaches that emphasize the “roles,” “tasks,” and “locations,” and discuss what and how different categories of AR approaches may help students learn. While AR offers new learning opportunities, it also creates new challenges for educators. We outline technological, pedagogical, learning issues related to the implementation of AR in education. For example, students in AR environments may be cognitively overloaded by the large amount of information they encounter, the multiple technological devices they are required to use, and the complex tasks they have to complete. This article provides possible solutions for some of the challenges and suggests topics and issues for future research.
  • Item
    Toward an integrated model for designing assessment systems: An analysis of the current status of computer-based assessments in science
    (ELSEVIER, 2013-10-01) Kuo, C. Y.; Wu, H.-K.
    Drawing upon an integrated model proposed by Bennett and Bejar (1998), this review study examined how 66 computer-based science assessments (CBSAs) in basic science and medicine took advantage of advanced technologies. The model regarded a CBSA as an integrated system, included several assessment components (e.g., assessment purpose, measured construct, test and task design, examinee interface, and scoring procedure), and emphasized the interplay among these components. Accordingly, this study systematically analyzed the item presentations of interactive multimedia, the constructs measured, the response formats in formative and summative assessments, the scoring procedures, the adaptive test activities administrated based on the algorithms related to the item response theory (IRT) and other rules beyond IRT, and the strategies for the automatic provision of informative hints and feedbacks in the CBSAs. Our analysis revealed that although only 19 out of 66 assessments took advantage of dynamic and interactive media for item presentations, CBSAs with these media could measure integrated understanding of science phenomena and complex problem-solving skills. However, we also found that limitations in automated scoring may lead to infrequent use of the automated provision of hints and feedbacks with open-ended and extended responses. These findings suggest the interrelatedness of the assessment components, and thus we argue that designers should repeatedly consider the relationships between components of CBSAs to ensure the validity of the assessments. Finally, we also indicate the issues for future research in computer-based assessments.