本研究旨在探討科技融入碳足跡課程對國小中年級學生環境素養之影響，並著重比較「情意教學」與「認知教學」策略在提升學童知識、態度與行為意圖上的成效差異。研究採用不等組前後測之準實驗設計，以143位國小三年級學生為正式研究對象（實驗組72人接受情意教學策略；對照組71人接受認知教學策略），進行為期六週（共8節課）之教學介入。兩組皆使用相同之數位平台（LoiLoNote）、AI碳足跡計算工具與核心文本《未來少年》。量化資料透過自編「環境素養量表」進行施測，並以單因子多變量共變數分析（MANCOVA）與後續單變量共變數分析（ANCOVA）進行嚴謹檢定，輔以質性數位作品進行三角檢核。研究之核心量化數據與成效亮點如下： 1. 環境態度展現跨組顯著優勢：在排除起始能力差異後，單變量共變數分析顯示組別主效果達統計顯著（F = 5.712， p = .018 < .05， partial η² = .040），實驗組之調整後平均數（4.05）顯著優於對照組（3.858）。差異中之差更指出，實驗組態度顯著進步 0.103 分，而對照組卻下降 0.105 分，實驗組之進步幅度達 0.207分且達顯著（p = .026， d = .371），本研究實證了情意策略的介入，能有效彌補傳統認知導向教學在情感連結上的不足。 2. 減碳行為意圖具備組間領先趨勢：行為意圖之 ANCOVA 主效果同樣達到顯著（F = 4.026， p = .047 < .05， partial η² = .028），實驗組調整後平均數（4.095）顯著高於對照組（3.927）。且組內前後測配對分析顯示，僅實驗組之行為意圖獲得顯著增強（進步0.211分， p = .025 < .05），對照組則未達顯著。 3. 情意導向學習促進知識顯著增長：組內配對 t檢定顯示，實驗組之環境知識大幅提升0.077分且達高度顯著（p = .002），反觀對照組僅微幅增加0.023 分且未達顯著（p = .260），破除「情意教學會削弱科學知識建構」之迷思。 綜合質性分析，本研究實證了「科技為體，情意為用」的適性化模式，科技工具結合親自然體驗任務，能促進中年級學童環境素養的整合發展，為彌合環境教育中「知行差距」提供具學術價值與實務可行之實徵證據。;This study investigates the impact of a technology-integrated carbon footprint curriculum on the environmental literacy of middle-grade elementary students， specifically focusing on comparing the empirical efficacy of the "affective teaching strategy" and the "cognitive teaching strategy" across knowledge， attitudes， and behavioral intentions. Employing a non-equivalent pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design， the study involved 143 third-grade students (Experimental Group: N=72， receiving the affective strategy; Control Group: N=71， receiving the cognitive strategy) for a six-week (8-period) instructional intervention. Both groups utilized identical digital platforms (LoiLoNote)， AI carbon footprint tools， and core texts from Future Youth magazine. Quantitative data obtained via the self-developed "Environmental Literacy Scale" were rigorously analyzed using a one-way multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) and follow-up univariate analysis of covariance (ANCOVA)， validated through qualitative triangulation of students′ digital artifacts. The prominent quantitative highlights and research findings are as follows: 1. Significant Inter-group Advantage in Environmental Attitudes: After controlling for baseline differences， the ANCOVA revealed a statistically significant main effect for the group (F = 5.712， p = .018 < .05， partial η² = .040). The adjusted posttest mean of the experimental group (4.05) was significantly superior to that of the control group (3.858). Furthermore， the difference-in-differences (DID) analysis indicated that while the experimental group improved significantly by +0.103 ， the control group declined by -0.105， yielding a statistically significant net improvement of 0.207 points for the experimental group (p = .026， d = .371). This study empirically demonstrates that the intervention of affective strategies can effectively compensate for the deficiency of traditional cognitive-oriented teaching in emotional connection. 2. Leading Performance in Behavioral Intentions: The ANCOVA main effect for behavioral intentions also achieved statistical significance (F = 4.026， p = .047 < .05， partial η² = .028)， with the experimental group′s adjusted mean (4.095) being significantly higher than the control group′s (3.927). Paired t-tests indicated that only the experimental group attained a significant within-group increase (+0.211 points， p = .025 < .05)， whereas the control group failed to reach statistical significance. 3. No Compromise on Cognitive Learning with Significant Knowledge Growth: Within-group paired t-tests revealed that the experimental group achieved highly significant progress in environmental knowledge (+0.077 points， p = .002)， whereas the control group′s progress was negligible and non-significant (+0.023 points， p = .260). This finding dispels the misconception that affective strategies compromise scientific knowledge acquisition. Synthesizing the qualitative insights， this study substantiates the adaptive model of "technology as form， affection as function." The integration of digital tools with nature-connecting experiential tasks successfully fosters the holistic development of environmental literacy among middle-grade students， thereby providing robust， academically valuable， and practically feasible empirical evidence to bridge the persistent "knowing-doing gap" in environmental education.
