:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:運用多元智慧理論在國小一年級生活課程之教學實驗研究
作者:歐慧敏
作者(外文):Hui-Min Ou
校院名稱:國立政治大學
系所名稱:教育學系
指導教授:林邦傑
詹志禹
學位類別:博士
出版日期:2002
主題關鍵詞:多元智慧國小學生生活課程Multiple IntelligencesFirst GradersLiving Curriculum
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(10) 博士論文(3) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:8
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:71
本研究旨在以多元智慧理論為基礎,探討將多元智慧理論融入生活課程的教學成效。本研究採實驗研究與訪談研究進行,實驗研究之設計採「不等組前後測設計」加延宕後測進行研究,旨在了解運用多元智慧理論在國小一年級生活課程的教學設計及其成效,並輔以觀察及訪談與挑選兩個個案進行深入分析其成效;訪談研究部分乃針對實驗組教學者,旨在瞭解教師因運用多元智慧教學策略與評量方式而引發其專業成長的情形及分析國小一年級運用多元智慧理論融入生活課程的困難。
實驗研究以「幼童多元智慧觀察量表」、「學習興趣問卷」為前、後測及延宕後測工具,實驗處理方面,實驗組以運用多元智慧理論改編的國小一年級生活課程教學設計實施教學,控制組則以一般出版社(南一書局)的教材來實施教學。為深入評估經由多元智慧的課程設計其實驗組學生學習成就的情形,輔以錄影帶觀察(學生)、訪談(教師、學生)、座談會(家長)來瞭解學生在實驗期間的進步情形。並為深入實驗處理的效果,在實驗組中隨機挑選兩位學生進行個案分析,以增加實驗研究的信度。其研究發現:(1)實驗組在生活課的基本知識顯著高於控制組,且控制組的變異數顯著高於實驗組;實驗組在過關評量中的「校園尋寶」及「介紹新朋友」兩關所花的時間顯著高於控制組,在過「風精靈」關時所花的時間顯著低於控制組。(2)實驗組學生經實驗處理後其學習興趣顯著高於控制組,且實驗處理與學習興趣間具有強度關係;經過一學期後,其實驗組學生經實驗處理後其學習興趣顯著高於控制組,且實驗處理與學習興趣間具有強度關係。(3)實驗組學生經實驗處理後其「視覺-空間智慧」、「肢體-動覺智慧」、人際智慧」及「內省智慧」等四項智慧均顯著高於控制組,然實驗處理僅與「肢體-動覺智慧」、「人際智慧」及「內省智慧」等三項智慧間均具有強度關係,其餘均關係微弱;經過一學期後,實驗組學生在「視覺-空間」、「肢體-動覺」、「音樂」、「人際」、「內省」與「自然觀察者」等六項智慧均顯著高於控制組,且實驗處理與「視覺-空間」、「肢體-動覺」、「音樂」、「人際」與「內省」等五項智慧間均具有中度關係。(4)從檔案評量、家長座談會、教師訪談、學生晤談及個案分析中均可發現學生在經過實驗處理後其學習興趣、能力與八項智慧均有明顯提升。
訪談研究其研究發現,在教師專業成長方面: (1)對多元智慧有更深的認識;(2)更加尊重學生的個別差異;(3)強化專業自信、提升專業自主;(4)教學策略與評量方式的運用更多元、更有彈性。在課程實施上可能遭受的限制方面:(1)人力不足;(2)學習場地安排的困難;(3)學校其他班級的配合。
依據研究發現提出五點對教師教學的建議,五點對教育輔導與行政的建議,五點未來研究方向,俾供教師從事教學、教育行政輔導及未來進行研究參酌。
The purposes of this study were : (a) to assess the effect of implementing multiple intelligence (MI) theory on first graders in the area of “Living Curriculum,” (b) to examine how teachers develop themselves professionally in the process, and (c) to find out the limits of implementing MI on the first graders in the “Living Curriculum” domain.
A quasi experiment design with pretest-posttest nonequivalent groups, delayed test, and interviews were applied to conduct the comprehensive study. The purpose of the quasi experiment design was to compare first-graders’ performance in the area of “Living Curriculum” under two different modes of instruction, the MI theory and traditional textbook instruction.
Seventy-one first-graders participated in the fourteen-week study. The experimental group was positioned under the instruction based on MI theory; the control group was taught in the traditional textbook-teacher-centered mode of instruction. “Children MI Observation Scale” and “ Learning Interest Questionnaire” were administered to 71 subjects on pre-test, post-test, and delayed test. In addition, “videotape on student performance,” “interview with teachers,” “discussion meeting with parents,” and “ two case analysis” were administered to the experimental group. The findings show that: (1) Participants in the experimental group performed more positively than those in the control group in the basic knowledge of Living curriculum. (2) Students in the experimental group showed more interest than those in the control group on post-test and delayed tests. (3) Students in the experimental group showed higher performance than those in the control group in the following intelligence, “bodily-kinesthetic intelligence,” “interpersonal intelligence,” and “intrapersonal intelligence.” After the study, results from the post-test showed that students in the experimental group showed higher performance than those in the control group in the following intelligence: “spatial intelligence,” “bodily-kinesthetic intelligence,” “musical intelligence,” “interpersonal intelligence,” “intrapersonal intelligence,” and "naturalist intelligence.” (4) Results from portfolio, discussion meetings, interviews, and case analyses showed that students from the experimental group demonstrated higher learning interest, and performed more positively in eight intelligence.
The study presents four encouraging findings on teachers’ professional development. First, teachers learn more about MI theory. Second, teachers pay more attention to needs of individual student. Third, teachers gain more confidence in their competencies. Finally, teachers apply more diversified and flexible strategies in terms of instruction and evaluation. Moreover, the study shows that limits on human resources, limits on learning location, and limits on cooperation with other classes will lessen the predicted effect when MI theory is put into practice.
參考文獻
壹、中文部分:
王為國(2000)。國民小學運用多元智慧理論的歷程分析與評估之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士論文(未出版)。new window
王慧勤(2000)。扮演遊戲-國語課的另一扇窗。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
田耐青(1999)。由多元智慧的觀點談教學評量:一些台灣的實例。教師天地,99,32-37頁。
吳靜吉(2001)。學得有智慧、工作得有智慧、生活得有智慧--這才是人生。載於多元智慧豐富人生,羅吉台、席行蕙譯,10-18頁。台北市:遠流出版社。
李心瑩譯(2000)。再建多元智慧。台北市:遠流出版社。
李平譯(1997)。經營多元智慧。台北市:遠流出版社。
李永吟、單文經(1997)。教學原理。台北:遠流出版事業。
李玉鳳(2001)。運用多元智慧理論改善學生學習態度之行動研究。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
李坤崇(2001)。綜合活動學習領域教材教法。台北市:心理出版社。
李坤崇(2002)。國民中小學成績評量準則之多元評量理念。載於教育部主編:國民中小學校長與視導人員理論篇研習手冊,121-136頁。台北:教育部。
李坤崇、毆慧敏(2000)。統整課程理念與實務。台北:心理出版社。
林倩玉(2001)。運用多元智慧教學提升學生的同儕互動--以自然科教學為例。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
邱麗雅(2000)。多元智慧理論在國小英語科教學運作歷程之探究--一個國小英語教師的個案觀察研究。國立台北師範學院課程與教學研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
封四維(1999)。多元智慧教學之實踐:一個教師的行動研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文(未出版)。
施良方(1996)。課程理論-課程的基礎、原理與問題。高雄:麗文文化。
秦葆琦(2000)。生活課程的特質、功能與實施方式。九年一貫課程研習講義。
高浦勝義(1989)。生活科的想法、實行方法。東京都:黎明書房。(日文)
高浦勝義(1991)。生活科的中的想法、實行方法。東京都:黎明書房。(日文)
高浦勝義(1998)。綜合性學習的理論、實踐與評量。東京都:黎明書房。(日文)
張世忠(1999)。教材教法之實踐-要領、方法、研究。台北市:五南圖書出版有限公司。
張春興(1990)。現代心理學。台北市:東華書局。
張景媛(1999)。多元思考教學策略工作坊對國小教師數學教學影響的評估暨教學督導對教師教學歷程轉變之影響。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫第一年成果報告。
張景媛(2000)。多元思考教學策略工作坊對國小教師數學教學影響的評估暨教學督導對教師教學歷程轉變之影響。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫第二年成果報告。
張稚美(2000)。落實多元智慧評量是心智習性的一大挑戰,載於落實多元智慧評量,郭俊賢、陳淑惠譯,9-12頁。台北市:遠流出版社。
張德銳(1998)。以同儕教練模式提升教師專業,載於中華民國課程與教學學會主編:學校本位與課程創新,219-235頁。台北市:揚智文化事業股份有限公司。
張曉華(1999)。創作性戲劇原理與實作。台北市:財團法人成長文教基金會。
教育部(1999)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要(第一學習階段)。台北市:教育部。new window
教育部(2000)。國民中小學九年一貫課程暫行綱要。台北市:教育部。new window
梁雲霞譯(2000)。多元智慧和學生成就:六所中小學的成功實例。台北市:遠流出版社。
郭俊賢、陳淑惠譯(1999)。多元智慧教與學(第二版)。台北市:遠流出版社。
郭俊賢、陳淑惠譯(2000)。落實多元智慧教學評量。台北市:遠流出版社。
陳伯璋(1999)。九年一貫課程的理念、內涵與評析。發表於板橋教師研習會辦「國民教育階段九年一貫課程座談會」。
陳杰琦(1998)。鑑別、培養與發展兒童的多元智力。文教新潮,3(5),6-17頁。
陳舜芬、丁志仁、洪儷瑜(1996)。師資培育與教師進修制度的檢討。台北市:行政教育改革審議委員會。
陳瓊森、汪益譯(1995)。超越教化的心靈。台北市:遠流出版社。
曾志朗(1995)。超越教化的心靈序。台北市:遠流出版社。
黃政傑(1991)。課程設計。台北市:東華書局。
黃政傑(1992)。合作學習教學法。台北:五南圖書。
黃政傑、林佩璇(1996)。合作學習。台北:五南圖書。
楊思偉(1999)。規劃國民中小學九年一貫課程基本能力實踐策略。教育部委託專案研究報告。台北:台灣師範大學教育研究中心。
雷敏君(2001)。多元智慧教學對學生自然科學習自我效能之影響。國立台北師範學院數理教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
歐用生(1999)。從「課程統整」的概念評九年一貫課程。教育研究資訊,第七卷,第一期,22-32頁。new window
薛梨真(1999)。國小課程統整的理念與實務:高雄市國小統整課程教學種子教師培育成果彙編。高雄市:高雄市政府教育局。
簡維君(1999)。國小人際智能訓練之教學成效研究。國立台灣師範大學特殊教育研究所碩士論文(未出版)。
羅吉台、席行蕙譯(2001)。多元智慧豐富人生。台北市:遠流出版社。
貳、英文部分:
Albero, P., Brown, A. Eliason, S. & Wind, J. (1997). Improving reading through the use of multiple intelligence. Master’s Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University and IRT/Skylight. (ED 410522)
Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple intelligence in the classroom. VA : ASCD.
Armstrong, T. (1998). Awakening genius in classroom. VA : ASCD.
Armstrong, T. (1999). 7 kinds of smart : Identifying and development your multiple intelligence(2th ed.). New York : Penguin Putnam Inc.
Arter, J. (1990). Using portfolios in instruction and assessment : state of the art summary. Portland, Or. : Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Baney, M. E.. (1998). An examination of the process of implementing multiple intelligence theory into classroom practice : a team approach. Doctor dissertation Temple University, UMI No. : 9838458.
Beane, J. A., Toepfer, C. F. (Jr.) & Alessi, S. J. (Jr.) (1986). Curriculum planning and development. Boston : Allyn & Bacon.
Beltzman, J. (1994). A case study describing the application of Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences as applied to the teaching of learning disabled students. Walden University, Ph. D. AAC 9536766.
Campbell, M. J. (2000). An experiential learning approach to faculty in Asla-Pacific education. The Faculty of School of Intercultural Studies in Biola University. Ph. D.
Campbell, L. &Campbell, B. (1999). Multiple intelligences and student achievement : Success stories from six school. VA : ASCD.
Campbell, L., Campbell, B. & Dickinson, D. (1999). Teaching & learning through multiple intelligences(2th ed.). MA : Allyn & Bacon.
Carson, D. (1995). Diversity in the classroom : multiple intelligences and mathematical problem-solving. AAC 9616884.
Cattell, R. B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. Baltimore : Penguin.
Checkley, K. (1997). The first seven and eighth : A conversation with Howard Gardner. Education Leadership ,55(1), 10.
Chen, J. Q. & Gardner, H. (1997). Alternative assessment from a multiple intelligences perspective. In B. Torff (Ed.) Multiple intelligences and Assessment(pp. 27-54). IL : IRI Skylight.
Costa, A. L., & Liebmann, R. (1997). Toward a renaissance curriculum : An idea whose time has come. In A. Costa & R. Liebmann(eds.), Envisioning process as content : Toward a renaissance curriculum (pp. 1-20). Thousand Oasks, CA:Corwin Press.
Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2000). Habits of Mind : Discovering and exploring habits of mind. Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development(ASCD).
Crockett, T. (1998). The portfolio journey : A creative guide to keeping student-managed portfolios in the classroom. Englewood, Colorado : Teacher Ideas Press, A Division of Libraries Unlimited, Inc.
Danielson, C. & Abrutyn, L. (1997). An introduction to using portfolios in the classroom. VA : Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Dare, M., Durand, S., Moeller, L. & Washington, M. (1997). Using multiple intelligence, cooperative learning, and higher order thinking skills to improve the behavior of at-risk students. Master’s Field-Based Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University & IRI/Skylight (ED 411954).
Das, J. P., Naglieri, J. A. & Kirby, J. R. (1994). Assessment of cognitive processes : The PASS theory of intelligence. Boston : Allyn & Bacon.
Eisner, E. W. (1995). Educational reform and the ecology of schooling. In A. C. Ornstein & L. S. Behar (Eds.), Contemporary issues in curriculum. (pp. 390-402). MA : Allyn & Bacon.
Ellingson, W. E., Long, E. A. & McCullough, K. L. (1997). Improving student motivation through the use of varied instructional and curricular adaptation. Master’s Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University & IRI/Skylight (ED 412006).
Edwards, M. A. (1995). Growth is the name of the game. Educational Leadership, 52(6), 72-74.
Fisher, E. M. (1997). A cross case survey of research based on Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences. University of South Carolina. Ph. D. AAC 9815503.
Feuerstein, R., Rand, Y., Hoffman M. B. & Miller, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment : An intervention program for cognitive modifiability. Baltimore, MD : University Park Press.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of Mind : The theory of Multiple Intelligence. New York : Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind. New York : Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligence : The theory in practice. New York : Basic Books.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed : Multiple intelligence for the 21st century. New York : Basic Books.
Gens, P., Provance, J., VanDuyne, K. & Zimmerman, K. (1998). The Effects of integrating a multiple intelligence based language arts curriculum on reading comprehension of first and second grade students. Master’s Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University & IRI/Skylight (ED 420840).
Glathorn, A. A. (1987). Cooperative professional development : Peer-centered options for teacher growth. Educational Leadership, 45(3), 31-35.
Goodnough, K. C. (2000). Exploring multiple intelligences theory in the context of science education : an action research approach. Department of Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto. Ph. D.
Guilgord, J. P. (1977). Way beyond the I.Q. Buffalo, NY : Creative Education and Bearly Limited.
Horn, J. L. (1968). Organization of abilities and development of intelligence. Psychological Review, 75, 242-259.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1988). Cooperation in the classroom (rev. ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and Individualistic Learning. (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Johns, J. (1992). How professionals view portfolio assessment. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(1), 1-10.
Kagan, S. & Kagan, M. (1998). Multiple intelligence : The complete MI book. CA : Kagan Cooperative learning..
Kanter, A. K. (1994). Arts in our school : arts-based school reform that applies the concepts of interdisciplinary study and active learning to teach to the multiple intelligences. University of Northern Colorado. MA. AAC 1354296.
Kingmore, B. (1993). Portfolios : Enriching and assessing all students. Des Moines, Iowa : Leadership Publishers.
Klein, P. D. (1997). Multiplying the problems of intelligence by a critique of Gardner’s theory. Canadian journal of education, 22(4), 377-394.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential Learning : Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood cliffs, New Jerry : Prentice Hall.
Kornhaber, M. L. (1997). Seeking strengths : equitable identification for gifted education and the theory of multiple intelligences. Harvard University. Ed. D. AAC 9734807.
Layng, D., McGrane, V., & Wilson, C. (1995). Improving behavior through multiple intelligence. Master’s Research Project, Saint Xavier University & IRI/Skylight (ED 392550).
Lazear. D. (1999a). Multiple intelligence approaches to assessment. Tucson Arizona:Zephyr Press.
Lazear. D. (1999b). Eight ways of teaching(3rd ed.). IL : IRI Skylight.
Leeper, J. E. (1996). Early steps toward the assimilation of theory of multiple intelligences into classroom practice : four case studies. Doctor dissertation Temple University, UMI No. : 9623778.
Lindvall, R. (1995). Addressing multiple intelligence and learning styles : creating active leaning. Master’s Research Project, Saint Xavier University of Illinois (ED 388397).
Long, P. & Bowen, J. (1995). Teaching students to take control of their learning. Paper present at the International Conference of the Learning Disabilities Association. (ED 381989)
Mcgraw, R. L. (1997). Multiple intelligence theory and seventh-grade mathematics learning : A comparison of reinforcing strategies. Georgia State University. Ph. D. AAC 9733105.
Melrose, R. E. (1997). Examining the strengths of the learning disabled : multiple intelligences theory as a growth paradigm. University of Southern California. Ed. D. AAC 9733105.
Mueller, M. M. (1995). The educational implications of multiple intelligence groupings within a cooperative learning environment. Illinois State University. Ed. D. AAC 9604379.
Nefsky, P. (1997). The effectiveness of authentic assessment and multiple intelligences theory with an individual with developmental disabilities : a case study in therapeutic arts. California State University, Long Beach. MA. AAC 1385643.
Nicholson-Nelson, K. (1998). Developing student’s multiple intelligences. MO : Scholastic Professional Books.
Perkins, D. N. (1995). Outsmarting IQ : The emerging science of learnable intelligence. New York : The Free Press.
Pierce, M. (1997). Improving elementary students’ motivation. Master’s Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University & IRI/Skylight (ED 412002).
Radford, J. D. (1994). The impact of multiple intelligences theory and flow theory in the school lives of thirteen children. Indiana University. Ed. D. AAC 9527829.
Raffin, D. S. (1996). Brain-compatible learning and instruction (Bloom’s taxonomy, multiple intelligences, cooperative learning, integrated instruction ). Arizona State University. Ed. D. AAC 9622835.
Rosenthal, M. L. (1998). The impact of teaching to Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences on student self-esteem. Saint Louis University. Ed. D. AAT 9911985.
Schonebaum, J. A. (1997). Assessing the multiple intelligences of children who are deaf with the discover process and the use of American sign language. The University of Arizona. AAC 1387962.
Scott, O. JR. (1996). Multiple intelligences and the gifted identification of African-American students. Old Dominion University. Ph. D. AAC 9639108.
Sharon, S. (1980). Cooperative learning in small groups: Recent methods and effects on achievement, attitudes, and ethnic relations. Review of Education Research, 50(2), 241-271.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning theory, research, and practice. Boston; Allyn and Bacon.
Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Commentary : Reforming school : Comments on multiple intelligence : the theory in practice. Teacher College Record, 95(4), 562-569.
Sternberg, R. J., Torff, B., & Grigorenko, E. (1998). Teaching for successful intelligence raises school achievement. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(9), 667-669.
Teele, S. (2000). Rainbows of intelligence : Exploring how students learn. California : Corwin Press, Ins.
Troff, B. (1997). Introduction : the multiple intelligences. In B. Torff (Ed.) Multiple intelligences and Assessment (pp. Vii-x). IL : IRI Skylight.
Vangilder, J. S. C. (1995). A study of multiple intelligence as implemented by a Missouri school. University of Arkansas. Ed. D. AAC 9608005.
Vavrus, L. (1990). Put Portfolio to the test. Instructor 100, 1, 48-53.
Ward, W. (1981). Stories to Dramattize. New Orleans : Anchoage Press.
Weber, E. F. (1994). A multiple intelligence view of learning at the high school level. The University of British Columbia (Canada). Ph. D. AAC NN95406.
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE