成就目标定向与小学生数学学习投入的关系:学业拖延和数学焦虑的中介作用

采用问卷法对708名小学高年级学生进行调查,以考察成就目标定向、学业拖延、数学焦虑与数学学习投入之间的关系,结果显示：（1）掌握定向和表现-接近定向均能直接正向预测数学学习投入,而表现-回避定向的直接预测作用不显著;（2）掌握定向、表现-接近定向和表现-回避定向均能通过学业拖延来间接预测数学学习投入;（3）掌握定向和表现-回避定向均能通过数学焦虑来间接预测数学学习投入,但表现-接近定向不能通过数学焦虑来间接预测数学学习投入;（4）三种成就目标定向均能通过学业拖延经数学焦虑的多重中介作用来预测数学学习投入。这表明成就目标定向不仅能直接预测,还能通过学业拖延和数学焦虑的多重中介作用,来间接预测小学生数学学习投入。     

Derrida and Cavaillès: Mathematics and the Limits of Phenomenology

Abstract

This paper examines Derrida’s interpretation of Jean Cavaillès’s critique of phenomenology in On Logic and the Theory of Science. Derrida’s main claim is that Cavaillès’s arguments, especially the argument based on Gödel’s incompleteness theorems, need not lead to a total rejection of Husserl’s phenomenology, but only its static version. Genetic phenomenology, on the other hand, not only is not undermined by Cavaillès’s critique, but can even serve as a philosophical framework for Cavaillès’s own position. I will argue that Derrida’s approach to Cavaillès is fruitful, facilitating the exposition of some central Cavaillèsian ideas, including the notion of dialectics. Nevertheless, it is important to evaluate Derrida’s own arguments against static phenomenology. I undertake such an assessment in the last section of the paper, showing that Gödel’s theorems do not in themselves warrant rejection of static phenomenology. I base this conclusion in part on Gödel’s own understanding of phenomenology as a philosophical basis for mathematics.     

The Role of Mathematics in Deleuze’s Critical Engagement with Hegel

Abstract

The role of mathematics in the development of Gilles Deleuze’s (1925–95) philosophy of difference as an alternative to the dialectical philosophy determined by the Hegelian dialectic logic is demonstrated in this paper by differentiating Deleuze’s interpretation of the problem of the infinitesimal in Difference and Repetition from that which G. W. F Hegel (1770–1831) presents in the Science of Logic. Each deploys the operation of integration as conceived at different stages in the development of the infinitesimal calculus in his treatment of the problem of the infinitesimal. Against the role that Hegel assigns to integration as the inverse transformation of differentiation in the development of his dialectical logic, Deleuze strategically redeploys Leibniz’s account of integration as a method of summation in the form of a series in the development of his philosophy of difference. By demonstrating the relation between the differential point of view of the Leibnizian infinitesimal calculus and the differential calculus of contemporary mathematics, I argue that Deleuze effectively bypasses the methods of the differential calculus which Hegel uses to support the development of the dialectical logic, and by doing so, sets up the critical perspective from which to construct an alternative logic of relations characteristic of a philosophy of difference. The mode of operation of this logic is then demonstrated by drawing upon the mathematical philosophy of Albert Lautman (1908–44), which plays a significant role in Deleuze’s project of constructing a philosophy of difference. Indeed, the logic of relations that Deleuze constructs is dialectical in the Lautmanian sense.     

Intrinsic Explanation and Field’s Dispensabilist Strategy

Abstract

Hartry Field defended the importance of his nominalist reformulation of Newtonian Gravitational Theory, as a response to the indispensability argument, on the basis of a general principle of intrinsic explanation. In this paper, I argue that this principle is not sufficiently defensible, and can not do the work for which Field uses it. I argue first that the model for Field’s reformulation, Hilbert’s axiomatization of Euclidean geometry, can be understood without appealing to the principle. Second, I argue that our desires to unify our theories and explanations undermines Field’s principle. Third, the claim that extrinsic theories seem like magic is, in this case, really just a demand for an account of the applications of mathematics in science. Finally, even if we were to accept the principle, it would not favor the fictionalism that motivates Field’s argument, since the indispensabilist’s mathematical objects are actually intrinsic to scientific theory.     

基于时间分割的手写输入系统的用户绩效模型

为定量估计与提高基于时间分割的手写输入系统用户绩效 ,推导了用户绩效的静态与动态模型。实验一检验与修正了这两个模型 ,并获得整合模型。实验二证明该整合模型能对不同训练水平用户的绩效有较高的解释率。应用该整合模型发现 :当识别正确率RA、输入字数N为定值时 ,修改时间T、单字手写时间WT、分割时间ST、识别时间R这四个因素对任务完成时间D的影响大小次序为WT =ST =R >T ;当这四个因素为定值时 ,RA每提高 1% ,D至少节省 10 0 0ms。     

《周易》对中国古代数学的影响

分析中国古代数学史上重要的数学著作可以看出,《周易》往往被古代数学家们视作数学发展最早的源头,而且在一些重要的数学著作中,数学家们运用《周易》中的有关概念表述数学问题,对《周易》中的数学问题及其相关问题进行深入的研究,取得了重要的数学成就。这一切足以表明《周易》对于古代数学发展具有非常重要的影响。     

中小学生数学知识观的调查研究

本研究采用12道假设性情境题目和包含数学涉及运算、思考、实用性三个维度的数学认识问卷,选取90名六年级小学生和106名初二学生作为被试,探讨中小学生的数学知识观。结果表明:1)中小学生数学知识观形成及发展与学校数学课程内容紧密相关。2)中小学生数学知识观存在差异,主要表现在初二学生对假设性情境的认同程度显著地高于六年级学生;在数学认识问卷的数学实用性维度上,六年级学生的肯定程度显著地高于初二学生。3)从总体上看,学生的学业水平与数学知识观的关系不大。     

小学三年级数学学优生与学困生解决比较问题的差异

运用实验法和临床访谈法研究了数学学优生与学困生在解决比较问题时的差异及元认知对解题成绩的影响。被试为40名小学三年级学生。比较问题分为一致问题和不一致问题。元认知包括元认知知识和元认知监控技能。结果表明：(1)学优生与学困生解决比较问题的成绩差异显著,学优生在一致问题和不一致问题上的解题成绩均优于学困生。这种差异与其解题时所运用的表征策略有关。(2)学生在解决比较问题中出现的主要错误为转换错误,在不一致问题中出现的错误多于一致问题中出现的错误。(3)学优生与学困生在元认知知识和监控技能上均有显著差异,元认知监控技能对解决比较问题的成绩有显著预测作用。     

小学生应用题表征的类型和特点

以124名小学六年级学生为被试。采用应用题解决问卷考查了我国小学生应用题表征的类型和特点。结果表明小学生应用题的表征方式有复述内容、图式表征、图片表征、直译表征、语义结构分析等;成功解题者和不成功解题者对各种表征方式的使用次数上没有显着差异;成功解题者和不成功解题者在各种表征方式下的解题成绩有显着差异,成功解题者在图式表征、直译表征和语义结构分析表征下的成绩显着优于不成功解题者。