| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立師範大學 === 教育心理與輔導學系 === 86 === The Effects of Cognitive Apprenticeships Collaborative Learning on English Le
arning Achievement, Motivational Belief , and Learning Strategies of Second
Graders of Junior High School.
Mei-Ling, Lin
ABSTRACT
The main purposes of this study were ：（1）to construct the
instructional prosedure of“ cognitive apprenticeships cooperative learnin
g ”，and （2?to explore the effects of different instruction methods（co
gnitive apprenticeships cooperative learning, group cooperative learning ,
and traditional lecture ）on English learning achievement , motivational b
elief , and learning strategies of the second graders of junior high school.
In this study , the“ cognitive apprentice
ships cooperative learning”instruction method was formed by combining Col
lins''s cognitive apprenticeships and Danserau''s dyadic cooperative learning.
The“group cooperative learning ” instruction method was formed by Slav
in''s Student Teams Achievement Division， STAD.
The subjects were 130 second
graders in three classes from an junior high school in Taipei County. The
three classes were assigned to Experimental Group ,Experimental GroupⅡ,and
Control group. Experimental GroupⅠreceived "cognitive apprenticeships
cooperative learning”instruction, Experimental GroupⅡreceived “group coo
perative learning”instruction, and Control group received traditional lec
ture instruction. The experiment was conducted over a time span of twelve we
eks. Nonequivalent-control group design was used for this study. The quant
itative data obtained were analyzed by one-way ANCOVA .
The major findings were as follows:
1. The English learning achievement of Experimental groupⅠwas significantly
higher than that of Experimental GroupⅡ. But the English learning achievemen
-ts of the Experimental Group Ⅱwas not significantly higher than that of C
ontrol Group.
2. Experimental GroupⅠshowed significantly better effects on enhancing
the English self-efficacy than Experimental GroupⅡ did. But Experimental
GroupⅡ showed no significant effects on enhancing the English self-efficacy
than Control group did.
3. Experimental GroupⅠshowed significantly better effects
on increasing the English intrinsic-value than Experimental GroupⅡdid.
But Experimental Group Ⅱ showed no significant effects on increasing the
English intrinsic-value than Control Group did.
4. Experimental GroupⅠshowed significantly better
effects on enhancing the Eng -lish achievement motivation than Experime
ntal GroupⅡ. But Experimental Group Ⅱ showed no significant effects on enh
ancing the English achievement motivation than Control group did.
|
|---|
