Japan Journal of Educational Technology
Online ISSN : 2432-6038
Print ISSN : 0385-5236
Volume 12, Issue 2
Displaying 1-14 of 14 articles from this issue
  • Article type: Cover
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages Cover1-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (24K)
  • Article type: Cover
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages Cover2-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (24K)
  • Article type: Appendix
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages App1-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (103K)
  • Article type: Appendix
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages App2-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (103K)
  • Shigeru SHINDO, Kanji AKAHORI
    Article type: Article
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages 37-49
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    The authors present a method for Item Co-Relational Structure (ICRS) analysis which can be used to analyze the relational structures among test items. This ICRS method is an extension of the Item Relational Structure (IRS) method proposed by M. Takeya. This new method, however, makes it possible to take into account the logical sum ensemble hierarchy structure among the items. The authors, using actual data, also discuss the differences between the structure obtained by these two methods.
    Download PDF (1315K)
  • Shizuo YOSHIZAKI
    Article type: Article
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages 51-59
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    The purposes of this study are : (a) to point out shortcomings found in earlier models for teacher interactive decision making, (b) to describe and illustrate an alternative model, and (c) to outline the implications of this alternative model for teaching and teacher education. The alternative model may be characterized as follows : 1. It describes three basic decision processes which teachers adopt whenever there are discrepancies between their lesson plan and the reality of the classroom situation. These are : (a) either the teacher does not realize that discrepancies may exist or chooses to ignore them, (b) the teacher realizes that there are discrepancies resulting from his or her management of the classroom, discrepancies which he or she does not wish to tolerate, therefore he or she selects a different approach from his or her repetory of alternative teaching routines, (b) the teacher realizes that there are intolerable discrepancies resulting from lesson content, therefore he or she selects an acceptable alternative from his or her understanding of the lesson structure and subject matter content. 2. It discusses the relationships between teachers' decision making processes and their understanding of the subject matter and teaching routines. The proposed model assumes that whenever any recognized and intolerable discrepancies are concerned with classroom management, teachers will scan through their own, known alternative teaching routines. However, when such discrepancies are concerned with the content of the lesson, they will rely upon their understanding of the lesson structure and subject matter content. 3. This paper also discusses the close link which exists between teachers' planning methods and interactive decision making. Teachers rely upon a monitoring schema to check upon their own thinking, the lesson plan's instructional purposes, and various classroom events. This schema also supports the teachers' decision making processes by linking their knowledge of the subject matter content to their understanding of the lesson structure. Two concrete examples of the application of this new model are also introduced, the first being related to lesson content and the second being related to classroom management.
    Download PDF (995K)
  • Tomoji TOMIYAMA, Atsushi KIMURA, Yasumasa ITAKURA
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages 61-69
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: February 14, 2025
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS

    In this paper, the authors suggest a ""Matched Evaluation"" method which, unlike similar evaluation systems, takes into account not only an evaluation of the teacher's instructional activities but also the students'self-evaluations. This makes it possible to simultaneously study both the overall quality of learning in the class as a whole as well as that of each individual student. In a practical application of this method in analyzing the teaching/learning process in an Industrial Arts course titled ""Electricity I,"" the authors discovered the following: 1. In the unit on ""Design of Electric Appliances,""it is necessary to pay greater attention to an analysis of the treatment and teaching methods used regarding fluorescent light materials. 2. In the unit on ""Prevention of Electrical Accidents,"" it is necessary to improve the teaching materials and aids being utilized so as to better match the students'own life experiences. By studying the quality of the learning going on in the classroom in this way, the authors were able to obtain data for objectively improving teaching methods. To date, however, similar methods have been conducted primarily only from the teacher's point of view. The practical application ofthis new method shows that it holds great promise for contributing to the improvement of teaching methods in the Industrial Arts.

    Download PDF (1463K)
  • Isamu MATSUBARA
    Article type: Article
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages 71-76
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    The use of main-frame computer time-sharing systems has become quite popular in instruction in recent years. This trend, however, has given rise to a number of problems. This paper is a report on the results of a questionnaire given to students who had undergone instruction using such a system. The questionnaire included items on the job processing status, the number of questions which arose during instruction, etc.
    Download PDF (578K)
  • Article type: Appendix
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages App3-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (30K)
  • Article type: Appendix
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages App4-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (30K)
  • Article type: Appendix
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages App5-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (129K)
  • Article type: Appendix
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages App6-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (129K)
  • Article type: Cover
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages Cover3-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (20K)
  • Article type: Cover
    1988Volume 12Issue 2 Pages Cover4-
    Published: July 20, 1988
    Released on J-STAGE: October 20, 2017
    JOURNAL FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (20K)
feedback
Top