不同教學策略對大專校院籃球選修課程學習成效之探討

The Effect of Different Teaching Strategies to Discuss the Different Teaching Strategies and the Learning Effects of Elective Basketball Course in Colleges

10.29423/JSRR.201012_5(2).0011

高俊傑(Chun-Chieh Kao)

教學策略 ； 合作學習 ； 學習動機 ； Teaching strategy ； cooperative learning ； learning motivation

運動與遊憩研究

5卷2期（2010 / 12 / 01）

124 - 138

繁體中文

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to discuss how the following three teaching strategies: cooperative learning, video discussion and traditional teaching strategies, influence the differences of the perception in basketball strategies and learning motivation of the students who take the elective basketball course. Method: Three classes with one hundred and ninety-five junior students were participated in this study from a college in Taoyuan. We took per class as a group, proceeded with the experimental teaching and categorized the three groups into videos discussion experiment, cooperative learning experiment, and traditional teaching. The participants have signed the agreements before they involved in this experiment. Sixty-four students were in video discussion experiment group, forty-one males and twenty-three females included, and received the scheme of video teaching and discussion. Sixty-five students were in cooperative learning experiment group, forty-six males and nineteen females included, and received the scheme of cooperative learning. Sixty-six students were in control group, forty-eight males and eighteen females included, and received traditional teaching strategy of physical education (PE). There were totally twelve weeks of teaching experimental involvement, two classes per week and fifty minutes per class. The basketball strategy perception scale and learning motivation scale were the tools of this study and we analyzed the data with ANCOVA, one way ANOVA and t-test. Result: a).The students in cooperative learning group had significantly better grades than those in video discussion and traditional teaching groups (F=12.10, p＜0.5) on basketball strategy perception; b). After the experimental processing, the students in cooperative learning group had significantly better grades than those in video discussion and traditional teaching (F=9.91, p＜0.5). Conclusion: This study proves that the design of cooperative learning and learning can effectively enhance the learning motivation and basketball strategy perception of students who take elective basketball courses.

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to discuss how the following three teaching strategies: cooperative learning, video discussion and traditional teaching strategies, influence the differences of the perception in basketball strategies and learning motivation of the students who take the elective basketball course. Method: Three classes with one hundred and ninety-five junior students were participated in this study from a college in Taoyuan. We took per class as a group, proceeded with the experimental teaching and categorized the three groups into videos discussion experiment, cooperative learning experiment, and traditional teaching. The participants have signed the agreements before they involved in this experiment. Sixty-four students were in video discussion experiment group, forty-one males and twenty-three females included, and received the scheme of video teaching and discussion. Sixty-five students were in cooperative learning experiment group, forty-six males and nineteen females included, and received the scheme of cooperative learning. Sixty-six students were in control group, forty-eight males and eighteen females included, and received traditional teaching strategy of physical education (PE). There were totally twelve weeks of teaching experimental involvement, two classes per week and fifty minutes per class. The basketball strategy perception scale and learning motivation scale were the tools of this study and we analyzed the data with ANCOVA, one way ANOVA and t-test. Result: a).The students in cooperative learning group had significantly better grades than those in video discussion and traditional teaching groups (F=12.10, p＜0.5) on basketball strategy perception; b). After the experimental processing, the students in cooperative learning group had significantly better grades than those in video discussion and traditional teaching (F=9.91, p＜0.5). Conclusion: This study proves that the design of cooperative learning and learning can effectively enhance the learning motivation and basketball strategy perception of students who take elective basketball courses.

1. 周建智、黃美瑤(2010)。健康體適能教學方案在高中體育課的應用：問題導向學習理論觀點。體育學報，43(2)，149-170。
   連結：
2. 溫麗香、林玉瓊(2003)。合作學習教學法在學校舞蹈教學上的應用。大專體育，69，21-26。
   連結：
3. 鄭金昌(2004)。不同教學法在排球教學對班級氣氛影響之研究。大專體育學刊，6(3)，11-20。
   連結：
4. Cohen, E. G.(1994).Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups.Review of education Research,64,1-35.
5. Duin, A. H.(1984).Implementing cooperative learning groups in the writing curriculum: What research shows and what you can do.Annual Meeting of the Minnesota Council of Teachers of English
6. Hesley, J. W.(2001).Using popular movies in psychotherapy.USA Today,129(2668),52-54.
7. Hung, H. L.(2004).Effects of cooperative learning and motivation on student performance and satisfaction during woodball instruction.Annual Journal of Physical Education and Sports Science,4,35-48.
8. Johnson, D. W.,Johnson, R. T.(1999).Learning Together and Alone: Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic learning.Allyn & Bacon.
9. McHale, M.(2002).Cooperative learning in an elementary physical education program.Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance,73,1.
10. Mosston, M.,Ashworth, A.(1994).Teaching physical education.New York:Macmillan College Publishing Company.
11. Newton, A. K.(1995).Silver screens and silver linings: Using theater to explore feelings and issues.Gifted child,18(2),14-20.
12. Slavin, R. E.(1995).Cooperative learning: Theory research and practice.Edgewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice Hall.
13. 方永泉(2003)。E世代教師應具備的電影素養。臺北:高等教育文化事業。
14. 王家福(2004)。嘉義，國立中正大學教育研究所。
15. 朱敬先(1998)。教育心理學。臺北:五南。
16. 朱瓊芳(2006)。臺北，國立臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修碩士班。
17. 吳武典(2001)。輔導原理。臺北:心理。
18. 李嘉祥(1998)。高雄，國立高雄師範大學科學教育研究所。
19. 周宏室(1995)。Mosston摩斯登體育教學光譜的理論與運用。臺北:師大。
20. 周紹忠、岑漢康(2000)。體育心理學。臺北:亞太。
21. 林玉体(1998)。教育概論。臺北:師大。
22. 林信宏(2006)。桃園，國立體育學院體育推廣學系研究所。
23. 徐苔玲(2002)。花蓮，國立東華大學教育研究所。
24. 馬啓偉、張力爲(1996)。體育運動心理學。臺北:東華。
25. 高俊傑(2004)。合作學習理論的教學理念。馬偕醫護暨管理專科學校學報，4，133-143。
26. 張淑卿、唐廷俊(2002)。不同運動能力學生再體育課學習需求差異之研究—以臺北市東湖國中爲例。中華民國大專運校九十一年體育學術研討會專刊（上）
27. 梁正怡(2005)。嘉義，國立中正大學教育研究所。
28. 陳俐燁(2002)。屏東，國立屏東師範學院音樂教育研究所。
29. 陳景星(2000).Wisdom formulas in action.臺北:中國文化大學運動教練研究所.
30. 陳傳吉(2004)。嘉義，國立嘉義大學國民教育研究所。
31. 單文經(1997)。提昇內在動機的教學原則。教學科技與媒體，35，14-20。
32. 黃政傑、林佩璇(2000)。創思與合作的教學法。臺北:五南。
33. 葉憲清(1998)。體育教學要素與特性（上）。學校體育雙月刊，8(6)，4-14。
34. 歐玲(2003)。影片欣賞在英語教學中的作用。重慶大學學報，9(6)，72-76。
35. 鄭金昌(2002)。臺北，國立臺灣師範大學體育學系在職進修班。
36. 鍾聖校(2000)。情意溝通教學理論。臺北:五南。
37. 簡光明(2002)。電影在文學教學中的運用。第一屆全國通識教育情意教學研討會論文集
38. 闕月清(1999)。體適能課程活動設計。臺灣省學校體育，9(3)，28-33。

1. (2015)。影響國中技藝教育學程餐旅職群學生學習滿意度之因素。靜宜人文社會學報，9(2)，143-178。