:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:比較三種教學法對大學生排球高手傳球學習成效與學習動機、班級氣氛之探討
書刊名:彰化師大體育學報
作者:鄭金昌 引用關係
作者(外文):Cheng, Chin-chang
出版日期:2011
卷期:10
頁次:頁38-50
主題關鍵詞:理解式球類教學理解與傳統式整合教學法學習動機班級氣氛Teaching games for understandingA combination teaching of TTM and TGfULearning motivationClassroom climate
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(2) 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:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:39
  • 點閱點閱:16
本研究主要目的探討傳統式教學、理解式球類教學、理解與傳統式結合教學三種教學法,運用在大學生排球動作技能學習成效與學習動機、班級氣氛之影響。方法:採用準實驗設計將三班166位選修排球課程大一學生,隨機分為傳統式教學、理解式球類教學、理解與傳統式整合教學三組,教學前先施予前測,實驗參與者完成八週的排球教學後,立即施以後測。結果:傳統式教學、理解與傳統式整合教學,在排球高手技能學習成效優於理解式球類教學。另外,理解式球類教學、理解與傳統式整合教學的學習動機優於傳統式教學。而理解與傳統式整合教學、理解式球類教學的班級氣氛優於傳統式教學。結論:近年來理解式球類教學法已證實有其創新之處,在學習動機、班級氣氛得到學生認同,而傳統式教學法在客觀技能學習仍然有它的優點。另外,理解與傳統式整合教學法對於學生除了客觀技能學習表現提升之外,對學習動機與班級氣氛方面皆有成效。
The purpose of this study was to investigate the influences of three different teaching methods on the volleyball learning of undergraduate students. The three methods include the traditional teaching method (TTM), teaching games for understanding (TGfU), and integrated teaching method (ITM) which combines TTM and TGfU. Effectiveness of learning was evaluated through the improvement of volleyball skill, motivations of learning, and classroom climate. A quasi- experimental design was employed. A total of 166 undergraduate students was divided into three groups and taught with different methods. Following the pre-tests, the post-tests were taken immediately after an eight-week lesson. Results showed that both TTM and ITM were more effective than TGfU in the improvement of volleyball skill with statistical discrepancy. On the other hand, TGfU and ITM were shown to be more effective than TTM in terms of both the learning motivation and classroom climate with statistical discrepancy. Results showed that although TGfU has been demonstrated to be rather innovative in recent years, the traditional teaching method still has its own merits. Furthermore, ITM has been showed to enhance not only the volleyball skill but also the motivation and classroom climate.
期刊論文
1.Kirk, D.、MacPhail, A.(2002)。Teaching Games for Understanding and situated learning: Rethinking the Bunker-Thorpe Model。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,21(2),177-192。  new window
2.Turner, A. P.、Martinek, T. J.(1992)。A comparative analysis of two models for teaching games: Technique approach and game-centered (tactical focus) approach。International Journal of Physical Education,29(4),15-31。  new window
3.Almond, L.、Thorpe, R.(1988)。Asking teachers to research。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,7(3),221-227。  new window
4.McPherson, S. L.、French, K. E.(1991)。Changes in cognitive strategies and motor skill in tennis。Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology,13,26-41。  new window
5.Timothy, C.(1996)。Reflections and further questions。Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,67(4),49-52。  new window
6.Turner, A. P.(1996)。Myth or Reality。Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance,67(4),46-48。  new window
7.French, K. E.、Werner, P. H.、Rink, J. K.、Taylor, K.、Hussey, K.(1996)。The Effects of a 3-Week Unit of Tactical, Skill, or Combined Tactical and Skill Instruction on Badminton Performance of Ninth-Grade Students。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,15(4),418-438。  new window
8.Holt, Nicholas L.、Strean, William B.、Bengoechea, Enrique Garcia(2002)。Expanding the Teaching Games for Understanding Model: New avenues for future research and practice。Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,21(2),162-176。  new window
9.Turner, A. P.、Martinek, T. J.(1999)。An investigation into teaching games for understanding: Effects on skill, knowledge and game play。Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport,70(3),286-296。  new window
10.廖智倩、闕月清(20080600)。中學師生對理解式球類教學實施知覺之探討。臺中教育大學學報. 教育類,22(1),1-20。new window  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.呂秀美(2006)。理解式球類教學法對國中學生巧固球學習效果之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.李日順(2001)。國中地理科合作學習教學法實驗成效之研究--以台中縣立順天國中為例(碩士論文)。彰化師範大學,彰化。  延伸查詢new window
3.李世雄(2007)。理解式球類教學法與傳統教學法對高中生足球學習效果之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
4.吳英義(2007)。遊戲/比賽理解式教學法對國小學生問題解決能力與問題解決態度影響之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺南大學。  延伸查詢new window
5.邱奕銓(2005)。傳統與理解式教學法對高職學生籃球學習效果比較之研究(碩士論文)。國立體育學院。  延伸查詢new window
6.游淑霞(2006)。理解式球類教學法對高中生合球學習效果之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
7.鄭金昌(2002)。合作學習與精熟學習在排球技能學習成就及學習反應之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
8.吳福源(1999)。國民小學教師班級經營策略與班級氣氛之研究--優良教師與一般教師之比較(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.黃志成(2004)。理解式球類教學對國小六年級學生羽球學習效果之研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
10.郭世德(2000)。理解式教學在國小五年級學生足球學習效果的研究(碩士論文)。國立體育學院。  延伸查詢new window
11.蔡宗達(2004)。理解式球類教學法與技能取向球類教學法比較研究(碩士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。  延伸查詢new window
12.Turner, A. P.(1995)。An Investigation into teaching games for understanding(博士論文)。North. Carolina University,Greensboro。  new window
13.王國鑫(2007)。多媒體輔助教學對國小學童體育課學習動機與班級氣氛之影響(碩士論文)。國立體育大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.李啟塤、陳秀枝(1995)。教育心理學名詞彙編。千華圖書。  延伸查詢new window
2.Vickers, J. N.(1990)。Instructional design for teaching physical activities: A knowledge structures approach。Champaign, IL:Human Kinetics。  new window
3.廖玉光(2003)。球類教學--領會教學法。香港:香港教育學院。  延伸查詢new window
4.張春興(1991)。張氏心理辭典。臺北市:臺灣東華書局。  延伸查詢new window
5.Butler, J.、Griffin, L.、Lombardo, B.、Nastasi, R.(2003)。Teaching Games for Understanding in physical education and sport: An international perspective。Reston, Virginia:National Association of Sport and Physical Education。  new window
6.彭鈺人(1993)。體育測驗與統計。臺北市:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
7.周宏室(1994)。Mosston(摩斯登)體育教學光譜的理論與應用。臺北市:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
8.Lave, Jean、Wenger, Etienne(1991)。Situated learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation。Cambridge University Press。  new window
圖書論文
1.林寶山(1986)。凱勒式個人化系統的教學理論。有效教學研究。臺北市:臺灣書局。  延伸查詢new window
2.許義雄(1997)。目標與架構:體育教學設計與實施。學校體育教材與評量。臺北市:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
3.闕月清、黃志成(2008)。理解式球類教學法與Mosstonr教學光譜。理解式球類教學法。臺北市:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
4.闕月清、蔡宗達、黃志成(2008)。理解式球類教學模式。理解式球類教學法。臺北市:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
5.Bunker, D.、Thorpe, R.(1986)。The curriculum model。Rethinking games teaching。University of Technology。  new window
6.闕月清、蔡宗達(2003)。體育教學的新概念--遊戲比賽理解式教學法(TGFU)。體育課程教學設計理論與實務。台北縣:國立教育研究院。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE