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
作 者:江胜华[1,2] 武立群[1] 李伟清[1] 汪时机[1] 鲍安红[1]
机构地区:[1]西南大学工程技术学院,重庆400716 [2]南洋理工大学土木与环境工程学院,新加坡639798
出 处:《西南师范大学学报(自然科学版)》2017年第1期179-184,共6页Journal of Southwest China Normal University(Natural Science Edition)
基 金:重庆市前沿与应用基础研究计划项目(cstc2015jcyjA30008)
摘 要:提问是教师课堂中广泛采用的一种重要手段,课堂提问的有效性直接影响着教学的质量,影响着学生思维的训练,但目前大多数课堂提问的有效性却不高.针对现有课堂提问的有效性亟需进行评价衡量的现状,本文将提问标准分为问题的类别、问题的型式、问题的层次、问题的质量、问题的数量和提问的态度等6个方面进行较深层的剖析,并针对有效性评价时需结合具体教学情境而存在的经验性和主观性,引入隶属函数和模糊评价指标,构建教师课堂提问有效性的模糊评价模型,且结合具体的案例进行分析.分析结果表明,本文提出的评价标准和模糊评级方法简便可行,可供教师课堂提问有效性评价时参考.Questioning is an important measure widely used by teachers in teaching. The effectiveness of classroom questioning not only effects the teaching quality, but also influences the training of student's thinking. But most of the present classroom questioning is not effective. Since the effectiveness of the teacher's classroom questioning should be evaluated, for which the standard of classroom questioning has been raised in the paper, such as type of question, kind of question, level of question, quality of question, the number of question and attitude of questioning, and the 6 aspects have been analyzed deeply. Due to the personal experience and subjectivity in the evaluation of questioning effectiveness, the membership function and fuzzy indices have been put forward to construct the fuzzy evaluation model, by which an example of classroom questioning has been evaluated and analyzed. The results show that that the criteria and fuzzy evaluation method is convenient and feasible, which can be used as reference for effectiveness evaluation of the teacherrs classroom questioning.
分 类 号:G424.21[文化科学—课程与教学论]
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:216.73.216.117