本文選題：高校教師 + 課堂教學(xué)�。� 參考：《西南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：教師課堂提問質(zhì)量是影響教學(xué)質(zhì)量的關(guān)鍵因素,課堂提問質(zhì)量的高低決定教學(xué)效度的大小。日本教育家齋藤喜博稱提問為“教學(xué)的生命”。提問是教學(xué)過程中教師和學(xué)生之間常有的一種相互交流的教學(xué)技能,也是任何一種教學(xué)重要的、中心的技能；教師課堂提問不僅對于學(xué)生,而且對于教師都具有非常重要的意義,它不僅可以吸引學(xué)生注意力,引導(dǎo)學(xué)生積極思考,激發(fā)學(xué)習(xí)興趣,而且學(xué)生的回答還可以使教師了解學(xué)生知識(shí)掌握狀況,促使師生共同對于問題有更全面的把握和更深刻的理解。 高校教學(xué)改革是高等教育改革的核心,教學(xué)質(zhì)量是高等教育質(zhì)量的重心。教學(xué)質(zhì)量的決定因素有很多,教師提問質(zhì)量是其重要的一方面。而在高校課堂教學(xué)中,教師整堂課都在講,節(jié)課下來一次都不提問的現(xiàn)象時(shí)有發(fā)生�；蚴翘崃藛�,也只是為了調(diào)節(jié)一下課堂氛圍,而沒有真正去探究實(shí)質(zhì)性的問題。因此,高校課堂教學(xué)中提問功能異化,教師問題設(shè)計(jì)不當(dāng),提問類型不均衡,現(xiàn)實(shí)中教師不重視提問等,導(dǎo)致提問質(zhì)量不高,提問不能夠發(fā)揮其應(yīng)有的價(jià)值。 本研究在開展高校教師課堂教學(xué)提問行為現(xiàn)狀調(diào)查的基礎(chǔ)上,通過理論探討和實(shí)證研究,對高校教師的課堂教學(xué)提問質(zhì)量作了較為深入系統(tǒng)的分析。本研究立足于規(guī)范完善教師課堂教學(xué)提問行為,提高課堂提問質(zhì)量,從而提高教學(xué)質(zhì)量,以期為廣大高校教師課堂教學(xué)實(shí)踐提供一定的參考。 本研究主要運(yùn)用訪談法、課堂觀察法及問卷調(diào)查法。在已有理論的基礎(chǔ)上,本研究設(shè)計(jì)了教師課堂提問質(zhì)量的5個(gè)一級指標(biāo)——難度、效度、跨度、坡度、適度,每個(gè)一級指標(biāo)下設(shè)10個(gè)二級指標(biāo),根據(jù)各個(gè)指標(biāo)編制觀察量表,并對量表進(jìn)行信度及效度分析,均符合統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義上的信效度。對重慶市某高校42節(jié)課進(jìn)行課堂觀察,得出以下結(jié)論： (1)42節(jié)課教師總共提出問題118個(gè),平均每節(jié)課提問2.81個(gè),從每節(jié)課的平均提問數(shù)量看,工科理科文科。 (2)高校教師課堂提問質(zhì)量的整體水平一般,均值為3.60,三大學(xué)科的提問質(zhì)量整體均值較為接近,排名為：理科工科文科； (3)對三大學(xué)科的各項(xiàng)維度進(jìn)行差異檢驗(yàn),一級維度總均值最高的是難度,均值最低的是跨度；二級維度中均值最高的是恰當(dāng)時(shí)機(jī),均值最低的是跨科知識(shí)；在一級維度上,工科與理科在提問的跨度上差異顯著,理科顯著高于工科；理科與文科在難度和跨度方面均存在差異,理科顯著高于文科,而工科與文科無差異。在二級維度上,工科與理科在學(xué)科知識(shí)這一項(xiàng)存在差異；理科與文科在教學(xué)目標(biāo)和學(xué)生水平以及學(xué)科知識(shí)均存在差異。而工科與文科僅在學(xué)科知識(shí)這一項(xiàng)上存在差異。 (4)提問類型方面,136個(gè)問題中,接近一半的問題屬于知識(shí)型,所占比例為最大。理解型問題約占1／4,其次依次是分析型11%、綜合型8.8%、運(yùn)用型7.4%,而評價(jià)型問題所占比例為最小,僅有5.9%。 問卷調(diào)查針對該校的112名教師以及167名學(xué)生展開,調(diào)查涉及文、理、工、經(jīng)濟(jì)、管理、教育等學(xué)科,樣本具有一定的代表性。調(diào)查結(jié)果表明：(1)絕大部分高校教師和學(xué)生認(rèn)識(shí)到了提問的必要性,即97.4%的教師和89.8%的學(xué)生認(rèn)為大學(xué)課堂上教師有必要提問；引導(dǎo)思考,形成互動(dòng)、了解知識(shí)掌握為師生一致認(rèn)同的課堂提問的重要的三大作用。(2)提問可以保持教師集中注意力以及組織教學(xué)則相對不被重視。(3)對于衡量課堂提問質(zhì)量的十項(xiàng)指標(biāo),激發(fā)思考均排在第一位,跨科知識(shí)均排在最后一位,與觀察結(jié)果一致。 本研究的價(jià)值有理論和實(shí)踐兩個(gè)方面。理論方面,豐富了提問研究在高等教育領(lǐng)域的成果,為提問質(zhì)量的研究提供理論支持；實(shí)踐方面,對高校教師提高課堂提問質(zhì)量有一定的參考與借鑒作用。 本研究的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)在于：(1)在對已有文獻(xiàn)分析的基礎(chǔ)之上,整理、編訂《高校教師課堂提問質(zhì)量指標(biāo)》,為提問質(zhì)量的研究提供一個(gè)參考標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。(2)制定了信效度合理的《高校教師課堂提問行為觀察量表》,并運(yùn)用它對高校課堂提問進(jìn)行了觀察研究。
[Abstract]:The quality of teacher questioning is the key factor affecting the quality of teaching. The quality of the classroom questions determines the size of the teaching validity. Japanese educationist Saito Kihiro called the question "the life of teaching". The teacher's classroom questioning is not only very important to the students but also for the teachers. It can not only attract students' attention, guide the students to think actively and stimulate their interest in learning, but also the students' answers can make the teachers understand the situation of the students' knowledge and grasp the situation, so that the teachers and students will be more comprehensive for the problems. The grasp and the deeper understanding.
The reform of college teaching is the core of the reform of higher education. The quality of teaching is the center of gravity of the quality of higher education. There are many determinants of the quality of teaching. The quality of the teacher's question is an important aspect. It is to adjust the atmosphere of the classroom, but not to really explore the substantive problems. Therefore, the questioning function of the classroom teaching is dissimilated, the teacher's problem design is unsuitable, the type of question is not balanced, the teacher does not attach importance to the question in reality, which leads to the poor quality of the question, and the question can not play its due value.
On the basis of the investigation of the present situation of the questioning behavior in the classroom teaching of college teachers, this study makes a thorough and systematic analysis of the quality of the questioning of the teachers in the classroom through theoretical and empirical research. This study is based on standardizing and perfecting the questioning behavior of teachers' Classroom Teaching, improving the quality of classroom questioning, and thus improving the quality of teaching. In order to provide some reference for the general university teachers' classroom teaching practice.
This study mainly uses interview, classroom observation and questionnaire survey. On the basis of the existing theories, this study designs the 5 first grade indicators of teacher questioning quality in the classroom - difficulty, validity, span, slope, moderate, each level index has 10 two level indicators, according to each index, the observation scale is compiled, and the reliability of the scale is made. The validity and reliability of the 42 classes of a university in Chongqing were observed.
(1) a total of 118 questions were raised by the 42 class teachers, with 2.81 questions per class on average.
(2) the overall level of the quality of College Teachers' Questioning in class is generally 3.60, and the overall mean of the quality of the questions in the three major subjects is close, which is ranked as science engineering arts.
(3) to test the differences of the dimensions of the three major disciplines, the highest of the average value of the first level dimension is the difficulty, the lowest is the span; the highest average in the two level dimension is the appropriate time, the lowest is the interdisciplinary knowledge; in the first degree dimension, the span of the science and Science in the question is distinct, science is significantly higher than science and science. There are differences in degree of difficulty and span between liberal arts and liberal arts. Science is significantly higher than liberal arts, but there is no difference between engineering and liberal arts. In the two level, there is a difference in the subject knowledge between science and science; science and liberal arts are different in teaching goals, students' level and subject knowledge. There is a difference.
(4) in the type of question, about half of the 136 problems belong to the knowledge type, the proportion of which is the largest. The understanding problem accounts for about 1 / 4, followed by the analysis type 11%, the comprehensive 8.8% and the application type 7.4%, while the proportion of the evaluation type is the smallest, only 5.9%.
The questionnaire survey was carried out by 112 teachers and 167 students in the school. The survey involved the subjects of literature, science, industry, economics, management, education and other subjects. The survey showed that: (1) most of the college teachers and students realized the necessity of asking questions, that is, 97.4% teachers and 89.8% students considered the teachers in the university class. It is necessary to ask questions; to guide thinking, to form an interaction, to understand the important three important roles of knowledge mastery in classroom questioning by teachers and students. (2) questions can keep the attention of the teachers and the organizational teaching is relatively unattached. (3) to measure the quality of questions in the class, the first, interdisciplinary knowledge is the first. All of them were in the last place, consistent with the observation.
The value of this study has two aspects of theory and practice. In theory, it enriches the achievements of question research in the field of higher education and provides theoretical support for the study of quality of questions. In practice, it has a certain reference and reference for college teachers to improve the quality of classroom questions.
The innovation points of this study are: (1) on the basis of the existing literature analysis, collating and arranging the quality indexes of Teacher Questioning in the classroom, and providing a reference standard for the study of the quality of questions. (2) the observability of classroom questioning behavior of college teachers is set up, which is reasonable and valid, and is used to observe the classroom questions in Colleges and universities. Research.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：G642.421

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 龔放,岳曉東;強(qiáng)化問題意識(shí) 造就創(chuàng)新人才[J];高等教育研究;2000年01期

2 洪松舟;盧正芝;;我國有效課堂提問研究十余年回顧與反思[J];河北師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(教育科學(xué)版);2008年12期

3 胡選萍;周芳;霍科科;王琦;秦公偉;;高校課堂教學(xué)的“優(yōu)秀元素”探析[J];現(xiàn)代教育科學(xué);2012年03期

4 楊中躍;學(xué)生反感的幾種課堂提問方式[J];教學(xué)與管理;2001年09期

5 宋振韶,張西超,徐世勇;課堂提問的模式、功能及其實(shí)施途徑[J];教育科學(xué)研究;2004年01期

6 姚本先;論學(xué)生問題意識(shí)的培養(yǎng)[J];教育研究;1995年10期

7 朱德全;張家瓊;;論教學(xué)邏輯[J];教育研究;2007年11期

8 金傳寶;美國關(guān)于教師提問技巧的研究綜述[J];課程.教材.教法;1997年02期

9 許紹康;;教師課堂提問研究進(jìn)展[J];心理研究;2008年03期

10 申繼亮,李茵;教師課堂提問行為的心理功能和評價(jià)[J];上海教育科研;1998年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 彭愛輝;初中數(shù)學(xué)教師錯(cuò)誤分析能力研究[D];西南大學(xué);2007年

2 黃偉;對話語域下的課堂提問研究[D];上海師范大學(xué);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 夏玲;大學(xué)生品牌依戀問卷的編制及其與自我概念關(guān)系的研究[D];浙江師范大學(xué);2011年

2 孫青青;中學(xué)生校服需求問卷編制[D];西南大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1799085