用理论三角法评估一种改进的竖锯技术

B. Anderson, Rachel Rymer, Jennifer Versaskas, Abigail Bueter, Mahalia Masood
{"title":"用理论三角法评估一种改进的竖锯技术","authors":"B. Anderson, Rachel Rymer, Jennifer Versaskas, Abigail Bueter, Mahalia Masood","doi":"10.36021/jethe.v5i1.252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The jigsaw technique has been successfully used in classrooms for decades, though less in higher education. Groups are formed with each student having a precise piece of information necessary to complete the assignment. Next, expert groups of students with the same material meet to sharpen their understanding before reforming their initial group to share their new insights. This study sought to assess a modified jigsaw format where students received their material two days before the class, began with the expert groups, and closed with mixed groups where students taught their material and completed the assignment. A random 30% sample of assignments (n = 110) from three classes was analyzed using a pattern-matching technique (Yin, 2013) and coded utilizing the six levels of Bloom’s revised taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) and six significant learning types (Fink, 2013) as predetermined codes. One-way ANOVA found no significant difference between classes, F (2, 540) = 1.244, p. = 0.289, when coded with the taxonomy. Results were positive, indicating thinking well above rote learning (M = 2.9, SD = 1.233) with most (39.9%) students effectively comparing material. Coding was similarly positive for learning types (Fink, 2013), again, with no significant difference between classes, F (2, 501) = 3.036, p. = 0.084. Integration, making connections between varied information, was the primary type of learning (31.9%) used. Evidence of students learning about themselves was also noted (31.3%). The modified jigsaw was a well-received addition to the class and effective in teaching this material.","PeriodicalId":93777,"journal":{"name":"Journal of effective teaching in higher education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing a Modified Jigsaw Technique with Theoretical Triangulation\",\"authors\":\"B. Anderson, Rachel Rymer, Jennifer Versaskas, Abigail Bueter, Mahalia Masood\",\"doi\":\"10.36021/jethe.v5i1.252\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The jigsaw technique has been successfully used in classrooms for decades, though less in higher education. Groups are formed with each student having a precise piece of information necessary to complete the assignment. Next, expert groups of students with the same material meet to sharpen their understanding before reforming their initial group to share their new insights. This study sought to assess a modified jigsaw format where students received their material two days before the class, began with the expert groups, and closed with mixed groups where students taught their material and completed the assignment. A random 30% sample of assignments (n = 110) from three classes was analyzed using a pattern-matching technique (Yin, 2013) and coded utilizing the six levels of Bloom’s revised taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) and six significant learning types (Fink, 2013) as predetermined codes. One-way ANOVA found no significant difference between classes, F (2, 540) = 1.244, p. = 0.289, when coded with the taxonomy. Results were positive, indicating thinking well above rote learning (M = 2.9, SD = 1.233) with most (39.9%) students effectively comparing material. Coding was similarly positive for learning types (Fink, 2013), again, with no significant difference between classes, F (2, 501) = 3.036, p. = 0.084. Integration, making connections between varied information, was the primary type of learning (31.9%) used. Evidence of students learning about themselves was also noted (31.3%). The modified jigsaw was a well-received addition to the class and effective in teaching this material.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93777,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of effective teaching in higher education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of effective teaching in higher education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36021/jethe.v5i1.252\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of effective teaching in higher education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36021/jethe.v5i1.252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

几十年来,拼图技术已经成功地应用于课堂,尽管在高等教育中应用较少。小组是由每个学生组成的,每个学生都有完成作业所需的准确信息。接下来,由拥有相同材料的学生组成的专家小组会面,以加深他们的理解,然后改革他们的初始小组,分享他们的新见解。这项研究试图评估一种改进的拼图格式,学生在上课前两天收到他们的材料,从专家小组开始,到混合小组结束,学生教授他们的材料并完成作业。使用模式匹配技术(Yin, 2013)对来自三个班级的随机30%的作业样本(n = 110)进行分析,并使用Bloom修订分类法的六个级别(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)和六个重要学习类型(Fink, 2013)作为预定代码进行编码。单因素方差分析发现,分类间无显著差异,F (2540) = 1.244, p. = 0.289。结果是积极的,表明思维优于死记硬背(M = 2.9, SD = 1.233),大多数(39.9%)学生有效地比较了材料。编码对于学习类型同样是积极的(Fink, 2013),班级之间没有显著差异,F (2,501) = 3.036, p. = 0.084。整合,在不同的信息之间建立联系,是使用的主要学习类型(31.9%)。学生学习自我的证据也被注意到(31.3%)。修改后的拼图在课堂上很受欢迎,在教学中也很有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessing a Modified Jigsaw Technique with Theoretical Triangulation
The jigsaw technique has been successfully used in classrooms for decades, though less in higher education. Groups are formed with each student having a precise piece of information necessary to complete the assignment. Next, expert groups of students with the same material meet to sharpen their understanding before reforming their initial group to share their new insights. This study sought to assess a modified jigsaw format where students received their material two days before the class, began with the expert groups, and closed with mixed groups where students taught their material and completed the assignment. A random 30% sample of assignments (n = 110) from three classes was analyzed using a pattern-matching technique (Yin, 2013) and coded utilizing the six levels of Bloom’s revised taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001) and six significant learning types (Fink, 2013) as predetermined codes. One-way ANOVA found no significant difference between classes, F (2, 540) = 1.244, p. = 0.289, when coded with the taxonomy. Results were positive, indicating thinking well above rote learning (M = 2.9, SD = 1.233) with most (39.9%) students effectively comparing material. Coding was similarly positive for learning types (Fink, 2013), again, with no significant difference between classes, F (2, 501) = 3.036, p. = 0.084. Integration, making connections between varied information, was the primary type of learning (31.9%) used. Evidence of students learning about themselves was also noted (31.3%). The modified jigsaw was a well-received addition to the class and effective in teaching this material.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
Teaching Spirituality in Higher Education Graduate Programs Indigenous cultures and communities in higher education teaching and learning Using Design Thinking to Solve Real-World Problems Students’ Use and Perceptions of a Due Date Extension Policy Incorporating Positive Psychology into the Post-Secondary Classroom
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1