頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 批判思考融入國小寫作教學之探究=The Empirical Study of Integration of Critical Thinking into the Writing Instruction in the Elementary School |
---|---|
作 者 | 林國陽; 項必蒂; 陳滿銘; | 書刊名 | 國立臺北教育大學學報. 教育類 |
卷 期 | 18:2 民94.09 |
頁 次 | 頁197-234 |
分類號 | 523.38181 |
關鍵詞 | 批判思考; 寫作教學; 作文評定量表; 寫作邏輯量表; Critical thinking; Writing instruction; Writing ability scale; Writing logic scale; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本研究在探究將批判思考融入寫作教學以提升寫作能力與批判思考之教學效果。在探討實驗效果方面,採用前後測準實驗設計,以北市民權國小六年級,隨機抽取兩班各29 名學生,實驗組接受每週一次40 或80 分鐘,計14 次的批判思考寫作教學;控制組接受一般寫作教學。 實驗結果顯示,實驗組顯著優於控制組的有:「作文評定量表」的「措辭」與「結構」,「寫作邏輯量表」的得分,「康乃爾批判思考測驗(X 級)」的「歸納」、「確認隱含假設」與「總分」。 同時,從實驗組學生的寫作歷程分析,發現:在寫作的計畫階段,學生較感困難;轉譯階段,學生注意文章的變化;檢視階段,學生對作品的評估與修正比較不足。在批判思考教學過程方面,學生間雖偶有紛爭,但藉由師生討論、小組討論與分組報告,學生嘗試轉移觀點,試從他人的立場來看待事情。 |
英文摘要 | The purposes of this study were to design a program of “Integration of Critical Thinking into the Writing Instruction” (ICTWI) which could enhance the ability of writing and critical thinking of students and to probe into the effects of ICTWI on the students. Procedures This study adopts the quasi-experimental design that compares the outcomes of the control and treatment groups before and after the experiment. Final sample consists of two classes which were randomly drawn from the Taipei Municipal Min-Chuan Elementary School. Each class has 29 students. One class was the experimental group, in which students received the ICTWI for 14 weeks (40 or 80 minutes each week). The other was the control group, in which students received the general composition instruction. The outcomes for comparison include the “Writing Ability Scale” (WAS), the “Writing Logic Scale” (WLS), and the “Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level X” (CCT-X), which were collected before and after the experiment for both experimental and control groups. Finding and Conclusions The experimental group’s scores were significantly higher than the control group’s in following aspects: WAS’s “rhetoric” and “construct”, WLS’ “holistic scores”, and CCT-X’s “induction”, “assumptions”, and “holistic scores”. Besides, qualitative analysis from the writing process yielded the following findings: With respect to writing, most students find the planning stage most difficult. During the translating stage, the students could pay attention to the variety of the content. During the revising stage, the students’ performance on evaluation and correction of their essays are inadequate. As to the critical thinking aspect, albeit disagreements arose among different teams in the experimental class, the students always tried to see things from others’ perspective through discussions with their teacher, discussions within their teams, and during the preparation of team reports. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。