检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]北京师范大学心理学院,应用实验心理北京市重点实验室,北京100875 [2]福建儿童发展职业学院,福州350025
出 处:《心理科学》2008年第6期1361-1364,1352,共5页Journal of Psychological Science
基 金:全国教育科学规划课题(EBA010432)的成果之一
摘 要:研究通过对比同伴辅导、合作、协作等三种同伴互动写作方式与个体化写作教学干预前后,三年级学生独立写作水平的变化,了解同伴互动类型对初学者写作水平的影响。结果发现,和个体化写作相比,三种同伴互动写作方式均更有利于整体写作水平和"结构"维度写作水平的提高;但合作写作最为突出,不仅在各个维度都优于个体化写作,而且在"选材"维度上还优于同伴辅导写作和协作写作。这说明,社会性互动有利于初学者写作水平的提高,且主要表现为提升记叙文的结构完整性和层次清楚性;但只有兼顾"个人责任"和"高平等性、相互性",社会性互动对写作的促进作用才能更加充分地发挥。The present study investigated the effects of peer-tutoring writing, cooperative writing writing, collaborative writing and individualistic writing on pupils' writing quality. 239 third grade students in 5 classes took part in the study. Each class was randomly assigned to one of the four writing instructional models while two classes were assigned to collaborative writing. Pre- and post- assessments of independent writing were taken. The results showed that (1) all the three types of peer-interactive writing showed significantly greater pre-post gain in the dimension of Structure than individualistic writing. (2) cooperative writing showed significantly greater pre-post gain in all dimensions than individualistic writing, and it was the most efficacious instruction model in improving the dimension of material.
分 类 号:B841.7[哲学宗教—基础心理学]
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.229