透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.237.91.98
  • 學位論文

不同回饋教學法及自我口語提示法對桌球正手殺球教學效果之研究

A research towards teaching methods and their results on Difference Feedback Methods and Self-Verbal Cueing Methods on Forehand Smashing in table tennis

指導教授 : 黃國義
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


本研究之目的在探討自我回饋教學法、他人回饋教學法、自我口語提示教學法等三種教學法間對桌球正手殺球教學效果之差異。此外,本研究同時探討三種不同教學法教學前後的教學效果之差異以及不同教學法教學後各組組間學習效果之交互關係。本研究以研究者原授課班級之三個高一班級為實驗班,共112位學生為研究對象,並以班級為單位,分成自我回饋教學組、他人回饋教學組及自我口語提示教學組等三組,進行為期三週的教學實驗,並於教學前、教學後實施桌球正手殺球測驗。將所得數據資料整理經統計分析後,獲得以下結論: 一、接受自我回饋教學、他人回饋教學與自我口語提示教學等三種教學 法的學生,桌球正手殺球技術評量皆有顯著的進步(P<.05)。 二、他人回饋教學法顯著的優於自我口語提示教學法(P<.05),也顯著的優於自我回饋教學法(P<.05)。 三、自我口語提示教學法也顯著的優於自我回饋教學法(P<.05)。 四、實驗結果顯示,三種教學法中,以他人回饋教學法最優,其次是自我口語提示教學法,最後是自我回饋教學法。 五、雖然研究者在教學前有計畫性的教導學生回饋訊息回收練習及回饋訊息應用練習流程(試作→ 觀察→ 比較→ 說出正誤→ 老師評語),但學生還是無法自我回收訊息及自我應用訊息來改進錯誤。

並列摘要


The purpose of this research is to investigate into the resulting influences observed in differentteaching methods applied on forehand smashing table tennis. This paper also discusses in detail the difference in each test subject prior and after the experiments based on the different teaching methods. There are three chosen teaching methods used for this research. They are self-feedback pedagogy, feedback from others pedagogy and self-verbal cueing pedagogy. In addition, this research also aims to explore the difference in teaching results before and after and investigate the three different kinds of teaching methods are given and the relations of learning achievements between different teaching methods after they are given. There are a total of 112 study subjects considered for the experiments. Three classes of 10th grade students are subjected to experimental classes taught by the writer throughout a duration of three weeks. Class I is assigned as self-feedback group, class II as feedback from others group and class III, as self-verbal cueing group. Each class is given forehand smashing tests prior and following the three different teaching methods. Comparisons are made and quantified as data. Below are the results obtained through statistical analysis applied to the collected data: 1.The students taught in self-feedback method, feedback from others method and self-verbal cueing method display a significant improvement in the technical evaluation of forehand smashing (P<.05). 2.The result from feedback from others method is apparently much better than self-verbal cueing method (P<.05), and self-feedback method. 3.The results collected from self-verbal cueing method are unambiguous in comparison to the self-feedback method. 4.The experiment results show that feedback from others method has the best result, followed by self-verbal cueing method and self-feedback method. 5.Although the researcher uses a system of instructing students on relaying feedback messages. This takes place in the format, test → observation → comparison → tell the correction → teacher’s evaluation. The results show that students are still unable to rectify their mistakes despite careful planning of these instructions and feedback messages.

參考文獻


黃國義(1988)。抽?因子訓?法對桌球之自動期抽球技術的訓?效果之研究。台?:中華民國大專體育總會。
姚漢禱(1988)。大學女生桌球的技術評量研究,體育學報,10,49-55。
姚漢禱、蔡漢隆(1986)。我國少年桌球選手技術成績表現和經驗、體格、體能相關之探討。體育學報,8,77-84。
胡志鋒(2005)。大專甲組桌球雙打技術分析-以93年全國大專校院運動會為例。國?台灣師範大學體育學系碩士?文,台北市。
劉亞文(1982)。大學男生桌球運動能力測驗項目之編製研究。國立臺灣師範大學體育研究所集刊,第九輯,P.278。

被引用紀錄


曾義強(2009)。表現與結果獲知回饋策略對輕度智障學生動作技能學習成效之影響〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-1610201315162410

延伸閱讀