طرح مدل ساختاری پیش بینی روحیه پژوهشگری دانش آموزان با استفاده از سبک های تدریس و سبک های تفکر معلمان.

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار بخش مدیریت و برنامه ریزی آموزشی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

2 دانشیار بخش مدیریت و برنامه ریزی آموزشی، دانشکده روان‌شناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

3 کارشناس ارشد برنامه درسی، دانشگاه شیراز، شیراز، ایران

https://doi.org/10.34785/J012.2020.733

چکیده

هدف: پژوهش حاضر به طرح مدل ساختاری پیش‌بینی روحیه پژوهشگری دانش آموزان با استفاده از سبک‌‌های تدریس و سبک‌های تفکر معلمان پرداخته است.
روش: روش تحقیق توصیفی از نوع همبستگی بود. جامعه آماری پژوهش، شامل کلیه دانش‌آموزان و معلمان دوره اول متوسطه نواحی چهارگانه شهر شیراز هست که در سال تحصیلی 97-1396 مشغول به تحصیل بودند و با استفاده از روش نمونه‌گیری خوشه‌ای چندمرحله‌ای، تعداد نمونه 600 دانش‌آموز و 60 معلم انتخاب شد. ابزار پژوهش شامل پرسشنامه سبک‌های تدریس (Grasha and Richman, 2002)، پرسشنامه سبک‌های تفکر (Harrison, and Bramson, 2002) و پرسشنامه روحیه‌ی‌ پژوهشگری (Mohammad Sharifi, 2013) بود، ضریب آلفای کرونباخ آن‌ها به ترتیب 79/0، 91/0 و 81/0 بود. یافته‌های پژوهش با استفاده از نرم‌افزارهای Spss و Lisrel و با بهره‌گیری از روش‌های آماری آزمون تی تک نمونه‌ای، ضریب همبستگی پیرسون و تحلیل رگرسیون چندگانه تجزیه‌وتحلیل شد.
یافته‌ها: نتایج نشان داد روحیه پژوهشگری دانش‌آموزان بالاتر از حد متوسط است، سبک غالب تدریس معلمان، سبک تدریس تسهیل‌کننده و سبک غالب تفکر آنان سبک تحلیل‌گرایی هست. رابطه معناداری بین تعدادی از سبک تدریس و سبک تفکر معلمان مشاهده شده است. رابطه‌ای معنی‌دار و مستقیم بین انواع سبک تدریس معلمان و روحیه پژوهشگری دانش‌آموزان وجود دارد. سبک تدریس و سبک تفکر معلمان به‌طور همزمان پیش‌بینی کننده معناداری برای روحیه پژوهشگری دانش‌آموزان می‌باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Designing a Structural Model for Predicting Students Research Morale based on Teachers’ Teaching Styles and Thinking Style.

نویسندگان [English]

  • Maryam Shafiesarvestani 1
  • Jafar Jahani 2
  • Asad Rakhdapoor 3
1 Assistant Professor of Educational Management and Planning, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
2 Associate Professor, Department of Educational Management and Planning, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
3 Master of Curriculum Planning, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده [English]

Abstract:

The research method was descriptive and correlational. The population of this research consisted of all first cycle of secondary education students and teachers in the four district of Shiraz, who studied in the academic year 96-97. Using multi-stage cluster sampling, 600 students and 60 teachers were selected. Research tools included Grassha and Richman Teaching Styles Questionnaire (2002), Harrison & Bramson Thought Style Questionnaire (2002) and Mohammad Sharifi’s research morale questionnaire (2013). Which Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.79, 0.91 and 0.81 respectively. Research findings were analyzed by SPSS and LISREL software and using statistical methods such as one-sample t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and multiple regression analysis. The results showed that: Research morale in students was higher than average, the dominant teaching style of teachers, was facilitator style and dominant thinking style was the style of analytics. There is a significant relationship between a number of teaching styles and teachers' thinking styles. There is a significant and direct correlation between the different teaching styles of teachers and students' research morale. Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles simultaneously predict a significant role for the students' Research Morale, Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles are simultaneously significant predictor of students' research morale.
Keywords: Teaching Styles, Thinking styles, Research Morale,

Abstract:

The research method was descriptive and correlational. The population of this research consisted of all first cycle of secondary education students and teachers in the four district of Shiraz, who studied in the academic year 96-97. Using multi-stage cluster sampling, 600 students and 60 teachers were selected. Research tools included Grassha and Richman Teaching Styles Questionnaire (2002), Harrison & Bramson Thought Style Questionnaire (2002) and Mohammad Sharifi’s research morale questionnaire (2013). Which Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.79, 0.91 and 0.81 respectively. Research findings were analyzed by SPSS and LISREL software and using statistical methods such as one-sample t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and multiple regression analysis. The results showed that: Research morale in students was higher than average, the dominant teaching style of teachers, was facilitator style and dominant thinking style was the style of analytics. There is a significant relationship between a number of teaching styles and teachers' thinking styles. There is a significant and direct correlation between the different teaching styles of teachers and students' research morale. Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles simultaneously predict a significant role for the students' Research Morale, Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles are simultaneously significant predictor of students' research morale.
Keywords: Teaching Styles, Thinking styles, Research Morale,

Abstract:

The research method was descriptive and correlational. The population of this research consisted of all first cycle of secondary education students and teachers in the four district of Shiraz, who studied in the academic year 96-97. Using multi-stage cluster sampling, 600 students and 60 teachers were selected. Research tools included Grassha and Richman Teaching Styles Questionnaire (2002), Harrison & Bramson Thought Style Questionnaire (2002) and Mohammad Sharifi’s research morale questionnaire (2013). Which Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.79, 0.91 and 0.81 respectively. Research findings were analyzed by SPSS and LISREL software and using statistical methods such as one-sample t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and multiple regression analysis. The results showed that: Research morale in students was higher than average, the dominant teaching style of teachers, was facilitator style and dominant thinking style was the style of analytics. There is a significant relationship between a number of teaching styles and teachers' thinking styles. There is a significant and direct correlation between the different teaching styles of teachers and students' research morale. Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles simultaneously predict a significant role for the students' Research Morale, Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles are simultaneously significant predictor of students' research morale.
Keywords: Teaching Styles, Thinking styles, Research Morale,


Abstract:

The research method was descriptive and correlational. The population of this research consisted of all first cycle of secondary education students and teachers in the four district of Shiraz, who studied in the academic year 96-97. Using multi-stage cluster sampling, 600 students and 60 teachers were selected. Research tools included Grassha and Richman Teaching Styles Questionnaire (2002), Harrison & Bramson Thought Style Questionnaire (2002) and Mohammad Sharifi’s research morale questionnaire (2013). Which Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.79, 0.91 and 0.81 respectively. Research findings were analyzed by SPSS and LISREL software and using statistical methods such as one-sample t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and multiple regression analysis. The results showed that: Research morale in students was higher than average, the dominant teaching style of teachers, was facilitator style and dominant thinking style was the style of analytics. There is a significant relationship between a number of teaching styles and teachers' thinking styles. There is a significant and direct correlation between the different teaching styles of teachers and students' research morale. Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles simultaneously predict a significant role for the students' Research Morale, Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles are simultaneously significant predictor of students' research morale.
Keywords: Teaching Styles, Thinking styles, Research Morale,

Abstract:

The research method was descriptive and correlational. The population of this research consisted of all first cycle of secondary education students and teachers in the four district of Shiraz, who studied in the academic year 96-97. Using multi-stage cluster sampling, 600 students and 60 teachers were selected. Research tools included Grassha and Richman Teaching Styles Questionnaire (2002), Harrison & Bramson Thought Style Questionnaire (2002) and Mohammad Sharifi’s research morale questionnaire (2013). Which Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.79, 0.91 and 0.81 respectively. Research findings were analyzed by SPSS and LISREL software and using statistical methods such as one-sample t-test, Pearson's correlation coefficient, and multiple regression analysis. The results showed that: Research morale in students was higher than average, the dominant teaching style of teachers, was facilitator style and dominant thinking style was the style of analytics. There is a significant relationship between a number of teaching styles and teachers' thinking styles. There is a significant and direct correlation between the different teaching styles of teachers and students' research morale. Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles simultaneously predict a significant role for the students' Research Morale, Teachers teaching styles and thinking styles are simultaneously significant predictor of students' research morale.
Keywords: Teaching Styles, Thinking styles, Research Morale,

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Keywords: Teaching Styles
  • Thinking styles
  • Research Morale

مراجع

Abbasi Asl, R, Saeedipour, I., & Asadzadeh, H. (2016). “Comparison of the Efficacy of Three Methods of Cooperative Learning on Social Skills in Second Grade Female Students, New Educational Approaches, Eleventh Year, Issue 1”, University of Isfahan, pp. 105-124. [In Persian]
Abraham, L. (2016). Inculcation of Research Spirit in Students. International Journal of Scientific Research and Modern Education (IJSRME), ISSN (Online), 2455-5630.
Apaydin, B. B., & Cenberci, S. (2018). Correlation between Thinking Styles and Teaching Styles of Prospective Mathematics Teachers. World Journal of Education, 8(4), 36-46.
Amin Khandaqi, M., and Rajaii, M. (2013). The Impact of Students' Learning Style on Their Favorite Teaching Style, Quarterly Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 16- 40. [In Persian]
Bakhshayesh, A. (2014). Investigating the Relationship Between Thinking Styles and Learning Strategies with Academic Performance of University Students, Journal Curriculum Planning Knowledge & Research in Educational Sciences, Volume 14, Number 14, pp.135-146. [In Persian]
Becerne, B.O., & Ozdemir, A.D. (2010). Thecomparision of prospective preschool teachers thinking styles and intelligence types procedia-social and Behavioral sciences,26(2), 2131-2136.
Chen, J. (2018). A study on the correlations between thinking styles and academic achievement in web-based environmental education. Ekoloji, 27(106), 2045-2051.
Coldren, J., & Hively, J. (2009). Interpersonal teaching style and student impression formation. College Teaching, 57(2), 93-98.
Crosby, R. H. J. (2000). AMEE Guide No 20: The good teacher is more than a lecturerthe twelve roles of the teacher. Medical teacher, 22(4), 334-347.
Entwistle, N, (2002), Research-Based University Teaching: What is It and Could There be an Agreed Basis for It? The Psychology of Education Review,36(2),2-9.
Fan, J., Zhang, L. F., & Chen, C. (2018). Thinking styles: Distinct from personality? Personality and Individual Differences, 125, 50-55.
Farajollahi, M., Sarmadi, M., Hosni, K., & Kazemi, Z. (2014). Explaining Students' Research Mood, Second Conference on Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, February 2014. [In Persian]
Grasha, A. F. (2002). The dynamics of one-on-one teaching. College Teaching, 51(4), 129- 146.
Harrison, A. F., & Bramson, R. M. (2002). The Art of Thinking: The Classic Guide to Increasing Brain Power. Berkley Pub Group.
Hassanzadeh, H, Bahram Rezaie, M, Poladi, A., & Hassanzadeh, A. (2013). styles of Faculty Members of Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences for theoretical Lessons 2010-2011. Kurdistan Journal of Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences / Seventeenth / Fall 2013. 77-70. [In Persian]
Hauer, P., Straub, C., & Wolf, S. (2005). Learning styles of allied health students using Kolb's LSI-IIa. Journal of Allied Health, 34(3), 177-182.
Irmscher, M. (2019). The Interface Function of Thinking Styles between Personality and Intelligence. World Journal of Education, 9(1), 79-91.
Jafari, Z, Samadi, P., & Ghaedi, Y. (2015). The study of the impact of teaching philosophy to children on nurturing their research spirit among the preschool students, Journal Curriculum Planning Knowledge & Research in Educational Sciences, 12, (17), 41- 49. [In Persian]
Kadivar, P. (2002). Psycology of learning. Tehran: Samt Publications. [In Persian]
Kardan, A. (2007). Applying Science Insights to the Field of Education, Quarterly Journal of Effective Schools, 3, 73. [In Persian]
Mardani, L, Yazidi, M., & Nazar Azari, K. (2016). “The representation of research experience model and its relationship with researcher spirituality and research selfefficacy of M.A.” students of Islamic Azad University of Sari, Educational Management Innovations, 11)1( ,81-102. [In Persian]
Marin, L. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(1), 1-13.
Mehr Mohammadi, M. (2000). Rethinking the Process of Teaching - Teacher Learning and Teaching, Tehran: School. [In Persian]
Miller, B. M. (2006). The Impact of Individual Teaching Syles on Student Academic Achievement (Doctoral dissertation, Marietta College).
Mirslimani, M. (2011). “The amount of theoretical and secondary school science curriculum and secondary students of research and researcher component, Faculty of Psycholgy and Education Sciences”, Islamic Azad University Marvdasht. [In Persian]
Mohammad Sharifi, Z. (2013). An Investigation of Research Morality and its In-School Factors in Elementary School Students. M.Sc., Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. [In Persian]
Mokhtari, M, Zarei Zavaraki, I., & Mofidi, F. (2014). Assessing Communication, Thinking and Research Skills among the Fifth Grade Students in Tehran (educational year 91-90). Modern Educational Thoughts, 10(3), 79-102. [In Persian]
Momeni, A, Khamsan, A, Rastegomqadam, M., & Talibzadeh, S. (2017). Identifying the Characteristics and Actions of Supporting Teachers from the Students' Viewpoint: Qualitative Analysis, Journal of Educational Research, 35, 51-71. [In Persian]
Munir, F. (2016). Most Frequent teaching styles and students' learning strategies in public high schools of lahore, pakistan. Science International, 28(2).
Nosrati, F, Khoshnazar, A., & Pour Azari, A. (2015). Investigating the Relationship between Critical Thinking in Teaching Style and Educational Performance among Elementary Teachers in Shabestar, 3rd International Conference on Modern Research in Management - Economics and Accounting, 2015. [In Persian]
Ph’ng, L. M. (2018). Teaching Styles, Learning Styles and the ESP Classroom. In MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 150, p. 05082). EDP Sciences.
Razak, N. A., Ahmad, F., & Shah, P. M. (2017). Perceived and preferred teaching styles (methods) of english for specific purposes (ESP) Students. e-Bangi, 2(2).
Shabani, H. (2014). Instructional Skills: Teaching Methods and Techniques. [In Persian] Shafi'i, S. (2011). “Investigating the Relationship between the Spiritual Thinking Style of Teachers of High School Girls in Tehran, M.Sc”, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen. [In Persian]
Shoarinejad, A. (2015). Psychology of Education, Tehran: Information dissemination. [In Persian]
Shirzad, Z. (2016). Construction and Validation of the Scale of Research spirit among Girl students of High school in Mashhad. Journal of Educational Measurement, 6(23), 117- 139. [In Persian]
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (1997). Are cognitive styles still in style? American psychologist, 42(7), 701.
Zhang, L. F. (2001). Do styles of thinking matter among Hong Kong secondary school students? Personality and Individual Differences, 32(3), 299-301.
تدریس پژوهی
دوره 8، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 1
فروردین 1399
صفحه 241-218

فایل ها

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار