【摘要】：創(chuàng)新意識(shí)的培養(yǎng)是現(xiàn)代數(shù)學(xué)教育的基本任務(wù),應(yīng)體現(xiàn)在數(shù)學(xué)教與學(xué)的過(guò)程之中。學(xué)生發(fā)現(xiàn)問(wèn)題和提出問(wèn)題是創(chuàng)新的基礎(chǔ)。問(wèn)題是數(shù)學(xué)發(fā)展的源泉,也是數(shù)學(xué)創(chuàng)新的基礎(chǔ),數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題可以把思考引向深處,問(wèn)題可以發(fā)現(xiàn)新的思路。我國(guó)研究者對(duì)問(wèn)題和問(wèn)題提出內(nèi)涵解讀以及在數(shù)學(xué)課堂教學(xué)中得到特別的重視,大部分都集中在思辨論證階段,而對(duì)深入學(xué)校扎扎實(shí)實(shí)地了解、考察實(shí)際實(shí)施狀況的研究相對(duì)忽視。國(guó)外對(duì)數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出的課堂教學(xué)的研究比較豐富,而我國(guó)涉及數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題在課堂教學(xué)中的實(shí)證研究文章也較少。為此,本研究做了以下一些工作及其得出的結(jié)論:第一、通過(guò)文獻(xiàn)研究,提出高中數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出課堂教學(xué)的研究背景以及問(wèn)題、數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題、問(wèn)題提出的核心概念。第二、根據(jù)中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)課堂中問(wèn)題提出的學(xué)生活動(dòng)的強(qiáng)弱關(guān)系,構(gòu)建了數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出的課堂教學(xué)的五級(jí)水平體系。根據(jù)課堂教學(xué)中問(wèn)題提出的五級(jí)水平體系,通過(guò)問(wèn)卷和訪談的形式,調(diào)查了高中數(shù)學(xué)課堂教學(xué)中問(wèn)題提出的師生活動(dòng)究竟如何?問(wèn)題提出主要是那種水平較好?是實(shí)現(xiàn)學(xué)生自主學(xué)習(xí)、合作探究、發(fā)現(xiàn)問(wèn)題和提出問(wèn)題的教育理念,還是沿襲教師講學(xué)生聽(tīng)的教學(xué)方式?第三、通過(guò)訪談、問(wèn)卷調(diào)查、隨機(jī)聽(tīng)課、測(cè)試及教師個(gè)案分析等方法,比較了不同的課堂教學(xué)中數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出的差異,對(duì)不同程度的學(xué)生進(jìn)行了數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出的認(rèn)識(shí)、態(tài)度和影響因素等進(jìn)行對(duì)比分析;對(duì)不同學(xué)校的教師進(jìn)行了數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出的認(rèn)識(shí)、學(xué)習(xí)情況、課堂教學(xué)指導(dǎo)情況和一些外界因素的影響進(jìn)行橫向?qū)Ρ�。其研究的結(jié)果是:教師和學(xué)生都傾向于師生探究式的問(wèn)題提出教學(xué)方式;成績(jī)差異較大的學(xué)生對(duì)數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出沒(méi)有太大的差別;教師在引導(dǎo)學(xué)生提出問(wèn)題過(guò)程中起著關(guān)鍵作用。優(yōu)秀的學(xué)生更希望得到教師的直接講解;中等學(xué)生和差等生希望更多地獲得教師的鼓勵(lì)和支持;不同學(xué)校的教師都對(duì)數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出的課堂教學(xué)持“觀望”的態(tài)度,希望獲得更多的指導(dǎo);許多學(xué)生對(duì)“問(wèn)題”把握不準(zhǔn),認(rèn)為提出問(wèn)題也許不太“合適”;問(wèn)題提出的外界因素的影響也是阻礙學(xué)生問(wèn)題提出的最大“瓶頸”。第四、在問(wèn)題提出的課堂教學(xué)的個(gè)案研究中,培養(yǎng)學(xué)生良好的問(wèn)題意識(shí)還是在問(wèn)題解決中和問(wèn)題解決后進(jìn)行,學(xué)生能進(jìn)行“模仿”提出一些數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題;教師在教學(xué)時(shí)也使用“問(wèn)題”驅(qū)動(dòng)教學(xué),利用“問(wèn)題串”完成教學(xué)任務(wù),提出“問(wèn)題串”的“串聯(lián)模式”、“并聯(lián)模式”和“混聯(lián)模式”,為學(xué)生認(rèn)識(shí)并提出問(wèn)題搭建良好平臺(tái)。第五、在問(wèn)題提出的“教”與“學(xué)”中,學(xué)生要能提出問(wèn)題,離不開(kāi)教師“元認(rèn)知指導(dǎo)語(yǔ)”的引導(dǎo),對(duì)學(xué)生進(jìn)行“元認(rèn)知訓(xùn)練”有效地促進(jìn)學(xué)生在課堂教學(xué)中提出問(wèn)題。從三大因素九個(gè)方面對(duì)數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出前、數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出中和數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題提出后進(jìn)行了元認(rèn)知理論的刻畫(huà)。得出的結(jié)論是:優(yōu)秀學(xué)生的數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題出的元認(rèn)知總體上比中等生(差等生)的要好,優(yōu)秀學(xué)生在個(gè)體知識(shí)、任務(wù)知識(shí)、計(jì)劃和調(diào)控等元認(rèn)知因素中比中等生在這些方面出現(xiàn)的可能性較大。中等生和差等生在策略、反思和調(diào)控方面不如優(yōu)等生強(qiáng),中等生和差等生在提出問(wèn)題和表述問(wèn)題時(shí)表現(xiàn)出不太自信的特點(diǎn)。經(jīng)過(guò)訓(xùn)練在學(xué)生的問(wèn)題提出的元認(rèn)知體驗(yàn)方面,中等生和優(yōu)等生沒(méi)有太大的差別。中等生在問(wèn)題提出的態(tài)度上容易獲得成功的體驗(yàn),優(yōu)等生除了提出問(wèn)題之外,還要考慮其它別的因素人,如怎樣解決、是否合理等,中等生在這方面考慮欠佳。
[Abstract]:The cultivation of innovative consciousness is the basic task of modern mathematics education, which should be embodied in the process of mathematics teaching and learning. Students discover problems and propose problems as the basis of innovation. Problems are the source of mathematical development and the basis of mathematical innovation. Mathematical problems can lead their thinking to the depths, and problems can find new ideas. Most of them concentrate on the stage of speculation and argumentation, but neglect the study of thoroughly understanding the school and investigating the actual implementation. Therefore, this study has done the following work and its conclusions: first, through literature research, put forward the research background and problems of high school mathematics classroom teaching, mathematical problems, the core concepts of the problem. second, according to the middle school mathematics classroom problems. This paper puts forward the relationship between the strength and weakness of students'activities, and constructs a five-level system of classroom teaching for mathematical problems. According to the five-level system of classroom teaching problems, through questionnaires and interviews, the author investigates what kind of teacher-life activities are put forward in high school mathematics classroom teaching. The main problem is what kind of level is better. Is it the educational idea of realizing students'autonomous learning, cooperative inquiry, finding problems and raising questions, or is it the teaching method that teachers teach students to listen to? Thirdly, through interviews, questionnaires, random lectures, tests and teacher case analysis, this paper compares the differences of mathematical problems in different classroom teaching, and makes a comparison between students of different degrees. This paper makes a contrastive analysis of the understanding, attitude and influencing factors of mathematical problems, and makes a horizontal comparison of the understanding, learning, classroom instruction and some external factors of teachers in different schools. The excellent students want to be explained directly by the teachers; the middle and poor students want more encouragement and support from the teachers; teachers in different schools all want more encouragement and support from the teachers. Many students hold a "wait-and-see" attitude toward the classroom teaching of mathematical problems, hoping to get more guidance; many students are not sure about the "problems" and think it may not be "appropriate" to ask questions; the influence of the external factors of the problems is also the biggest "bottleneck" to hinder students'problems. Fourthly, classroom teaching of problem-solving is proposed. In the case study, the cultivation of students'good problem consciousness is still carried out in the process of problem solving and after problem solving, students can "imitate" to raise some mathematical problems; teachers also use "problem" to drive teaching, use "problem series" to complete teaching tasks, and put forward "series" and "parallel" of "problem series". Fifthly, in the "teaching" and "learning" put forward in the question, students can ask questions without the guidance of the teacher's "meta-cognitive guidance", and the "meta-cognitive training" can effectively promote students to ask questions in classroom teaching. The conclusion is that the excellent students'metacognition of mathematical problems is generally better than the middle students' (poor students'), and the excellent students'metacognition of individual knowledge, task knowledge, planning and regulation is better than the middle students' (poor students'). Medium students and poor students are not as good as top students in strategy, reflection and regulation, and middle students and poor students are not very confident in asking and expressing questions. There are too many differences. The middle school students are easy to get a successful experience in problem-solving attitude. Besides asking questions, the top students should also consider other factors, such as how to solve the problem, whether it is reasonable or not. The middle school students are not good at this aspect.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：貴州師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：G633.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李吉寶;論學(xué)生數(shù)學(xué)素質(zhì)培養(yǎng)的有關(guān)問(wèn)題[J];安徽教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

2 竇盼英;;從線性規(guī)劃課例談探究型教學(xué)模式的設(shè)計(jì)[J];安陽(yáng)師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

3 夏小剛;呂傳漢;;美國(guó)數(shù)學(xué)教育中的提出問(wèn)題研究綜述[J];比較教育研究;2006年02期

4 黃勇;“問(wèn)題解決”與中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)課程教學(xué)[J];福建教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期

5 陳顯強(qiáng);問(wèn)題解決與數(shù)學(xué)教學(xué)改革[J];廣東廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2001年02期

6 楊彥金;談情境創(chuàng)設(shè)在思想政治課中的應(yīng)用[J];廣西教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年S1期

7 張維忠;;跨文化數(shù)學(xué)教育研究綜述[J];當(dāng)代教育與文化;2011年03期

8 章建躍;;沒(méi)有“過(guò)程”=沒(méi)有“思想”[J];中小學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)(高中版);2008年09期

9 蔣曉武;;培養(yǎng)學(xué)生“提問(wèn)能力”的認(rèn)識(shí)與實(shí)踐[J];職業(yè)教育研究;2006年02期

10 劉元宗;數(shù)學(xué)問(wèn)題解決及其教學(xué)[J];課程.教材.教法;2004年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張偉民;教學(xué)網(wǎng)站的輔助教學(xué)研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：2223115