Effects of Using S-P Chart as a Feedback Tool on Elementary School Students'' Learning Achievement, Attitudes, and Self-Regulated Learning toward Mathematics.

• Main Authors: Yi- Ching Lin, 林宜靜
• Other Authors: Ping-Yeh Tsai
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2012
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/46669571661405306132

碩士 === 淡江大學 === 教育科技學系碩士班 === 100 === Feedbacks provide relevant information required to achieve the learning objectives in the learning process of learners. In recent years, education reform has been noted that using scores as the only feedback has several limitations and drawbacks. There are many studies have found that teachers apply various feedback types in math classes or provide learning feedbacks through the auxiliary system.This study aims to use S-P chart as a feedback tool and adopt quasi-experimental research method, collecting data through questionnaire survey. The subjects are 151 fourth graders in one elementary school in New Taipei City. There are three classes each in experimental group and control group.After the math tests, the experimental group students would get S-P chart as the learning feedback; on the other hand, the control group students adopt the traditional test review. In so doing, researcher wants to understand the effects of using S-P chart as a feedback tool on students'' learning achievement, attitudes, and self-regulated learning toward mathematics. This research revealed the following results: 1.Using S-P chart as a feedback tool has no influence on students'' learning achievement. 2.There is no significant difference between using S-P chart as a feedback tool and students'' learning attitude in mathematics. 3.There is no positive impact on experimental group students’ attitude toward mathematics learning. 4.There is no significant difference between using S-P chart as a feedback tool and students'' self-regulated learning. 5.There is no positive impact on experimental group students’ self-regulated learning ability. 6.Using S-P chart leads to a negative effect on students’ expectancy regulation strategies.