研究生: |
郝曉青 Tina Hao |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
「探究-發現」教學法之個案研究--以商高定理為例 |
指導教授: |
林福來
Lin, Fou-Lai |
學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
系所名稱: |
數學系 Department of Mathematics |
論文出版年: | 2005 |
畢業學年度: | 93 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 137 |
中文關鍵詞: | 「探究-發現」教學法 、商高定理 、演繹推理 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:178 下載:40 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究的主要目的是探討在台灣現行的教育環境下,在數學教室中施行「探究-發現」教學法的可行性,使用不同的教學法對一位資深數學教師的衝擊與影響以及瞭解學生在「探究-發現」教學法的環境下的學習過程與表現。又因為以商高定理的教學為例,所以本研究也針對學生對學習數學定理的發現與產生作細部的描述與分析。
根據研究者的教學心得,教學的錄影資料與文字稿以及個別訪談資料,本研究得到的主要結果如下:
1. 學生在「探究-發現」教學法下的學習表現
(i) 經由本教學法學習「商高定理」的學生能對圖形作靈活的切割,組合,平移,旋轉以說明解釋正方形的面積。
(ii) 經由本教學法學習「商高定理」發現1.部分學生已經能應用如
若P Q與若非Q 非P的等價觀念。2.實驗對象中大約有2/3的學生能夠分辨若P Q中P與Q的因果關係。
(iii) 經由本教學法學習「商高定理」的學生能夠1.以直觀的視覺推理
和等量公理對圖形作演繹式的推理與說明。2.能夠從多元表徵達成以符號作演繹推理。
2. 「探究-發現」教學法對教師的衝擊與影響
(1)發現學生學習能力以及創造力的潛力深厚。(2)讓研究者從不同的角度反省平日的教學死角,增進教學技能。
3. 施行「探究-發現」教學法的優、缺點以及在現行數學教育環境下實行「探究-發現」教學法的可行性:
就整體而言,在「商高定理」的單元教學上,比起傳統講述式的教學法,「探究-發現」教學法的施行是可行的。建議往後的研究可以針對不同單元作教學實驗,以瞭解「探究-發現」教學法的適用單元。
關鍵字:「探究-發現」教學法,商高定理,演繹推理
The Case Study of “Inquiry and Discovery” Teaching Method
-on Pythagorean Theorem
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to understand: under the circumstances of the educational environment in Taiwan, if it is feasible to utilize a different teaching method-“Inquiry and Discovery” teaching method other than the traditional way of teaching, how it affects a senior teacher and what the impact is of trying a new teaching method on her ordinary daily teaching, and observe the students’ learning process and performance during the teaching. And because the Pythagorean Theorem is the main theme of the teaching context, students’ learning concerning generating conjecture, justification of the conjecture and reasoning and proving the result is also analyzed.
The results of this study show that:
1. Students’ performance under the teaching method of “Inquiry and Discovery”
(i) Students are able to manipulate the geometric figures through cutting, combining, translating and rotating in order to explain the area of different squares.
(ii) Some of the students are able to apply the equivalence concept of if P then Q and if ~Q then ~P. And about 2/3 of the class can differentiate the relationship between P and Q among the proposition of if P then Q.
(iii) Students are able to do the explanation and reasoning via multi-representation towards deductive reasoning with symbols.
Study shows that teaching with “Inquiry and Discovery” teaching method is feasible in mathematics classroom in Taiwan.
中文部分
杜威(1973?)明日之學校。朱經農, 潘梓年譯(62?)。 商務印書館發行。
高廣孚(1976)。杜威的教育思想。水牛圖書出版事業有限公司。台北市。
麥菁(1991)。發現學習與直授學習的比較--Mayer (1975)理論的再驗證。國立臺灣師範大學家政教育學系碩士論文。
戴寶蓮(1991)。讓教育的根更紮實-談國小低年級數學科教學。教與學。23,20-24
九年一貫課程暫綱(2003)。來源網站(http://www.math.ntnu.edu.tw//~cyc/~private/ mathedu/me9/ index.htm.)
王文科(1995)。教育研究法(第四版)。台北,五南。
杜佳真(1997)。建構論在數學教學上的應用。科學教育研究與發展。7期,14-23。
陳雅惠(1998)。從邏輯推理能力探討學生犯錯的成因— 以對數解題錯誤為例。國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文。
謝志成(2001)。網路科技融入國中二年級數學教學之行動研究。國立高雄師範大學數學系教學碩士班碩士論文。
江蕙如(2002)。建構主義在歷史教學上的理論與實踐-以國二中國現代史教學為例。國立台灣師範大學歷史學系在職進修碩士班。
林文惠(2002)。主題式教學中的合作行為。國立臺灣師範大學物理學系在職進修碩士班。
李偵生(2002)。發展數學科GSP教學模組之行動研究-以商高定理為例。國立高雄師範大學教學碩士論文。
郭香妙(2002)。國中數學教學改進之行動研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所在職進修專班數理教學碩士班碩士論文。
李宜芬(2002)。國三學生突破因附圖造成之論證障礙的學習歷程之研究。國立台灣師範大學數學系碩士班碩士論文。
陳麗蓉(2002)。發展數學科教學模組之個案研究-以畢氏定理、函數為例。國立高雄師範大學教學碩士論文。
吳勇龍(2003)。「合作學習」教學模式的探討。國立台灣師範大學物理學系在職進修碩士班論文。
林寶山(2003)。實用教學原理。心理出版社股份有限公司。台北市。
許淑清(2003)。融入數學史教學對國二學生數學學習成效影響之研究-以「商
高定理」單元為例。國立高雄師範大學數學系碩士論文。
林福來(2004)。青少年數學論證”學習與教學”的理論之研究。行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫:總計畫(1/4)計畫編號:NSC 92-2521-S -003-009-。92年08月01日至 93年10月31日
江岳霖(2004)。引導發現式電腦輔助學習於數位電路原理教學之研究。國立臺灣師範大學資訊教育學系在職進修碩士班。
鄧國基(2004)。小組合作學習形式對學生學習行為的影響。國立臺灣師範大學 物理學系在職進修碩士班。台北市。
西文部分
Balacheff, N.(1990). A study of students’ proving processes at junior high
school level. In Wirszup, I. & Streit, R.(Eds.), Developments in school mathematics education around the world, 284-297. Chicago: NCTM.
Balacheff, N.(2002). The researcher epistemology; a deadlock for educational research on proof. In F.L.Lin(Ed.), Proceedings of the 2002 International Conference on Mathematics: Understanding proving and proving to understand(pp.23-44). Taipei: Taiwan Normal University.
Bell, A. W., Costello, J. Kuchemann, D.(1983). A Review of Research in Mathematical Education. Part A. Research on Learning and Teaching. England, NFER-Nelson Publishing Company Ltd.
Borasi R.(1989). Learning Mathematics Through Inquiry. Portsmoutj, NH:Heinemann, c1992.
Borasi R.(1997). What does it really mean to teach math through inquiry? Canadian Education.
Boero, P(1999). Argumentation and mathematical proof: A complex, productive, unavoidable relationship in mathematics and mathematics education. September/October Newsletter.
Bruner, Jerome S.(1068). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Harvard University Press.
Chazan, D.(1993). High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Education studies in Mathematics, 24(4), 359-387.
Duval, R.(1991). Structure du raisonment deductif et apprentissage de la demonstration. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 233-261.
Duval, R.(1995). Geometrical pictures: Kinds of representation and specific processings. In R. Suttherland & J. Mason(Eds.), Exploiting mental imagery with computers in mathematics education, 142-157. Berlin: Springer.
Duval, R.(1998). Geometry from a cognitive point a view. In C.Mammana & V.Villani(Eds.), perspectives on the teaching of geometry for 21st century, 37-52. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Duval, R.(2002). Proof understanding in mathematics: what ways for students? Proceeding of 2002 International Conference on Mathematics: Understanding Proving and Proving to understand. pp.61-77.(,引自國科會青少年論證能力成果發表,2002)
Duval, R.(2005). Personal Communication.
Fischbein, E.(1993). The theory of figural concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 139-162.
FitzPatrick, Sarah B.(2001). Students’ Experiences of the Implementation of an
Interactive Learning System in Their Eighth Grade Mathematics Classes: An exploratory Study. Annual Proceedings of Selected Research and Development (and)Practice Papers Presented at the National convention of the Association for Educational Communications and technology (24th, Atlanta, GA, November 8-12, 2001). Volumes 1-2; see IR 021 504
Harel, G(2005). Personal Communication.
Heinz, A(2004). The proving process in mathematics classroom-method and results of a video study-. Psychology of Mathematics Education 28.
Heinz, A(2005). Personal Communication.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T.(1999). Learning together and alone.(5th ed.). Boston, Mass.: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
Lesley Lee(2001). An Inquiry Based Mathematics Classroom. Voyage in Mathematics and Science.
NCMEW(1993). National Curriculum for Mathematics in England and Wales. (derived from http://www.math.ntnu.edu.tw//~cyc/~private/mathedu/me9/ index.htm.)
NCTM(2000). National Council of Teacher of Mathematics(1989). Revised from The Standards 2000 project. (derived from http://www.math.ntnu.edu.tw//~cyc/
~private/mathedu/me9/ index.htm.)
Horiguchi, Tomoya; Hirashima, Tsukasa(2001). A Framework for Creating Counterexamples in Discovery Learning Environment. ED-MEDIA 2001 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications.
Piaget, J. (1976). The grasp of consciousness: Action and Concept in the Young Child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University press.
Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15 (4), 485-529.
Panitz Theodore(1999). Collaborative versus Cooperation Learning: A Comparison of The Two Concepts Which Will Help us Understanding Nature of Interactive Learning. Eric. Cs 217 306
Polya, G. (1962). Mathematical Discovery on Understanding, Learning, and Teaching Problem Solving. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Susan Steward & Tony Pell(2004). Changing Students’ Attitudes to Mathematics Through Small-Group Collaboration. Psychological Mathematics Education. 28
Susie Groves & Brian Doig(2004). Progressive Discourse in Mathematics Classes-The Tasks of The Teacher. Psychological Mathematics Education. 28
Tracy Hamler Carrick, Kate Giglio, and Seth Kahn(2001). An Inquiry into Inquiry. ( http://wrt.syr.edu/pub/handbook/inquiry.html)
Villiers, M.(2005). Personal Communication.