PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Children have persistent difficulty with foundational measurement concepts, which may be linked to the instruction they receive. Here, we focus on testing various ways to support their understanding that rulers comprise spatial interval units. We examined whether evidence-based learning tools-disconfirming evidence and/or structural alignment-enhance their understanding of ruler units. Disconfirming evidence, in this context, involves having children count the spatial interval units under an object that is not aligned with the origin of a ruler. Structural alignment, in this context, involves highlighting what a ruler unit is by overlaying plastic unit chips on top of ruler units when an object is aligned with the origin of a ruler. In three experiments employing a pre-test/training/post-test design, a total of 120 second graders were randomly assigned to one of six training conditions (two training conditions per experiment). The training conditions included different evidence-based learning principles or \"business-as-usual\" instruction (control), with equal allocation to each (N = 20 for each condition). In each experiment, children who did not perform above chance level on the pre-test were selected to continue with training, which resulted in a total of 88 students for the analysis of improvement. The children showed significant improvement in training conditions that included disconfirming evidence, but not in the structural alignment or control conditions. However, an exploratory analysis suggests that improvement occurred more rapidly and was retained better when structural alignment was combined with disconfirming evidence compared to disconfirming evidence alone.
摘要：
孩子们对基础测量概念有持续的困难，可以链接到他们收到的指令。这里,我们专注于测试各种方法来支持他们的理解，即标尺包括空间间隔单位。我们研究了基于证据的学习工具-不确认证据和/或结构对齐是否增强了他们对尺子单元的理解。不确定的证据,在这种情况下，涉及让孩子计算与标尺原点不对齐的对象下的空间间隔单位。结构对齐,在这种情况下，涉及当对象与标尺的原点对齐时，通过在标尺单元顶部覆盖塑料单元芯片来突出显示标尺单元。在采用测试前/培训/测试后设计的三个实验中，总共120名二年级学生被随机分配到6种训练条件中的一种(每个实验2种).培训条件包括不同的循证学习原则或“照常营业”指导（控制），每个分配相等(每个条件N=20)。在每个实验中,在预试中表现不超过机会水平的儿童被选择继续训练，共88名学生进行了改进分析。孩子们在训练条件方面表现出了显着改善，其中包括不确定的证据，但不在结构对齐或控制条件下。然而,一项探索性分析提示,与仅有不确定证据相比,当结构比对结合不确定证据时,改善发生得更快,并且保留得更好.
