:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:大學聯考數學成績與大一微積分學習成就之相關研究
書刊名:高雄師大學報
作者:柳賢
出版日期:1993
卷期:4
頁次:頁252-232
主題關鍵詞:大一大學成就成績微積分數學學習聯考
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:2
  • 點閱點閱:66
     本研究之主要目的在於探討大學聯考數學成績與大一微積分學習成就之相關;並 比較大一理工學系學生學習一年微積分課程之後,其思考能力與計算能力有否顯著差異;以 及比較分別畢業於公私立高中之大一理工學系學生在學習一年微積分課程之後,其思考能力 與計算能力有否顯著差異。 研究對象為三所國立大學五個理工學系 146 位一年級學生, 研究工具為自行編製之微積分成 就測驗、思考能力測驗與計算能力測驗,統計資料系上述三項測驗前後測驗成績與大學聯考 數學成績。 研究資料根據研究目的與假設, 分別使用皮爾遜積差相關、t- 檢定、共變數分析、迴歸分析 等統計方式處理。主要研究發現如下: 1. 大學聯考數學科成績和大一微積分學習成就測驗成績有顯著相關,相關係數為 0.2969。 2. 大學聯考數學科命題內容涵蓋數學思考能力與計算能力的評量。 3. 大學理工學系大一微積分課程, 對於大一理工學系學生的數學思考與計算能力,有所助 益。 4. 畢業於不同性質(公、私立)高中的大學理工學系學生, 經過一年大一微積分的學習後 ,其計算與思考能力均有進步,公私立高中畢業學生之間沒有顯著差異。唯,單就私立高中 畢業生而言,其計算能力並無明顯的進步現象。 根據上述主要研究發現,本研究提出兩項建議,一為研究大學聯考命題內容與大學甄選辦法 的改進;二為針對大一微積分課程的教材內容或教學方法等加以探討,以了解如何提昇學生 之思考與計算的數學能力。另外,提出進一步研究建議兩項:一為探討大學聯考數學科成績 與大學理工學系各年級數學課程學習成就的關係;以及進一步探討公、私立高中數學科教材 教法與學生數學科成就、數學能力的相關性。
     Scores of College Entrance Examination and that of Achievement Test of First-year College Calculus Students. The study was aimed to:(1) explore the correlation of Mathematics scores on the college Entrance Examination (CEE) and the freshmen Caculus achievements; (2) examine if there are any significant differences on math thinking and computation ability after they learned the Caculus course for one year; (3) distinguish the Math thinking and computation ability of those graduated from the public senior high schools from those graduated from the private ones. The subjects were 146 freshmen from Science & Engineeing Colleges at three national universities in Taiwan. The study instruments were the measurement of Caculus, the test of Math thinking ability and the test of Math computation ability. The statistic methods used to examine the hypothesises were: Pearson-productive correlation, T-test, ANCOVA, and regression correlation. The findings were the following: (1) The correlation on the Math scores of CEE and the Caculus achievements is significant. The coefficece is 0.2969. (2) The main content in the Math test of the CEE covered the evaluation of Math thinking and computation ability. (3) After learning the Caculas course for one year, the Math thinking and computation ability of the subjects have been improved. (4) There is no significant difference on Math thinknig and computation ability between those who graduated from the public and private high schools. However, within the private students group, there is not very much progress on their computation ability. Some implications of the findings and suggestions for further research were presented: (1) To improve the test contents of the CEE and the procedures to select college students. (2) To select suitable subject matters for college freshmen Calculus and to explore more effective teaching methods.
期刊論文
1.Humphreys, L. G.(1968)。The Fleeting Nature of the Prediction of College Academic Success。Journal of Educational Measurement,59(5),375-380。  new window
2.許佩玲、林邦傑(19820100)。我國大學學業成就之預測。測驗年刊,29,51-62。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.盧欽銘、簡茂發、郭生玉(1976)。大學聯考試題型式、計分方式及其預測效度之研究。測驗年刊,23,28-45。  延伸查詢new window
4.朱綺鴻(19910600)。國中數學學習成就優異學生數學能力分析。國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所集刊,33,187-210。  延伸查詢new window
5.陳榮華(1975)。大學聯招成績能預測什麼?。測驗年刊,22,95-98。  延伸查詢new window
6.Commitee on the Undergraducate Program in Mathematics(1987)。Report of the CUPM Panel on Calculus Articulation: Problems in Transition from High School Calculus to College Calculus。The American Mathematical Monthly,94(8),776-785。  new window
7.Dickey, Edwin M.(1986)。A Comparison of Advanced Placement and College Students on a Calculus Achievement Test。Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,17(2),140-144。  new window
8.French, John W.(1958)。Validation of New Item Types, Against Four Year Academic Criteria。Journal of Educational Psychology,49,67-76。  new window
9.Hills, J. R.、Bush, M. L.、Klock, J. A.(1964)。Predicting grades beyond the Freshman year。College Board Review,54,22-25。  new window
10.Humphreys, Lloyd G.、Taber, Thomas(1973)。Postdiction Study of the Graduate Record Examination and Eight Semesters of College Grades。Journal of Educational Measurement,10(3),179-184。  new window
11.Jones, Chancey O.、Kenelly, John W.、Kreider, Donald L.(1975)。The Advanced Placement Program in Mathematics--Update 1975。The Mathematics Teacher,68(8),654-670。  new window
12.Mauger, Paul A.、Kolmodin, Claire A.(1975)。Long-Term Predictive Validity of the Scholastic Aptitude Test。Journal of Educational Psychology,67(6),847-851。  new window
13.Sorge, D. H.、Wheatley, G. H.(1977)。Calculus in High School--At What Cost?。American Mathematical Monthly,84(8),644-647。  new window
14.Spresser, Diane M.(1979)。Placement of the first calculus course。International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology,10(4),593-600。  new window
會議論文
1.陳順宇、鄭碧娥(1989)。高中、測試、大學聯考數學成績之相關分析以及影響數學成績之因素分析。中華民國第四屆科教學術研討會,353-369。  延伸查詢new window
研究報告
1.宗亮東、程法泌、盧欽銘、林邦傑、李汝現、王希平(1977)。大學入學考試成績與高中、大學在校成績之相關研究。教育部大學入學考試研究委員會第二專題研究小組。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.嚴天秩(1968)。大專學校聯合招生考試預測功能之統計分析(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Krutetskii, Vadim Andreevich、Teller, Joan、Kilpatrick, Jeremy、Wirzup, Izaak(1976)。The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren。Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE