Educational effects of contextual and decontextual learning in Serbian language teaching
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7251/FLZB2324259SKeywords:
contextual learning, decontextual learning, traditional teaching, educational effectsAbstract
The work represents an experimental research in which the theoretical, pedagogical-psychological, didactic and functional methodical aspects of contextual learning in traditional teaching are highlighted. Starting from those analytical-synthetic and comparative approaches, a thematically appropriate methodological concept of scientific valorization of the educational effects of contextual and decontextual learning in teaching within the professional constructive system was inventively operationalized. During the 2019/2020 school year, after advisory work with experimenters in two stages, the research was successfully implemented and a didactic experiment was verified within the teaching of the Serbian language subject with experimental and control groups. The sample was fifth-grade students of “Sveti Sava” Junior High School in Bijeljina. Study analysis and synthesis of quantitative and qualitative indicators of the initial and final examinations clearly point to the scientific assumptions of the generalization of the educational effects of contextual learning in the teaching of the Serbian language in the teaching of tradition. For students who learned contextually, better educational effects are evident in fast reading, comprehension of the read text, culture of written expression, word development.
References
Beatson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. Northvale: Jason Aronson, Inc.
Biggs, J. B., Kembler, D., & Leung, D. (2001). The revised two-factor study process questionnaire: R-SPQ-2F. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 133–149.
Brown, B. L. (1998). Applying constructivism in vocational and career education. Information Series No. 378. Columbus: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Center on Educational and Training for Employment, The Ohio State University.
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). The Guilford Press.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cohen, B. H. (2008). Explaining psychological statistics (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (2006). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Mason, OH: Cengage.
Dewey, J. (1952). Experience and education. The Macmillan Company.
Hamilton, J., & Singwhat, T. (2010). Teaching and learning: ASEM blended learning system approach. Higher Education Research and Development, 29(1), 1–16.
Harwell, M. (2003). Summarizing Monte Carlo results in methodological research: The single-factor, fixed-effects ANCOVA case. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 45–70.
Ilić, M. (2015). Didaktika i sloboda učesnika nastavnog procesa. In Zbornik radova Nauka i sloboda (pp. 645–667). Istočno Sarajevo: Filozofski fakultet Pale.
Ilić, M. (2017). Kontekstualizovana nastava u teoriji i praksi. In Zbornik Banjalučki novembarski susreti (pp. 391–408). Banja Luka: Filozofski fakultet.
Ilić, M. (2020). Didaktika. Banja Luka: Filozofski fakultet.
Johnson, P. O., & Fay, L. C. (1950). The Johnson-Neyman technique: Its theory and application. Psychometrika, 15(4), 349–367.
Johnson, E. B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: What it is and why it’s here to stay. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Pavlović, Z. (2016). Prezentovanje znanja u udžbenicima fizike. Filozofski fakultet, Istočno Sarajevo.
Piters, R. Stanley. (2012). Ciljevi obrazovanja – Pojmovno istraživanje. Reč, 28, 11.
Puri, M. L., & Sen, P. K. (1969). Analysis of covariance based on general rank scores. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 40, 610–618.
Rutter, M. (1983). School effects on pupil progress: Research findings and policy implications. Child Development, 54(1), 1–29.
Rutherford, A. (1992). Alternatives to traditional analysis of covariance. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 45(2), 197–223. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1992.tb00988.x
Stepansky, V. I. (2006). Psihoinformatsiya: Teoriya i eksperiment. Moscow: Moscowskij psihologosotsialnyj institut.
Schunk, D. (2005). Commentary on self-regulation in school contexts. Learning and Instruction, 15, 173–177.
Špijunović, K., & Maričić, S. (2017). Kontekstualni pristup učenju i poučavanju u početnoj nastavi matematike. In Banjalučki novembarski susreti 2016. Filozofski fakultet, Banja Luka.
Verbitsky, A. A. (2004). Kompetentnostny podkhod i teoriya kontekstnogo obucheniya. Moscow: ITS PKPS.
Verbitsky, A. A., & Kalashnikov, V. G. (2010). Category of “context” in psychology and pedagogics. Moscow: Logos.
Wilcox, R. R. (2003). Applying contemporary statistical procedures. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Downloads
Published
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
