:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:兩種線段圖表徵解題策略在學習成效上的比較
書刊名:教育心理學報
作者:黃一泓 引用關係謝進泰
作者(外文):Huang, Yi-hungShie, Jin-tai
出版日期:2016
卷期:47:4
頁次:頁581-601
主題關鍵詞:表徵認知負荷理論線段圖Cognitive load theoryLine diagramRepresentations
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:1
  • 共同引用共同引用:15
  • 點閱點閱:5
本研究探討國小六年級學童在「基準量與比較量」單元中,使用長度線段圖與成比例線段圖表徵的解題策略時,對學童所產生的認知負荷與學習成效的影響。研究者先以Schnotz 提出的文字與圖像理解的整合模式(integrated model of text and picture comprehension)為依據,分析兩種表徵解題策略的認知過程,並以認知負荷理論為基礎,探討兩者在認知負荷上的差異。研究方法採取真實驗設計,以三階段的實驗來驗證此分析的論點,並且得到下列結論:成比例線段圖表徵的解題策略在後測成績的表現顯著優於長度線段圖表徵的解題策略。然而,當學童學習「比與比值」單元後,兩種不同表徵解題策略在延宕測驗的表現並沒有顯著差異。最後,針對研究的結果,提出線段圖表徵解題策略在教學上的意義。
This research is to study how the two mathematics problem-solving strategies, length and proportional line-diagram representations, affect sixth grade students’ cognitive load and learning performance during they study the unit of "baseline and comparison". The researchers adopted Schnotz’s integrated model of text and picture comprehension to analyze the cognitive process of studying worked examples with line diagram, and compare the differences in term of cognitive load between the two methods based on cognitive load theory. Then, the researcher conducted a three phases of true-experimental design to show the effectiveness of our analysis. The experimental results show that the proportional line-diagram condition performed significantly better than the length line-diagram condition on post-tests, and after the students had learned the unit of "ratio", the difference between the length line-diagram condition and the proportional line-diagram condition on delay-test are not significant. Finally, the researcher will provide some implications for the educational authorities, teachers, and future researches.
期刊論文
1.蔣治邦(20011200)。中年級學童「部份-全體」運思的發展 : 文字題選圖與解題作業表現的差異。中華心理學刊,43(2),239-254。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Wong, A.、Leahy, W.、Marcus, N.、Sweller, J.(2012)。Cognitive load theory, the transient information effect and e-learning。Learning and Instruction,22(6),449-457。  new window
3.Sáenz-Ludlow, A.(1994)。Michael's fraction schemes。Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,25(1),50-85。  new window
4.Schnotz, W.、Bannert, M.(2003)。Construction and interference in learning from multiple representations。Learning and Instruction,13(2),141-156。  new window
5.McCloskey, A.、Norton, A.(2009)。Using Steffe's advanced fraction schemes。Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School,15(1),44-50。  new window
6.Cohen, S. A.、Stover, G.(1981)。Effects of teaching sixth grade students to modify format variables of math word problems。Reading Research Quarterly,16(2),175-199。  new window
7.Anderson, J. R.(1996)。ACT: A simple theory of complex cognition。American Psychologist,51(4),355-365。  new window
8.顏宗斌、劉祥通(20051200)。一位國小六年級學生在分數基準化問題的解題表現。科學教育研究與發展季刊,41,44-73。  延伸查詢new window
9.黃一泓、虞翔(20140600)。不同範例與解題組合對初學者在學習上的影響。教育心理學報,45(4),497-515。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.Moreno, R.、Mayer, R. E.(2000)。Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages。Journal of Educational Psychology,92(4),724-733。  new window
11.凃金堂(20110900)。運用「範例(worked-out example)」在國小數學問題解決的教學實驗研究。教育心理學報,43(1),25-49。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.Sweller, John(2010)。Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load。Educational Psychology Review,22(2),123-138。  new window
13.Sweller, John(1988)。Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning。Cognitive Science,12(2),257-285。  new window
會議論文
1.Koedinger, K. R.、Terao, A.(2002)。A cognitive task analysis of using pictures to support pre-algebraic reasoning。The twenty-fourth annual conference of the cognitive science society。Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum。542-547。  new window
研究報告
1.朱建正、吳昭容(1993)。國小兒童使用數學圖示之發展研究 (計畫編號:NSC-82-0111-S-002-004)。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.林施君(2013)。線段圖表徵對國小學生代數解題表現之研究(碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學。  延伸查詢new window
2.李玉珍(2013)。國小六年級學童以線段圖表徵基準量問題的解題研究(碩士論文)。國立屏東教育大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.(2012)。國民小學數學課本、備課指引。台南:南一。  延伸查詢new window
2.(2012)。國民小學數學第十二冊教師手冊。台南:翰林。  延伸查詢new window
3.(2012)。國小數學6下教師手冊。新北:康軒。  延伸查詢new window
4.劉祥通(2007)。分數與比例問題解題分析--從數學提問教學的觀點。臺北:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
5.Kintsch, Walter(1998)。Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition。Cambridge University Press。  new window
其他
1.周筱亭,黃敏晃(2002)。國小數學教材分析--比(含線段圖),http://www.naer.edu.tw/216/book12/index.htm。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.Kalyuga, S.(2005)。Prior knowledge principle in multimedia learning。The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning。Cambridge, NY:Cambridge University Press。  new window
2.Sweller, J.(2010)。Cognitive load theory: Recent theoretical advances。Cognitive Load Theory。Cambridge University Press。  new window
3.Schnotz, W.(2005)。An integrated model of multimedia learning。The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning。New York, NY:Cambridge University Press。  new window
4.Horz, H.、Schnotz, W.(2010)。Cognitive load in learning with multiple representations。Cognitive load theory。New York, NY:Cambridge University Press。  new window
5.陳竹村(1998)。對等關係與線段圖的教材處理。國民小學數學科新課程概說(高年級): 協助兒童認知發展的數學課程。新北:台灣省國民學校教師研習會。  延伸查詢new window
6.Lamon, S. J.(1994)。Ratio and proportion: Cognitive foundations in unitizing and norming。The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics。Albany, NY:State University of New York Press。  new window
7.Brünken, R.、Seufert, T.、Paas, P.(2010)。Measuring cognitive load。Cognitive Load Theory。New York, NY:Cambridge University Press。  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