| Project/Area Number |
16K04697
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Education on school subjects and activities
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Ehime University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2016-04-01 – 2020-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2019)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥4,550,000 (Direct Cost: ¥3,500,000、Indirect Cost: ¥1,050,000)
Fiscal Year 2019: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2018: ¥910,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000、Indirect Cost: ¥210,000)
Fiscal Year 2017: ¥1,430,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,100,000、Indirect Cost: ¥330,000)
Fiscal Year 2016: ¥1,170,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000、Indirect Cost: ¥270,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 構成的な学習 / 教授的な学習 / 理解の定着 / 過程や結論の再現 / 問題解決 / 構成的学習及び教授的学習による問題解決の実施 / ２ヶ月後・半年後の理解状況調査 / 教育学 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
The following statements are the results of student transformations over two months, six months, one year, two years, and three years. 1. Problem-solving through constructive study was deemed to lead to better retaining of concepts. Furthermore, students who reached the right answers through constructive study displayed high retention levels and relatively low rates of inability to reproduce results. 2. With regard to shifts in the rates of students who could reproduce results and had confidence in reproducibility, similar shifts and transformations were noted for both problem-solving formats. 3. Students who were able to reproduce the results at an early stage were able to do so and/or to develop suitable solutions at high rates even after three years, regardless of the problem-solving format. 4. Although constructive solutions were initially shared, further amendments and improvements can be made, and more changes toward suitable solutions are possible.
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
学習者たちだけの構成的な学習による解決は、教師によるスムーズで理解しやすいと想定される教授的な学習による解決と比べて、必ずしも劣るものではなく、理解の定着の点においては、自らが解決を図っているため、再現の可能性も再現の自信度も高いことがわかった。しかしながら、その解決は、必ずしも事前に想定される妥当な解決に至る保証はなく、その点が問題である。実際には、上手く教師が介入し、学習者たちの主体的な学習が保障された中で、教師を含めた授業参加者全員で妥当と判断する解決を図っていく必要がある。また、教授的な学習は学習の終着完了を生み出しやすく、構成的な解決は更なる学習の継続を生む可能性があると整理できた。
|
