类比比较样例对物理综合题学习迁移效果的影响

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2022.05.08

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 研究通过三个实验,比较了普通样例和类比比较样例在学习物理综合题中的效果,并在此基础上,进一步分析两种不同类型的类比比较样例对物理综合题学习的迁移效果以及“提示”这一样例设计方法的促进作用。结果发现:(1)通过类比比较样例学习物理综合题的效果优于普通样例;(2)相比于单综概念类比比较样例,综合概念类比比较样例能更好地提高物理综合题学习的近迁移成绩,但未提高其远迁移成绩;(3)提示能明显促进类比比较样例在物理综合题学习中的作用,但不同提示类型的影响无显著差异。该结果表明:类比比较样例是学习物理综合题的有效样例形式,而其中综合概念类比比较样例效果最佳;开放式提示和支架式提示均能较好地促进类比比较样例的学习。

关键词: 物理综合题, 样例, 类比比较样例, 提示

Abstract: The current study compared the effects of analogical comparison of worked examples (ACME) and traditional worked examples on learning physical synthesis problems. Furthermore, this study examined the effects of different kinds of ACME, as well as the effects of ACWE designed with different "prompts" method on physical synthesis problems learning. The results were as follows:(1) The post-test scores of the ACWE groups were significantly higher than the scores of traditional worked examples group; (2) Students in the multiple concept ACWE group performed significantly better than students in single and multiple mixed concept ACWE group on near transfer results. However, there was no significant difference between these two groups on far transfer scores; (3) Students who have learned worked-examples designed with prompts performed better than those who haven't. However, there was no significant difference between the students who learned worked examples with scaffolding-prompts and open-prompts. The present study implied that, ACWE, especially multiple concepts ACME, is an effective way to learn physical synthesis problems. Both design methods of scaffolding-prompts and open-prompts can facilitate the learning effect of ACME.

Key words: physical synthesis problem, worked example, analogical comparison of worked examples, prompts

中图分类号:

G442

于雅迪, 杨立娜, 曲可佳. 类比比较样例对物理综合题学习迁移效果的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(5): 675-682.

YU Yadi, YANG Lina, QU Kejia. The Effect of Analogical Comparison of Worked Examples on Learning Physical Synthesis Problems[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2022, 38(5): 675-682.

参考文献

Badeau, R., White, D. R., Ibrahim, B., Ding, L., & Heckler, A. F. (2017).What works with worked examples:Extending self-explanation and analogical comparison to synthesis problems. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13, 020112.https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.02112
Bassok,M., & Holyoak, K. J. (1989). Interdomain transfer between isomorphic topics in algebra and physics. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning Memory and Cognition, 15(1), 153-166.
Berthold, K., Eysink, T. H. S., & Renkl, E. A. (2009). Assisting self-explanation prompts are more effective than open prompts when learning with multiple representations.Instructional Science, 37(4), 345-363.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-41.
Ding, L., Reay, N. W., Heckler, A., & Bao, L. (2010).Sustained effects of solving conceptually scaffolded synthesis problems. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1289(1), 133-136.
Ding, L., Reay, N., Lee, A., & Bao, L. (2011). Exploring the role of conceptual scaffolding in solving synthesis problems.Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 7(2), 020109.https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRewSTPER.7.020109
Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students' problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions.Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21-38.
Gentner,D. (1983). Structure-mapping:A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155-170.
Gentner, D., & Hoyos, C. (2017). Analogy and abstraction.Topics in Cognitive Science, 9(3), 672-693.
Gentner, D., Levine, S. C., Ping, R., Isaia, A., Dhillon, S., Bradley, C., & Honke, G. (2016). Rapid learning in a children's museum via analogical comparison. Cognitive Science, 40(1), 224-240.
Gentner, D., Loewenstein, J., & Thompson, L. (2003). Learning and transfer:A general role for analogical encoding.Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 393-408.
Hoyos, C., & Gentner, D. (2017). Generating explanations via analogical comparison.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(5), 1364-1374.
Ibrahim, B., Ding, L., Heckler, A. F., White, D. R., & Badeau, R. (2017).Students' conceptual performance on synthesis physics problems with varying mathematical complexity. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010133.https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010133
Jacobson, M. J., Goldwater, M., Markauskaite, L., Lai, P. K., Kapur, M., Roberts, G., & Hilton, C. (2020). Schema abstraction with productive failure and analogical comparison:Learning designs for far across domain transfer. Learning and Instruction, 65, 101222.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101222
Mason, L., & Tornatora, M. C. (2016). Analogical encoding with and without instructions for case comparison of scientific phenomena.Educational Psychology, 36(3), 391-412.
Rittle-Johnson, B., Star, J. R., & Durin, K. (2011).The power of comparison in learning and instruction:learning outcomes supported by different types of comparisons. Psychology of Learning & Motivation, 55, 199-225.
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions:A review of the intervention studies.Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181-221.
Sidney, P. G., Hattikudur, S., & Alibali, M. W. (2015). How do contrasting cases and self-explanation promote learning? Evidence from fraction division. Learning and Instruction, 40, 29-38.
Thompson,L., Gentner, D., & Loewenstein, J. (2000). Avoiding missed opportunities in managerial life:Analogical training more powerful than individual case training. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 60-75.
White, D. R., Badeau, R., Heckler, A. F., & Ding, L. (2015). Bottlenecks in solving synthesis problems. In P. V. Engelhardt, A. D. Churukian, & D. L. Jones (Eds.), Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference (pp.267-270).The American Association of Physics Teachers.
陈琦, 刘儒德. (2019). 当代教育心理学 (第3版). 北京:北京师范大学出版社.
杜雪娇, 张奇. (2016). 样例设计及呈现方式对学习代数运算规则的促进. 心理学报, 48(11), 1445-1454.
郭建鹏, 杨凌燕. (2015). 通过对比进行学习:多重样例变异性与先前知识的作用. 心理学报, 47(8), 1013-1027.
李静芳. (2004). 在积极的体验中提高学生的问题解决能力. 现代教学, 10, 59-60.
刘丹. (2019). 核心素养目标下高中物理力学规律教学研究(硕士学位论文). 安徽师范大学,芜湖.
宁宁, 喻平. (2010). 多重变异性数学样例对迁移影响的初步研究. 数学教育学报, 19(6), 50-52.
曲可佳, 徐彤, 王景玉. (2019). 学习域知识的熟悉程度和样例设计对学习浓度百分数应用题的影响. 心理与行为研究, 17(5), 596-603.
曲可佳, 张奇. (2019). 算术运算规则单双内容样例学习效果的比较. 数学教育学报, 28(2), 41-45.
宋东清. (2004). 样例、练习及加工方式影响小学数学解题策略迁移的实验研究 (硕士学位论文). 西南师范大学, 重庆.
邢强, 莫雷. (2003). 渐减提示法呈现样例对学习迁移的作用. 心理与行为研究, (4), 274-277.
徐碧波, 林崇德, 杨永宁. (2010). 样例顺序和解释方式对问题解决迁移的影响. 心理科学, 33(2),278-281.
杨翠蓉, 蒋曦, 韦洪涛, 周成军. (2017). 样例类型与解释方式对初中生数学概率问题解决的效果. 心理科学, 40(5), 1117-1122.
杨凌燕, 郭建鹏. (2015). 样例关键特征变异数量对学习解方程的影响. 心理学报, 38(6), 1359-1367.
张向葵, 张雪琴, 高琨, 孙树勇. (2000). 类比推理研究综述. 心理科学, 23(6), 725-728.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	吴瑕, 钟希苹, 姜云鹏. 不同搜索情境下老化对自上而下注意加工的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(1): 26-34.
[2]	曲可佳, 刘颖英. 先前知识和样例设计对学习分数乘法规则的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 539-545.
[3]	刘希平, 王贝妮, 唐卫海. 阈下情绪面孔的注视线索提示效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2019, 35(2): 129-137.
[4]	蔡晨, 曲可佳, 张华, 张奇. 正误样例组合学习的相似性效应和认知加工深度效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(3): 310-316.
[5]	费广洪, 王淑娟, 秦梅梅. 提示对3~11岁儿童解决类比推理问题的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(5): 578-585.
[6]	张奇, 郑伟, 万莹. “解释法”样例对小学生学习新运算规则的促进[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2014, 30(2): 153-159.
[7]	王海涛, 黄珊珊, 黄月胜, 孙孝游, 郑希付. PTSD青少年对威胁图片注意偏向的时程特点及习惯化倾向[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2012, 28(3): 255-262.
[8]	赵俊峰, 张晓慧. 语言提示对高中生英语阅读的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2007, 23(2): 106-110.
[9]	徐速. 小学生算术应用题上真实性思考及相关因素的研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2006, 22(2): 76-80.