|
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
概念構圖教學對不同學習風格學童在籃球動作技能表現及體育課學習態度之影響
|
|
|
| 作者 |
 |
蘇詩媚 |
| 學校系所 |
|
台北巿立體育學院運動教育研究所 |
| 地點 |
|
全臺 全部
|
| 研究內容 |
|
[ 摘要 ]
本研究旨在探討概念構圖教學對不同學習風格學童在國小籃球動作技能及體育課學習態度之影響，以四種學習風格(行動型、思考型、理論型、實用型)分別探討組間及組內之差異，以台北縣某國民小學五年級31人做為實驗研究對象，進行十週概念構圖教學實驗，每週2次，每次40分鐘，在教學實驗之前施以國小學童健康與體育領域學習風格測驗、教學實驗前後施以籃球技能表現測驗及體育課學習態度測驗，並根據所獲得資料進行t分數換算、單因子變異數分析、相依樣本t檢定等統計方法分析，將統計顯著水準訂於α=.05，得到以下結果：
一、同學習風格學童之籃球動作技能在經過概念構圖教學後，實用型學童在投籃、右手運球及傳球之技能皆提升。
二、不同學習風格學童之籃球動作技能在經過概念構圖教學後，思考型學童在投籃之技能有提升。
三、學習風格學童之籃球動作技能在經過概念構圖教學後，理論型學童在投籃之技能有提升。
四、不同學習風格學童之籃球動作技能在經過概念構圖教學後，實用型學童在投籃、左手運球、右手運球及傳球之技能皆未提升。
五、不同學習風格之學童之體育課學習態度在接受概念構圖教學後，行動型、思考型、實用型學童在學習方法、學習態度、學習情境態度及上課態度上皆未提升。
六、不同學習風格之學童之體育課學習態度在接受概念構圖教學後，理論型學童在學習動機上有提升。
七、透過概念構圖教學後，投籃項目中行動型學童優於實用型學童、思考型學童優於實用型學童。
八、透過概念構圖教學後，傳球項目中行動型學童優於思考型、理論型及實用型學童。
九、透過概念構圖教學後，組間之體育課學習態度皆未達顯著差異。
[ 英文摘要 ]
The purpose of this study was to discuss the effect of concept mapping teaching for elementary school students on learning style to basketball skill and physical education learning attitude. The learning style have activist, reflector, pragmatist and theorist. The participants for this study were 31 5th elementary school students in Taipei. The teaching strategy for concept mapping in physical education was intervened for 40 min per session twice time per week. The pre-test before used learning style analysis, After used basketball skill and physical education attitude assessment was conducted in the pre-test and the post-test. After the statistical analysis, the results of this study were as following:
1.
The activist students had a significance progress in shooting, right hand dribble and passing from the pre-test to the post-test.
2.
The reflector students had a significance progress in shooting from the pre-test to the post-test.
3.
The pragmatist students had significance progress in shooting from the pre-test to the post-test.
4.
The theorist students no significance progress in basketball skill from the pre-test to the post-test.
5.
The activist, reflector and pragmatist students no significance progress in physical education learning attitude from the pre-test to the post-test.
6.
The theorist students had significance progress in learning motivation from the pre-test to the post-test.
7.
The shooting item on the activist students was significant better than pragmatist, reflector students was significance better than pragmatist students.
8.
The passing item on the activist students was significance better than reflector, theorist and pragmatist students.
9.
The activist, reflector, pragmatist and theorist no significance progress in physical education learning attitude.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
