义务教育阶段城乡学生数学应用能力的比较研究
|
摘要
数学来源于生活又应用于生活,中小学生的数学应用能力尤为重要。通过文献研究,我们将数学应用能力划分为三个维度:解答传统文字数学应用题的能力、解答模拟真实情境数学应用题的能力、解决具有真实情境数学应用题的能力。本研究主要针对前两个维度展开,其中第一个维度“解答传统文字数学应用题的能力”又分为两个小维度:直接判断、表征及模式识别。
我国长期以来的城乡二元结构造成城乡教育效果及学生学习能力存在明显差异,义务教育阶段城乡学生数学应用能力的差距客观存在。研究城乡学生学习能力的差异具有显著的现实意义。
本研究采用问卷调查和访谈等研究方法,针对城乡四到九年级学生开展“解答传统文字数学应用题能力”问题的相关调查测试;针对城乡七至九年级学生开展“解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力”问题的相关调查测试。再以SPSS17.0独立样本T检验进行差异研究,用SPSS相关性分析进行影响因素研究。最终就城乡学生数学应用能力比较研究得出以下结论:
1.城乡四、五、六、七、八、九这六个年级学生在解答传统文字数学应用题能力上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生,在直接判断维度上不存在显著差异,在表征及模式识别维度上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生;
2.城乡小学高年级学生和初中生(包括初中三个年级)在解答传统文字数学应用题能力上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生,在直接判断维度上不存在显著差异,在表征及模式识别维度上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生;
3.城乡初中各年级学生及其整体在解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生;
4.城乡中小学生解答传统文字数学应用题的能力普遍较低,城乡初中生解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力也普遍较低;
5.城乡中小学生解答传统文字数学应用题能力不均衡,好生和学困生的能力差距较大,城乡初中生解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力也不均衡,好生和学困生的能力相差较大。
义务教育阶段城乡学生的数学学习基础、数学学习观对学生的数学应用能力有较显著影响,但学生的语文阅读基础对数学应用能力影响不显著。
Mathematics not only comes from life, but also applies to life. Math in real life has a wide range of applications, so primary and secondary student's mathematics application ability are particularly important. Through literature study, mathematics application ability can be divided into three dimensions: answer the ability of traditional text mathematics problems, answer simulated real situation among the ability, solve mathematical problems with real situation mathematical ability. This study focused on two dimensions before the start. Among them, the first dimension“answer the ability of traditional text mathematics problems”is divided into two small dimensions: direct judgment, characterization and pattern recognition.
Our long-standing urban-rural dual structure created effects of urban and rural education and student learning education effect significantly different, urban and rural students receiving compulsory education gap between mathematics proficiency objective. Of urban and rural differences in learning ability of students has significant practical significance.
In this study, we adopt testing, interview and questionnaire research methods. For grades four to nine rural and urban students to“answer the ability of traditional text mathematics problems”issues related to inspection and testing; for seven to nine students to carry out urban and rural areas, "answered mathematical simulation of real-life situation Application Problem capacity "issues related to inspection and testing. By SPSS17.0 independent samples and T-test differences in study, correlation analysis using SPSS Factors. Applied Mathematics, urban and rural students eventually comparing the following conclusions:
1. Urban and rural grade four, five, six, seven, eight, nine students in a solution traditional text mathematics application ability were significantly different and urban students were better than the countryside student. In direct judgment dimensions does not exist significant differences. In pattern recognition and characterization, there was a significant difference and urban students were better than the countryside student;
2. Urban and rural elementary students and junior high school students (including the junior middle school three year) in a solution traditional text mathematics application ability significant differences and urban students were better than the countryside student, in direct judgment dimensions does not exist significant differences in pattern recognition and characterization, there was a significant difference and urban students were better than the countryside student;
3.Urban and rural middle school students in mathematical applications to answer questions simulate the real situation there are significant differences in ability and urban students than rural students;
4. Urban and rural primary and middle school students answer traditional text mathematical among the ability is generally low, meanwhile urban and rural junior high school students answer simulation real situation mathematics application ability also is generally low;
5. Urban and rural primary and middle school students answer traditional text mathematics application ability is not balanced .There is a big gap between good students and the ability of students with learning difficulties. Urban and rural primary and middle school students answer simulated real situation among the ability is not also balanced .There is also a big gap between good students and the ability of students with learning difficulties.
In compulsory education phase, urban and rural students mathematics application ability development factors include: The basis of mathematics learning, mathematics learning concept and Chinese reading foundation, in which the basis of mathematics learning, mathematics learning perspective and the relevance of mathematics are proficiency high, and language proficiency reading and mathematics based on the relatively weak correlation.
我国长期以来的城乡二元结构造成城乡教育效果及学生学习能力存在明显差异,义务教育阶段城乡学生数学应用能力的差距客观存在。研究城乡学生学习能力的差异具有显著的现实意义。
本研究采用问卷调查和访谈等研究方法,针对城乡四到九年级学生开展“解答传统文字数学应用题能力”问题的相关调查测试;针对城乡七至九年级学生开展“解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力”问题的相关调查测试。再以SPSS17.0独立样本T检验进行差异研究,用SPSS相关性分析进行影响因素研究。最终就城乡学生数学应用能力比较研究得出以下结论:
1.城乡四、五、六、七、八、九这六个年级学生在解答传统文字数学应用题能力上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生,在直接判断维度上不存在显著差异,在表征及模式识别维度上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生;
2.城乡小学高年级学生和初中生(包括初中三个年级)在解答传统文字数学应用题能力上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生,在直接判断维度上不存在显著差异,在表征及模式识别维度上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生;
3.城乡初中各年级学生及其整体在解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力上存在显著差异且城市学生优于农村学生;
4.城乡中小学生解答传统文字数学应用题的能力普遍较低,城乡初中生解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力也普遍较低;
5.城乡中小学生解答传统文字数学应用题能力不均衡,好生和学困生的能力差距较大,城乡初中生解答模拟真实情境数学应用题能力也不均衡,好生和学困生的能力相差较大。
义务教育阶段城乡学生的数学学习基础、数学学习观对学生的数学应用能力有较显著影响,但学生的语文阅读基础对数学应用能力影响不显著。
Mathematics not only comes from life, but also applies to life. Math in real life has a wide range of applications, so primary and secondary student's mathematics application ability are particularly important. Through literature study, mathematics application ability can be divided into three dimensions: answer the ability of traditional text mathematics problems, answer simulated real situation among the ability, solve mathematical problems with real situation mathematical ability. This study focused on two dimensions before the start. Among them, the first dimension“answer the ability of traditional text mathematics problems”is divided into two small dimensions: direct judgment, characterization and pattern recognition.
Our long-standing urban-rural dual structure created effects of urban and rural education and student learning education effect significantly different, urban and rural students receiving compulsory education gap between mathematics proficiency objective. Of urban and rural differences in learning ability of students has significant practical significance.
In this study, we adopt testing, interview and questionnaire research methods. For grades four to nine rural and urban students to“answer the ability of traditional text mathematics problems”issues related to inspection and testing; for seven to nine students to carry out urban and rural areas, "answered mathematical simulation of real-life situation Application Problem capacity "issues related to inspection and testing. By SPSS17.0 independent samples and T-test differences in study, correlation analysis using SPSS Factors. Applied Mathematics, urban and rural students eventually comparing the following conclusions:
1. Urban and rural grade four, five, six, seven, eight, nine students in a solution traditional text mathematics application ability were significantly different and urban students were better than the countryside student. In direct judgment dimensions does not exist significant differences. In pattern recognition and characterization, there was a significant difference and urban students were better than the countryside student;
2. Urban and rural elementary students and junior high school students (including the junior middle school three year) in a solution traditional text mathematics application ability significant differences and urban students were better than the countryside student, in direct judgment dimensions does not exist significant differences in pattern recognition and characterization, there was a significant difference and urban students were better than the countryside student;
3.Urban and rural middle school students in mathematical applications to answer questions simulate the real situation there are significant differences in ability and urban students than rural students;
4. Urban and rural primary and middle school students answer traditional text mathematical among the ability is generally low, meanwhile urban and rural junior high school students answer simulation real situation mathematics application ability also is generally low;
5. Urban and rural primary and middle school students answer traditional text mathematics application ability is not balanced .There is a big gap between good students and the ability of students with learning difficulties. Urban and rural primary and middle school students answer simulated real situation among the ability is not also balanced .There is also a big gap between good students and the ability of students with learning difficulties.
In compulsory education phase, urban and rural students mathematics application ability development factors include: The basis of mathematics learning, mathematics learning concept and Chinese reading foundation, in which the basis of mathematics learning, mathematics learning perspective and the relevance of mathematics are proficiency high, and language proficiency reading and mathematics based on the relatively weak correlation.
引文
[1]陈爱华.农村小学生数学问题解决能力影响因素的调查与思考.当代教育论坛,1998.
[2]陈向阳,卓斌.利用“问题征解活动”培养高中生数学应用能力的实验研究.数学教育学报,2004(2).
[3]但琦.高一学生数学应用能力的调查与分析.数学教育学报,2007.
[4]邓应维.中学数学应用问题与数学建模的差异.数学教学与研究,2010.
[5]丁蕾.初中生数学“应用题”问题解决过程中自我监控能力研究.东北师范大学,2008.
[6]丁国盛,李涛.SPSS统计教程---从研究设计到数据分析.机械工业出版社,2008.
[7]范文贵,张守波,朱凤林.影响数学应用能力之主要因素的剖析.锦州师范学院学报,2000.
[8]何浩明.培养学生数学应用能力的两点思考.教学与管理,2001(7).
[9]胡淑凤.关于开展数学应用及数学建模教学的思考.中国科教创新导刊,2007.
[10]胡凯林.中学生概率推理能力的研究.广西师范学院硕士论文,2009.
[11]贾汉·吐衣别克.有关学生数学应用能力培养的重要性和基本途径.科教文化, 2000.
[12]贾亚青.小学生解答数学应用题能力的因素分析.河北师范大学硕士论文, 2000.
[13]焦学安.数学应用教学与中学生应用能力的培养.北京师范大学硕士论文,2002.
[14]教育部.普通高中数学课程标准.人民教育出版社,2003.
[15]教育部.义务教育初中数学课程标准.人民教育出版社,2001.
[16]李德勇.数学应用能力的层次分析与教学建议.中小学数学(中学版),1994.
[17]刘兼.21世纪中国数学教育展望(第二辑.北京师范大学出版社,1995.
[18]罗小伟.中学数学教学论.广西民族出版社,2002.
[19]秦小龙.利用“数学建模兴趣小组”培养学生数学应用能力的实践研究.华东师范大学,2006.
[20]闰江涛.提高数学应用能力的培养策略学科教育.通识教育,1998.
[21]沈翔.提倡四大能力--如何摆正数学应用能力位置的思考.数学通报,1997.
[22]苏小霞.初中数学应用题教学策略研究.西北师范大学教育硕士论文,2008.
[23]孙岚.培养高中生的数学应用能力.苏州大学硕士论文,2008.
[24]孙名符.提高数学应用能力的若干策略.学科教育,1998.
[25]田晓娟.重视“数学应用”,渗透“数学建模”.科学教育,2008.
[26]魏嵬.高职数学应用能力培养的认识与实践.高职高专教育研究,2007.
[27]魏玉成.探析高职学生数学应用能力的构建要素.通识教育,2010.
[28]孙晓东.城乡高中生数学成绩的对比分析与教学对策.中学数学月刊,2009.
[29]翁昌来.影响应用题能力因素的调查研究.数学教育研究,2001.
[30]吴国英.中学生化学空间能力城乡差异的调查研究.浙江师范大学,2009.
[31]吴玉婷.城乡小学三年级学生解决数学比较问题的差异研究.西南大学硕士论文, 2006
[32]王丽媛.浅淡我国家庭教育的城乡差异及原因.当代教育论坛(学科教育研究),2008年02期.
[33]王佳.城乡教育差异.高教改革背景,2010.
[34]王晓丹.城乡初中生主观幸福感比较研究.四川师范大学硕士论文,2006.
[35]王明.高师数学专业学生数学应用能力的培养.长春师范大学硕士论文,2010.
[36]项昭,项听.“数学应用题”学习现状的调查分析.数学教育学报,1998(02)
[37]奚定华等.高中数学能力型问题研究.上海教育出版社,2001.
[38]杨富华.小学生数学应用题解题手册.上海远东出版社,1996.
[39]伊秀珍.初中数学应用意识和能力的研究.内蒙古师范大学硕士论文,2010.
[40]游旭群等.小学生数学应用题解题水平影响因素的研究---视空间能力、认知方式及表征方式的影响.心理科学,2006.
[41]岳敏.初中数学应用问题解题障碍的研究.首都师范大学教育硕士论文,2006.
[42]张奠宙等(编译).国际展望:九十年代的数学教育.上海教育出版社,1990.
[43]郑毓信.教育哲学.南京师范大学出版社,1992.
[44]张柏林.城乡高中生源英语学习成绩差异及对策的研究.苏州大学,2008.
[45]张清.农村中小学教师继续教育调查与分析.继续教育,2005.
[46]周仕荣.中学生学习数学应用题的建模障碍分析.毕节师范高等专科学校学报,2000.
[47]朱乐平.生活中的数学.浙江少年儿童出版社,2004.
[48]俎媛媛.教育公平性问题.教育理论与实践,2006.
[49]中小学教师专家委员会.教育学原理江西出版社,2010.
[50] Niss, Issues and problems of research on the teaching and learning of applications and modeling. In: Matos,J.F. et al(Eds.), Modelling and mathematics education: ICTMA9: Applications in science and technology[M]. Horwood publishing, Chichester, England ,2001.
[51] Freudenthal,Model building– an educational philosophy for applied mathematicians[J]. Int.J.Math.Educ.Sci.Technol,1:77, 1973.
[52] K. P. Wong,.Foundations of a models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching,learning,and problem solving.In: Lesh,R.&Doerr,H.M.(Eds.).Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving,learning,and teaching[M]. Lawrence Erlbaum Associatees,London.3-34. (2003).
[53] http://baike.baidu.com/view/41286.htm#sub41286
[54] http://baike.baidu.com/view/220910.htm#sub220910
[55] http://baike.baidu.com/view/133261.htm
[56] http://wenku.baidu.com/view/9c69493a580216fc700afdec.html
[57] http://baike.baidu.com/view/57757.htm
[2]陈向阳,卓斌.利用“问题征解活动”培养高中生数学应用能力的实验研究.数学教育学报,2004(2).
[3]但琦.高一学生数学应用能力的调查与分析.数学教育学报,2007.
[4]邓应维.中学数学应用问题与数学建模的差异.数学教学与研究,2010.
[5]丁蕾.初中生数学“应用题”问题解决过程中自我监控能力研究.东北师范大学,2008.
[6]丁国盛,李涛.SPSS统计教程---从研究设计到数据分析.机械工业出版社,2008.
[7]范文贵,张守波,朱凤林.影响数学应用能力之主要因素的剖析.锦州师范学院学报,2000.
[8]何浩明.培养学生数学应用能力的两点思考.教学与管理,2001(7).
[9]胡淑凤.关于开展数学应用及数学建模教学的思考.中国科教创新导刊,2007.
[10]胡凯林.中学生概率推理能力的研究.广西师范学院硕士论文,2009.
[11]贾汉·吐衣别克.有关学生数学应用能力培养的重要性和基本途径.科教文化, 2000.
[12]贾亚青.小学生解答数学应用题能力的因素分析.河北师范大学硕士论文, 2000.
[13]焦学安.数学应用教学与中学生应用能力的培养.北京师范大学硕士论文,2002.
[14]教育部.普通高中数学课程标准.人民教育出版社,2003.
[15]教育部.义务教育初中数学课程标准.人民教育出版社,2001.
[16]李德勇.数学应用能力的层次分析与教学建议.中小学数学(中学版),1994.
[17]刘兼.21世纪中国数学教育展望(第二辑.北京师范大学出版社,1995.
[18]罗小伟.中学数学教学论.广西民族出版社,2002.
[19]秦小龙.利用“数学建模兴趣小组”培养学生数学应用能力的实践研究.华东师范大学,2006.
[20]闰江涛.提高数学应用能力的培养策略学科教育.通识教育,1998.
[21]沈翔.提倡四大能力--如何摆正数学应用能力位置的思考.数学通报,1997.
[22]苏小霞.初中数学应用题教学策略研究.西北师范大学教育硕士论文,2008.
[23]孙岚.培养高中生的数学应用能力.苏州大学硕士论文,2008.
[24]孙名符.提高数学应用能力的若干策略.学科教育,1998.
[25]田晓娟.重视“数学应用”,渗透“数学建模”.科学教育,2008.
[26]魏嵬.高职数学应用能力培养的认识与实践.高职高专教育研究,2007.
[27]魏玉成.探析高职学生数学应用能力的构建要素.通识教育,2010.
[28]孙晓东.城乡高中生数学成绩的对比分析与教学对策.中学数学月刊,2009.
[29]翁昌来.影响应用题能力因素的调查研究.数学教育研究,2001.
[30]吴国英.中学生化学空间能力城乡差异的调查研究.浙江师范大学,2009.
[31]吴玉婷.城乡小学三年级学生解决数学比较问题的差异研究.西南大学硕士论文, 2006
[32]王丽媛.浅淡我国家庭教育的城乡差异及原因.当代教育论坛(学科教育研究),2008年02期.
[33]王佳.城乡教育差异.高教改革背景,2010.
[34]王晓丹.城乡初中生主观幸福感比较研究.四川师范大学硕士论文,2006.
[35]王明.高师数学专业学生数学应用能力的培养.长春师范大学硕士论文,2010.
[36]项昭,项听.“数学应用题”学习现状的调查分析.数学教育学报,1998(02)
[37]奚定华等.高中数学能力型问题研究.上海教育出版社,2001.
[38]杨富华.小学生数学应用题解题手册.上海远东出版社,1996.
[39]伊秀珍.初中数学应用意识和能力的研究.内蒙古师范大学硕士论文,2010.
[40]游旭群等.小学生数学应用题解题水平影响因素的研究---视空间能力、认知方式及表征方式的影响.心理科学,2006.
[41]岳敏.初中数学应用问题解题障碍的研究.首都师范大学教育硕士论文,2006.
[42]张奠宙等(编译).国际展望:九十年代的数学教育.上海教育出版社,1990.
[43]郑毓信.教育哲学.南京师范大学出版社,1992.
[44]张柏林.城乡高中生源英语学习成绩差异及对策的研究.苏州大学,2008.
[45]张清.农村中小学教师继续教育调查与分析.继续教育,2005.
[46]周仕荣.中学生学习数学应用题的建模障碍分析.毕节师范高等专科学校学报,2000.
[47]朱乐平.生活中的数学.浙江少年儿童出版社,2004.
[48]俎媛媛.教育公平性问题.教育理论与实践,2006.
[49]中小学教师专家委员会.教育学原理江西出版社,2010.
[50] Niss, Issues and problems of research on the teaching and learning of applications and modeling. In: Matos,J.F. et al(Eds.), Modelling and mathematics education: ICTMA9: Applications in science and technology[M]. Horwood publishing, Chichester, England ,2001.
[51] Freudenthal,Model building– an educational philosophy for applied mathematicians[J]. Int.J.Math.Educ.Sci.Technol,1:77, 1973.
[52] K. P. Wong,.Foundations of a models and modeling perspective on mathematics teaching,learning,and problem solving.In: Lesh,R.&Doerr,H.M.(Eds.).Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving,learning,and teaching[M]. Lawrence Erlbaum Associatees,London.3-34. (2003).
[53] http://baike.baidu.com/view/41286.htm#sub41286
[54] http://baike.baidu.com/view/220910.htm#sub220910
[55] http://baike.baidu.com/view/133261.htm
[56] http://wenku.baidu.com/view/9c69493a580216fc700afdec.html
[57] http://baike.baidu.com/view/57757.htm