:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:生物認知偏好與學業成就的關係
書刊名:科學教育學刊
作者:鄭湧涇楊坤原 引用關係
作者(外文):Cheng, Yeong-jingYang, Kun-yeng
出版日期:1995
卷期:3:1
頁次:頁1-21
主題關鍵詞:生物認知偏好生物認知偏好測驗學業成就Biology cognitive preferencesTest of biology cognitive preferenceTBCPAcademic achievement
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(1) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:2
  • 點閱點閱:20
     本研究以臺北市、縣的國中一年級學生為研究對象,採分層隨機取樣與集群取樣並行的方法,由大、中、小型學校中,抽取九所學校之1632位學生為樣本,應用「生物認知偏好測驗(TBCP)」探究生物認知偏好與生物、數學及學期總平均成績三項學業成就的關係。研究結果顯示,全體樣本之生物認知偏好取向為P(原理原則)>A(應用)>Q(發問質疑)>R(回憶)。男女生的生物認知偏好取向有明顯差異,男生為P>A>R>Q,女生則為P,A>Q>R。 研究的結果亦顯示,國一兩個學期之生物、數學兩科的學期成績和學期總平均成績的平均與R認知偏好型式之間呈顯著之負相關(p<0.01),而與Q認知偏好型式之間則呈顯著之正相關(p<0.01),與P和A認知偏好型式之間則無顯著的相關存在。學業成就較佳的學生,表現較強的Q偏好和較弱的R偏好,其生物認知偏好取向為Q>P>A>R,即偏好對所習得之生物學知識批判、質疑,也比較偏好學習生物學知識之原理原則,而對記憶生物學知識的偏好則最低。相反的,學業成就較差的學生則表現較強的R偏好和較弱的Q偏好,其生物認知偏好取向為R>P, A>Q。
     In this study, the Test of Biology Gognitive Preference (TBCP) was employed to assess the biology cognitive preference of 7th grade students in Taipei area. The relationships between biology cognitive preferences and academic achievement were investigated. The results showed that the reliability of the TBCP was satisfactory. The internal consistency reliabilities of the R, P, Q, A modes were 0.88, 0.81, 0.91 and 0.68 respectively. Two factors were extracted when TBCP scores were subjected to principal components factor analysis. Factor 1 represents "Critical questioning", while factor 2 represents "Knowledge application". Both the intercorrelation among the four preference modes and factor analysis supported the existence of Q-R and A-P bipolar axes. The biology cognitive preference style of the subjects was P>A>Q>R. Significant differences in biology cognitive preferences were found between male and female subjects. The males exhibited a preference order of P>A>R>Q, and the females exhibited a preference order of P, A>Q>R. Biology, mathematics achievement scores and semester average scores correlated positively with Q preference mode but negatively with R preference mode (p<0.01). No statistically significant correlations were found between the three achievement scores listed above and P and A preference modes. The subjects with higher academic achievement scores exhibited strongest preference for Q mode and weakest preference for R mode. The cognitive preference style was Q>P>A>R. Conversely, low achievers exhibited strongest R preference and weakest Q preference. The cognitive preference style was R>P, A>Q. This indicated that high achievers preferred critical questioning and identifying principles when dealing with the biological information presented to them, and exhibited low preference for memorizing biological facts. Conversely, low achievers exhibited high preference for memorizing biological facts and low preference for critical questioning.
期刊論文
1.Tamir, P.(1985)。Meta-analysis of cognitive preference and learning。Journal of Research in Science Teaching,22(1),1-17。  new window
2.鄭湧涇、黃秋純、蔡在壽、廖碧珠(1993)。國中一年級學生的科學認知偏好。科學教育學刊,1(1),51-76。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.鄭湧涇、蔡在壽、黃秋純、廖碧珠(19930600)。國中學生生物認知偏好之研究。師大學報,38,223-249。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Atwood, R. K.(1968)。A cognitive preference examination using chemistry content。JRST,5(1),34-35。  new window
5.Atwood, R. K.(1971)。Development of a cognitive preference examination utilizing general science and social science content。JRST,8,273-275。  new window
6.Atwood, R. K.、Stevens, J. T.(1978)。Do cognitive preferences of 9th-grade students influence science process achievement?。JRST,15(4),277-280。  new window
7.Barnett, H. C.(1974)。An investigation of relationships among biology achievement, perception of teacher style, and cognitive preferences。JRST,11(2),141-147。  new window
8.Ben-Zvi, A. H.、Salomon, Y.、Samuel, D.(1979)。Cognitive preferences and modes of instruction in high school chemistry。JRST,16(6),569-574。  new window
9.Brown, S. A.(1975)。Cognitive preferences in science: Their nature and analysis。Studies in Science Education,2,43-65。  new window
10.Fazio, F.、Zambotti, G.(1977)。Some cognitive style variables and their relationships to chemistry achievement。Journal of College Science Teaching,6(3),154-155。  new window
11.Heath, R. W.(1964)。Curriculum, cognition and educational measurement。Educational & Psychological Measurement,24(2),239-253。  new window
12.Jungwirth, E.(1980)。Alternative interpretations of findings in cognitive preference research in science education。Science Education,64(1),85-94。  new window
13.Kempa, R. F.、Dube, G. E.(1973)。Cognitive preference orientations in students of chemistry。British J. of Educational Psychology,43,279-288。  new window
14.Lewis, R. W.(1988)。Biology: A hypothetico-deductive science。The American Biology Teacher,50(6),362-366。  new window
15.Mackay, L. D.(1972)。Changes in cognitive preferences during two years of study in Victorian schools。Australian Science Teacher J.,18,63-66。  new window
16.McNaught, C.(1982)。Relationship between cognitive preferences and achievement in chemistry。JRST,19(2),177-186。  new window
17.Robinson, J. T.(1969)。Philosophy of science: Implications for teacher education。Journal of Research in Science Teaching,6,99-104。  new window
18.Tamir, P.(1975)。The relationship among cognitive preference, school environment, teachers' curricular bias, curriculum, and subject matter。AERJ,12(3),235-264。  new window
19.Tamir, P.(1976)。The relationship between achievement in biology and cognitive preference style in high school students。British J. Educational Psycholology,46,57-67。  new window
20.Tamir, P.(1977)。A note on cognitive preferences in science。Studies in Science Education,4,111-121。  new window
21.Tamir, P.(1977)。The relationship between cognitive preferences of students and their teachers。Journal of Curriculum Studies,9(1),67-74。  new window
22.Tamir, P.(1981)。Validation of cognitive preferences。British Educational Research Journal,7(1),37-49。  new window
23.Tamir, P.(1988)。The relationship between cognitive preferences, student background and achievement in science。JRST,25(3),201-216。  new window
24.Tamir, P.、Kempa, R. F.(1978)。Cognitive preferences styles across three science disciplines。Science Education,62(2),143-152。  new window
25.Tamir, P.、Lunetta, V. N.(1977)。A comparison of ipsative and normative procedures in the study of cognitive preferences。The Journal of Educational Research,71(2),86-92。  new window
26.Tamir, P.、Lunetta, V. N.(1978)。Cognitive preference in biology of a group of talented high school students。JRST,75(1),59-64。  new window
27.Tamir, P.、Jungwrith, E.(1984)。Test scores and associations as measures of cognitive preferences。Studies in Educational Evaluation,10,149-158。  new window
28.Tamir, P.、Yamamoto, K.(1977)。The effects of the junior high "FAST" program on student achievement and preferences in high school biology。Studies in Educational Evaluation,3(1),7-17。  new window
29.Tamir, P.、Penick, J. E.、Lunetta, V. N.(1982)。Cognitive preferences and creativity: An exploratory study。JRST,19,123-132。  new window
30.van den Berg, E.、Lunetta, V. N.、Tamir, P.(1982)。The convergent validity of the cognitive preference construct。JRST,19(5),417-424。  new window
31.Hicks, L. E.(1970)。Some properties of Ipsative, Normative, and Forced-choice Normative measures。Psychological Bulletin,74(3),167-184。  new window
32.Witkin, Herman A.、Moore, C. A.、Goodenough, D. R.、Cox, P. W.(1977)。Field-Dependent and Field-Independent: Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications。Review of Educational Research,47(1),1-64。  new window
33.Okebukola, Peter Akinsola、Jegede, Olugbemiro J.(1988)。Cognitive preference and learning mode as determinants of meaningful learning through concept mapping。Science Education,72(4),489-500。  new window
會議論文
1.Cheng, Y. J.(1991)。Biology cognitive preferences of preservice biology teachers1(1),32-40。  new window
學位論文
1.van den Berg, E.(1978)。Cognitive preferences: A Validation Study(博士論文)。The University of Iowa,Iowa City, Iowa。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE