תפישה פדגוגית העוסקת בהוראה לקראת הבנה וחשיבה ויישומה בעבודת המפמרי"ם פרופסור ענת זוהר 11.09.06

  • Published on
    03-Jan-2016

  • View
    24

  • Download
    3

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

" 11.09.06. : - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

  • "

    11.09.06

  • : . , - 21 .

  • . , , .

  • , . .

  • , . , . .

  • :

    " ??????"

  • " .

    ( ).

  • - 20 " ??????" .

    : "

  • " (" "...) "

  • ? (1987): -, , , ,

  • ( ) (Bloom, 1954) , ( ) .

  • , , .

  • :

    , , , , , .

  • : , , , .

  • (Ennis, 1989). . , .

  • ( ):

    . .

  • "" , :

    . . , .

  • :

    " ":

    .

  • The TSC project (Zohar, 2004) does not require schools to abandon the curriculum they are used to and commit themselves to a totally different program.

    Rather, we offer to teach the same curriculum using alternative means.

    Our basic unit is the learning activity: a task that requires thinking within a particular science topic.

    The project consists of a collection of learning activities that teachers may integrate into their regular instruction whenever they get to a topic covered by one of the activities.

  • Varied types of learning activities were designed in order to enhance transfer and to avoid fixed patterns of learning activities, which might eventually train students to deal with them in a merely algorithmic way.

  • The following types of learning activities were designed:

    Activities that follow lab experiments; Invitations to Inquiry; Critical assessment of newspaper clips; Investigation of microworlds;Argumentation;Open-ended inquiry learning activitiesAn assortment of smallscale, learning activities

  • Another hallmark of the TSC project is the use of metacognition.

    The TSC project employs a rather specific component of metacognition - Meta-strategic Knowledge (MSK), defined as general, explicit knowledge about the cognitive procedures that are being manipulated

  • MSK consists of the following abilities: making generalizations and drawing rules regarding a thinking strategy, naming the thinking strategy, explaining when, why and how such a thinking strategy should be used, when it should not be used, what are the disadvantages of not using appropriate strategies, and what task characteristics call for the use of the strategy (Kuhn, 1999; 2000a; 2001).

  • AN EXAMPLE OF A TSC LEARNING ACTIVITY

    The main goal of the unit Genetic Revolution- Discussions of Moral Dilemmas (GreMoD) is to foster students argumentation skills while teaching key concepts in genetics.

    The GreMoD unit was constructed with attention to three major issues: (1) Biological knowledge:(2) Strategic and MSK regarding Argumentation: (3) Principles of bio-ethics

  • 1. A section of a dilemma related to genetics (CF)

    Table 1: concrete examples of the TSC learning activities

    Cystic Fibrosis (CF) is an autosomal recessive genetic trait. It is one of the most prevalent genetic diseases. In England and the United States one out of 2000 newborns is affected and one out of 20 people is a carrier. Cystic fibrosis causes a deficient functioning of the external secretion glands that is pronounced (among other things) in the production of salty sweat, in digestion disorders, and in the production of large quantities of mucus in the respiratory tracts. The mucus causes recurrent lung infections. Each additional infection adds to the long-term damage to the lungs. The disease is therefore lethal: patients rarely survive past the age of 40.

  • The gene responsible for CF has been located. Scientists from laboratories in several countries are now working on methods for genetic therapy. One idea was to substitute a healthy gene for the deformed one in the lung tissue. However, the complex branching of the lungs makes it impossible to remove the Epithelium cells and then return them after the gene substitution. In 1992 one group of researchers succeeded in inserting the gene into the Epithelium of a rats lung where it continued to function for 6 weeks. Another research direction focuses on the development of a spray consisting of normal genes attached to transporters whose role will be to insert the genes into the cells. The idea is that patients will inhale the spray from time to time (with the hope that the normal genes will be able to function in the cells). Despite all these efforts, it is still a long way before genetic treatment of CF can become practical. Meanwhile, patients keep suffering.

  • Dilemma: a. Rebecca and Joseph both have brothers whom are sick with CF (an autosomal recessive trait). Rebecca and Joseph got married and Rebecca is now pregnant. Should they abort the embryo? Explain!

    B. Genetic tests showed that both Rebecca and Joseph are carriers of CF and that the embryo is homozygous for CF. Rebecca and Joseph contemplate whether or not they should have an abortion.b1 What is the moral problem under consideration?b2. Do you think they should perform an abortion? Offer reasons for your position!b3. Your friend disagrees with you. Define his/her position. Offer reasons for that position (what will your friend say to convince you that s/he is right?)4. What will you answer your friend? Explain!

  • 2. A section of a unit regarding MSK

    In order to argue well, it is important to study several basic concepts relating to argumentation. A discussion is a conversation in which the participants strive to convince each other in their positions. Participants present their beliefs by using arguments. During a discussion, an argument is an effort to convince someone to change his/her mind. It consists of two main components: 1. The conclusion, which is the main position a person would like to present; and, 2. One or more justifications that support the conclusion..

  • What is a good argument?A good argument is one in which the conclusion is well supported. The argument is supported by numerous and varied justifications and by general rules. A good argument also responses to positions that contradict it. The justifications in a good argument must be:a. True; b. Relevant to the conclusion;c. Refer to a large variety of aspect

  • Zohar, A. and Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, pp. 35-62.

  • Table 4. Performance of experimental and comparison students on the critical thinking tests

    Experimental group N SD Comparison group

    N SD *p

  • Table 6. Comparison between pre-test and post-test #1 in the experimental group

  • The thinking project is great. You know what the problem is? Its the curriculum. If we are going to spend so much time on developing students thinking, how will they ever learn all that they are supposed to know?

    (From a teacher who participated in a TSC teacher workshop)

  • Table 3. Comparison between knowledge scores in the experimental and comparison groups in two of the TSC units

  • Some kids simply cant do it ....You cannot ignore the variability among children.

    I had a beautiful lesson with students who did just that. I enjoyed them a lot. They drew conclusions and planned the experiment and made hypotheses, practically all by themselves. But this is a very strong class with excellent students. I dont think it can work with all students.

  • Figure 1. Longitudinal analysis- frequency of Distinguishing Consistently (DC), Not- Distinguishing Consistently (NDC) and Inconsistent (INC) teachers

    1

    45

    35

    20

    1

    DCINCNDC

    453520

    1

    0

    0

    0

    2

    3

  • Zohar, A., Vaaknin, E., & Degani, A. (2001). Teachers beliefs about low achieving students and higher order thinking. Teaching and Teachers Education, 17, 469-485.

  • Table 7. Students of different academic levels: scores of genetic argumentation testPre-test

    SDPost-test

    SD

  • Table 8. Students of different academic levels: scores of genetic transfer tests (relating to everyday dilemmas)Pre-test

    SDPost-test

    SD*P

  • Table 9. Students scores in the GCT tests distributed according to their biology grade. The grades range between 4 (poor) and 10 (excellent).

  • Table 9. Students scores in the GCT tests distributed according to their biology grade. The grades range between 4 (poor) and 10 (excellent).

  • METACOGNITION STUDYResearch design: Equal numbers of LA and HA students were randomly assigned into two treatment groups: experimental and control. We thus had a total of four experimental sub-groups in a 2X2 design: LA experimental sub-group, LA control sub-group, HA experimental sub-group and HA control sub-group.

  • Strategic knowledge: mean scores of experimental and control groups in practice sessions

    1

    0.94920634920.485

    0.8730158730.4441666667

    0.8690476190.465

    0.71111111110.3125

    0.28571428570.215

    Experimental

    Control

    Sessions

    Proportions Means of Valid Inferences

  • Strategic knowledge regarding the 4 sub-groups: mean scores of HA and LA students in practice sessions.

    0.98484848480.910.49444444440.4772727273

    10.73333333330.38333333330.4939393939

    0.95454545450.7750.60.3545454545

    0.92727272730.47333333330.31111111110.3136363636

    0.52727272730.020.22222222220.2090909091

    HA Experimental

    LA Experimental

    HA Control

    LA Control

    Session

    Proportion of valid Inferences

  • Meta Strategic knowledge: means of experimental and control groups in practice sessions.

    4.63809523812.3

    4.37142857142.54

    2.29523809521.91

    Experimental

    Control

    Session

    Mean MSK score

  • Meta Strategic knowledge regarding the 4 sub-groups: mean scores of HA and LA students in practice sessions

    5.10909090914.122.88888888891.8181818182

    5.07272727273.632.1636363636

    3.21818181821.282.46666666671.4545454545

    HA Experimental

    LA Experimental

    HA Control

    LA Control

    Session

    Proportion Means of Meta Strategic Knowledge

  • Strategic knowledge regarding the 4 sub-groups: mean scores of HA and LA students in transfer and retention sessions

    10.980.780.61

    10.930.810.48

    10.850.740.47

    10.80.710.54

    HA Experimental

    LA Experimental

    HA Control

    LA Control

    Session

    Proportion Mean in Valid Inferences

    Retention (far transfer task)Retention (near transfer task)Far TransferNear Transfer

    HA Experimental1111

    LA Experimental0.980.930.850.8

    HA Control0.780.810.740.71

    LA Control0.610.480.470.54

  • Meta Strategic knowledge regarding the 4 sub-groups: mean scores of HA and LA students in transfer and retention sessions

    5.51515151525.33333333334.523.696969697

    5.51515151525.33333333334.144.09

    HA Experimental

    LA Experimental

    HA Control

    LA Control

    Session

    Mean MSK Score

  • For a copy of the article please write:

    msazohar@mscc.huji.ac.il

    Here we see the means score of the strategic knowledge in the experimental and control groups in practice sessionsThe blue line represents the experimental group and the pink line represents the control gorupWe can see that the experimental group achieved higher scores than the control group

    Here we can see the strategic knowledge mean scores of the 4 sub-groups in practice sessions.The blue line represents the high experimental group, the pink line represents the low experimental group, the green line represents the high control group and the red line represents the low control group.we can see that LA students in the experimental group who had the lowest scores in the pre-test, performed in the sessions that took place after the intervention almost as good as the HA students in the experimental group and better than the LA and HA students in the control group.

    Now I will move to part two, describing the meta strategic knowledge findings.Here we can see the mean scores of Meta Strategic knowledge in experimental and control groups in practice sessions.The blue line represents the experimental group and the pink line represents the control groupAs in the strategic knowledge, also here, the experimental group achieved higher mean scores than the control group.

    Here we can see the meta strategic mean scores of the 4 sub-groups in practice sessions.The blue line represents the high experimental group, the pink line represents the low experimental group, the green line represents the high control group and the red line represents the low control group.we can see that low students in the experimental group who had the same mean scores in the pre test as the low students in the control group, performed, in the sessions that took place after the intervention, better than the low, and even the high students of the control group.