一個元素管理良好的教材運用於學生自學與教師教學之研究-以基本尺規作圖為例

Abstract

在以往的研究中，一個元素管理良好的教材比一般教材更有教學成效，本研究在此背景下，進一步採取「學生自學」、「教師教學」兩種不同教學法，以及在「先學生自學再教師教學」和「先教師教學再學生自學」兩種不同上課順序下，探討對於學生的學習成效以及學習方式滿意度的影響。本研究採取準實驗研究法，對新竹市某國中四個常態班共100名學生進行實驗；實驗教材內容是以箏形為教學脈絡的四個基本尺規作圖，呈現方式則是翻頁為主的結構式投影片。實驗後，針對實驗組、對照組以及兩組中的高低成就組，透過二因子變異數分析進行資料檢定，以不同教學法或不同學習順序和不同成就為自變項，兩次後測、延後測以及對於學習模式滿意度量表為依變項，前測當共變項，分析後得到的研究結果為：(1)不同的學習方式在第一次後測的總分、先備知識、基本作圖和應用作圖四個面向的表現結果皆無顯著性差異；而不同成就在第一次後測的總分、先備知識、基本作圖和應用作圖四個面向的表現結果皆有顯著性差異。(2)不同的學習順序在第二次後測的總分、先備知識、基本作圖三個面向的表現結果皆無顯著性差異，在應用作圖面向上，對照組顯著性高於實驗組；而不同成就在第二次後測的總分和應用作圖兩個面向的表現結果有顯著性差異，在先備知識和基本作圖兩個面向的表現結果無顯著性差異。(3)不同的學習順序在延後測的總分、先備知識、基本作圖和應用作圖四個面向的表現結果皆無顯著性差異；而不同成就在延後測的總分和應用作圖兩個面向的表現結果有顯著性差異，在先備知識和基本作圖兩個面向的表現結果無顯著性差異。(4)在不同學習方式的滿意度表現上，學生自學方式顯著性高於教師教學方式。而在兩種不同學習順序的滿意度表現是無顯著性差異；對不同成就來說，不同學習方式和不同學習順序的滿意度皆是無顯著性差異。

In previous studies, a well managed element instruction is more effective than a general one.Further, in this study, two different instruction modes, which only vary in sequence, that is, " self-learning -- teaching" and " teaching -- self-learning”, were applied to two groups to investigate the students’ performance and satisfaction.This study was carried out with a quasi-experimental design in a junior high school in Hsinchu City. The participants, 100 junior-high-school students enrolled in four classes, received the experimental instruction of four basic ruler and compass constructions within the teaching context of kite shapes. The instruction was mainly based on well element-managed flipping PowerPoint slides.After the experiment, two-way ANOVA was conducted to analyze the dependent variables of the experimental / control groups and the high / low achievers of the both groups. The independent variables were “learning mode” (self-learning vs teaching), “learning sequence” (self-learning – teaching vs teaching – self-learning) or “achievement” (high achievers vs low achievers ). The dependent variables were the scores of two post-test and one delayed post-test as well as learning satisfaction. The covariate is the pre-test score. The results of this study are summarized as follows: (1) There are no significant effectiveness contributed by the independent variable of “learning mode” in scores, prior knowledge, basic construction and application construction in the first post-test. There are significant effectiveness contributed by the independent variable of “achievement” in scores, prior knowledge, basic construction and application construction in the first post-test. (2) There are no significant effectiveness contributed by the independent variable of “learning sequence” in scores, prior knowledge and basic construction in the second post-test. But the effectiveness of the control group is significantly higher than the experimental group in application construction. There are significant effectiveness contributed by the independent variable of “achievement” in scores and application construction in the second post-test, but no significant effectiveness in prior knowledge and basic construction. (3) There are no significant effectiveness contributed by the independent variable of “learning sequence” in scores, prior knowledge, basic construction and application construction in the delayed post-test. There are significant effectiveness contributed by the independent variable of “achievement” in scores and application construction in the delayed post-test, but no significant effectiveness found in prior knowledge and basic construction. (4) In the independent variable of “learning mode”, the satisfaction toward “self-learning” is significantly higher than that toward “teaching”. There is no significant difference in satisfaction in the independent variable of “learning sequence”. Among the high achievers and the low achievers, there are no significant effectivenesses found in the satisfaction in neither the independent variable of “learning mode” nor the independent variable of “learning sequence”.