頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 小學職前教師類比教學策略的運用研究=The Investigation of Instructional Strategies on Constructivism: Elementary Preservice Teachers' Use of Analogies |
---|---|
作 者 | 郭金美; | 書刊名 | 嘉義師院學報 |
卷 期 | 11 1997.11[民86.11] |
頁 次 | 頁259-272 |
分類號 | 522.4 |
關鍵詞 | 建構論; 先前概念; 類比; 教學策略; 小學職前教師; 師資訓練; Constructivism; Preconceptions; Analogy; Elementary preservice teachers; Teacher education; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本報告旨在研究小學職前教師如何應用類比(analogy)教學策略於科學 教室俾協助學習者了解科學概念,本文以詮釋性研究方法分析小學職前教師應用類比教學策 略的內涵及頻率。本研究對象為研究者所擔任小學師資培育課程之一∼小學自然科教材與教 法的班級,總計有師範學院三年級學生六班 (非數理教育系四班,數理教育系二班 ),共二 百一十人,所有研究對象自高中畢業後,進入師院均已修習至少十四學分的數理課程,小學 自然科學教材與教法屬必修課程,研究者安排每班分八組進行試教,單元內容由各組自行安 排設計,每組由一位上臺教三十分鐘。本研究由研究者歷經一學期觀察記錄,每節課也經錄 影,另在學期末以紙筆測驗及晤談方式調查四十八位試教者的意見,藉以了解小學職前教師 下列四個問題:(1) 你覺得類比教學策略在科學教室是否有效﹖ (2) 你本次試教是否用過類 比策略於教學﹖次數呢﹖請指出你在教束用過的實例。(3) 你覺得應用類比策類最大困難何 在﹖ (4) 應用類比策略困難原因何在﹖分析觀察記錄、教學設計及錄影帶的資料, 配合問 卷的交互比對,撿驗四種資料來源的一致性。結果顯示四十八個單元教學中,僅出現四個類 比策略的案例運用幫助學習者了解教學者所期望教學的新概念,其中三個案例的類比策略屬 較為簡單的運用:說明人需要喝水解釋植物需要水分;球碰牆壁說明光遇鏡面的反射;人不 喜歡酸和鹼性藥品小動物亦然。能適切的應用在教學上僅一個類比案例:讓學習者排成列以 力擠壓之情行描述對氣體分子加壓的擠壓模型,此適切之案例由數理教育系學生所演示,雖 然教學設計中並無書寫,但清楚地表達在問卷內。紙筆問卷顯示出受測者多數誤把舉例教學 認為類比教學,表答在問卷上應用類比策略的案例,顯示多數師院生無法區分兩者之間差異 ;受測者大部分對運用類比教學策略幫助學童建立新概念持肯定態度,但認為不知道如何應 用適宜的類比技巧於教學中。問卷調查亦指出困難原因多數在於不知道如何聯結學童舊知識 與新知識,受測者認為在科學教室中學習經驗極少接受此種教學。結果說明了類比策略的運 用,需如同 Treagust et al. (1992) 所指出需經事先完整的設計,由專家針對某些專門題 材提供妥切的類比教學模式,作為教學者之參考。雖然本研究只取樣研究者服務學校六個班 級,然此類比教學策略的應用觀察結果,一則作為改進資培育的教學參考,再則藉此研究結 果亦可協助師院生應用此一策略解決教學的問題,此一教學策略對小學科學教學之影響也值 得是未來研究的方向之一。 |
英文摘要 | The study was designed to examine how elementary preservice teachers used analogies during their teaching to enable students to comprehend scientific concepts. A interpretive research methodology was used to investigate the nature and frequency of analogy used by elementary preservice teachers. Six classes of 3rd year teachers' college students who will be the elementary teachers two years later were involved in the study. Eight small groups in each class were scheduled to teach science class for 30 minutes. One in each small group was invited to be responsible to teach. Observations, field notes and video taped were made and data were collected during 8 weeks in March, Apriland May in 1996. After 48 lessons of each 30 minutes' duration, each preservice was interviewed about his view of the use of analogies in teaching. The questions discussed in the interviews were:(1)What do you think analogies are good for teaching and learning science ﹖ (2)Do you use analogies in your teaching ﹖ Frequency ﹖ Explain the events you use analogies to teach. (3)What the difficulties about using analogies ﹖ (4)What the reasons you feel difficult ﹖ The interviews were intended to gain a deeper appreciation of what the preservice teachers thought about analogy use in helping students understanding complex concepts. In this study the elementary preservice teachers used few analogies, though both simple and enriched types were observed in their teaching. The results revealed that the elementary preservice teachers were knowledgeable about some of the beneficial and detrimental aspects of analogy use, and they considered that they used analogies and examples as regular part of their teaching, though it was observed that often they did not differentiate between examples and analogies. The research suggests that effective use of analogies in regular classroom science teaching needs to be based on a well-prepared teaching repertoire of analogies, using specific content in specific contexts, and for science teachers to have a view of learners being responwsible for constructing their own knowledge rather than being passive recipients of teacher-presented knowledge. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。