5E探究式教學對國小學童在情境興趣、決策能力與動作技能之效應_

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

論文基本資料
摘要
外文摘要
參考文獻

題名：	5E探究式教學對國小學童在情境興趣、決策能力與動作技能之效應
作者：	涂馨友
作者(外文)：	Hsin-yu Tu
校院名稱：	國立臺灣師範大學
系所名稱：	體育學系
指導教授：	闕月清周建智
學位類別：	博士
出版日期：	2014
主題關鍵詞：	探究教學；學習興趣；判斷力；籃球技能；學習表現；inquiry teaching；learning interest；determination；basketball skills；learning performance
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	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:0 共同引用:0 點閱:20

本研究目的在探討5E探究式教學在籃球課程之實施，對國小高年級學童情境興趣、決策能力與動作技能之影響。研究採準實驗設計，量為主質為輔之「主-輔式設計」研究方法，透過不等組前後測設計，以臺北市某國小兩班五年級學童為研究對象，一班為實驗組 (n=22)，另外一班為對照組 (n=20)。兩組學生分別接受8週，每週2次40分鐘的籃球課程。本研究透過「情境興趣量表」、「判斷力測驗」與「籃球測驗」等量化研究工具蒐集資料，並輔以討論單、學習單、半結構式訪談與觀察等質性資料進行資料分析。量化資料以描述性統計、二因子混合設計變異數、多變項變異數、皮爾森積差相關與多元逐步迴歸分析其差異性與解釋力，統計顯著水準訂為α=.05；質性資料採用內容分析法分析以輔助詮釋研究結果。結果顯示：(一) 5E探究式教學對學童情境興趣之新奇、挑戰與專注需求等構面達顯著效果，質性資料顯示5E探究式教學對情境興趣有所提升；(二) 5E探究式教學對學童決策能力未達顯著差異，從學習歷程的改變來看，本研究學童在運動競賽策略的提升較不明顯；(三) 5E探究式教學對學童籃球技能之運球有顯著的效果，從質性資料中發現，學童在籃球技能表現有進步；(四) 實驗組不同情境興趣者在決策能力與動作技能皆無顯著差異。(五) 實驗組學童的專注需求、反應時間與答對率對動作技能具顯著的預測力，在教師的提問之下，能引發學習者專注思考問題的答案，可能有助於動作技巧的精緻化。根據研究結果發現，針對5E探究式教學在教學實務以及未來研究提供建議。

以文找文

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of 5-E Inquiry Teaching Model on situational interest, determination ability and motor skill on basketball program for fifth grade students. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Quasi-experimental design with an experimental group (EG) and a comparison group (CG) were adopted to investigate the effects on student learning. Two classes of fifth grade students were selected from an elementary school in Taipei City, Taiwan. Twenty-two students (n=22) received 5-E Inquiry Teaching Model as EG, and twenty-one subjects (n=20) received direct teaching as CG. Both groups met twice a week for 40 minutes per session with duration of 8 weeks. Situational interest questionnaire, determination test and basketball test were used to collect quantitative data, and analyzed by descriptive statistics, mixed-design two-way ANOVA, MANOVA, Pearson product-moment correlation and simultaneous regression (α=.05) while qualitative data was analyzed through content analysis from discussion sheets, learning sheets, semi-structure interview, observation journals. The level of significance for acceptance or rejection for this study was set at the .05 level. Results indicated that (1) For situational interest, EG had significant improvement on novelty, challenge and attention demand when comparing with the CG. (2) For determination ability, there was no significant difference between EG and CG. (3) For motor skill, EG showed significant improvement on dribbling when comparing with the CG. (4) For EG, there was no significant difference between high and low situational interest and students on determination ability and motor skill. (5) Through 5-E Inquiring Teaching, attention demand, reaction time and accuracy were good predicter for motor skill. Based on the above result findings, suggestions on 5-E Inquiry Teaching Model, teaching practice and future studies were proposed.

以文找文

王美芬、熊召弟 (1995)。國民小學自然科教材教法。臺北市：心理出版社。
王駿濠、張哲千、梁衍明、邱文聲、洪蘭、曾志朗、阮啟弘 (2012)。運動對孩童認知功能及學業表現的影響：文獻回顧與展望。教育科學研究期刊，57 (2)，65-94。 new window

王駿濠、蔡佳良 (2011)。運動對改善大腦認知功能之效益評析。應用心理研究，50，191-216。 new window

余民寧、韓珮華 (2009)。教學方式對數學學習興趣與數學成就之影響:以TIMSS 2003臺灣資料為例。測驗學刊，56(1)，19-48。 new window

吳明隆 (2008)。論文寫作與量化研究。臺北市：五南。
李松濤、林煥祥、洪振方 (2010)。探究式教學對學童科學論證能力影響之探究。科學教育學刊，18 (3)，177-203。 new window

李榮彬 (2011)。提升學童批判思考能力之5E探究式教學研究 (未出版博士論文)。國立嘉義大學，嘉義市。 new window

周建智 (2011)。動作學習歷程前決策與後決策階段中批判思考的中介角色。體育學報，44(4)，495-510。 new window

周建智、鄭家惠 (2010)。在體育課中發展學生運動競賽的決策能力模式。中華體育季刊，24(4)，138-151。 new window

周裕欽 (2009)。反省探究學習模式之建立及其應用 (未出版博士論文)。國立東華大學，花蓮縣。
段曉林(2008，12月)。迷人的科學探究教學。論文發表於中華民國第廿四屆科學教育學術研討會，彰化。
洪振方 (2003)。探究式教學的歷史回顧與創造性探究模式之初探。高雄師範大學學報，15，641-662。 new window

張育愷、林珈余 (2010)。身體活動對孩童認知表現的影響。中華體育季刊，24(2)，83-92。 new window

張靜儀 (1995)。自然科探究教學法。屏師科學教育, 1, 36-45。
郭重吉 (1992)。從建構主義的觀點探討中小學數理教學的改進，科學發展月刊，20(5)，548-568。 new window

陳文正 (2012)。國小高年級學童的論證學習在科學解釋合理性判斷之效應探討 (未出版博士論文)。國立東華大學，花蓮縣。
黃芳銘 (2009)。結構方程模式理論與應用。臺北市：五南。
黃昭銘 (2008)。提升學童批判思考能力之5E探究式教學研究 (未出版博士論文)。國立嘉義大學，嘉義市。
楊秀停、王國華 (2007)。實施引導式探究教學對於國小學童學習成效之影響。科學教育學刊，15(4)，439-459。 new window

歐用生 (1989)。國民小學社會科教學研究。臺北市：師大書苑。
蔡執仲、段曉林 (2005)。探究式實驗教學對國二學生理化學習動機之影響。科學教育學刊，13(3)，289-315。 new window

鄭瑞洲、洪振方、黃臺珠 (2011)。情境興趣-制式與非正式課程科學學習的交會點。科學教育月刊，340，2-10。
鄭瑞洲、洪振方、黃臺珠 (2013)。採用多元教學策略的非制式奈米課程對國中生情境興趣之促進。教育實踐與研究，26(2)，1-28。 new window

Akerson, V. L., &; Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: The results of a three-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653-680.
Arnheim, D. D., &; Sinclair, W. A. (1979). The clumsy child: a program of motor therapy (2nd ed.). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.
Bakas, C., &; Mikropoulos, T. A. (2003). Design of virtual environments for comprehension of planetary phenomena based on students’ ideas. International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), 949-967.
Blitzer, L.(1995). “It’s a gym class…what’s there to think about?” Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, &; Dance, 66(6), 44-48.
Bloom, B. S. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectiνes-Book 1: cognitive domain. (2 nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Publishing Company.
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bybee, R. W., &; DeBoer, G. (1993). Goals for the Science Curriculum. In Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
Chase, C., &; Gibson, H. L. (2002). Longitudinal impact of inquiry-based science program on middle school students’ attitudes toward science. Science Education, 86(5), 693-705.
Chen, A., Darst, P. W., &; Pangrazi, R. P. (1999). What constitutes situational interest? Validating a construct in physical education. Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science, 3, 157- 180.
Chen, A., Darst, P. W., &; Pangrazi, R. P. (2001). An examination of situational interest and its sources. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 383-400.
Chen, S., Chen, A., &; Zhu, X. (2012). Are K-12 Learners Motivated in Physical Education? A Meta-Analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 83(1), 36-48.
Cleland, F., &; Pearse, C. (1995). Critical thinking in physical education reflections on a yearlong study. Journal of Physical education, Recreation, and Dance, 66(6), 31-38.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 754-761.
Dauer, V., &; Pangrazi, R. (1995) . Dynamic physical education for elementary school children (11th ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: Restatement of the reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: Health.
Ding, H., Sun, H., &; Chen, A. (2013). Impact of Expectancy-Value and Situational Interest Motivation Specificity on Physical Education Outcomes. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 32, 253-269.
Dohn, N. B., Madsen, P. T., &; Malte, H. (2009). The situational interest of undergraduate students in zoo physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 33(3), 196-201.
Downing, J. H., &; Lander, J. E. (1997). Fostering critical thinking through interdisciplinary cooperation: Integrating secondary level physics into a weight training unit. NASSP Bulletin, 81(591), 85-94.
Eccles, J.S, &; Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.
Graham, G., Holt/Hale, S. A., &; Parker, M. (2009). Children Moving: a reflective approach to teaching physical education (8th ed.). Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill Education.
Hammer, D. (1997). Inquiry learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 485-529.
Harrison, J. M., Blakemore, C. L., Buck, M. M., &; Pellett, T. L. (1996). Instructional strategies for secondary school physical education (4th ed.). Carmel, IN: Benchmark Press.
Hidi, S. &; Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: a critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70, 151-179.
Hidi, S. (2001). Interest, reading, and learning: Theoretical and practical considerations. Educational Psychology Review, 13, 191-209.
Hidi, S., &; Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127.
Hillman, C. H., Belopolsky, A. V., Snook, E. M., Kramer, A. F., &; McAuley, E. (2004). Physical activity and executive control: implications for increased cognitive health during older adulthood. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 75(2), 176-785.
Hillman, C. H., Buck, S. M., Themanson, J. R., Pontifex, M. B., &; Castelli, D. M. (2009). Aerobic fitness and cognitive development: event-related brain potential and task performance indices of executive control in preadolescent children. Developmental Psychology, 45(1), 114-129.
Hillman, C. H., Kramer, A. F., Belopolsky, A. V., &; Smith, D. P. (2006). A cross-sectional examination of age and physical activity on performance and event-related brain potentials in a task switching paradigm. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 59(1), 30-39.
Hillman, C. H., Weiss, E. P., Hagberg, J. M., &; Hatfield, B. D. (2002). The relationship of age and cardiovascular fitness to cognitive and motor processes. Psychophysiology, 39(3), 303-312.
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Krapp, A. (2002). An educational-psychological theory of interest and its relation to SDT. In E. L. Deci &; R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 405-426). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
Krapp, A. (2005). Basic needs and the development of interest and intrinsic motivational orientations. Learning and Instruction, 15, 381-395.
Lee, O., Buxton, C., Lewis, S., &; LeRoy, K. (2006). Science inquiry and student diversity: Enhanced abilities and student difficulties after an instructional intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(7), 607-636.
Lewthwaite, R., &; Wulf, G. (2010). Grand challenge for movement science and sport psychology: embracing the social-cognitive-affective-motor nature of motor behavior. Front. Mov. Sci. Sport Psychol. 1:42.10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00042
McBride, R. E. (1999). If you structure it, they will learn it: critical thinking in physical education classes. The cleaning House, 72(4), 217-220.
McManama, J. (2013). Physical Education Activity Handbook. San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.
Metzler, M. W. (2011). Instructional models for physical education. Scottsdale, AZ: Holcomb Hathaway.
Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., &; Hays, T. (2008). In-depth Interviewing (3rd ed.). Pearson, IL: Prentie Hall.
Mitchell, S., Oslin, J., &; Griffin, L. (2013). Teaching sport concepts and skills-a tactical games approach for ages 7 to 18. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Mosston, M., &; Ashworth, S. (2002). Teaching physical education (5th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings.
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Toronto, ON: Allyn and Bacon.
Palmer, D. (2004). Situational interest and the attitudes towards science of primary teacher education students. International Journal of Science Education, 26(7), 895-908.
Palmer, D. H. (2009). Student interest generated during and inquiry skills lesson. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 147-165.
Pontifex, M. B., Hillman, C. H., &; Polich, J. (2009). Age, physical fitness, and attention: P3a and P3b. Psychophysiology, 46(2), 379-387.
Renninger, K. A., Hidi, S. &; Krapp, A. (1992). The role of interest in learning and development. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Richardson, K., &; Henninger, M. L. (2008). A model for developing and assessing tactical decision-making competency in game play. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 79(3), 24-29.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299-323.
Schmidt, R. A., &; Wrisberg, C. A. (2008). Motor learning and performance: a situation-based learning approach. Champaign, IL : Human Kinetics.
Schraw, G., &; Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review, 13(1), 23 – 52.
Schraw, G., Flowerday, T., &; Lehman, S. (2001). Situational interest in the classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 13(3), 211 – 224.
SCHUHFRIED GmbH. (2014). Vienna Test System. Mödling, Österreich: SCHUHFRIED GmbH.
Shen, B., Chen, A. &; Guan, J. (2007). Using achievement goals and interest to predict learning in physical education. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 89-108.
Siedentop, D., &; Tannehill, D. (2000). Developing teaching skills in physical education (4th ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Mayfield.
Stocklmayer, S. M., Rennie, L. J., &; Gilbert, J. K. (2010). The roles of the formal and informal sectors in the provision of effective science education. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 1- 44.
Stroth, S., Hille, K., Spitzer, M., &; Reinhardt, R. (2009). Aerobic endurance exercise benefits memory and affect in young adults. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 19(2), 223-243.
Tenenbaum, G. (2003). An integrated approach to decision making. In J. L. Starkes, &; K. A. Ericsson (Eds.), Expert performance in sport: advances in research on sport expertise (pp.195). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Tillotson, J. (1970). Problem-solving. In R. T. Sweeney (Ed.), Selected readings in movement education (pp. 130-135). Reacing, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Tomporowski, P. D., Davis, C. L., Miller, P., &; Naglieri, J. (2008). Exercise and children's intelligence, cognition, and academic achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 111-131.
Trowbridge, L. W., &; Bybee, R. W. (1986). Becoming a secondary school science teacher. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.
Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Xiang, P., McBride, R. E., Guan, J., &; Solmon, M. A. (2003). Children's motivation in elementary physical education: an expectancy-value model of achievement choice. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 74(1), 25-35.
Zhu, X., Chen, A., Ennis, C.D., Sun, H., Hopple, C., Bonello, M., . . . Kim, S. (2009). Student situational interest, cognitive engagement, and learning achievement in physical education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34, 221-229. doi:10.1016/j. cedpsych.2009.05.002

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	探討科學探究文創工作坊提升高中職學生科學探究自我效能之差異與預測力
2.	改良式管顧練習個案教學法對學生批判性思考意向與學習興趣的影響
3.	探究式教學融入教育心理學課程之行動研究
4.	從腦與認知科學觀點探討體育課的價值與應用
5.	探討過程導向引導式探究學習模式對消弭大學生化學學習成效落差之影響
6.	課後益智動作遊戲對超重兒童在視覺選擇性注意力、健康體適能與學科表現的影響
7.	應用差異化教學策略實施國小跨年級自然教學之研究
8.	J. Dewey探究理論與有關教學主張解析
9.	球類活動對智能障礙學生視覺動作整合的影響
10.	國、高中手球代表隊選手在計劃行為理論驗證之研究
11.	學習興趣和自信對中年級學生數學成就成長率的影響
12.	身心障礙選手運動自我效能、身體自我概念、情緒智力與運動成就之相關研究
13.	嵌入式教學對集中式特教班低口語自閉症學生科學探究學習成效之參與式行動研究
14.	國小三年級社會領域教科書「探究任務」內涵之分析--以探究為本的觀點
15.	慢性有氧運動對提升輕度智能障礙學生認知與學習之成效

1.	議題式行動導向科學教學之設計與實踐
2.	探究式教學法對幼兒編程學習的影響
3.	創造性探究教學模組對高中社團學生科學探究能力、科學創造力與科學學習動機之影響
4.	國小學童學習三角形邊長關係之個案研究
5.	一位國小校長課程領導觀追尋之敘事探究
6.	建構高中學生探究能力之影響模式：從學習經驗、科學好奇心以及科學投入的因素進行探討
7.	以ARCS動機模式融入探究教學提升不同學業成就國中生科學知識、學習動機與探究能力
8.	體育課樂趣結構恆等性檢驗– 以Scanlan運動樂趣模式為基礎
9.	學習共同體與講述教學對國小高年級學童社會學習領域學習成效之比較研究
10.	合作式推理教學對學童論證能力之影響
11.	翻轉教室融入論證探究教學模式之發展與學生成效評估—以遺傳單元為例
12.	台灣國小數理教師「以學習者為中心」數理教學專業能力自我知覺之探討
13.	臺灣不同地區、不同性別的國小學童科學探究之比較
14.	科學探究歷程想像力測驗發展及其相關因素之研究
15.	模糊德菲法與層級分析法在國中資優生研究作品評量指標建構之應用

1.	創新教學之操作應用研究 : 以感官學習型態為例
2.	科學探究教學

無相關著作

1.	採用多元教學策略的非制式奈米課程對國中生情境興趣之促進
2.	學生課程學習興趣、學習倫理、自我概念、學習投入行為與學生知覺評量行為關係之研究
3.	國小學童英語科學習興趣模式建構與教學效果研究
4.	先前知識文章結構和多媒體呈現對文章學習的影響

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫