【摘要】：教材改革是基礎(chǔ)教育課程改革的重要方面,而教材難度又是教材組成中的重點(diǎn)部分,有效地把握教材難度,是新課程改革的一個(gè)重點(diǎn)工作�！敖y(tǒng)計(jì)與概率”內(nèi)容在當(dāng)代受到越來越多的重視,在初中數(shù)學(xué)教學(xué)中占據(jù)著重要的地位,但是不同版本之間在內(nèi)容的廣度、深度以及習(xí)題的難度等方面存在較大差異,因此需要對(duì)其難度進(jìn)行深入地對(duì)比研究。選取初中四年學(xué)制下的人教版、魯教版和滬教版數(shù)學(xué)教材,以其中的“統(tǒng)計(jì)與概率”作為研究對(duì)象,采用新課改組長史寧中等建立的“課程難度模型”和鮑建生建立的“數(shù)學(xué)題綜合難度模型”,分別從課程難度和習(xí)題難度兩個(gè)方面進(jìn)行定量分析,從而比較不同版本之間的難度差異,為教材的編寫、教師的教學(xué)等提供建議和依據(jù)。在課程難度部分,得出課程難度的大小順序?yàn)?滬教版的課程難度最大,魯教版次之,人教版較小,《數(shù)學(xué)課程標(biāo)準(zhǔn)》最小。在習(xí)題難度部分,得出的結(jié)論是:魯教版在“背景、推理、運(yùn)算”這三個(gè)因素上均高于其他兩個(gè)版本,人教版在“探究、知識(shí)含量”兩個(gè)因素上是占優(yōu)勢的。總體上來說,滬教版的難度是最低的。最后,根據(jù)得出的難度結(jié)論,深入分析每一種版本的教材情況,提出針對(duì)性的優(yōu)化意見。對(duì)于滬教版,主要存在的問題是課時(shí)量少,題目與生活背景聯(lián)系相對(duì)較少,應(yīng)著重從這兩個(gè)方面進(jìn)行優(yōu)化。魯教版存在的主要問題是習(xí)題數(shù)量過多,應(yīng)當(dāng)篩選出具有代表性的題目供學(xué)生練習(xí),另外,魯教版絕大多數(shù)為基礎(chǔ)題目,知識(shí)含量少,不利于學(xué)生形成完整的知識(shí)結(jié)構(gòu),所以在題目設(shè)計(jì)上應(yīng)當(dāng)注重增加題目知識(shí)量。人教版的最大特點(diǎn)是課時(shí)量過大,容易導(dǎo)致時(shí)間利用效率不高,可以適當(dāng)縮短課時(shí)量,或者進(jìn)行有效地知識(shí)拓展。
[Abstract]:Teaching material reform is an important aspect of the basic education curriculum reform, and the difficulty of teaching material is the key part of the teaching material composition. It is a key work of the new curriculum reform to grasp the difficulty of the teaching material effectively. More and more attention has been paid to the content of "Statistics and probability" in the contemporary times, which occupies an important position in mathematics teaching in junior high school. However, there are great differences in the breadth, depth and difficulty of exercises between different versions of the contents. Therefore, it is necessary to carry on the deep contrast research to its difficulty. In this paper, we choose the mathematics teaching materials of the four years junior high school system, including the "statistics and probability" as the research object, and the mathematics textbooks of the four years of junior high school, the Lujiao edition and the Shanghai edition. Adopting the "course difficulty model" established by Shi Ningzhong, the new curriculum reform leader, and the "mathematics comprehensive difficulty model" by Bao Jiansheng, respectively, the quantitative analysis is carried out from the two aspects of the course difficulty and the exercise difficulty. Therefore, the differences between different versions of the difficulty are compared, and suggestions and bases are provided for the compilation of teaching materials and the teaching of teachers. In the difficulty part of the course, the order of the difficulty of the course is as follows: the Shanghai edition is the most difficult, the Lu version is the second, the human version is small, and the Mathematics Curriculum Standard is the least. In the difficulty part of the exercises, the conclusion is that the three factors of "background, reasoning and operation" are higher than those of the other two versions, while the two factors of "inquiry and knowledge content" are dominant. On the whole, the Shanghai version of the difficulty is the lowest. Finally, according to the difficulty conclusion, this paper analyzes the situation of each version of the textbook, and puts forward some suggestions for optimization. For the Shanghai Education Edition, the main problem is that the amount of class hours is less, the connection between the topic and the living background is relatively small, so we should focus on the optimization from these two aspects. The main problem of the Lu education edition is that the number of exercises is too large, so we should screen out representative questions for students to practice. In addition, most of the problems in the Lu education edition are based on the topic, and the knowledge content is less, which is not conducive to the formation of the complete knowledge structure of the students. So in the topic design should pay attention to increase the amount of topic knowledge. The biggest characteristic of the edition is that the amount of class hours is too large, which can lead to inefficient use of time, which can shorten the amount of class hours or expand knowledge effectively.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：魯東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：G633.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

中國期刊全文數(shù)據(jù)庫 前10條

1 陳志輝;;中美兩國初中數(shù)學(xué)課程的問題情境水平比較研究——以“函數(shù)”內(nèi)容為例[J];數(shù)學(xué)教育學(xué)報(bào);2016年01期

2 孔企平;許自強(qiáng);陳志輝;彭墨緣;;近十年來國際數(shù)學(xué)教育研究趨勢[J];全球教育展望;2015年12期

3 史寧中;孔凡哲;嚴(yán)家麗;崔英梅;;十國高中數(shù)學(xué)教材的若干比較研究及啟示[J];外國教育研究;2015年10期

4 沈繼俠;;中俄數(shù)學(xué)教科書分?jǐn)?shù)習(xí)題難度的比較研究——以人教版和俄羅斯АСТ版為例[J];課程教學(xué)研究;2015年10期

5 徐玉慶;;中、新兩國初中數(shù)學(xué)習(xí)題綜合難度比較研究——以人教版、新加坡教材中“三角形有關(guān)的角”為例[J];中學(xué)數(shù)學(xué);2015年12期

6 王建磐;鮑建生;;高中數(shù)學(xué)教材中例題的綜合難度的國際比較[J];全球教育展望;2014年08期

7 郭玉峰;;中澳高中數(shù)學(xué)課程難度的量化研究[J];中國教育學(xué)刊;2014年04期

8 嚴(yán)家麗;孔凡哲;李清;;中美高中數(shù)學(xué)教材難度特征的比較研究——以《核心數(shù)學(xué)課程》和人教A版教材為例[J];上海教育科研;2014年03期

9 吳立寶;王建波;曹一鳴;;初中數(shù)學(xué)教科書習(xí)題國際比較研究[J];課程.教材.教法;2014年02期

10 張維忠;李芳奇;;新加坡與中國數(shù)學(xué)教材的特色比較[J];外國中小學(xué)教育;2009年02期

，

本文編號(hào)：2252836