教育技术学--杨九民--第二章
- 格式:ppt
- 大小:590.50 KB
- 文档页数:128
贵州师范大学硕士研究生入学考试大纲(复试)(科目:教育技术学基础)本科目复试内容包括“教育技术学导论”和“教育技术学研究方法”两部分。
一、考查目标(一)教育技术学导论1.考生对教育技术学的基础知识、基本概念和基本理论的掌握情况;2.考生对信息技术支持的教与学相关基础知识、基本理论的掌握情况;3.考生对国家关于教育信息化方面有关方针、近期政策及其影响的熟悉程度;4.考生对教育信息技术新领域、新发展、新动态的熟悉情况。
(二)教育技术学研究方法1.考生对教育技术学研究的基本理论、基本概念及常用研究方法的熟悉程度;2.考生开展科学研究和实际工作的能力,从实践问题中选择有价值的、新颖的、可行的研究方法,运用教育技术学的基本理论与常用方法分析、解决教育技术学领域的理论与实践问题;3.考生对教育技术学研究设计、数据分析与处理过程、途径与常用工具软件的掌握情况。
二、考查范围(一)教育技术学导论1.教育技术概述教育技术的本质、教育技术定义与内涵;教育技术的产生、形成与发展过程;教育技术学的学科性质及研究范畴;教育技术的理论基础(学习理论、教学理论、传播与媒体理论、系统科学理论、信息科学理论等)。
2.信息技术支持的教与学信息化教学设计理论、实践与应用;学习资源的开发与应用;信息化环境下的教学模式;信息化教学策略与教学方法;信息化教学评价方法与过程。
3.教育信息化建设教育信息化的概念、特征及其对教育改革的影响;教育信息化领域最新政策文件。
4.教育信息技术新领域、新发展、新动态网络与在线教育、创客与STEAN教育、人工智能与教育大数据、云技术等前沿发展与动态;教育信息技术前沿发展对教育的作用与影响。
(二)教育技术学研究方法1.教育技术学研究概述教育研究的概念与内涵;。
综合测试试卷三一.单项选择题1、网络教育中采用的网上考试属于教育技术研究范畴中的_____。
A.设计B.开发C.管理D.评价2、用计算机展示图片辅助课堂讲授,秉承了教育技术中_______的发展思路。
A.视听教学B.程序教学C.班级授课D.多媒体教学3、我国的教育技术实际上开始于20世纪初,在60多年的发展过程中一直被称为_____,直到20世纪八、九十年代才逐渐采纳了国际上的普遍提法——教育技术。
A.教学技术B.视听教育C.电化教育D.教育工艺4、教学设计一般过程中不断进行的形成性评价和修改的过程运用了系统科学中的_____。
A. 反馈原理B 有序原理C. 整体原理D. 控制原理5、下列关于戴尔“经验之塔”理论说法中错误的是________。
A.教学应从具体入手,逐步抽象,但也不能过分强调直接经验,还应注意引导学生发展抽象思维B.电视节目可以将遥远的宇宙、微小的生物、缓慢的花开过程等这些人眼不能观察到的事物栩栩如生地呈现在我们面前,为我们提供了丰富的直接经验C.提出了从具体到抽象划分学习经验的观点,后来成为视听教材分类的理论依据D.由于既照顾到了形象性,又摈弃了亲自实践中很多非本质因素的干扰,由媒体提供的经验往往能产生更好的学习效果6、拉斯威尔的5W传播模式中的“to whom”相当与香农-韦佛模式中的______,在传统教学中一般是学生。
A.信源B.信道C.信宿D.噪声7、被誉为当代程序教学之父的是_______。
A.皮亚杰B.斯金纳C.普莱西D.布鲁纳8、对从属技能的分析属于教学设计环节中的_______。
A.需求分析B.学习者分析C.学习内容分析D.学习目标分析9、在写电视节目的分镜头稿本时,下列描述镜头的项目中应填入“技巧”一栏的是_____。
A.特写B.摇C.7秒D.音乐渐起10、能体现学习者个体在实施信息加工、形成假设和解决问题过程的速度和准确性的学习风格分类是_______。
A.沉思型和冲动型B.整体策略型和序列策略型C.场依存型和场独立型D.顺时加工型和继时加工型二.多项选择题1.适合在接受式教学的导入阶段所做的工作有_____________。
教育技术学专业(26)硕士研究生培养方案一.培养目标本专业主要培养德、智、体全面发展的,适应社会主义现代化建设需要的教育技术学专业专门人才,其具体要求是:1.较好地掌握马克思主义基本原理,坚持党的基本路线、热爱祖国、遵纪守法,有好的品德,乐于为社会主义现代化建设服务。
2.在教育技术学科方面,掌握坚实的基础理论和较系统的知识,熟悉该学科国内外研究的历史、现状及发展趋势,较熟练地掌握一门外国语。
3.初步具备能独立进行教育技术方面的科学研究与教学工作的能力。
4.热爱教师工作,具有健康的体格。
二.研究方向1.计算机辅助教育2.教育影视技术3.教育电子技术三.学习年限与学分学习年限一般为三年,各方向的课程学习时间为两年,从事科学研究和学位论文工作时间为一年左右,参加教学实践和调查研究分别为四周。
每个方向的总学分为38分,其中学位课程学分24学分(含三个方向的公共必修课),教育实践为2学分。
四、课程设置(一)学位课程(本专业各方向硕士生公共必修课,计24学分)(二)指定选修课程(按研究方向设置)(三)任意选修课程五.教学实践三个研究方向的硕士均要参加本科的教学工作,主要是参加与三个方向有关的实验教学工作,均安排在第一或第二学年,总计不少于40课时的实验教学工作,成绩合格者计2学分。
六.调查研究在培养过程中,坚持理论联系实际,根据科研和学位论文的需要,引导和支持硕士生进行资料收集=科技咨询或学术研讨等,进行调研活动累计为一月左右(四周),无论进行那一种调研,必须有充分和周密的前期准备,调研结束后,要写出调研报告,由导师评定成绩。
七.科学研究及学位论文1.本专业硕士生在校期间应至少完成2篇课程论文。
其中应至少有2篇论文在省级或省级以上刊物上公开发表。
2.本专业硕士研究生至迟应在第4学期末确定学位论文题目通过学位论文开题报告,并订出学位论文工作计划。
3.本专业硕士生学位论文选题及学术水平的要求为:1)在理论与技术上有一定的创新;2)在实际应用中能解决某些应用中的具体问题;3)能结合论文的内容综述国内外有关方面研究的动态和发展方向;4)努力做到在理论研究、技术水平上达到国内外先进水平。
全国高等教育自学考试《教育技术》0413考试重点4第一章教育技术开展的简史和概念的演变三种教学方法的实践:A.视听教学的开展B.程序教学的开展C.系统化教学设计的开展视听教学方法:一种以视听设备和相应软件为辅助手段的教学方法。
视听教学开展的阶段:视听教学的初期阶段:19世纪末、20世纪初〔1918年—1942年〕二战期间机器战后十年的视听教学的开展〔1941-1945-1955〕3视听教学向视听教学传播学开展〔1955——1965〕程序教学方法:个别化教学是一种适合个别学习者需要和特点的教学。
学生个别地自学,在方法上允许学习者自定目标、自定步调,自己选择学习的方法、媒体和材料。
系统化设计教学方法:称为教学系统方法,是一种系统地设计、实施和评价学生学与教全过程的方法。
,该方法最早可以从17世纪夸美纽斯提出的“用归纳法来分析和改进教学的进程〞。
第二章教育技术的定义实质和知识体系教育技术的定义:根本定义:在视听教学运动的背景下,指的是教学过程中所应用的技术手段〔教学媒体的硬件和软件〕和技术方法〔教学过程的设计方法或教学系统方法〕。
教育技术领域的定义:它是三种概念〔学习者为中心、依靠资源、运用系统方法〕综合应用于教育、教学实践而形成的一个具有特色的专门的教育实践与研究领域。
该书认为:教育技术是一个分析问题并对解决问题的方案进行设计、实施、评价和管理的综合完成的过程。
美国学者把教育技术应用于解决教学问题的根本指导思想为:以学习者为中心、依靠资源、运用系统教育技术学科的定义:教育技术是教育技术学的研究对象,教育技术学是研究教育技术的理论。
它是教育学科中的一个分支学科。
教学技术是为了促进学习而对资源与过程进行设计、开发、利用、管理和评价的理论与实践。
目的:为了促进学习研究对象:过程和资源根本内容:设计、开发、利用、管理、评价根本知道:系统方法教育技术学的知识体系美国AECT的1994年关于教育技术的定义:教育技术是为了促进学习对资源与过程进行设计、开发、利用、管理和评价的理论与实践。
综合测试试卷二一.单项选择题1、程序教学是以_A_______为理论依据的。
A.行为主义B.认知主义C.建构主义D.客观主义2、教学也是一种传播活动,拉斯威尔5W传播模式中的要素“with which channel”在教学传播过程中指___B____。
A.教学方法B.教学媒体C.教学模式D.教学内容3、奥苏泊尔在其提倡的有意义的学习中提出用一段高抽象、高概括、或高综合水平的材料,在学习者已知与未知知识间架设桥梁,这就是著名的_____C___策略,是媒体教学重要的理论依据之一。
A.认知结构B.认知同化C.先行组织者D.动机激发4、当教师要求学生用绘图软件画出给定的函数图像并探索之中规律时,媒体充当了__B______。
A.演示工具B 认知工具C.效能工具D.通讯工具5、利用光学投影仪器进行教学,其主要操作步骤顺序是______B__:(1)放上投影片,四周注意遮光。
(2)打开反射镜盖。
(3)调正调焦旋钮角度,映出最佳图像。
(4)接通电源使光源与散热风扇同时工作。
A.1234B.4213C.2413D.14326、将数码摄像机拍摄的画面和声音采集进非线性编辑系统时,我们用的是__D___接口。
A.RF INB.VIDEO INC.RGB IND.DV7、从系统科学的观点来看,因使用话筒不当引起的音箱啸叫是一种___A____现象。
A.正反馈B.负反馈C.自组织D.自适应8、用电视手段展现健美操的动作过程时,我们通常采用全景拍摄;而在进行钢琴教学时,则应多采用____D___镜头,以便更清楚地表现手指的运动。
A.远景B.中景C.近景D.特写9、学生在宿舍通过网上点播教师课堂授课的视频进行学习,这是一种B_______的教学组织形式。
A.集体授课B.个别学习C.小组学习D.远程学习10、学会根据字数和韵脚辨别诗词的格律或词牌,是一种___B___学习。
A.言语信息B.智力技能C.认知策略D.动作技能11、能体现学习者个体在实施信息加工、形成假设和解决问题过程的速度和准确性的学习风格分类是___A____。
教育技术学专业(040110) 硕士研究生培养方案2012 年 6 月一、专业概况教育技术学作为教育学领域一个独立二级学科成立于 1993 年,因此是一个年轻而又充满活力与挑战的综合应用性学科。
南京大学教育技术的历史可以追溯至 20 世纪 30 年代,金陵大学(南京大学的前身之一)在我国首创电化教育专业,先后培养了 14 届毕业生,成为中国第一代电化教育创始人和奠基者的摇篮。
南京大学教育研究院于 2003 年开始挂靠本系课程与教学论方向培养教育技术学方向硕士研究生,于 2007 年独立招收教育技术学专业硕士研究生。
本专业借鉴国际教育技术学专业人才培养的前沿与经验,秉承我国同类专业人才培养的优良传统,依托综合性大学所具有的学科群体优势及学术研究氛围,融合相关学科的教学和研究力量,统整式、前瞻式地积极探索综合性大学教育技术学专业人才培养的新型模式,旨在培养服务于教育科研机构、教育行政部门、高等院校、商业企业领域教育技术研究、设计、开发与管理的专门人才。
本专业的研究生导师有桑新民教授、张宝辉教授、梁林梅副教授等。
授予学位:教育学硕士。
二、培养目标本专业培养适应我国现代化建设和社会发展需要,德、智、体、美和谐发展,具有较高文化修养、信息素养和创新精神,有坚实的教育技术学理论功底和研究能力,能熟练运用现代教育信息技术进行课程开发与教学设计的教育技术学专业人才。
1、具有严谨的治学态度、科学的思想方法和诚朴的工作作风,具有良好的思想政治素质和学术道德。
2、具有扎实的专业理论基础,较强的教育技术学理论与实践能力,具有独立、批判性地思考和解决教育技术领域内问题的能力,并具有在本学科前沿进行科学研究的潜力。
3、能胜任高等院校、科研机构和相关企事业单位的科研、教学、培训,课程设计与开发、网络资源建设与管理,以及相关部门的管理工作。
4、具有较强的国际意识和较高的信息素养,熟练掌握一门以上外国语,具有较强的跨文化学习与交流能力。
教育技术学专业(040110)硕士研究生培养方案2012年6月一、专业概况教育技术学作为教育学领域一个独立二级学科成立于1993年,因此是一个年轻而又充满活力与挑战的综合应用性学科。
南京大学教育技术的历史可以追溯至20世纪30年代,金陵大学(南京大学的前身之一)在我国首创电化教育专业,先后培养了14届毕业生,成为中国第一代电化教育创始人和奠基者的摇篮。
南京大学教育研究院于2003年开始挂靠本系课程与教学论方向培养教育技术学方向硕士研究生,于2007年独立招收教育技术学专业硕士研究生。
本专业借鉴国际教育技术学专业人才培养的前沿与经验,秉承我国同类专业人才培养的优良传统,依托综合性大学所具有的学科群体优势及学术研究氛围,融合相关学科的教学和研究力量,统整式、前瞻式地积极探索综合性大学教育技术学专业人才培养的新型模式,旨在培养服务于教育科研机构、教育行政部门、高等院校、商业企业领域教育技术研究、设计、开发与管理的专门人才。
本专业的研究生导师有桑新民教授、张宝辉教授、梁林梅副教授等。
授予学位:教育学硕士。
二、培养目标本专业培养适应我国现代化建设和社会发展需要,德、智、体、美和谐发展,具有较高文化修养、信息素养和创新精神,有坚实的教育技术学理论功底和研究能力,能熟练运用现代教育信息技术进行课程开发与教学设计的教育技术学专业人才。
1、具有严谨的治学态度、科学的思想方法和诚朴的工作作风,具有良好的思想政治素质和学术道德。
2、具有扎实的专业理论基础,较强的教育技术学理论与实践能力,具有独立、批判性地思考和解决教育技术领域内问题的能力,并具有在本学科前沿进行科学研究的潜力。
3、能胜任高等院校、科研机构和相关企事业单位的科研、教学、培训,课程设计与开发、网络资源建设与管理,以及相关部门的管理工作。
4、具有较强的国际意识和较高的信息素养,熟练掌握一门以上外国语,具有较强的跨文化学习与交流能力。
三、研究方向1、学习科学与技术2、教育技术国际比较研究3、现代远程教育四、招生对象招收具有本科学历的高校毕业生以及有一定实践经验的优秀大专毕业生。
教学视频中教师出镜对教师的作用*——基于对比实验和访谈的实证分析杨九民1艾思佳1皮忠玲2喻邱晨1(1.华中师范大学人工智能教育学部,湖北武汉430079;2.陕西师范大学现代教学技术教育部重点实验室,陕西西安710062)摘要:为探究教学视频录制过程中教师出镜对教师的作用,文章以60名准教师为研究对象进行对比实验,设计了出镜与不出镜两种教学视频录制模式,并记录其脑电信号,探究其专注程度、放松程度、应激水平和教学效果的差异。
研究发现:尽管相较于不出镜教师,出镜教师更紧张,但其教学效果却更好。
此外,文章还访谈了10名一线教师对教学视频录制过程中教师出镜的态度和看法,发现:出镜授课对教师教学心理和教学效果具有一定的影响。
文章的研究结果为教学视频的设计与开发提供了相应的证据支持和理论支撑,教师可以运用出镜授课的方式提高教学效果,未来此方式也可拓展至在线教学和教师专业发展领域。
关键词:教学视频;教学效果;教师形象;脑电技术;应激水平【中图分类号】G40-057 【文献标识码】A 【论文编号】1009—8097(2021)01—0054—08 【DOI】10.3969/j.issn.1009-8097.2021.01.008“互联网+教育”的时代特征是基于移动互联网等技术,让学习者能够不受时间、地点的限制获得大量的数字化学习资源[1]。
教学视频作为学习资源的一种,以其生动、直观、形象等特点受到了广大学习者的欢迎。
在国内外在线学习平台,94.5%的教学视频都呈现了教师形象[2]。
教师画面作为教学视频的重要组成部分,对学习者的学习效果、认知负荷、学习满意度等均产生了深远的影响[3]。
然而,教学视频设计的相关研究更加关注教师形象呈现对学习者学习的影响,往往忽视了对教师教学的影响。
基于此,本研究从教师视角出发,探究在教学视频录制过程中教师出镜对教师教学效果与心理活动的影响,以期为教学视频的设计与开发提供参考。
一文献综述1 教学视频中教师出镜的作用围绕教学视频中教师形象对学习者的影响,研究者分别从认知过程和社会存在层面,提出了两种不同的观点:①根据认知负荷理论[4],当教学视频中呈现教师形象时,学习者由于需要同时加工学习材料与教师形象,可能会使原本容量有限的工作记忆出现超负荷,导致无法进行有效的信息加工,因此教师形象的呈现不利于学习者的学习;②根据社会存在感理论,教师形象的呈现可以让学习者在学习过程中产生一种与“真人”互动的感觉,这就增加了学习者的社会存在感[5],并促使学习者更加主动地对信息进行选择、组织和整合,从而提高学习者的学习效果,因此教师形象的呈现促进了学习者的学习。
Educational Psychology Re v iew,Vol.12,No.1,2000Conversations with Three Highly Productive Educational Psychologists:Richard Anderson, Richard Mayer,and Michael PressleyKenneth A.Kiewra1,2and John W.Creswell1This article seeks to answer the question,‘‘What factors characterize highly producti v e educational psychologists?’’Using qualitati v e research methods, we identified three top scholars in educational psychology—Richard Ander-son,Richard Mayer,and Michael Pressley—and examined factors that influ-ence their work.Although each scholar had a distincti v e trademark character-istic,they had much in common.Each had an impressi v e lineage,gra v itated to centers of excellence,was guided by routine,contributed significantly to educational ser v ice,pursued outside interests,stri v ed for clarity in writing, collaborated hea v ily and effecti v ely with students,and shared the same guid-ing philosophy regarding scholarly producti v ity.The article concludes with ad v ice to budding educational psychologists and with unanswered questions that perhaps merit further research.KEY WORDS:educational psychology;expertise;scholarly productivity.INTRODUCTIONSuppose you are serving on your department’s annual evaluation com-mittee and one of your colleagues submits materials detailing the year’s accomplishments listed below?1Department of Educational Psychology,University of Nebraska—Lincoln,Lincoln,Ne-braska.2Correspondence should be directed to Kenneth Kiewra,Department of Educational Psychol-ogy,Bancroft Hall,University of Nebraska,Lincoln,Nebraska68588-0345.1351040-726X/00/0300-0135$18.00/0 2000Plenum Publishing Corporation136Kiewra and Creswell●Articles—18●Books—3●Edited Books—2●Journal Editor—2●Editorial Boards—9●Major Awards—2●Department ChairWhat would you think?First,you might believe your colleague was halluci-nating.After confirming he/she was lucid and had actually accomplished all of this,you wonder how these accomplishments were possible.That is what we wondered.How do highly productive educational psychologists accomplish so much?To answer this question,we interviewed three top educational psychologists.Our investigation is thefirst,to our knowledge,that examines the scholarly lives of prolific educational psychol-ogists.Certainly,productivity or expertise has been explored in various domains such as music and art(Hayes,1985),chess(Charness et al.,1996) and architecture(Dudek and Hall,1991).In addition,psychologist Howard Gardner(1993)studied the lives and works of outstanding creators from various disciplines,and educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom(1985) studied how artistic,athletic,scientific,and mathematical talent develop-ment is affected by early parental and educational influences.Expertise in the closely alignedfields of education(Beliner,1986,1988)and psychology (Lindsey,1976)have also been studied,but not in educational psychology.A second question also drove our investigation:What advice might be given to budding educational psychologists who hope to become more productive?Insights gleaned from highly productive educational psycholo-gists might help others work more productively.This article is divided into six sections:(1)how the study was completed, (2)a glimpse at their work,(3)trademark characteristics,(4)common characteristics,(5)surprising aspects,and(6)conclusions.HOW THE STUDY WAS COMPLETEDThe overall research approach was to use case analysis as the mode of qualitative inquiry.This consisted of purposefully selecting three highly productive scholars in educational psychology who were not representative of the universe of scholars,but who were individuals who could provide detailed case descriptions of prolific scholars.The case analysis approach further meant describing each scholar,identifying themes,reflecting on how these three cases were both similar and different,and posing severalHighly Productive Educational Psychologists137 naturalistic generalizations about what we learned.These procedures were consistent with good qualitative case development(Merriam,1998;Stake, 1995).The study was completed in four phases:(1)nomination process, (2)scoring,(3)data gathering,and(4)data analysis and interpretation.Nomination ProcessWe narrowed our focus to highly productive educational psychologists in the cognition and learning area(which is Division C in the American Educational Research Association).We sent letters to all113Division C members in the Midwestern Educational Research Association(MWERA) asking them to‘‘rank the names of educational psychologists working in the area of learning and cognition who you consider most successful in terms of their contributions,visibility,and influence.’’About40%of the members surveyed were men.Eighty-nine percent were employed in the midwest(e.g.,Illinois,Indiana,Kansas,Nebraska,Ohio,and Wisconsin) and11%worked outside the Midwest with the greatest numbers from New York(3)and Canada(3).A stamped,addressed card accompanied the letter.The card provided space for anonymous nominators to list the‘‘most,’’‘‘second-most,’’and ‘‘third-most’’successful educational psychologists in the learning and cogni-tion area.Forty-one(36%)of the cards were completed and returned.The return rate is acceptable given that our sampling was purposeful rather than representative.ScoringScoring was done by assigning three,two,and one point(s),respec-tively,for educational psychologists designated as‘‘first,’’‘‘second,’’and ‘‘third’’most successful.The top10educational psychologists,according to our survey,are listed alphabetically in Table I.The list of nominees does not seem to represent an association or geographic bias.Among the10nominees,only Joel Levin is an active member in the Midwestern Educational Research Association.Five of the 10have made invited addresses at MWERA conferences but so too have several other outstanding Division C scholars whose names do not appear on the list.Geographically,only Richard Anderson and Joel Levin were at Midwest institutions when the survey was done.The others were largely at institutions on the East or West Coasts.The list of nominees is biased toward men even though the majority138Kiewra and Creswell Table I.Top10Successful Educational Psychologists in Alpha-betical Order1.Richard Anderson,University of Illinois2.David Berliner,Arizona State University3.John Bransford,Vanderbilt University4.Ann Brown,Stanford University5.John Gardner,University of South Carolina6.Joel Levin,University of Wisconsin7.Richard Mayer,University of California,Santa Barbara8.Michael Pressley,University of Notre Dame a9.Robert Slavin,John Hopkins University10.Robert Sternberg,Yale Universitya Michael Pressley was at the University of Albany in New Yorkat the time of the survey and interview.of nominators were women(60%).With the exception of Ann Brown,the list of nominees is comprised solely of men.Women,were better repre-sented,however,among the pool of nominees.Seven(16%)of the44 different nominees were women.Data GatheringThe four most successful educational psychologists,as perceived by our nominators,were(in alphabetical order)Richard Anderson,Ann Brown, Richard Mayer,and Michael Pressley.We contacted each one and asked him/her to participate in our study.Pressley,Mayer,and Anderson agreed to participate,but Brown did not.The participating scholars sent us a current vita,reprints representative of their best empirical and theoretical work,and pictures and videotapes that were used in invited presentations at the Midwestern Educational Research Association(Kiewra et al.,1996) and the American Educational Research Association(Kiewra et al.,1997).Kiewra and Creswell interviewed each nominee by telephone.Each interview lasted between one and two hours.The interviews were tape recorded and transcribed.We asked general questions about their(a)schol-arly work,(b)influences,(c)time management,and(d)research manage-ment.With regard to scholarship we asked them(a)to describe their most important contributions to theory and practice,(b)to tell how their work has evolved,and(c)to outline future research plans.With regard to influ-ences,we asked about(a)personal characteristics,(b)academic ancestry, and(c)how other people,places,or things influenced them.With regard to time management,we asked them to describe(a)an average work day, (b)how they spend leisure time,and(c)strategies used or sacrifices made for increasing work time.With regard to research management,we askedHighly Productive Educational Psychologists139 Table II.Number of Books and Articles Published by the ThreeScholarsAnderson Mayer PressleyPublished books498Published articles145147203how they conduct research and how they write a manuscript.Finally,we asked them what advice they might give to a student who aspires to become a highly productive scholar and what important questions we might have failed to ask.Data Analysis and InterpretationOur analysis strategy consisted of generating detailed descriptions of each of the three prolific scholars tofirst allow an overview or a‘‘glimpse’’of the range and extent of their scholarship.We then examined our data sources to determine themes or‘‘trademark characteristics’’in the profes-sional life of each.We next used a cross-case analysis approach(Yin,1989) to identify the scholars’‘‘common characteristics’’and‘‘surprising aspects’’of their work.Finally,we drew‘‘conclusions’’about the characteristics of these three highly productive scholars.A GLIMPSE OF THEIR WORKBefore overviewing their work,we confirm that the three scholars interviewed(R.Anderson,Mayer,and Pressley)are indeed productive. Table II shows the number of books and articles each has published through 1996.Table III shows that their productivity has continued unabated.Rich-Table III.Number of Articles Published by the Three ScholarsOver Five Year PeriodsArticles published Anderson Mayer Pressley1–5years1210226–10years15284311–15years29296516–20years27336121–25years154726–30years2231–35years18140Kiewra and Creswell ard Anderson,in the pastfive years,has published about four articles per year which is the average number of articles he has published per year over his35-year career.Pressley’s and Mayer’s productivity are on the rise. Mayer has averaged nearly10articles per year in the pastfive years and six articles per year throughout his25-year career.Pressley has averaged about12articles per year in the pastfive years compared to10articles per year throughout his20-year career.Richard Anderson is professor of psychology and the Director of the Center for the Study of Reading at the University of Illinois at Urbana—Champaign.Anderson’s work focuses on reading.He has received approxi-mately26million dollars through grants and contracts to support reading research and practice.Anderson’s early work examined issues related to critical thinking and problem solving(Anderson,1963a,1963b,1965a),concept learning (Anderson,1965b,1966),and programmed instruction(Anderson and Faust,1967;Faust and Anderson,1967).In the early1970s,Anderson’s work shifted toward verbal learning,in general,and sentence learning,in particular(Anderson,1970,1971;Anderson et al.,1971).Later that decade, his focus shifted slightly toward the role that schema play in text learning (Anderson,1977,1978;Pichert and Anderson,1977).Since then,Anderson has investigated a wide array of theoretically and practically important reading issues such as attention(Anderson,1982),inserted questions(Rey-nolds and Anderson,1982),independent reading(Fielding,et al.,1986), text readability(Anderson and Davison,1988;Anderson et al.,1987),con-text(Nagy et al.,1987;Nagy et al.,1985),cross-cultural comparisons(Shu et al.,1995),and vocabulary acquisition(Anderson and Nagy,1992;Herman et al.,1987).Anderson’s work has influenced practice.For instance,Anderson and colleagues’s(Anderson et al.,1985)text Becoming a Nation of Readers has sold more than350,000copies.Anderson and colleagues(Anderson,Au, and Jacobs,1991)have also developed a six-part national teacher training video series on reading instruction and have published extensively on read-ing instruction practices(Anderson,Wilkenson,and Mason,1991;Gaskins et al.,1993).Richard Mayer is professor of psychology,University of California, Santa Barbara.Mayer’s chief focus is problem solving.He has examined how instructional variables such as advance organizers(Mayer,1982),repe-tition(Bromage and Mayer,1986),questions(Sagerman and Mayer,1987), note taking(Shrager and Mayer,1989),illustrations(Mayer and Gallini, 1990),and animation(Mayer and Anderson,1992)influence problem solv-ing in content areas such as science,math,and computer programming. Mayer has received over four million dollars in grant funding to supportHighly Productive Educational Psychologists141 his research.He has authored texts on problem solving(Mayer,1992), cognitive psychology(Mayer,1981),computer programming(Mayer,1980a, 1986),learning and memory(Tarpy and Mayer,1978),critical thinking (Mayer&Goodchild,1995),and educational psychology(Mayer,1987, 1999).Michael Pressley is a professor of educational psychology at the Univer-sity of Notre Dame.His research career has advanced in approximately three seven-year phases.Hisfirst phase beginning in1976investigated imagery,in particular the keyword method for vocabulary learning (Pressley,1976,1977a,1977b).His second phase,beginning in about1983, examined strategy instruction with an emphasis on metacognition as an important component of strategy instruction(Pressley et al.,1984).An important outgrowth of this phase was the‘‘Good Strategy User’’model (Pressley,1986).The third phase,beginning around1990,examined reading comprehension strategies with emphasis on transactional reading strategies (Pressley et al.,1991).Several subthemes punctuate Pressley’s work.One is a developmental theme.Much of Pressley’s work,particularly his earliest work,addresses developmental issues(Pressley and Levin,1977).A second subtheme is his investigation of students with special needs(Pressley et al.,1989).A third subtheme is Pressley’s shift from experimental to qualitative investigations. Much of Pressley’s recent work with reading instruction,for example,is anthropological in nature(Pressley,Schuder,SAIL Faculty and Adminis-tration,Bergman&El-Dinary,1992).TRADEMARK CHARACTERISTICSEach scholar exhibited a trademark characteristic instrumental in his productivity.Anderson is the‘‘enculturator,’’able to assemble and mentor teams of highly productive graduate students.Mayer is the‘‘systematizer.’’There exists remarkable order in Mayer’s research agenda and the ways he produces his work.Pressley is the‘‘interconnector.’’Every task he undertakes leads ultimately to multiple products.Richard Anderson—EnculturatorAbout75%of Anderson’s work involves collaboration with other re-searchers.Many collaborators are graduate students.Anderson has devel-oped an apprenticeship program for mentoring graduate students and con-ducting research.At any given time,Anderson directs multiple research142Kiewra and Creswell teams comprised of graduate students working on various problems.Ander-son credits his research productivity to his work with graduate students. He remarks:If you’re going to be a productive researcher you need to get your new peopleenculturated,get them motivated,and get them to understand what they’re supposedto do.It’s good for them;it keeps up the productivity of the whole research groupand the senior professor.His apprenticeship system is such that the more senior and motivated students are assigned increasingly higher leadership roles and reap more of the publication rewards.Anderson meets at least once a week with research teams and allows students to drop by his office at any time for guidance.Anderson also credits his continued zest for research to his collabora-tions with students.He says,My sense of excitement[for my work]builds when that excitement is shared bythe eager young people who together are going to do great things.It’s exciting tocome to work and bounce ideas around with these kids.I can now call them kids.I have been able to attract a stream of exceptional young people to work with.That keeps you young.That keeps you fresh.Anderson chides his students to become more than normal scientists who replicate the work of others.He pushes them to become pioneering scientists whofind and tackle new or understudied problems using the powers of observation and thinking.Below is advice given to his gradu-ate students:I feel that too many people are contributing footnotes to other people’s historyrather than making some substantial and unique—at least distinctive—contributionon their own.We do a fairly good job of training normal scientists—people whorun the101st adjunct question study,the500th feedback study,the600th study onmaps,the incremental improvement,or the additional control.We’ve gotten to thepoint of paint-by-number science.Don’t take the most popular problem of the day.Ask what is important in thegeneral area I’m working in that is poorly understood,important,but understudied,and do an analysis of that.First,think,talk,discuss,search your own feelings.If there is something you canwatch or do,do that before you go out and read everything written on the subject.All graduate training pushes you in quite the other direction.We have becomeexperts at reading the ideas and research of others.Richard Mayer—SystematizerThere is a system governing the work Mayer does and how he does it.Mayer’s research agenda is highly programmatic.Figure1shows many of the variables Mayer’s work addresses.Driving Mayer’s research is hisHighly Productive Educational Psychologists143Fig.1.Representation showing aspects of Mayer’s research program.quest to facilitate‘‘meaningful’’learning,which Mayer defines as the ability to apply information and solve problems.Thus,Mayer’s research commonly includes measures of meaningful and nonmeaningful learning(e.g.,Mayer and Gallini,1990).Both types of learning are measured to illustrate that some learner activities or instructional methods foster meaningful learning, whereas others foster nonmeaningful or rote learning.Mayer’s research also alters and examines an array of instructional variables.He has examined various delivery systems such as lecture(Kiewra et al.,1991),text(Mayer,1984),and multimedia(Mayer and Sims,1994), most often in the content areas of math(Mayer,1993),science(Cook and Mayer,1988),and computer science(Mayer and Fay,1987);and he has examined a host of instructional methods such as questions(Sagerman and Mayer,1987),signals(Loman and Mayer,1983),organizers(Mayer,1978), and illustrations(Mayer,1989).Mayer has studied learner activities as well, including note taking(Peper and Mayer,1978),establishing text structure (Cook and Mayer,1988),and elaboration(Mayer,1980b).In addition, Mayer often considers how instructional methods and learner activities interact with individual learner characteristics such as spatial ability(Mayer and Sims,1994)and prior knowledge(Mayer et al.,1995).Each Mayer study examines the relationships among several of these factors.For instance,Mayer’s(1989)article‘‘Systematic Thinking Fostered144Kiewra and Creswell by Illustrations in Scientific Text’’assessed whether students with low knowledge(individual characteristic)about science(content)could transfer ideas(meaningful learning)or recognize verbatim facts(nonmeaningful learning)from text(delivery system)containing varying types of illustra-tions(instructional methods).From these studies,Mayer advises students,instructors,or instructional material developers about facilitating meaningful learning.He has done this by writing numerous review articles that address systematically portions of his research agenda.Mayer’s(1984)article‘‘Aids to Prose Comprehen-sion,’’for example,describes learner activities and instructional methods that facilitate the cognitive processes of attention,organization,and integra-tion,and thereby facilitate meaningful learning.Another example of May-er’s systematic approach to writing review articles is seen in his article ‘‘Multimedia Learning:Are We Asking the Right Questions?’’(Mayer, 1997).Here Mayer reviews research showing that(a)multimedia delivery systems are better than verbal explanations alone,(b)instructional methods involving coordinated verbal and visual explanations are better than expla-nations separated by time or space,and(c)effects are strongest for students with low prior knowledge and high spatial ability.In summary,through his research and interactive reports,Mayer examines systematically the instructional variables,learner activities,and learner characteristics that combine to influence meaningful learning.Mayer is also systematic about his research methods and his writing of research reports.For example,here he describes his development of research ideas:I begin with a well-defined problem that I’m trying to ually an idea beginson one sheet of paper.If I really like it,it gets its own folder.And,when I reallyget into it,it gets an expandingfile.That’s when I know I’m really committed. Mayer’s writing is equally systematic.First,he focuses the article on one major question such as,‘‘What are the characteristics of effective illustra-tions?’’Second,he often captures readers’attention by demonstrating in the introduction section the problem at hand such as solving math problems that contain inconsistent language or solving scientific problems using illus-trations.Another trademark characteristic inherent in Mayer’s research articles is clearly stated predictions or hypotheses,such as the competing quantitative qualitative hypotheses developed to explain repetition and signaling effects on student learning(Loman and Mayer,1983;Mayer, 1983).A last characteristic of Mayer’s systematic writing is his unmistakable knack for explaining results in a straightforward manner.Mayer explains his methods:I try to have each section of the Results section focus on one of the researchquestions and predictions....I begin by stating what the prediction or questionwas and try to describe the results in words,and then also refer the reader to afigure or table to document that.I think it’s important to say in words what theresults were before presenting statistics.Below is an example of Mayer’s technique for reporting results taken from Mayer and Gallini(1990,p.722).Prediction2:Explanati v e illustrations impro v e creati v e problem sol v ing but notv erbatim retention.The top-right portion of Figure5shows the proportion correctresponse for low prior-knowledge students in each treatment group on problemsolving and verbatim retention.As can be seen,the parts-and-steps group outper-formed the control group on problem solving(47%versus28%)but not on verbatimretention(66%versus68%).Consistent with Prediction2,the results of Experiment1,and the results of Mayer(1989b),separate t-tests conducted on these data revealedthat the groups differed in problem solving performance,t(28)ϭ3.51,pϽ.01,butnot in verbatim retention,t(28)Ͻ1.Michael Pressley-InterconnectorFor Michael Pressley there are no wasted steps.Everything he does pays off in multiple ways.His scholarship,teaching,and service are tightly knit so that his efforts in one area invariably pay dividends in other areas. Pressley’s graduate level teaching impacts his research and scholarship. Pressley says:I doubt there has been in the last10years a single graduate course that I’ve taughtwhere there hasn’t been some important written product that I did or a studentdid with me...there’s been some important piece of writing or some importantpiece of research...in every course.There are several examples of connecting teaching and scholarship. Pressley,along with students in his course on cognitive strategy instruction wrote the textbook Cogniti v e Strategy Instruction That Really Works with Children(Pressley et al.,1995).As another example,Pressley taught a graduate course on motivation.Teaching it for thefist time,Pressley scoured the motivation literature to prepare his course.This literature review both informed his teaching and helped him write a chapter on motivation.Writ-ing the chapter,in turn,prompted him to revamp the motivation course before teaching it a second time and prompted him to open his own investi-gations into college student motivation.A last example of teaching connect-ing to research occurred when Pressley was struggling to learn new ideas about anthropological research methods.One solution he devised was studying anthropological research methods in his graduate seminars.Work-ing through the literature and applying it with students helped Pressley clarify his own understanding and led him to conduct anthropologicallyoriented studies in reading(Pressley et al.,1992)and note taking(van Meter et al.,1994).Pressley’s research efforts have resulted in several books.The Pressley and Affenbach(1995)text,Verbal Protocols of Reading,shows the intercon-nection of research and scholarship.This text resulted from work done to construct a model of reading comprehension based upon analyses of think-aloud protocols.Pressley’s extensive research in educational psychology resulted in his writing a series of educational psychology textbooks.In collaboration with Christine McCormick,Pressley wrote three textbooks (Pressley,1995a,1995b;McCormick and Pressley,1997)aimed at advanced graduate students,beginning graduate students,or undergraduate students, respectively.As might be expected,Pressley wrote the texts with two ideas in mind:to educate students of educational psychology and to‘‘reedu-cate’’himself.Pressley’s service work derives multiple payoffs as well.As editor of the Journal of Educational Psychology and as consulting editor for several other journals,Pressley stands on the cutting edge of research and theory in educational psychology,a stance that influences his research and teaching. As a consultant,Pressley performs considerable service for school personnel and other agencies,but selects carefully those projects likely to influence other aspects of his work.Pressley says,‘‘I’ve never taken a consultation or accepted an invitation for anything unless I think I’m going to end up learning something from it that will contribute to my research.’’In fact, Pressley credits his consultations with psychologists and educators for help-ing him develop and hone ideas that later led to award winning articles: The International Reading Association’s1996Albert Harris Award (Pressley and Rankin,1994)and the American Educational Research Asso-ciation’s1995Scribner Award(Pressley et al.,1992).Pressley’s deliberate interconnection of teaching,research,and service activities is fueled by Pressley’s inclination to ponder issues of educational psychology almost constantly and to seek stimulating events that foster the development and cross-pollination of these issues.Pressley says, [Ideas]are constantly on my mind.And the people I’m working with,I’m alwaystalking to them about it...[for instance,I enjoy]consulting with Deshler andhis group in Kansas.Sometimes,we’ll just sit around for a day and a half andbrainstorm,and those are interesting sessions....I seek out literature in thebookstores or library or I sit in my office and think about the possibilities.I’m sortof always turning stuff over in my head,and then I’ll run into things that sort ofset off associations in my head and‘‘click.’’I make sure I get those down. Pressley’s insatiable pondering and search for knowledge is legendary. Pressley reportedly once walked out of a dull movie and read a book he had along with him in the lobby until the movie ended.He displays a business-like demeanor at conferences and in consultations.He relentlessly。
教育技术学何克抗版学习笔记以及课后习题答案集团文件版本号:(M928-T898-M248-WU2669-I2896-DQ586-M1988)教育技术学(何克抗版)学习笔记以及课后习题答案!第一章教育技术学概述重要名词教育技术:教育技术是技术的子范畴,是人类在教育教学活动过程中所运用的一切物质工具、方法技能和知识经验的综合体,它分为有形的物化形态的技术和无形的观念形态的技术两大类。
AECT’94定义:教育技术是对学习过程和学习资源的设计、开发、运用、管理和评价的理论与实践。
教育技术学:教育技术学是专门用于研究教育技术现象及其规律的学科,是在教育心理学、媒体技术与系统科学方法的发展、彼此渗透、综合的基础上产生的。
系统科学:系统科学把事物、对象看作一个系统,通过整体的研究来分析系统中的成分、结构和功能之间的相互联系,通过信息的传递和反馈来实现某种控制作用,以达到有目的地影响系统的发展并获得最优化的效果。
系统科学的基本原理有整体原理、反馈原理和有序原理。
传播理论的7W、六阶段、四律:教学传播过程所涉及的要素(7W——谁、说什么、通过什么渠道、对谁、产生什么效果、为什么、在什么情况下),教学传播过程的基本阶段(六阶段——确定信息、选择媒体、通道传送、接收解释、评价反馈、调整再传送)及其教学传播基本规律(四律——共识律、谐振律、选择律、匹配律)行为主义:行为主义学习理论可以用刺激—反应—强化来概括,认为学习的起因在于外部刺激的反应,而不关心刺激引起的内部心理过程,认为学习与内部心理过程无关,根据这种观点,人类的学习过程归结为被动地接受外界刺激的过程,教师的任务是向学习者传授知识,而学习者的任务则是接受和消化。
认知主义:认知主义学习理论可以概括为认知结构论和信息加工论,它认为人的认识不是由外界刺激直接给予的,而是外界刺激和认知主体内部心理过程相互作用的结果,学习过程是学习者主动的有选择的信息加工过程,教师的任务是要设法激起学习者的学习兴趣和学习动机,然后再将当前的教学内容与学习者原有的认知结构有机地联系起来。
第三节教育的⽂化功能⼀、⽂化对教育的影响 (⼀)⽂化本⾝具有巨⼤的教育功能⽂化有⼴义和狭义两种。
关于⼴义⽂化,⽐较普遍的认识是指⼈类在社会历史实践过程中所创造的物质财富和精神财富的总和。
关于狭义⽂化,则较普遍地把它看作为社会精神⽂化,即社会的思想道德、科技、教育、艺术、⽂学、宗教、传统习俗等等及其制度的⼀种复合体。
这⾥所讲的⽂化主要是指狭义⽂化。
⼀个⼈降⽣在某⼀特定的⽂化之中,他从感性到理性,从⽣存到发展,从审美到情绪等,⽆⼀不被⼀种特定的⽂化所浸染、熏陶。
不要以为教育就是按照⼀定计划,将⼀定的内容传授或灌输给新⽣⼀代的过程,其实⼈格的形成是与⼀种特定⽂化类型直接相关的。
正是在这种意义上,我们才能全⾯地理解“⼈的本质并不是单个⼈所固有的抽象物,在其现实性上,它是⼀切社会关系的总和”的论断。
⽐如,不同国家、不同地区的起居、饮⾷、⾔谈,⾃信或⾃卑,勇敢或怯弱,情趣、爱好、喜怒等⾏为⽅式、思考⽅式和情感等,为什么竟如此不同呢?它⼜是由什么决定的呢?可以说是由不同的⽂化所⽀配的。
(⼆)⽂化直接影响课程内容 作为精神⽂化对教育的影响,最直接的⽅⾯,就是学校课程内容(各门学科),它正是⽂化的⼀部分。
⾃然学科是⽂化,⼈⽂学科是⽂化,就是伦理,道德等内容的教学,也是社会价值对青年发展的⼀种界定,⼀种要求,其实这也是⽂化,甚⾄可以说是⽂化的核⼼。
这⾥需要说明,经济、政治对教育的制约影响,往往要通过精神⽂化这⼀中介来实现。
⽽⽂化对教育的影响,可以说是直接的。
我们可以将某⼀种新思想、新认识、新的科学成果等,直接移植为教学内容。
教学内容的取舍并不完全受经济发展⽔平的⾼低、受国家财富的多少所制约,⽽与⽂化发展有直接关系。
(三) “校园⽂化”是潜在的、稳定的教育因素 学校教育既是⼀种⽂化形式,那么,我们常说的“校园⽂化”就是⼀种潜在的、稳定的、持续的教育因素。
⽐如,学校秩序,环境卫⽣状况,师⽣关系,师⽣员⼯的仪表、修饰,甚⾄教态,对学⽣的感情等,都对学⽣的⼈格形成有重要的影响。
教育技术导论教材及参考书•教材:–尹俊华庄榕霞戴正南编著《教育技术学导论》,高等教育出版社,2002年8月第2版。
•参考书目:–章伟民,曹揆申著《教育技术学》,人民教育出版社,2000年7月第1 版–南国农李运林主编,《电化教育学》,高等教育出版社,1998年8月第2版–祝智庭主编,《现代教育技术——走进信息化教育》,高等教育出版社,2001年9月第1版–南国农主编,《信息化教育概论》,高等教育出版社,2004年6月第1版先行课•计算机文化基础课程实施•打乱教材章节顺序,以讲座的方式进行,全部内容分为8讲。
在教学中,要求同学们积极参与到教学中。
我的联系方式•电话:8026156;2200076•电邮:shengze_p@ , mytc_psc@考核方式与办法•考核方式:考查•考勤:10%,最后按实际考勤次数计。
全面考勤不低于5次,另抽查若干次。
每缺课或早退一次扣1分,迟到每一次扣0.5分,请假每次0.2分。
•平时作业(不低于5次):30%,每次将评定等级,如A为90分,A-为85分,B+为80,依此类推,每差一个等级则减5分。
期末计算平均分即为平时作业成绩。
•课堂表现:10%,是否遵守纪律,回答问题是否积极等。
每次有记录。
•半期作业:20%•期末:30%,最后一次作随堂作业并评定成绩即为期末成绩。
教案首页一、几个基本概念1、教育(指南P52-55)教育是一种培养人的活动,构成教育活动的基本要素是:受教育者、教育者和教育措施。
2、技术(章伟民,教育技术学P41-42)3、教育技术(两种观点与两种偏见,章伟民,教育技术学P1-4):一种是指“教育中的技术”;另一种是指“现代媒体技术运用于教育”。
4、教育技术学()当教育技术发展到一定阶段后就形成了一门专门研究教育技术现象与规律的科学--教育技术学。
它是在教育学、认知心理学、教育传播学、系统科学、媒体技术等理论的指导下,研究如何在教育中应用各种教育技术以提高教育质量的理论与实践的一门学科。
综合测试试卷一一.单项选择题1、对“教学策略”的研究属于教育技术研究中的__A___领域。
错误!未找到引用源。
A.设计错误!未找到引用源。
B.开发错误!未找到引用源。
C.管理错误!未找到引用源。
D.评价2、教育技术着重研究解决的问题是__D_____。
错误!未找到引用源。
A.教学媒体使用错误!未找到引用源。
B.教学资源的配置错误!未找到引用源。
C.教学过程错误!未找到引用源。
D.教学过程和教学资源的合理配置3、作为认知主义心理学的代表人物,布鲁纳和奥苏泊尔都强调学习者内部的心理过程,认为能有效促进学生认知结构生长的学习才是成功的。
但在具体的教学运用中,他们的观点却不尽相同。
其中布鲁纳提倡的是_____。
错误!未找到引用源。
A.接受学习错误!未找到引用源。
B.发现学习错误!未找到引用源。
C.掌握学习错误!未找到引用源。
D.合作学习4、下列关于戴尔“经验之塔”理论说法中错误的是_____。
错误!未找到引用源。
A.学习是经验的不断增长,“从经验中学习”,是该理论的出发点错误!未找到引用源。
B 根据媒体所呈现信息的抽象水平由低到高,戴尔将人的学习经验分为做的经验、观察的经验和抽象的经验错误!未找到引用源。
C.顶层经验的获得以底层经验的获得为基础,因此,教学内容的呈现也应按照这种顺序错误!未找到引用源。
D.看重媒体的形式却忽视媒体的内容,是该理论一个很大的局限5、在某项教学活动中,对阶段教学效果和学生学习情况存在的问题等进行反复的考察、判断,以便及时反馈、调整和改进教学工作,这一过程称为_____。
错误!未找到引用源。
A.诊断性评价错误!未找到引用源。
B.调控性评价错误!未找到引用源。
C.形成性评价错误!未找到引用源。
D.总结性评价6、马杰的ABCD编写法提出,一个教学目标应包括对象、行为、条件和标准四个要素,并特别强调用动词来描述教学目标,基本上反映了_______的观点。
错误!未找到引用源。
A.行为主义错误!未找到引用源。