تأثیر تدریس با استفاده از سطح‌بندی و پیگیری تداوم یادگیری دانش‌آموزان پایه نهم بر یادگیری درس ریاضی
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسی
سیده نرجس دریابگی
1
,
نرگس یافتیان
2
1 - کارشناس ارشد آموزش ریاضی دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجائی، تهران، ایران.
2 - استادیار گروه ریاضی دانشگاه تربیت دبیر شهید رجایی، تهران، ایران.
کلید واژه: سطح‌بندی, آموزش ریاضی, پیگیری تداوم یادگیری, پایه نهم,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف اصلی پژوهش حاضر، بررسی تأثیر پیگیری تداوم یادگیری درس ریاضی دانش‌آموزان در پیشرفت یادگیری آنها با استفاده از سطح‌بندی است. روش پژوهش شبه آزمایشی با طرح پیش‌آزمون و پس‌آزمون با گواه است. جامعه آماری پژوهش شامل همۀ دانش‌آموزان دختر پایه نهم منطقه 9 شهر تهران است که چهار کلاس شامل 114نفر به روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی خوشه‌ای تک‌مرحله‌ای انتخاب شده‌اند و به‌طور تصادفی ساده، دو کلاس به گروه آزمایش و دو کلاس به گروه گواه تخصیص داده شد. ابزار اندازه‌گیری شامل یک آزمون مقدماتی برای سطح‌بندی اولیه و سه آزمون اصلی است. روایی صوری و محتوایی آزمون‌ها توسط صاحب‌نظران و دبیران باتجربه تأیید گردید و برای پایایی از آزمون کودر-ریچاردسون استفاده شد. پس از برگزاری آزمون مقدماتی، دانش‌آموزان به دو گروه سطح اول و دوم تقسیم شدند. پس از سه هفته آموزش، آزمونی از آنها به‌عمل آمد و مجدداً تعیین سطح شدند. سه آزمون به این صورت برگزار شد و پس از هر آزمون، سطح دانش‌آموزان تعیین گردید. جابجایی در این سطوح در تمام مراحل اجرای پژوهش با توجه به میزان تلاش آنها برایشان امکان‌پذیر بود. نتایج تحلیل واریانس در اندازه‌گیری مکرر نشان می‌دهد دانش‌آموزانی که به این روش آموزش داده شدند به‌طور نسبی پیشرفت داشته‌اند. به‌کارگیری این روش موجب شد نقاط ضعف و قوت و مشکلات پایه‌ای دانش‌آموزان در درک مفاهیم ریاضی مشخص شود و معلم بتواند نحوه آموزش خود را با نیازهای آنان تطبیق دهد. استفاده از این روش به معلمان در کلیه پایه‌های تحصیلی کمک می‌نماید تا سطح یادگیری دانش‌آموزان را ارتقاء دهند.
The main goal of the research is the study of effects of method of pursuing the continuity of learning the mathematics course of students in improvement the learning level of students by making use of tracking. The population of this research consists of students of the ninth grade of girls’ schools of Ninth District of Education Administration in Tehran. In this study, 114 students of ninth grade were selected by two different high schools, based on one-phase cluster sampling method. The tools of measurement consist of repeated tests at three-week intervals. After accomplishing of the first examination, the students were divided between two groups: the first level group and the second level group. The validity and reliability of the tests were approved by some specialists and experienced mathematics teachers, who were teaching in ninth grade. The reliability coefficient for examinations of Kuder-Richardson was acquired 91% that shows suitable position for reliability examination. The result of analyses in variance of repeated measurements by making use of SPSS20 software shows that the students who were taught by this method comparatively improved their learning. By pursuing students’ learning of mathematics, the basic problem of them in understanding mathematics subjects is concisely specified and the teacher can accord her/his own method of teaching to students’ learning needs. The findings of this research show that pursuing students’ learning of mathematics by using placement test method, increase their marks by improving their understanding of mathematics.
Akbari, M., Fathabadi, J., Almasi, I., Mohammadzadeh, J. (2019). Relationship between Study Approaches with Academic Achievement and Student`s Conception of Learning, Iran. Research in Curriculum Planning, 16(34), 75-84 (in Persian).
Bakhshalizādeh, S., broojerdiān, N. (2017). Identifying the primary school fourth grade students’ common misconceptions in content area of geometry and measurement: A comparison of their performance with the mean performance at international level. Educational Innovations, 16(4), 101-126 89 (in Persian).
Braun, B. (2014). Persistent Learning, Critical Teaching: Intelligence Beliefs and Active Learning in Mathematics Courses. Notices of the AMS, 61(1), 72-74.
Bronz, M. (2009). 9 Methods for promoting children's education. Education Leadership, 4,14-21 (in Persian).
Cantner, U., Hinzmann, S., & Wolf, T. (2017). The Coevolution of Innovative Ties, Proximity, and Competencies: Toward a Dynamic Approach to Innovation Cooperation. In Knowledge and Networks (pp. 337-372). Springer International Publishing.
Cattaneo, A., Oggenfuss, C., &Wolter, S. C. (2016). The more, the better? The impact of instructional time on student performance Education economics, 25(5), 433-445.
Cook, S. A., Hartman, J., Pierce, P. B., &Seaders, N. S. (2017). To Each Their Own: Students Asking Questions Through Individualized Projects. PRIMUS, 27(2), 235-257.
Domina, T., Hanselman, P., Hwang, N., &McEachin, A. (2016). Detracking and Tracking Up Mathematics Course Placements in California Middle Schools, 2003–2013. American Educational Research Journal, 53(4), 1229-1266.
Duflo, E., Dupas, P., &Kremera, M. (2011). Peer effects, teacher incentives, and the impact of tracking: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in Kenya. The American Economic Review, 101(5), 1739-1774.
Falkenstein, R. N. (2007). Student experiences of participation in tracked classes throughout high school: The ethic of justice, school leadership, and curriculum design (Doctoral dissertation, Bowling Green State University).
Farbman, D., & Kaplan, C. (2005). Time for a Change: The Promise of Extended-Time Schools for Promoting Student Achievement. Research Report. Massachusetts 2020.
Fong, T., Perry, R., Reade, F., Klarin, B., &Jaquet, K. (2016). Many Pathways to Student Success in Mathematics. Middle and high school math course sequences and placement decisions in the Math in Common districts. SanFrancisco, CA: WestEd.
Gamoran, A. (2004). Classroom organization and instructional quality. In H.J. Walberg, A.J. Reynolds, & M.C. Wang (eds.), Can unlike students learn together? Grade retention, tracking and grouping, 141-155. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Hernes, T., & Irgens, E. J. (2013). Keeping things mindfully on track: Organizational learning under continuity. Management learning, 44(3), 253-266.
Jackson, C. K. (2014). Teacher quality at the high school level: The importance of accounting for tracks. Journal of Labor Economics, 32(4), 645-684.
Lee, J., & Stankov, L. (2013). Higher-order structure of noncognitive constructs and prediction of PISA 2003 mathematics achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 26, 119-130.
Lee, Y. (2004). Student Perceptions of Problems' Structuredness, Complexity, Situatedness, and Information Richenss and Their Effects on Problem-Solving Performance. Phd. Doctoral thesis, Florida State University.
McMillan, J. H. (2001). Secondary teachers' classroom assessment and grading practices. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(1), 20-32.
Mireles, S. V., Acee, T. W., & Gerber, L. N. (2014). FOCUS: Sustainable Mathematics Successes. Journal of Developmental Education, 38(1), 26-36.
Northrop, L., & Kelly, S. (2018). Who Gets to Read What? Tracking, Instructional Practices, and Text Complexity for Middle School Struggling Readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(3), 339-361.
Odendahl, W. (2019). Gateways, Placements, and Grouping: Automating the C-Test for Language Proficiency Ranking. Interface--Journal of European Languages and Literatures, 8, 29-67.
Puente-Ervin, L. (2017). How High School Teachers Perceive the Quality of Professional Development Phd. Doctoral thesis, Walden University.
Saif, A. A. (2017). Modern educational psychology, 7 Edition. Doran; Tehran (in Persian).
Sampson, C. B. (2019). Stratification, Tracking, and Course-taking Patterns: An Examination of the Impact of Mathematics Course Placement on Achievement in a Regional High School District (Doctoral dissertation, Seton Hall University).
Shahriari, P.(2008). Mathematics education, 2 Edition. Mohajer; Tehran (in Persian).
Suarez, d. (2009). When do students choose the challenge? Education Leadership, 4, 54-59 (in Persian).
Tieso, C. L. (2003). Ability grouping is not just tracking anymore. Roeper Review, 26(1), 29-36.
Zaresefat, S. (2018). “You need to know” What is the Challenge of the good teaching in high school?, Iran. Research in Curriculum Planning, 15(30), 128-137 (in Persian).
_||_