查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- A Study on Prospective Teachers' Knowledge in the Domain of Multiplicative Structure
- Construction of Teacher Knowledge: Learning to Teach EFL at the Elementary Level
- 教師對兒童的長度知識與學習認知之探討
- 從教學研究實作中學習教學--以數學科職前教師為例
- 從伽利略的思維實驗探討職前教師之科學思考及其教學啟發
- 數學教學轉型與關鍵事件
- 教師知識之概念分析
- 職前及在職國民小學教師的天氣概念及其相關迷思概念之探究
- 職前教師的參訓投入程度、批判思考意向與改善批判思考教學之關係
- 臺北市立體育學院國小職前教師教師效能研究
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | A Study on Prospective Teachers' Knowledge in the Domain of Multiplicative Structure=職前教師乘法結構知識之研究 |
---|---|
作 者 | 張英傑; | 書刊名 | 國立臺北師範學院學報. 數理科技教育類 |
卷 期 | 15 2002.09[民91.09] |
頁 次 | 頁1-33+35 |
分類號 | 522.4 |
關鍵詞 | 職前教師; 教師知識; 乘法結構; Prospective teacher; Teachers' knwoledge; Multiplicative structure; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 本研究乃在建立一個評鑑模式,用以評量職前教師的乘法結構知識及其教學知識。某一師範學院全體417位大四學生於畢業前,接受有關乘法結構知識的紙筆測驗,然後由該師範學院八個系中選出30位接受半結構之訪談。評量題目取材自以前相關研究問題加以修正,筆試之信度為α = .81。 研究顯示這些準教師尚未培育好去教數學,其有關乘法結構之教學知識的理解程度只有35%正確,而有乘法結構知識已達80%正確,但並非理想。他們缺乏診斷教學和補救教學知識,也不能利用各種合適的教學方式;他們既沒有意願去證明解題所需之公式,甚至使用不正確的數學知識。準教師解題解釋方式,大多數是程序性,而非教學啟示之瞭解。 比較八個系的表現,無論乘法結構知識或其教學知識,都有顯著差異。整體而言,主修數理教育者表現最好,主修初等教育、語文教育和社會教育者表現優於主修特殊教育、體育教育、藝術教育和音樂教育者。 |
英文摘要 | The purpose of this study is to set up an evaluation model in order to evaluate the prospective teachers' mathematical and pedagogical content knowledge in the domain of multiplicative structures. The study was conducted in two steps. Initially, 417 seniors at one teachers' college were given the written test. After completing the written test, thirty seniors, selected from eight departments in three different major groups, were interviewed. The reliability of the written test was determined as .81 (coefficient Alpha). These mathematics knowledge profiles indicated that the prospective teachers were not ready for teaching. Their level of pedagogical understanding was unacceptably low (35% correct). The mean score (80% correct) on the test of mathematical content knowledge was better but not completely satisfactory. The findings showed that the prospective teachers were lacking in diagnostic teaching and remediation teaching, suggesting they were not able to represent appropriately their teaching methods using a wide variety of models. They were not willing to prove their formula, and applied incorrect mathematical knowledge to solve problems. Their explanations relied on procedural approaches, rather than a pedagogically oriented understanding. There were significant differences between the different major groups in the mathematical content knowledge (F = 46.03, df = (2, 409)) and the pedagogical content knowledge (F: 21.74, df = (2, 409)). As a whole, the mathematics majors performed the best among all of the three groups. The education majors did better than the art majors on all the tasks except for remediation teaching. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。