团体合作认知影响学生几何概念结构表征的实验研究
|
摘要
概念作为知识构成的细胞，一直是认知心理学研究的重要内容。而概念结构表征则具体展示了概念形成系统知识的过程和结果，理应受到人们的重视。表征从本质上说是一种认知建构，长期以来，认知心理学的研究偏重于认知的个体建构。但是，人的许多认知活动是发生在人际交互过程中，个体的认知结果不可避免地会受到社会建构的影响，相对而言，这方面的研究却比较薄弱和缺乏。本研究以社会建构、团体合作及表征理论等为基础，通过设计不同的团体认知条件来研究社会建构对概念结构表征的影响，以期建立合理的认知建构模式来提高学生的认知水平。本研究以重庆市清华中学高一四个班的48名学生为实验被试，进行配对分组，采取平衡组实验设计，编制《实验方案》，在团体设计的情况下进行相应规则的训练，然后在独助型、互赖型、自由合作型和独立型四种团体条件中进行概念结构表征的认知测查。实验结果表明：
1．在完成概念结构表征的总体任务中，真实性合作(独助型和互赖型)取得了显著的效果，独助型团体的效果最为明显。
2．不同团体合作条件对不同水平学生的影响有差异，也对各团体原来的分层差异的影响不一样。
3．无论何种表征任务，真实性合作团体的认知成绩均优于其它两类团体。特别是独助型团体，在进行深度加工和多样性兼深度加工时，显著优于其它三类团体。
4．独助型团体的表征结构清晰度高、内容丰富性强；互赖型团体的表征结构清晰度不高但内容丰富性强；而独立型团体与自由型团体的表征结构清晰度与内容丰富性均较低。
5．在认知自信心和认知兴趣方面，真实性团体合作明显强于独立型和自由型。
6．在起点相同和认知条件相同的情况下，女生能够获得和男生同样好、甚至更好的成绩。
7．在起点相同和认知条件一致的情况下，不同认知风格之间不存在明显差异，而场独立者稍稍具有优势。
Concepts as cells of knowledge continuously were an important part in research fields of cognitive psychology, representation of conceptive structures should be attached important to because that concretely displayed procedures and outcomes of concepts forming systematic knowledge. Representation was a cognitive construction in natural. But from long on, people laid particular stress on individual construction in cognitive psychology. Because people had many cognitive activities taking play in course of interaction, social construction deeply influenced on individual cognitive outcome. However, the research about social construction in cognitive psychology was verily weak and lack. This study was based on the theories of social construction, team cooperation and representation. The purpose was to study influence of social construction to the representation of conceptive structures through designing different team cognitive conditions (independent-helpful team, dependent team, freely cooperative team and independent team), So that we could improve the students cognitive level by forming rational cognitive construction pattern. The 48 subjects were from 4 classes of Grade one (higher secondary) in ChongQing QingHua middle school, they were divided into matching groups and balance groups were considered in the experimental designing. we also formulated experimental program and practiced rules training. Then we had the cognitive tests of representation of conceptive structures in all of the four
conditions: independent-helpful team, independent team, freely cooperative team and independent team, the conclusions of the experiment as following:
1 .On the view of the totality of representation of conceptive structures, true cooperation (independent-helpful and dependent cooperation) had achieved significant effect. Among them, independent-helpful team was more significant.
2.Different team cooperation conditions had different influence to students that were in different levels, which resulted fluctuation of original stratification different in different teams.
3.whichever kind of representation task, truly cooperative teams had achieved better achievement than the other teams, specially the independent-helpful team was superior to the other three kinds of teams significantly on profound processing as well as multiplicative and profound processing.
4.The structures of representation in the independent-helpful team was clear and abundant in content; which in the dependent team was low in clearness and content abundance; independent team and freely cooperative team were verily weak in structure of representation and content.
5.when self-confidence and interest of cognition were considered, truly cooperative teams were stronger than the independent team and freely cooperative team.
6.If the starting point and cognitive conditions were identical, girl students could achieved the same goal as the boy students or ever better than them.
7. when the starting point and cognitive conditions were identical, no significant different was existed between different cognitive patterns, but the field-independent students had somewhat superiority.
1．在完成概念结构表征的总体任务中，真实性合作(独助型和互赖型)取得了显著的效果，独助型团体的效果最为明显。
2．不同团体合作条件对不同水平学生的影响有差异，也对各团体原来的分层差异的影响不一样。
3．无论何种表征任务，真实性合作团体的认知成绩均优于其它两类团体。特别是独助型团体，在进行深度加工和多样性兼深度加工时，显著优于其它三类团体。
4．独助型团体的表征结构清晰度高、内容丰富性强；互赖型团体的表征结构清晰度不高但内容丰富性强；而独立型团体与自由型团体的表征结构清晰度与内容丰富性均较低。
5．在认知自信心和认知兴趣方面，真实性团体合作明显强于独立型和自由型。
6．在起点相同和认知条件相同的情况下，女生能够获得和男生同样好、甚至更好的成绩。
7．在起点相同和认知条件一致的情况下，不同认知风格之间不存在明显差异，而场独立者稍稍具有优势。
Concepts as cells of knowledge continuously were an important part in research fields of cognitive psychology, representation of conceptive structures should be attached important to because that concretely displayed procedures and outcomes of concepts forming systematic knowledge. Representation was a cognitive construction in natural. But from long on, people laid particular stress on individual construction in cognitive psychology. Because people had many cognitive activities taking play in course of interaction, social construction deeply influenced on individual cognitive outcome. However, the research about social construction in cognitive psychology was verily weak and lack. This study was based on the theories of social construction, team cooperation and representation. The purpose was to study influence of social construction to the representation of conceptive structures through designing different team cognitive conditions (independent-helpful team, dependent team, freely cooperative team and independent team), So that we could improve the students cognitive level by forming rational cognitive construction pattern. The 48 subjects were from 4 classes of Grade one (higher secondary) in ChongQing QingHua middle school, they were divided into matching groups and balance groups were considered in the experimental designing. we also formulated experimental program and practiced rules training. Then we had the cognitive tests of representation of conceptive structures in all of the four
conditions: independent-helpful team, independent team, freely cooperative team and independent team, the conclusions of the experiment as following:
1 .On the view of the totality of representation of conceptive structures, true cooperation (independent-helpful and dependent cooperation) had achieved significant effect. Among them, independent-helpful team was more significant.
2.Different team cooperation conditions had different influence to students that were in different levels, which resulted fluctuation of original stratification different in different teams.
3.whichever kind of representation task, truly cooperative teams had achieved better achievement than the other teams, specially the independent-helpful team was superior to the other three kinds of teams significantly on profound processing as well as multiplicative and profound processing.
4.The structures of representation in the independent-helpful team was clear and abundant in content; which in the dependent team was low in clearness and content abundance; independent team and freely cooperative team were verily weak in structure of representation and content.
5.when self-confidence and interest of cognition were considered, truly cooperative teams were stronger than the independent team and freely cooperative team.
6.If the starting point and cognitive conditions were identical, girl students could achieved the same goal as the boy students or ever better than them.
7. when the starting point and cognitive conditions were identical, no significant different was existed between different cognitive patterns, but the field-independent students had somewhat superiority.
引文
[1]张大均主编、刘电芝副主编：《教学心理学》，西南师范大学出版社，1997年。
[2]黄希庭著：《心理学导论》，人民教育出版社，1991年。
[3]张大均主编：《教学心理学研究》，西南师范大学出版社，1998年。
[4]R．M．加涅著、皮连生等译：《学习的条件和教学论》，华东师大出版社，1997年。
[5]B．英海尔德等著，李其维译：《学习与认知发展》，华东师大出版社，1999年。
[6]张庆林主编：《当代认知心理学在教学中的应用》，西南师范大学出版社，1995年。
[7]时蓉华著：《新编社会心理学概论》，东方出版中心，1997年。
[8]汪安圣、王甦：《认知心理学》，北京大学出版社，1992年。
[9]陈琦、刘儒德：《当代教育心理学》，北师大出版社，1995年。
[10]吴庆麟等编著：《认知教学心理学》，上海科学技术出版社，2000年。
[11]李维主编：《学习心理学》，四川人民出版社，2000年。
[12]谢斯俊、张厚粲主编：《认知方式—一个人格维度的实验研究》，北师大出版社，1984年。
[13]刘力、谭力海主编：《剖析人生—心理类型学》，山东教育出版社，1992年。
[14]彼得．圣吉著、郭进隆译：《第五项修炼—学习型组织的艺术与实务》，上海三联书店出版，1998年。
[15]王垒编著：《组织管理心理学》，北京大学出版社，1993年。
[16]王莲芸．试论数学概念思维．现代远距离教育，1997(4)。
[17]喻平．数学概念学习刍议．课程．教材．教法，1995(4)。
[18]周建文．试论数学概念教学的基本策略．课程．教材．教法，1997(3)。
[19]丁家永．知识的本质新论．南京师范大学学报，1998(2)。
[20]王小明、鞠瑞利．现代认知心理学关于概念表征的研究．上海教育科研，1998(10)。
[21]李文玲、刘谦．心理表征及其争议．心理科学，1992(5)。
[22]邓铸、余嘉元．问题解决中对问题的内部表征和外部表征．心理学动态，2001年第3期。
[23]高文．知识的组织与表征—现代教学模式构建的基本要素之一．外国教育资料，2000(4)。
[24]梁宁建．专家和新手问题解决认知活动特征的研究．心理科学，1997(20)(4)。
[25]王红宇．合作学习理论在教学实践中的应用．比较教育研究，1992(1)。
[26]王国章、吴永玲．合作学习及其尝试．教育改革，1995(5)。
[27]孙法海．人际作用过程与团体工作效率．心理科学，1998(6)。
[28]高文．交往与认识积极性的发展．外国教育资料，1993(3)。
[29]顾清红、瞿放．建构、环境及学习团体：现代教育技术的新思维．外国教育资料，2000(3)。
[30]R．E．斯莱文，王红宇译．合作学习与学生成绩：六种理论观点．外国教育资料，1993。
[31]张小林、王重鸣．群体级效和团体效能研究的新进展．应用心理学，1997(2)。
[32]盛群力．小组互助合作学习革新述评．外国教育资料，1992(2)。
[33]丁邦平．合作学习—大面积提高学业成绩的理论和方法．外国教育资料，1988(5)。
[34]王重鸣、严进．团队问题解决的知识结构转换研究．心理科学，2000年第1期。
[35]郑全全、朱华燕．自由讨论条件下群体决策质量的影响因素，心理学报，2001年第3期。
[36]綦春霞．美国中学数学合作学习刍议．外国教育资料，1998(5)。
[37]高文．维果茨基的心理发展与社会建构主义．外国教育资料，1999(4)。
[38]丁家永．建构主义与教育心理学研究的新进展．南京师范大学学报，2000(9)。
[39]张建伟、陈琦．认知结构的测查方法．教育研究与实验，2001(1)。
[40]曾琦．合作学习的基本要素．学科教育，2000(6)。
[41]肖蓓苓．场独立性—场依存性与教育．心理学报，1982(5)。
[42]Gibson J J. The ecological approach to visual perception. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1979.
[43]Patterson M.E, Danserean D.F. Effects of communication aids and strategies on cooperative teaching. Journal of Education Psychology. 1992(84).
[44]Bower G.H. A selective review of organizational factors in memory. Organization of memory((93--137),New York: Academic press.
[45]Rumelhart D.E & Norman D.A. Representation in memory, from Handbook of experimental psychology edited by Atkinson RC, Hemnstein RJ. New York, NY: Wiley, 1983.
[46]Susan M.W & Krystal D. Collective memory: collaborative and individual processes in remembering. Journal of experimental psychology, 1997(23).
[47]Sullivan Palincsar A. Social constractivist perspectives on teaching and leaning. Annual Review Psychology, 1998(49)。
[48]Robert. E.Slavin. Cooperative leaning and the cooperative school. Educational leadership, 1987
[49]Shaw M.E. Communication network. In L. Berkowits (Ed). Advances in experimental social psychology, New York: Academic ss, 1964(1).
[50]Eggen. P.& Kauchak.D. Educational psychology. Merill, an imprint of prentice hall,1997.
[51]Hemk A.M & Wilke. etal. Group performance .London and New York, 1994.
[52]Stasser G.& Titus W. pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1985(48).
[53]Jasbir S.D& Lai L.T. Using group support systems for developing a knowledge—based explanation facility. International Journal of information mangment,2000(20).
[54]Lynn S & Fuchs. Effects of workgroup structure and size on student productivity during collaborative work on complex tasks. The elementary school journal,2000(100).
[55]Vermette P.J Making cooperative learning work. Prentice—hall,inc. 1998.
[56]Webb N.M. Sex differences in interaction and achievement in cooperative small group. Journal of educational psychology, 1984(76).
[57]Newman. F. & Thompson, J.A Effects of cooperative learning on achievements in secondary school :A summary of research. Madison, WI: National center effective secondary schools. Wisconsin center for education research. 1987.
[58] Pilar. G & Jose J.C. Structural representations in knowledge acquisition. Journal of education psychology, 1994(86) .
[59] Skon,L.& Johnson R.T. Cooperative peer interaction versus individual competition and individualistic effects on the acquisition of cognitive reasoning strategies . Journal of educational psychology, 1981 (73) .
[60] Whatley .Y. & Staniford .G., e tal. Intelligent agents to support students working in groups online. Journal of interactive learning research, 1999( 10) .
[61] Benbunan.F.R & Hiltz. S.R, Impacts of asynchronous learning networks on individual and group problem solving: A field experiment. Group decision & negotiation, 1999(8) .
[62] Sharan Y & Sharan S. Group investigatation expends cooperative learning. Educational leadership, 1990(47) .
[2]黄希庭著：《心理学导论》，人民教育出版社，1991年。
[3]张大均主编：《教学心理学研究》，西南师范大学出版社，1998年。
[4]R．M．加涅著、皮连生等译：《学习的条件和教学论》，华东师大出版社，1997年。
[5]B．英海尔德等著，李其维译：《学习与认知发展》，华东师大出版社，1999年。
[6]张庆林主编：《当代认知心理学在教学中的应用》，西南师范大学出版社，1995年。
[7]时蓉华著：《新编社会心理学概论》，东方出版中心，1997年。
[8]汪安圣、王甦：《认知心理学》，北京大学出版社，1992年。
[9]陈琦、刘儒德：《当代教育心理学》，北师大出版社，1995年。
[10]吴庆麟等编著：《认知教学心理学》，上海科学技术出版社，2000年。
[11]李维主编：《学习心理学》，四川人民出版社，2000年。
[12]谢斯俊、张厚粲主编：《认知方式—一个人格维度的实验研究》，北师大出版社，1984年。
[13]刘力、谭力海主编：《剖析人生—心理类型学》，山东教育出版社，1992年。
[14]彼得．圣吉著、郭进隆译：《第五项修炼—学习型组织的艺术与实务》，上海三联书店出版，1998年。
[15]王垒编著：《组织管理心理学》，北京大学出版社，1993年。
[16]王莲芸．试论数学概念思维．现代远距离教育，1997(4)。
[17]喻平．数学概念学习刍议．课程．教材．教法，1995(4)。
[18]周建文．试论数学概念教学的基本策略．课程．教材．教法，1997(3)。
[19]丁家永．知识的本质新论．南京师范大学学报，1998(2)。
[20]王小明、鞠瑞利．现代认知心理学关于概念表征的研究．上海教育科研，1998(10)。
[21]李文玲、刘谦．心理表征及其争议．心理科学，1992(5)。
[22]邓铸、余嘉元．问题解决中对问题的内部表征和外部表征．心理学动态，2001年第3期。
[23]高文．知识的组织与表征—现代教学模式构建的基本要素之一．外国教育资料，2000(4)。
[24]梁宁建．专家和新手问题解决认知活动特征的研究．心理科学，1997(20)(4)。
[25]王红宇．合作学习理论在教学实践中的应用．比较教育研究，1992(1)。
[26]王国章、吴永玲．合作学习及其尝试．教育改革，1995(5)。
[27]孙法海．人际作用过程与团体工作效率．心理科学，1998(6)。
[28]高文．交往与认识积极性的发展．外国教育资料，1993(3)。
[29]顾清红、瞿放．建构、环境及学习团体：现代教育技术的新思维．外国教育资料，2000(3)。
[30]R．E．斯莱文，王红宇译．合作学习与学生成绩：六种理论观点．外国教育资料，1993。
[31]张小林、王重鸣．群体级效和团体效能研究的新进展．应用心理学，1997(2)。
[32]盛群力．小组互助合作学习革新述评．外国教育资料，1992(2)。
[33]丁邦平．合作学习—大面积提高学业成绩的理论和方法．外国教育资料，1988(5)。
[34]王重鸣、严进．团队问题解决的知识结构转换研究．心理科学，2000年第1期。
[35]郑全全、朱华燕．自由讨论条件下群体决策质量的影响因素，心理学报，2001年第3期。
[36]綦春霞．美国中学数学合作学习刍议．外国教育资料，1998(5)。
[37]高文．维果茨基的心理发展与社会建构主义．外国教育资料，1999(4)。
[38]丁家永．建构主义与教育心理学研究的新进展．南京师范大学学报，2000(9)。
[39]张建伟、陈琦．认知结构的测查方法．教育研究与实验，2001(1)。
[40]曾琦．合作学习的基本要素．学科教育，2000(6)。
[41]肖蓓苓．场独立性—场依存性与教育．心理学报，1982(5)。
[42]Gibson J J. The ecological approach to visual perception. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1979.
[43]Patterson M.E, Danserean D.F. Effects of communication aids and strategies on cooperative teaching. Journal of Education Psychology. 1992(84).
[44]Bower G.H. A selective review of organizational factors in memory. Organization of memory((93--137),New York: Academic press.
[45]Rumelhart D.E & Norman D.A. Representation in memory, from Handbook of experimental psychology edited by Atkinson RC, Hemnstein RJ. New York, NY: Wiley, 1983.
[46]Susan M.W & Krystal D. Collective memory: collaborative and individual processes in remembering. Journal of experimental psychology, 1997(23).
[47]Sullivan Palincsar A. Social constractivist perspectives on teaching and leaning. Annual Review Psychology, 1998(49)。
[48]Robert. E.Slavin. Cooperative leaning and the cooperative school. Educational leadership, 1987
[49]Shaw M.E. Communication network. In L. Berkowits (Ed). Advances in experimental social psychology, New York: Academic ss, 1964(1).
[50]Eggen. P.& Kauchak.D. Educational psychology. Merill, an imprint of prentice hall,1997.
[51]Hemk A.M & Wilke. etal. Group performance .London and New York, 1994.
[52]Stasser G.& Titus W. pooling of unshared information in group decision making: biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of personality and social psychology, 1985(48).
[53]Jasbir S.D& Lai L.T. Using group support systems for developing a knowledge—based explanation facility. International Journal of information mangment,2000(20).
[54]Lynn S & Fuchs. Effects of workgroup structure and size on student productivity during collaborative work on complex tasks. The elementary school journal,2000(100).
[55]Vermette P.J Making cooperative learning work. Prentice—hall,inc. 1998.
[56]Webb N.M. Sex differences in interaction and achievement in cooperative small group. Journal of educational psychology, 1984(76).
[57]Newman. F. & Thompson, J.A Effects of cooperative learning on achievements in secondary school :A summary of research. Madison, WI: National center effective secondary schools. Wisconsin center for education research. 1987.
[58] Pilar. G & Jose J.C. Structural representations in knowledge acquisition. Journal of education psychology, 1994(86) .
[59] Skon,L.& Johnson R.T. Cooperative peer interaction versus individual competition and individualistic effects on the acquisition of cognitive reasoning strategies . Journal of educational psychology, 1981 (73) .
[60] Whatley .Y. & Staniford .G., e tal. Intelligent agents to support students working in groups online. Journal of interactive learning research, 1999( 10) .
[61] Benbunan.F.R & Hiltz. S.R, Impacts of asynchronous learning networks on individual and group problem solving: A field experiment. Group decision & negotiation, 1999(8) .
[62] Sharan Y & Sharan S. Group investigatation expends cooperative learning. Educational leadership, 1990(47) .