自20世纪80年代以来，将科学探究作为科学教育的核心理念已经逐步在世界各国达成共识。近些年，我国亦是如此，全社会对于科学教育的关注度在逐步提升，并且将“科学探究”置于科学教育的核心地位。但科学探究的有效理解、落实依赖于科学课程的实施，而教材又是课程实施的载体，是教师和学生进行教学活动的有效工具。 因此，本研究以美国麦格劳·希尔(McGraw-Hill)教育集团出版的《SCIENCE》与我国教育科学出版社出版的小学三至六年级的《科学》教材为研究对象，采用内容分析法等方法，分别从探究活动的数量、探究活动的文本呈现形式、探究活动的类型、探究活动的探究水平以及探究活动的广度几个方面进行了比较分析。 研究发现：在科学探究活动数量方面，中美两国教材中科学探究活动的数量均占比较重，可见两国都十分关注科学探究活动，对于学生科学探究能力的培养给予了高度的重视。但，两国科学探究活动数量在研究的中高学段上占比差异显著，中国教材显著高于美国教材。此外，在科学探究活动中，美国教材倾向于将活动本身与活动所涉及的科学知识分开呈现，而我国则是将科学探究中包含的知识渗透在科学探究活动本身中。在科学探究活动的呈现形式方面，两国均重视文字的呈现方式且显著性检验无差异；我国教材比美国教材在科学探究活动中更注重表格与示意图的使用且对于实物图的重视程度高于美国。在科学探究活动的类型方面，中美两国教材都十分重视操作类探究活动的设置，虽然两国教材中该类型的活动所占比重不同，但是无论是在各年级还是各学段中，两国差异不显著。中国教材比美国教材更关注调查类探究活动的设置，两国教材中交流类的探究活动数量均较少。在科学探究活动的探究水平方面，美国教材的整体探究水平高于我国教材，尤其对于水平0而言，美国对于水平为0的探究活动设置的寥寥无几，而我国却占有一定的比重，差异显著。此外，两国教材中科学探究活动的探究水平均随着学龄段的升高而升高。在科学探究活动的广度方面，两国教材都将“S”领域的知识置于科学探究活动的核心地位，对于“T”、“E”、“A”、“M”领域的知识均有所涉及，比重不一。此外，中美两国教材对于跨学科的探究活动均有所涉及，且比重随着学段的升高也在增加，但是对于跨学科、多领域的科学探究活动的设置明显不足，有待提高。

Since the 1980s, scientific inquiry as the core concept of science education has gradually reached a consensus in the world. In recent years, the same is true in China, where the whole society pays more attention to science education and puts "scientific inquiry" at the core of science education. However, the effective understanding and implementation of scientific inquiry depend on the implementation of science curriculum, and teaching materials are the carrier of curriculum implementation and the effective tools for teachers and students to carry out teaching activities. Therefore, this study in the United States McGraw Hill (McGraw Hill) education group published "SCIENCE and education SCIENCE publishing house in China for three to six grade SCIENCE teaching material as the research object, by adopting the method of content analysis, from the number of the inquiry activity, the text rendering forms of inquiry activity, to explore the types of activities, to explore the level of activity and inquiry activity the breadth of the several aspects has carried on the comparative analysis. Research findings: in terms of the number of scientific inquiry activities, the number of scientific inquiry activities in textbooks of China and the United States both account for a relatively large proportion, which shows that both countries pay great attention to scientific inquiry activities and attach great importance to the cultivation of students' scientific inquiry ability. However, there is a significant difference in the proportion of the number of scientific inquiry activities between the two countries in the middle and high school sections of the research, and Chinese textbooks are significantly higher than American textbooks. In addition, in the activity of scientific inquiry, American textbooks tend to present the activity itself and the scientific knowledge involved in the activity separately, while China penetrates the knowledge contained in scientific inquiry into the activity itself. In terms of the presentation forms of scientific inquiry activities, both countries attach importance to the presentation methods of words and there is no difference in significance test. Compared with American textbooks, Chinese textbooks pay more attention to the use of tables and schematic diagrams in scientific inquiry activities, and pay more attention to the physical pictures than American textbooks. In terms of the types of scientific inquiry activities, both Chinese and American textbooks attach great importance to the setting of operational inquiry activities. Although the proportion of this type of activities in the two textbooks is different, there is no significant difference between the two countries in terms of grades and sections. Compared with American textbooks, Chinese textbooks pay more attention to the setting of investigative inquiry activities, and the number of communicative inquiry activities in both textbooks is less. In terms of the inquiry level of scientific inquiry activities, the overall inquiry level of American textbooks is higher than that of Chinese textbooks. Especially for level 0, American textbooks set few inquiry activities with level 0, while China occupies a certain proportion with significant difference. In addition, the inquiry level of scientific inquiry activities in the textbooks of both countries increases with the increase of the school-age section. In terms of the breadth of scientific inquiry activities, the textbooks of both countries place the knowledge in the field of "S" at the core of scientific inquiry activities, and cover the knowledge in the fields of "T", "E", "A" and "M" in varying proportions. In addition, the textbooks of China and the United States both involve interdisciplinary inquiry activities, and the proportion increases with the increase of the learning period. However, the setting of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary scientific inquiry activities is obviously insufficient, which needs to be improved.