頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 問題引導式電腦合作學習在槓桿學習成就上之研究= |
---|---|
作者 | 鐘樹椽; 林菁; |
期刊 | 嘉義師院學報 |
出版日期 | 19941100 |
卷期 | 8 1994.11[民83.11] |
頁次 | 頁57-92 |
分類號 | 521.53 |
語文 | chi |
關鍵詞 | 引導式; 電腦合作學習; 槓桿; |
中文摘要 | 本研究之主旨在探討電腦應用引導式問題帶領學生在小組合作學習中的學習效果。本研究比較問題引導式電腦合作學習與電腦個別學習對學生學習成就影響之差異。此外,本研究亦探討問題引導式電腦合作學習對不同能力學生的學習成就的影響之差異。 本研究從臺灣南部的二所郊區國民小學四年級中,隨機選六個班級共251位學生為研究對象。然後隨機從這六班中選取三班為合作學習組,另三班為個別學習組。實驗前三天,學生接受電腦基本操作訓練及合作學習小組訓練,並且完成一份22題的學習前測驗。三天後學生依數學和自然科學成績分為高、中、低能力三組。接著,從合作學習的各能力小組中隨機選取高、中、低能力學生各一人組合成合成一合作學習小組。然後,學生完成一個電腦輔助教學平均約35分鐘的課程。三天後,每個學生再完成一份36題的學習保留成就測驗。 本研究結果發現:(一)在中難度學習成就上,問題引導式電腦合作學習顯著地優於電腦個別學習。(二)在高能力學生中,問題引導式電腦合作學習對中難度學習成就的影響顯著地優於電腦個別學習對中難度學習成就的影響。但在高能力學生高難度學習成就的影響上,電腦合作學習只略為高於電腦個別學習。(三)在低難度學習成就上,電腦合作學習與電腦個別學習沒有顯著差異。(四)對低能力學生而言,電腦合作學習與電腦個別學習的教學效果並無顯著的差異。 |
英文摘要 | The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of the leading-question method on natural science in a computer-based cooperative lesson. The subjects in this study were 251fourth-grade students from two urban elementary schools in the southern portion of Taiwan. Thress days before a computer-based lesson, the students received a computer basic skills training and a cooperation skills training. The students also completed a pencil-paper pretest which contained twenty two questions. These students were then divided into three ability groups, (high, medium, and low), based on their natural science and mathmatics scores. In the cooperative group, one students from each ability group were randomly chosen to compose a cooperative learning group. Then, all of the students completed a thirty-fiveminute computer-based lesson. Three days after the lesson, all of the students received a pencil-paper retention test, which included thirty six questions. Results revealed that there was a significant difference between the computer-cooperative learning and the computer-individual learning on the medium-difficulty achievement for overall students. High ability students who were in the cooperative learning significantly outperformed those who were in the individual learning on the medium-difficulty achievement, while there was a slightly significant difference between these two methods on the higher-difficulty achievement. In addition, the students who were in the cooperateive group did not outperformed those who were in the individual group on the lower-difficulty achievement. Furthermore, for the low ability students, there was no significant difference between the cooperative learning and the individual learning. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。