两种教学方法对不同认知风格11岁儿童数学学习效果的影响

心理发展与教育 ›› 2002, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (2): 55-59.

两种教学方法对不同认知风格11岁儿童数学学习效果的影响

李力红¹, 常逢锦¹, 刘便凤²

1. 东北师范大学教育科学学院, 长春130024;
2. 山西阳泉市盂县实验小学045100

出版日期:2002-04-15 发布日期:2002-04-15
作者简介:李力红(1963- ),女,东北师范大学心理系副教授.

The Influence of Primary Schoolers’ Field Independent Style and field Dependent Style on the Effects of Trial-teaching and Normal-teaching

LI Li-hong¹, CHANG Fong-jin¹

Department of Psychology Normal University, Changchun 130024

Online:2002-04-15 Published:2002-04-15

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 比较运用尝试教学法教学和常规教学法教学对小学五年级独立型和场依存型的学生在解决三种难度的百分数应用题中的效果.结果发现:(1)从整体上看,在高难度题的测试中,以尝试教学法教学的成绩明显高于以常规教学法教学的成绩,两者的差异达到显著水平.对场依存的学生,在低难度题测试时,两种教学方法取得的成绩无显著差异;在中难度题测试时,以常规教学法教学的成绩高于以尝试教学法教学的成绩,差异达到显著水平;在高难度题测试时,以尝试教学法教学的成绩高于以常规教学法教学的成绩,两者的差异达到显著水平.对场独立的学生在低难度题测试时,两种教学方法取得的成绩无显著差异;在中、高难度题测试时,以尝试教学法教学的成绩均高于以常规教学法教学的成绩,差异达到显著水平.(2)从整体来看,在题为高难度时男生的成绩高于女生,差异达到显著水平,而在低、中难度时无显著的性别差异.场依存者在题为低难度时女生的成绩高于男生差异达到显著水平,而中、高难度时无显著的性别差异.场独立者在高难度时男生的成绩高于女生,差异达到显著水平.

关键词: 认知风格, 尝试教学法, 常规教学法

Abstract: This study compared the scores of students of field independent style and field dependent style who werefrom the fifth grade of primary school were effected by trial-teaching and normal-teaching in the solution of per centapplied-problem of three kinds of difficulty level.Multiple analysis of variance(MANOVA) indicated:(1) The maineffect of teaching method was significant;On the whole,the scores in trial-teaching were much higher than those ofnormal-teaching in the highest level tests.To the students of field dependent style,the scores difference between thetwo teaching method was nonsignificant in the lowest level tests;The scores in normal-teaching were much higherthan those of trial-teaching in the middle level tests,so the scores difference between the two teaching method teaching was significant;in the highest level tests,the scores in trial-teaching were much higher than those of normal-teaching,the scores difference between the two teaching method was significant.To the students of field dependentstyle,the scores between the two teaching method were nonsignificant in the lowest level tests;the scores in trialteaching were much higher than those of normal-teaching in the imddle and the highest level tests,so the scores difference between the two teaching method was significant.(2) On the whole,the boy's scores were much higherthan the girls'scores,so sex difference of scores was significant;sex difference of scores was nonsignificant in themiddle and the highest level tests.To the students of field dependent style,theboys'scores were much higher thanthe girls'scores in the highest level tests,so sex differences of scores was significant.(3) The main effect of cognitive styles was nonsignificant.

Key words: field dependent, field independent, cognitive styles, trial-teaching, normal-teaching

中图分类号:

G441

李力红, 常逢锦, 刘便凤. 两种教学方法对不同认知风格11岁儿童数学学习效果的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2002, 18(2): 55-59.

LI Li-hong, CHANG Fong-jin. The Influence of Primary Schoolers’ Field Independent Style and field Dependent Style on the Effects of Trial-teaching and Normal-teaching[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2002, 18(2): 55-59.

参考文献

[1] Witkin H A.,Goodenough D K.:CognifiveStyles:Essencex and Origins,1981.56-62.
[2] Richard J.Riding,On the Nature of Cognitive Style:Educational Psychology.1997,29-49.
[3] Sternberg R J.,Grigorenko E L.Are cognitive Style still in style? American Psychologist,1997,Vol 52,700-712.
[4] Ren Jianjun.Multistage magnitude estimate and gamma response law of the human perception during prolonged spatial rotation,2nd APA-MA Conference,Aug 23-25,1992,P34.
[5] 张必隐.场依存性对于程序教学与常规教学的效果的影响谢斯骏张厚粲.《认知方式-人格维度的实验研究》,北京师范大学出版社,1988年版,48-53.
[6] 张必隐.程序模式与认知方式之间的关系,心理科学通迅,1983,1,21-25.
[7] 邱学华.尝试教学课堂艺术,教育科学出版社,2000年版,1-20.
[8] 张厚粲等.认知方式的个体发展与性别,谢斯骏,张厚粲.《认知方式-人格维度的实验研究》,北京师范大学出版社,1988年版,83-87.
[9] 杨治良.认知风格的研究新近展,心理科学,2001,5,326-332.

相关文章 9

[1]	胡卫平, 赵晓媚, 贾培媛, 陈英和. 学思维网络活动对小学生创造性的影响:认知风格的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2017, 33(3): 257-264.
[2]	马军朋, 叶卓尔, 林依, 高宏巍, 黄平, 林慧妍, 许欢, 杨楠, 金花. 认知风格影响归类过程中的神经活动-来自fMRI研究的证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2016, 32(2): 139-148.
[3]	程丽芳, 胡卫平, 贾小娟. 认知抑制对艺术创造力的影响:认知风格的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(3): 287-295.
[4]	陈英和, 郝嘉佳. 冲动-思考型儿童在拼图游戏中的问题解决及元认知差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2011, 27(3): 241-246.
[5]	韩秀, 裴燕红. 大学生智力与认知风格对内隐序列学习的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(1): 48-53.
[6]	康诚, 周爱保. 信息呈现方式与学习者的个性特征对多媒体环境下学习效果的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2009, 25(1): 83-91.
[7]	王静, 陈英和. 合作学习小组的认知风格对其问题解决的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2008, 24(2): 102-107.
[8]	吴国来, 沃建中, 白学军, 沈德立. 不同认知风格11岁儿童内隐序列学习的差异[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2006, 22(1): 39-42.
[9]	杨卫星, 王学臣, 张梅玲. 不同认知风格学生的问题共性意识水平对解题迁移的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2000, 16(2): 17-21,27.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed