• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文OA文献 >The effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) online on students’ creative and critical thinking in physics at tertiary level in Malaysia
【2h】

The effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) online on students’ creative and critical thinking in physics at tertiary level in Malaysia

机译：在线基于问题的学习（PBL）对学生在马来西亚大学物理领域的创造性和批判性思维的有效性

页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether student performance in creative thinking could be enhanced through Problem Based Learning delivered online (referred to as PBL online) and critical thinking. Students’ perceptions and adoptions of PBL learning and online learning also were studied. The PBL online model was adopted from the McMaster’s Model, and comprised three major steps: (i) problem posing; (ii) information searching; and (iii) discussion and application of knowledge in solving problems. PBL is operationally defined here as an instructional strategy which focuses on problem solving. Students are faced with real issues which they have to solve through information searching and group discussion online. In this study, students were given physics problems to solve as part of their Modern Physics course. The phases involved were (i) overview of the topic of the lesson; (ii) problem encounter; (iii) problem definition; (iv) exploration; (v) solution; and (vi) reflection. All of these phases were done through the University’s Learning Management System (LMS), which thus acts as the online delivery tool. This study employed a quasi-experimental design based on mixed between-within-subjects repeated measures. The independent variable was the instruction method, either PBL online (experimental) or Traditional method online (control), and the dependent variables were performance in creative and critical thinking. The Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) and the Watson Glaser Critical Thinking (WGCT) were used to measure the respective dependent variables. In the TTCT, there are four criteria used to evaluate creative thinking: (i) fluency; (ii) flexibility; (iii) originality; and (v) elaboration. For the critical thinking, five criteria were used: (i) making an inference; (ii) making an assumption; (iii) deduction; (iv) making an interpretation; and also (v) evaluation argument. Additionally, students’ perceptions and adoptions of PBL, as well as online learning, were captured through this study. A total of 102 students from the School of Science and Technology (SST) and the School of Education and Social Development were the subjects of the study. The SST students were science physics students (N = 61), and the SESD students were pre-service science teachers (N = 41). Results of the Mann-Whitney U test and also Independent Sample t-Test showed that there was significant difference in creative thinking in overall for both SST and SESD cohorts in favour of the PBL group. In addition, when the analysis was focussed on the two cohorts (i.e., SST and SESD), there were statistically significant differences observed for flexibility, originality and elaboration also in favour of the PBL group. However, results from the same analyses showed there was, in general, no significance difference for critical thinking for both cohorts. Further analysis identified statistically significant differences for making an inference (in favour of the PBL group) and assumption (in favour of the Traditional group). For the SST students, there were statistically significant differences in making an inference and evaluation argument criteria, in favour of the PBL group. Nevertheless, there were statistically significant differences for assumption, in favour of the Traditional group. No statistically significant differences were noted in any criterion for the SESD group. Students’ perceptions of PBL and willingness to adopt it were positive, even though they reported feeling confused at the beginning of the learning process. PBL was also reported as taking more time and requiring more effort. Nevertheless, students reported managing to build their capacity for self-directed learning and improving soft skills (i.e., communication, managing their learning timetable, finding relevant and valuable knowledge online, etc.). In the case of online learning, the students felt that they had learned how to get much more information online, and how to critique such information. Students’ readiness to use online learning was encouraging, and it provided at least basic experience on courses delivered through online learning. However, the Internet access needs to be adequate to ensure that online learning operates satisfactorily. Important findings were derived from this study. First, the results from this study suggest that PBL online enhances of Malaysian tertiary students’ creative thinking for both science physics students and pre-service science teachers. Second, PBL online also is capable of having a positive impact on students’ critical thinking for certain criteria, but this would be fostered by a whole programme approach rather than delivery via a single course. Third, students’ acceptance and perceptions of PBL and online learning were positive and encouraging, this despite encountering some issues technical during the intervention.
机译：这项研究的目的是调查是否可以通过在线（称为PBL在线）基于问题的学习和批判性思维来提高学生在创造性思维中的表现。还研究了学生对PBL学习和在线学习的看法和采用情况。 PBL在线模型是McMaster模型所采用的，包括三个主要步骤：（i）提出问题； （ii）资料搜寻； （三）讨论和运用知识解决问题。 PBL在操作上被定义为一种专注于解决问题的指导策略。学生面临着必须通过在线信息搜索和小组讨论来解决的实际问题。在这项研究中，向学生提供了物理问题以作为其现代物理课程的一部分来解决。涉及的阶段是（i）课程主题的概述； （ii）遇到问题； （iii）问题定义； （iv）探索； （v）解决方案； （vi）反思。所有这些阶段都是通过大学的学习管理系统（LMS）完成的，该系统可作为在线交付工具。本研究采用基于受试者间混合重复测量的准实验设计。自变量是教学方法，在线PBL（实验）或传统方法（控制），因变量是创造性和批判性思维的表现。创造性思维的托伦斯测验（TTCT）和沃森·格拉泽批判性思维（WGCT）用于测量各个因变量。在TTCT中，有四个用于评估创造性思维的标准：（i）流利程度； （ii）灵活性； （iii）独创性； （v）阐述。对于批判性思维，使用了五个标准：（i）进行推断； （ii）作出假设； （iii）扣除； （iv）作出解释； （v）评估论点。此外，这项研究还记录了学生对PBL的理解和采用以及在线学习。该研究的对象是来自科学技术学院（SST）和教育与社会发展学院的102名学生。 SST学生是科学物理学生（N = 61），而SESD学生是职前科学老师（N = 41）。 Mann-Whitney U检验和独立样本t检验的结果表明，在整体上，SST和SESD队列的创造性思维差异显着，而PBL组则更为明显。此外，当分析集中在两个队列（即SST和SESD）上时，在灵活性，独创性和精心设计上也观察到统计学上的显着差异，这也有利于PBL组。但是，相同分析的结果表明，总体而言，两个队列的批判性思维没有显着差异。进一步的分析确定了进行推理（有利于PBL组）和假设（有利于传统组）的统计上的显着差异。对于SST学生，在制定推理和评估论证标准方面存在统计学上的显着差异，这有利于PBL组。尽管如此，在统计上有明显的假设差异，有利于传统人群。对于SESD组，在任何标准中均未发现统计学上的显着差异。学生对PBL的理解和采用它的意愿是积极的，即使他们在学习过程开始时感到困惑。据报道，PBL需要花费更多时间，需要更多的努力。不过，学生们报告说要设法建立自我导向的学习能力并提高软技能（即沟通，管理学习时间表，在线查找相关和有价值的知识等）。在在线学习的情况下，学生们感到他们已经学会了如何在线获取更多信息以及如何批判此类信息。学生愿意使用在线学习令人鼓舞，并且至少提供了通过在线学习提供的课程的基本经验。但是，互联网访问必须足够以确保在线学习令人满意地进行。重要的发现来自这项研究。首先，这项研究的结果表明，PBL在线增强了马来西亚大专生对理科物理学生和职前科学老师的创造性思维。其次，PBL在线还能够对学生的某些标准的批判性思维产生积极影响，但这将通过整个计划方法而不是通过单门课程来实现。第三，尽管在干预过程中遇到了一些技术问题，但学生对PBL和在线学习的接受和看法是积极而令人鼓舞的。

著录项

  • 作者

    Sulaiman Fauziah;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2011
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号