In the past 30 years, the international academic circle of science education has made the considerable progress in the learning environment research, and it has been widely applied in fields of evaluation for curriculum reform, teaching improvement, teacher training and so on. This research, using the two questionnaires of construction learning environment survey(CLES) and science laboratory environment inventory(SLEI) and analyzing the actual perceptions and preference of the senior 3 students in Macao, discusses the science learing environment as well as the relations among background variables This research samples 411 senior 3 science subject students by Stratified Delphi Sampling, uses statistical methods like frequency, factor analysis, internalconsistency, discriminant validity, t test, single factor variance analysis and so on, finally draws up the conclusions following: First, the translated version of questionnaire construction learning environment survey (CLES) has good reliability and validity, and the laboratory environment (SLEI) validity is still ok. Second, in actual classroom, the highest score of student's actual perception is the uncertainty scale, the lowest score is the control scale.The ranking of the five scales of CLES actual version from the highest to the lowest is: uncertainty, student negotiation, personal relevance, critical voice, shared control. The highest score of student's preferred classroom learning environment is the personal relevance scale, the lowest score is the control scale, the ranking of the five scales of CLES preferred version from the highest to the lowest is: personal relevance, student negotiation, critical voice, uncertainty, shared control. The difference of the five scales of CLES between students’preferred and actual environments have reached a significance level, the preferred scores are higher than the actual perception in the four scales: personal relevance, student negotiation, critical voice, shared control, on the contrary, the preferred scores are lower than actual perception in the uncertainty scale. Third, the highest score of students’perception of laboratory learning environment is the integration scale, the lowest score is the open-cndedness scale.The ranking of the five scale of SLEI actual version from the highest to the lowest is: integration, 'student cohesiveness, rule clarity, material environment, and open-endedness. The highest score of students’preferred laboratory learning environment is the material environment scale, the lowest score is also the open-endedness scale. The ranking of the five scale of SLEI preferred version from the highest to the lowest is: material environment, student cohesiveness, integration, rule clarity, open-endedness. There are four scales reached the significance level, which are material environment, student cohesiveness,integration,open-endedness. The preferred scores are higher than actual perception in the four scales but there is no significance difference in the rule clarity scale. Fourth, there are differences between different genders students’ actual perceptions in the science learning environment. In the classroom, there are two scales reached the significance level. The male students are more positive in the personal relevance scale, while the female students are more positive in the student negotiation scale .In the laboratory, there are significance differences in two scales named student cohesiveness and integration. The female students are more positive in these two scales. Fifth, students in the different class sizes have different perceptions in the actual learning environment. In the classroom, only one scale, i.e.shared control which has reached the significance level .The students in the small classes which have less than 25 members are more positive than the students in the big classes which have more than 35 members. But there is no difference between the students in the medium classes (25-35 students) and students in the small classes as well as big classes. In the laboratory, there are significance differences in three scales, which are student cohesiveness, material environment, open-endedness. In the student cohesiveness scale, the students in the small classes are more positive than the students in the medium and large size classes, but there are no significance difference between the students in the medium classes and large classes. In the open-endedness scale, the students in the medium classes are more positive than the students in the large classes. In the material environment scale, the students in the small classes and medium classes are both more positive than the students in the large classes, but there are no significant difference between the small classes and medium classes. Finally, in order to building a more positive science learning environment, this research provides some suggestions for the improvement of the questionnaire, teaching, educational administrative department and teacher training and so on, simultaneously also provides suggestions for the further research. Key words: science classroom learning environment;laboratory learning environment

過去 30多年以来，國際科學教育學衡界對於學替環境的研究取得了相當程度的 進展，並且廣泛應用於課程改革的評估，教學改進、師賣培訓等等。本研究運用建構主義學替環境量表(CLES)和科學實驗室環境量表(SLEI)從學生的實際知覺和期望着手，探討澳門高三理科學生的科學課堂學習環境以及舆柜鞠背景變项的關係。 本研究主要透過分層立意抽樣，共抽取高三理科學生411名作爲調查對象，並應 用次数分配、因素分析、內部一致性以及區別效度1考驗、單因數變異數分析等統计方法，进行各项考驗分析。最後歸枯出以下的主要研究结論: 一、本研究海罪的建構主義學習環境量表(CLES)具有的良好的信效度，而實驗室環境量表(SLEI)信效度尙佳 二、學生實際感知的課堂（教室）學習環境，得分最高為科學不確定性，得分最低為共用控制，五個維度得分高低排列順序為：科學不確定性、學生協商、個人相關性、批判的表達、共用控制。 學生所期望的课堂(教室)學習環境，得分最高為個人相關性，得分最低的為共用控制，五個維度學生期望得分高低排列順序為：個人相關性、學生協商、批判的表達、不確定性、共用控制。 學生期望的课堂(教室)學習環境與實際的課堂（教室）學習環境各個維度均達顯著性差異，其中科學不確定性維度期望得分比實際感知要高，其他的四個維度學生協商、個人相關性、批判的表達、共用控制，期望得分均比實際感知得分要高。 三、學生實際感知的實驗室學習環境，得分最高的為統整性，最低的為開放性，五個維度得分高低排列順序為：統整性、學生凝聚力、規則明確、物質環境、開放性。 學生所期望的實驗室學習環境，得分最高為唔知環境，得分最低的為開放性，五個維度學生期望得分高低排列順序為：物質環境、學生凝聚力、統整性、規則明確、開放性。 學生期望的實驗室學習環境與實際感知的實驗室學習環境有四個維度均表達顯著性差異，分別為物質環境、學生凝聚力、統整性、開放性，期望得分均比實際得分要高，而規則明確這個維度期望和實際之間並未達顯著性差異。 四、不同性別的學生實際感知的學習環境有不同。在科學課堂（教室）學習環境，男女生在“個人相關性”和“學生協商”兩個維度有顯著性差異，男生實際感知的個人相關性更積極，女生實際感知的學生協商上得分更高。在實驗室裡，不同性別的學生對實驗室環境在“學生凝聚力”和“統整性”這兩個維度上有顯著的差異，女生實際感知的實驗室環境更有凝聚力以及統整性。 五、不同班級規模的學生實際感知的學習環境有不同。在科學課堂（教室）學習環境中只有共用控制這個維度達到顯著性水準，小於25人（小班）的班級比35人以上（大班）的大規模班級在共用控制上更為積極，而36人-35人（中班）與這兩者均沒有顯著性差異。 不同班級規模的學生實際所感知的實驗室學習環境在學生凝聚力、開放性、物質環境這三個維度上達到顯著性水準，其他統整性、規則明確兩個維度未達顯著。學生凝聚力維度，小班和中班、小班和大班之間存在顯著差異性，小班比中班和大班得分都要高，中班和大班之間沒有顯著性差異；而在開放性維度，只有中班和大班之間的差異性達到顯著，且中班的學生得分要高於大班；在物質環境維度，小班和大班、中班和大班之間的差異性達到顯著，小班和中班比大班得分更高，小班和中班並沒有顯著性差異。 最後，本研究分別針對研究工具的改進、教師、教育行政機關、師資培育提出營造積極的科學課堂學習環境的具體建議，同時也建議未來進一步的研究方向。 關鍵字：科學課堂學習環境 實驗室學習環境