طراحی و اثربخشی آموزش گروهی مبتنی بر نظریه بارشناختی بر پیشرفت تحصیلی مفاهیم جبر، بارشناختی ادراک شده، رفتار پیشرفت و کارایی در یادگیری

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشکده روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشگاه سمنان، سمنان، ایران.

2 عضو هیات علمی، گروه روانشناسی تربیتی

3 عضو هیات علمی، گروه روانشناسی تربیتی، دانشکده روانشناسی تربیتی، سمنان.، ایران

چکیده

نظریه بار شناختی تا امروز سهم مهمی در حوزه یادگیری و طراحی آموزشی ایجاد کرده است. هدف عمده این مطالعه به کارگیری اصول نظریه بارشناختی در طراحی یک برنامه آموزشی مفاهیم جبر دردانش آموزان پایه هفتم بود. شرکت کنندگان 56 دانش آموز دختر پایه هفتم بودند. برای انتخاب آنها، از مدارس راهنمایی دولتی منطقه 6 شهر تهران دو مدرسه به صورت تصادفی انتخاب شدند، که یک مدرسه به عنوان گروه آزمایش و مدرسه دیگر به عنوان گروه کنترل در نظر گرفته شد. برنامه آموزشی مبتنی بر اثرات بارشناختی در گروه آزمایش و برنامه آموزشی سنتی در گروه کنترل اجرا شد. شرکت کنندگان آزمون مفاهیم جبر، مقیاس درجه بندی ذهنی بار شناختی و اندازه های کارایی پاس و مرینبوئر، و مجموعه تکالیف سنجش رفتار پیشرفت را تکمیل کردند. داده ها با مدل تحلیل کوواریانس، تحلیل واریانس چند متغیری و مدل مجذورکای تحلیل شدند. یافته ها نشان داد که در گروه تحت آموزش با برنامه آموزشی طراحی شده با اصول بار شناختی، پیشرفت تحصیلی، کارایی، پافشاری در حل تکالیف و تلاش برای دادن پاسخ های درست بالاتر از گروه کنترل بود. هم چنین، دانش آموزان گروه آزمایش بار شناختی پایین تری از دانش آموزان گروه کنترل ادراک می کردند و نسبت انتخاب مسائل با دشواری متوسط در این گروه به طور معناداری بیشتر بود. برنامه آموزشی مبتنی بر اصول بار شناختی، پیشرفت و رفتارهای مرتبط با آن را در دانش آموزان بهبود می بخشد. تلویحات کاربردی یافته ها مورد بحث قرار گرفت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The Development and Effectiveness of Cognitive Load Theory Group Teaching on Algebra Concept, the Perceived Cognitive Load, Achievement Behaviors and Efficiency in Learning

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maryam Rostami 1
  • Siavash Talepasand 2
  • Mohammadali Mohammadyfar 3
1 Ph.D student in Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran
2 Faculty Member, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran.
3 Faculty Member, Department of Educational Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Semnan University, Semnan, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Cognitive load theory has made an important contribution in the field of learning up today.The objective of this study was applying the principles of cognitive load theory in development an educational plan for algebra concept, the perceived cognitive load, achievement behaviors and efficiency in learning. Participants included 56 girl students from 7th grade. Two schools were randomly selected among the secondary schools of district 6 of Tehran, and assigned one as the experimental group and the other as the control group. Educational program based on cognitive load effects was run in the experimental group. Participants completed algebra concepts test, subjective grading scale of cognitive load, efficiency measures of Pass and Merriënboer, and a measure of achievement behavior assignments. The data were analyzed using of covariance analysis, multivariate analysis of variance, and chi-square analysis. Results showed that in the experimental group the academic achievement in algebra concept, efficiency, persistence on homework, and making effort to give correct responses was higher than the control group. Also, students perceived lower cognitive load compared to the control group and selecting problems with average difficulty was significantly higher in the experimental group. The Educational plan based on the principles of cognitive load improves achievement and the related behaviors in students. Practical implications of results are discussed.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cognitive Load
  • Academic Achievement in Algebra Concepts
  • Efficiency
  • Achievement. behavior
1-Brunstein, A, Betts, S, Anderson, JR 2009, Practice enables successful learning under minimal guidance, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 101, No.4, Pp. 790.
     
2-Bokosmaty, S, Sweller, J, Kalyuga, S 2015, Learning Geometry Problem Solving by Studying Worked Examples Effects of Learner Guidance and Expertise, Journal of American Educational Research, Vol. 52, No. 2, Pp. 307-333
     
3-Clark, T, Ayres, P, Sweller, J 2005, The impact of sequencing and prior knowledge on learning mathematics through spreadsheet applications, Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol.53, No. 3, Pp.15-24.
     
4-Clark, R, Nguyen, F, Sweller, J 2005, Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load: San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer
     
5-Cooper, G, Sweller, J 1987, Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 79, No. 4, Pp. 347-362.
     
6-Deleeuw, K E, Mayer, R E 2008, A comparison of three measures of cogni-tive load: Evidence for separable meas-ures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load, Journal of Educational Psychol‌ogy, Vol, 100, Pp. 223–234. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.22.
     
7-Eccles, J S, Adler, TF, Futterman, R, et al 1983, Expectancies, Valuesand Academic Behaviors. In J. T. Spence (ED), Achievement and Achievement Motivation, Pp. 75-146
     
8-Gerven, PWM, Paas, F, Merriënboer, J J G, et al 2003, The efficiency of multimedia learning into old age, British Journal of Educational Psychology,Vol. 73, No. 4, Pp. 489-505.
     
9-Jalani, N H, Cheer- sern, L 2014, Effects of example-problem based learning on transfer performance in Circuit Theory, Journal of Technical Education and Training, Vol. 6, No. 2, Pp. 28–37.
     
10-Jalani, NH, Cheer- sern, L 2015, The Example-Problem-Based Learning Model: Applying CognitiveLoad Theory, Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 195, Pp. 872-880.
     
11-Kalyuga, S, Chandler, P, Sweller, J 2001, Learner experience and efficiency of instructional guidance, Educational Psychology,Vol. 21, No. 1, Pp.5-23.
     
12-Kalyuga, S, Renkl, A 2007, Exper‌tise reversal effect and its instructional implications: Introduction to the special issue, Instructional Science, Vol. 38, Pp. 209– 215. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s11251-009-9102-0 .
     
13-Klauer, K J, Leutner, D 2007, Lehren und Lernen. Einführung in die Instruktions psychologie. Weinheim: Beltz, PVU.
     
14-Mahbobi, T, Zare, H, Sarmadi, M, et al 2012, The Effectiveness of Instructional Design Principles on Learning Issues Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning environments, Journal of Higher Education Curriculum Studies,Vol. 3, No, 6. Pp. 29- 46. (In Persian).
     
15-McLaren, B M, van Gog, T, Ganoe, C, et al 2016, The efficiency of worked examples compared to erroneous examples,tutored problem solving, and problem solving in computer-based learning environments, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 55, Pp. 87-99.
     
16-Nievelstein, F, Gog,V T, Dijck, GV, et al 2013, The worked example and expertise reversal effect less structured tasks: Learning to reason about regal cases, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 38, Pp.118-125.
     
17-Paas, FGWC 1992, Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive load approach, Journal of Educational Psychology,Vol. 84, Pp. 429-434.
     
18-Paas, F, Renkl, A, Sweller, J 2003, Cognitive Load Theory and instructional design: Recent developments, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 38, No. 1, Pp. 1-4.
     
19-Paas, F, van Gog, T, Sweller, J 2010, Cognitive load theory: New conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives, Educational Psychology Review,Vol. 2, No. 2, Pp. 115-121.
     
20-Paas, F, Van Merrienboer, J 1993, The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures, Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 35, No.4, Pp. 737-743.
     
21-Paas, F, Van Merriënboer, J 1994, Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 6, No. 4, Pp. 351-371.
     
22-Schnotz, W, Kürschner, C 2007, A reconsideration of cognitive load theory, Educational Psychology Review,Vol. 19, No. 4, Pp. 469-508.
     
23-Schnotz, W, Fries, S, Horz, H 2009, Motivational aspects of cognitive load theory. In M. Wosnitza, S. A. Karabenick, A. Efklides, & P. Nenniger (Eds.), Contem‌porary motivation research: From global to local perspectives (Pp. 69–96). New York.
     
24-Senko, C, Hulleman, C S , Harackie-wicz, J M 2011, Achievement goal theory at the crossroads: Old controver-sies, current challenges, and new direc-tions, Educational Psychologist, Vol. 46, No.1, Pp. 26–47. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00461520.2011.538646
     
25-Sweller, J 2010, Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 22, No. 2, Pp. 123-138.
     
26-Sweller, J, Ayres, P, Kalyuga, S, 2011, Cognitive load theory. New York: Springer.
     
27-Takir, A, Aksu, M 2012, The Effect of an Instruction Designed by Cognitive Load Theory Principles on 7th Grade Students’ Achievement in Algebra Concepts and Cognitive Load, Journal of Creative Education, Vol. 3, No. 2, Pp. 232-240.
     
28-Talepasand, S 2013, The Effect of Perceived Motivational Structure of Classroom on Achievement Behaviors, Turkish Journal of Giftedness and Education, Vol. 3, No. 1, Pp.2-12
     
29-Van Gerven, P, Paas, F, Van Merrinboer, J, et al 2002, Cognitive load theory and aging: Effects of worked examples on training efficiency, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 12, No. 1, Pp. 87-105.
     
30-Van Merriënboer, J, Sweller, J 2005, Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 17, No. 2, Pp. 147-177.
     
31-Van Merriënboer, J, Schuurman, J, De Croock, M, et al 2002, Redirecting learners' attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 12, No. 1, Pp. 11-37.
     
32-Zhu, X, Simon, H A 1987, Learning mathematics from examples and by doing, Cognition and Instruction,Vol. 4, No. 3, Pp. 137-166.