:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:建構取向教學/指導教學對國小學童數學成績及學習適應之影響:以臺南市為例
書刊名:教育與心理研究
作者:鄭燿男
作者(外文):Cheng, Jao-nan
出版日期:2002
卷期:25(下)
頁次:頁585-613
主題關鍵詞:建構取向教學指導教學學習適應數學成績Constructional approach teachingDirect teachingLearning adapatationMathematics grades
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(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:512
  • 點閱點閱:20
建構取向教學是數學科今後主要的教學取向,但是許多家長與教師的疑慮仍然未消除。有人認為建構取向教學將使學生成績低落,數學能力變差;有人認為指導教學扼殺了學生思考能力及學習興趣。眾說紛紜的原因是缺乏實證研究的佐證,因此本研究以實證資料來探究這兩種教學取向與數學成續、學習適應的關係。 此外,針對Coleman(1996)提出的論點:「學生的學業成就與個人背景因素相關較高,而與教師因素相關較低」,本研究亦一併作探討。看看學生的背景因素以及教師的教學方法,對於學生的成續及影響力如何?並看看教師教學方法對於學生背景所造成的學習差異,是否有可以著力之處? 本研究結果顯示:1.補習、有專用書桌、請家教及雙親家庭等個人背景因素,對於數學成續有顯著正影響力。這顯示家庭背景是影響學生成續的主因,教師教學方法對於成續的影響並不顯著。2.背景因素對於學生的學習適應具有影響力,不過教學方法對於學習適應的影響力更高。而且建構取向教學對於學生數學科的學習適應,呈現顯著有利的影響。這個結果支持了許多學者提倡數學科建構取向教學的論點。顯示了教育上重大的意義是:雖然教師教學方法在提昇學生數學成續上,並無強大影響力,以至於背景因素是主要顯著影響數學成續的因素。但是學校教師的建構取向教學,卻能讓學生學習適應更好。這或許是教師建構取向教學上更重要的意義。3.本研究結果也顯示,部份教師經過教學反省後,採建構/指導混合教學,修改後的建構/指導混合教學與建構取向教學相較之下,在學習適應、數學成續上並無顯著的差異。
Constructional approach teaching will become the mainstream for future mathematics teaching, but many parents and teachers have doubts about it. Some think that constructional approach teaching brings about a drop in grades of students a decrease in their mathematical ability. Others think that direct teaching will hinder thinking ability and learning interests of students. These various concerns are due to a lack of actual data. So this study uses data to explore the relationship between the two types of teaching and their influence on mathematics grades or learning adaptation. The study will also further explore Coleman’s theory developed in 1966 : Grades of students are much more related to background factors than teacher factors. The study also explores the two following questions : How are grades of students affected by background factors of students and teaching methods of teaching ? And what can we do with learning differences in background caused by teaching methods of teachers? The study shows : First, some elements which have a crucial influence on mathematics grades are cram school education, having one’s own desk, and having tutors and parents. This means the family background is the main factor that affects grades of students and has little connection with teaching methods of teachers. Second, the learning adaptation of students is influenced more by teaching methods than by background factors. Also, constructional approach teaching will have a positive effect on mathematics learning adaptation. The result supports the theory of constructional approach teaching produced by many scholars. It means a lot in education that teaching methods have little influence on promotion of mathematics grades, so background factors have become the prime factor in the influence of mathematics grades. But teaching methods of teachers will help students have getter learning adaptation. This may be the importance of constructional approach teaching. Third, the study also finds that some teachers after their teaching introspection use mixed constructional and direct teaching. Compared with constructional approach teaching, the mixed constructional and direct teaching makes no difference in learning adaptation or mathematical grades.
期刊論文
1.楊龍立(19980300)。建構教學的研究。臺北市立師範學院學報,29,21-37。  延伸查詢new window
2.蘇育任(1997)。建構主義式教育的迷思與省思。國民教育研究集刊,5,121-137+139。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.簡茂發、蔡玉瑟、張鎮城(19930100)。國小單親兒童與雙親兒童生活適應之比較研究。測驗年刊,40,271-290。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.楊龍立(19970600)。建構主義評析--在課程設計上的啟示。臺北市立師範學院學報,28,41-55。  延伸查詢new window
5.林生傳(19980700)。建構主義的教學評析。課程與教學,1(3),1-13+133。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.高敬文(19901200)。批判的反省與師資培育計畫。初等教育研究,2,35-71。  延伸查詢new window
7.Anastas, J. W.、Reinherz, H.(1984)。Gender differences in learning and adjustment problems in school: Results of a longitudinal study。American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,54(1),110-122。  new window
8.Brodzinsley, D. M.、Schechter, D. E.、Braff, A. M.、Singer, L. M.(1984)。Psychological and academic adjustment in adopted children。Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology,52,582-590。  new window
9.Brooks, J. G.(1990)。Teachers and students: constructivists forging new connection。Educational Leadership,47(5),68-71。  new window
10.Cobb, P.(1988)。The tension between theories of learning and instruction in mathematics education。Educational psychologist,23,87-103。  new window
11.Hearn, J. C.(1984)。The relative roles of Academic, Ascribed, and socioeconomic characteristics in college destinations。Sociology of Education,57,22-30。  new window
12.Driver, R.、Oldham, V.(1985)。A constructivist approach to curriculum design in science。Studies in Science Education,13,105-122。  new window
13.Good, T. L.(1979)。Teacher effectiveness in the elementary school。Journal of Teacher Education,55,52-64。  new window
14.Law, L. C.、Wong, K. M.(1996)。Implication and problems of constructivism for instructional design。Education Journal,23(2),73-103。  new window
15.李坤崇(19900500)。我國國小學生學習適應及其相關因素之研究。臺南師院學報,23,133-159。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.劉好、易正明(20000600)。小學新課程數學科實施情況調查研究。臺中師院學報,14,321-340。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.吳新華(19940600)。國小學童班級適應、學習方法之效率與學業成就之關係。臺南師院學報,27,31-73。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.孫清山、黃毅志(19960300)。補習教育、文化資本與教育取得。臺灣社會學刊,19,95-139。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.鄭翠娟(19971100)。國小學童的學習適應、焦慮人格特質及其相關背景變項之研究。嘉義師院學報,11,119-156。  延伸查詢new window
20.張景媛(19940600)。數學文字題錯誤概念分析及學生建構數學概念的研究。教育心理學報,27,175-200。new window  延伸查詢new window
21.李坤崇(19850300)。中部地區國中一年級學生學習適應問題之調查研究。輔導月刊,21(2),12-21。  延伸查詢new window
22.黃毅志(20000700)。教育研究中的學童自陳問卷信、效度分析。國家科學委員會研究彙刊. 人文及社會科學,10(3),403-415。  延伸查詢new window
23.陳義勳(20000400)。探討使用建構主義教學在教學成效上之研究。臺北市立師範學院學報,31,347-355。  延伸查詢new window
24.甄曉蘭(19941100)。Rethinking Pedagogic Practice: Looking for More Promising Horizons。嘉義師院學報,8,209-230。  new window
25.蕭雅鈴(19980500)。直接教學法的應用:以高雄市成功國小為例。國教天地,127,82-87。  延伸查詢new window
26.詹志禹(19960600)。認識與知識:建構論VS.接受觀。教育研究月刊,49,25-38。new window  延伸查詢new window
27.陳淑絹(19990600)。不同性別與學習潛能之國小學童在學習適應、注意力與記憶力之比較研究。臺中師院學報,13,73-99。new window  延伸查詢new window
28.陳怡靖、鄭燿男(20000700)。臺灣地區教育階層化之變遷--檢證社會資本論、文化資本論及財務資本論在臺灣的適用性。國家科學委員會研究彙刊.人文及社會科學,10(3),416-434。  延伸查詢new window
29.吳和堂(19990600)。國中實習教師教學反省的內容與層次之分析。教育學刊,15,143-170。new window  延伸查詢new window
30.吳和堂(20010600)。國中實習教師教學反省與專業成長關係之量的研究。教育學刊,17,65-84。new window  延伸查詢new window
31.甄曉蘭、曾志華(19970600)。建構教學理念的興起與應用。國民教育研究學報,3,179-208。new window  延伸查詢new window
32.巫有鎰(19990700)。影響國小學生學業成就的因果機制--以臺北市和臺東縣作比較。教育研究集刊,43,213-242。new window  延伸查詢new window
33.李坤崇(19920700)。國小學生學習適應及其相關因素之賡續研究。臺南師院學報,25,83-122。new window  延伸查詢new window
34.Coleman, James S.(1988)。Social capital in the creation of human capital。American Journal of Sociology,94(suppl.),S95-S120。  new window
會議論文
1.鄧景文、賓玉玫、單文經(1999)。實習教師實地經驗的內涵與角色轉變。教育實習的典範與實踐學術研討會。台北:台灣師範大學教育學系。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.郭玉霞(1995)。準教師思考之個案研究 (計畫編號:NSC84-2411-H-142-004)。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.郭聰貴(1978)。國小學生對學校態度之調查分析(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.蔡敏光(1985)。高中生行為適應問題之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.教育部(2001)。國民教育九年一貫課程暫行網要。台北:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
2.李坤崇(1996)。學習適應量表指導手冊。臺北:心理。  延伸查詢new window
3.黃德祥(1998)。青少年發展與輔導。臺北市:五南書局。  延伸查詢new window
4.林美吟(1989)。國小單親家庭兒童自我概念與生活適應之研究。台北:文景。  延伸查詢new window
5.林生傳(2000)。新教學理論與策略。台北:五南。  延伸查詢new window
6.張春興(1994)。教育心理學三化取向。台北:東華。  延伸查詢new window
7.Coleman, J. S.(1966)。Equality of Educational Opportunity。Washington, D.C.:U. S. Government Printing Office。  new window
8.Fosnot, C. T.(1996)。Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice。New York:Teachers College Press。  new window
9.Giroux, H. A.、McLaren, P.(1989)。Critical pedogogy, the state and cultural struggle。NY:SUNY Press。  new window
10.Joyce, B.、Weil, M.、Showers, B.(1992)。Models of Teaching。Boston:Allyn and Bacon。  new window
11.Rosenshine, B.(1988)。Explicit teaching。NY:Random House。  new window
12.饒見維(1996)。教師專業發展--理論與實務。臺北市:五南圖書出版股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
13.朱敬先(1997)。教育心理學:教學取向。五南。  延伸查詢new window
單篇論文
1.Cotton, K.,Savard, W. G.(1982)。Direct instruction(ED 214 909)。  new window
2.Noori, K. K.(1994)。A constructivist/ reflective paradigm: A model for the early childhood program at Tuskegee University(ED3 70888)。  new window
其他
1.Moore, R. R.(1985)。Learning style preferences of nontraditional undergraduate students at private four year college。  new window
圖書論文
1.張善楠、黃毅志(1999)。台灣原漢族群、社區與家庭對學童教育的影響。台灣原住民教育。台北:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
2.Driver, R.(1995)。Constructivist approaches to science teaching。Constructivism in education。Hillsdale NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers。  new window
3.Von Glasersfeld, E.(1995)。A constructivist approaches to teaching。Constructivism in education。Hillsdale NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE