Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame.
Cogn Sci. 2021 Apr;45(4):e12960. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12960.
Mathematics word problems provide students with an opportunity to apply what they are learning in their mathematics classes to the world around them. However, students often neglect their knowledge of the world and provide nonsensical responses (e.g., they may answer that a school needs 12.5 buses for a field trip). This study examined if the question design of word problems affects students' mindset in ways that affect subsequent sense-making. The hypothesis was that rewriting standard word problems to introduce inherent uncertainty about the result would be beneficial to student performance and sense-making because it requires students to reason explicitly about the context described in the problem. Middle school students (N = 229) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions. In the standard textbook condition, students solved a set of six word problems taken from current textbooks. In the modified yes/no condition, students solved the same six problems rewritten so the solution helped answer a "yes" or "no" question. In the disfluency control condition, students solved the standard problems each rewritten in a variety of fonts to make them look unusual. After solving the six problems in their assigned condition, all students solved the same three "problematic" problems designed to assess sense-making. Contrary to predictions, results showed that students in the modified yes/no condition solved the fewest problems correctly in their assigned condition problem set. However, consistent with predictions, they subsequently demonstrated more sense-making on the three problematic problems. Results suggest that standard textbook word problems may be able to be rewritten in ways that mitigate a "senseless" mindset.
数学应用题为学生提供了一个将课堂所学知识应用于现实世界的机会。然而,学生往往忽略了他们对世界的了解,给出荒谬的答案(例如,他们可能会回答学校需要 12.5 辆公共汽车进行实地考察)。本研究考察了应用题的问题设计是否会以影响后续理解的方式影响学生的思维模式。假设是,将标准应用题改写为引入结果固有不确定性的问题设计将有益于学生的表现和理解,因为这要求学生明确思考问题描述的情境。本研究随机将 229 名中学生分配到以下三种条件之一:在标准教材条件下,学生解决了一组六个取自当前教材的应用题。在修改后的“是/否”条件下,学生解决了相同的六个问题,但答案可以回答一个“是”或“否”的问题。在不流畅控制条件下,学生解决了标准问题,每个问题都用不同的字体改写,使其看起来不寻常。在完成分配条件下的六个问题后,所有学生都解决了相同的三个“有问题”的问题,旨在评估理解。与预测相反,结果表明,在修改后的“是/否”条件下的学生在其分配条件下的问题集上正确解决的问题最少。然而,与预测一致的是,他们随后在三个有问题的问题上表现出了更多的理解。结果表明,标准教材中的应用题可能可以用减轻“无意义”思维模式的方式改写。