论文部分内容阅读
笔者听三位老师教学统编六年制小学数学课本第七册第62页应用题例6,设计的准备题各不相同,其教学效果也不一样。教师甲先让学生解答两步计算的连乘应用题:“学校给三好学生买奖品,买了3盒钢笔,每盒10支,每支2元,一共用去多少元?”然后要求学生将它改编成两步计算的连除应用题(即例6)。教者这样设计准备题,是从学生已学过的连乘应用题出发,意图从连乘与连除的互逆关系来引入新知。但是,由于准备题和例题都是两步计算,准备题的起点比较高,难点并未降低;加之解答准备题的思路与解答例题的思路联系不紧密,准备题的铺垫作用不明显,结果学生不仅改编起来有困难,而且解答例题仍较费劲。
The author listens to three teachers to teach the compilation of six-year primary school mathematics textbook seventh book page 62 application examples 6, the design of preparatory questions vary, and its teaching effect is not the same. Teacher A first let students answer the two-step calculation of the multiplication application: “The school bought prizes for students of Sanhao, bought 3 boxes of pens, each box of 10, each 2 yuan, for a total of how many dollars?” Then asked students to It is adapted into a two-step calculation of contingency problems (ie Example 6). The teacher prepares for the preparation of this question, is from the students have learned even by the application of the problem, the intention of the multiply and even with the addition of the reciprocal relationship between the introduction of new knowledge. However, because the preparatory questions and examples are two-step calculation, preparatory questions starting point is relatively high, the difficulty did not decrease; coupled with the idea of preparing questions and answers to the problem of train of thought is not closely linked to the preparation of the role of bedding is not obvious, the results of students Not only difficult to adapt, but also to answer the example is still strenuous.