dxppp
2022-09-13 08:33:47 +08:00
结论
In summary, the present RCT study shows that the use of computa- tional thinking via programming as a vehicle for learning mathematics in grades 4 and 5 is not as efficient as regular lessons where maths is taught for itself. The transfer of learning, although critical, is difficult to achieve, even when the presumed best conditions are met to facilitate it by relying on a near (mathematics in both situations) and high-road transfer, optimised by an explicit guidance of the teacher. Thus, visual programming languages should be introduced with caution if they are intended to replace regular mathematics teaching. The presented results are a strong indicator that this might be deleterious to mathematics acquisition.
Visual programming software such as Scratch can be useful for learning computational thinking. This is not evaluated in this article; however, it is what the ScratchMaths study indicates with a significant effect on computational thinking test scores (0.10 SD) for the inter- vention group. Thus, it seems more appropriate for computational thinking to be learned for its own sake, with a dedicated place in the curriculum, at least for grades 4 and 5. In addition to this, the use of programming could be exploited for complementary mathematics ac- tivities, which would not shorten the time devoted to regular lessons, but could be placed at other times in different forms (complementary work to manage differentiated work groups for example).
结论机翻
总之，本 RCT 研究表明，通过编程使用计算思维作为四、五年级数学学习的载体，并不像常规课程中的数学教学那样高效。学习的转移虽然很关键，但很难实现，即使在假定的最佳条件下，通过依靠近距离（两种情况下的数学）和高路径的转移，并通过教师的明确指导进行优化。因此，如果可视化编程语言是为了取代常规的数学教学，就应该谨慎引进。所提出的结果有力地表明，这可能会对数学学习产生有害影响。
诸如 Scratch 这样的可视化编程软件对于学习计算思维可能是有用的。本文没有对此进行评估；然而，ScratchMaths 的研究表明，它对干预组的计算思维测试分数有明显的影响（ 0.10 SD ）。因此，计算思维似乎更适合为其本身而学习，在课程中占有专门的位置，至少在四、五年级是这样。除此之外，还可以利用编程来进行补充性的数学活动，这不会缩短用于常规课程的时间，而是可以以不同的形式放在其他时间（例如，补充性的工作来管理有区别的工作小组）。