排序方式： 共有5条查询结果，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1
1.
Diakidoy Irene-Anna N. Iordanou Kalypso 《European Journal of Psychology of Education - EJPE》2003,18(4):357-368
The study examined (a) the extent to which teachers and preservice teachers understand the concept of energy and adhere to particular preconceptions associated with it; and (b) their ability to predict pupils’ knowledge and understanding of the same concept. Teachers and preservice teachers completed a test by indicating for each item what their response was and what an average sixth-grade pupil’s response might have been, and their predictions were compared to actual pupil performance. Results indicated that teachers’ and preservice teachers’ understanding of the concept was far from complete, and that teachers were, in general, more likely to overestimate pupils’ knowledge. 相似文献
2.
Kalypso Iordanou Krista R. Muis Panayiota Kendeou 《Journal of Experimental Education》2013,81(4):531-551
Relations between epistemic perspective and online epistemic processing of evidence when reading a text were examined. Thirty-seven young adolescents and 24 graduate university students were asked to read and think aloud with two texts, one in the history domain and the other in the science domain. Participants also completed a prior-knowledge test and an instrument assessing their epistemic perspective. Results showed that participants who exhibited an evaluativist epistemic perspective and high prior knowledge used the epistemic standard of scientific research more than participants who held a nonevaluativist epistemic perspective. Furthermore, an age-related developmental difference was observed, with adults using the epistemic standard of scientific research more than young adolescents. Domain differences were observed in both participants’ epistemic perspectives and online epistemic processing. Participants overall engaged in online epistemic processing of evidence more in the history topic than in the science topic. 相似文献
3.
This study investigates whether university students’ epistemic beliefs and prior knowledge about controversial socioscientific issues (SSIs) can predict the different types of arguments that students construct. Two hundred forty-three university students were asked to construct different types of supportive arguments—social, ethical, economic, scientific, ecological—as well as counterarguments and rebuttals after they had read a scenario on a SSI. Participants’ epistemic beliefs and prior knowledge were assessed separately. Results showed that students’ epistemic beliefs and prior knowledge predicted the quantity, quality, and diversity of the different types of arguments the students constructed. In particular, students who held sophisticated epistemic beliefs about the structure of knowledge and exhibited relatively more robust prior knowledge scores, produced arguments of greater quantity, better quality, and higher diversity than students with less sophisticated epistemic beliefs and low prior knowledge scores. Educational implications are discussed. 相似文献
4.
5.
Iordanou Kalypso Kendeou Panayiota Zembylas Michalinos 《Metacognition and Learning》2020,15(3):319-342
Metacognition and Learning - The present study examines individuals’ thinking during and after reading controversial historical accounts and the possible contribution of epistemic beliefs,... 相似文献
1