الأساليب المعرفية وعلاقتها بحل المشكلات لدى طلبة المرحلة الثانوية في لواء قصبة الكرك

ربيع غالب أحمد البيايضه

Abstract


ملخص

هدفت الدراسة التعرف على الأساليب المعرفية وعلاقتها بحل المشكلات لدى طلبة المرحلة الثانوية للعام الدراسي (2018/2019) في لواء قصبة الكرك، تكونت عينة الدراسة من (285) طالباً وطالبة من الفرع العلمي والأدبي تم اختيارها بأسلوب العينة العشوائية الطبقية، ولتحقيق أهداف الدراسة تم استخدام مقياس حل المشكلات، ومقياس الأسلوب المعرفي (الاندفاع/ التروي)، ومقياس الأسلوب المعرفي (تحمل/ عدم تحمل الغموض)، وقد تم التحقق من مؤشرات صدقها وثباتها، أظهرت نتائج الدراسة أن مستوى حل المشكلات لدى طلبة المرحلة الثانوية جاء متوسطاً وغير دال إحصائياً، وتبين من تحليل النتائج إحصائياً وجود فروق ذات دلالة إحصائية في مستوى حل المشكلات تعزى للأسلوب المعرفي (تحمل/ عدم تحمل الغموض) لصالح الطلبة الذين ينتمون للأسلوب المعرفي تحمل الغموض، كما أظهرت النتائج وجود فروق ذات دلالة إحصائية في مستوى حل المشكلات تعزى للأسلوب المعرفي (الاندفاع/ التروي) لصالح الطلبة الذين ينتمون للأسلوب المعرفي التروي، وخرجت الدراسة بعدة توصيات أهمها استخدام أساليب تدريس تتلائم مع الاسلوب المعرفي لدى الطلبة.

 

 

 

Cognitive Styles and Their Relation to Problem Solving For High School Students in Al-Karak Region

 

Abstract

This study aimed at identifying the cognitive styles and their relation to problem solving within high school students in Al-karak region. The study sample consisted of (285) students during the academic year (2018/2019), from the scientific and literary branch. A descriptive method and random stratified sample have been used. To achieve the objectives of this study, three measurement were used: A Problem Solving Scale, (Tolerance-Intolerance for Ambiguity) Scale and (Reflective – Impulsivity) Scale were used to collect the needed data. The reliability and validity for these scales have been verified. The study ended with some results. First: the level of problem solving within high school students was average. Second: there are statistical significant differences in the level of problem solving in favor of cognitive style the tolerance for ambiguity. Third: there are statistical significant differences in the level of problem solving in favor of reflective cognitive style. The study recommended that teaching methods should be based on the student's favorite cognitive styles.

 


Keywords


الأساليب المعرفية، حل المشكلات، طلبة الثانوية العامة. Cognitive styles, Problem solving, High school students.

References


References:

Abd elhade, F. (2010). Cognitive Psychology.Jordan, Amman: Dar Osamah.

Askar,S.&Alshmare, M. (2016). Cognitive Style Reflective-Impulsive with High schools for excellence students, Journal of Education University of Mustansiriya, 49(1), 249-280.

Alasde, A. (2013). Cognitive Psychology. Eraq, Bagdad: Aladalh.

Albahadle, A. (1997). Ambiguity Tolerance and its Relationship with Superiority Among University Students. Unpublished Master Thesis, Bagdad University, Bagdad: Eraq.

Alfaramawe, H. (1994). Cognitive Methods between Theory and Research .Ejypt, Cairo: Angelo Library.

Alfaramawe, H.(2009). Cognitive Methods between Theory and Practice .Jordan, Amman: Dar Safa.

Alnajar, A. (2018). Effect of using reverse segregation according to the cognitive style (tolerance-intolerance of ambiguity) in developing problem solving skills in mathematics course for Azhar secondary students, Journal of Educational Technology, 34 (1), 163-235.

Alnashwate, A. (2003). Educational Psychology. Jordan, Amman: Dar Alforqan.

Alsharqawe, A. (1992). Contemporary Cognitive Psychology. Ejypt, Cairo: Angelo Library.

Alshqerat, M., & Alzoabe, A. (2003). The effect of the Cognitive Style Reflective-Impulsive on Performance on some Memory Tests and Problem Solving in the Students of the Faculty of Educational Sciences at Mu'tah University, University of Damascus Journal, 19(1), 57-93.

Alzgol, R., & Alzgol, E. (2008). Cognitive Psychology.Jordan, Amman: Dar Alshoroq.

Anderson, J. (2016). Cognitive Psychology and its Applications.(Translet: Mofed Hawshen, Fadel Kashwe & Mohamed Slet).Jordan,Amman: Dar Alfekr.( Original Publishing Year 2010).

Ayash, L. (2009). Cognitive Style and its Relation to Creativity.Jordan, Amman: Dar Safa.

Cassidy, T., &Long, C. (1996). Problem Solving Style Stress and Psychologcal Illness: Development of Multi Factorial Measure.British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 35(2), 265-277).

David, L. (1993). Anew Measurement of an Individuals Tolerance for Ambiguity, Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(1), 175-190.

Deyong, G. (2011). Impulsivity as a personality trait :Handbook of self regulation research,theory and application. New York:The Guilford Press.

Dirk, H. (2013). Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience. Wikibooks. org.

Ebrahem, S. (2010). Cognitive Neuropsychology.Ejypt, Cairo: Etrik.

Fite, E., & Staples, D. (2009). Behavior Regulation as a Product of Temperament and Environment: Biopsychosocials Regulatory Processes in the Development of Childhood Behavioral Problems New York: Cambridge University Press.

Furnham, A. (1993) .Content Correlation and Factor Analytic Study of Four

Tolernce of Ambiguity Questionnaires.Personnel and Individual

Differences,16(3), 403-410.

Gnem, M. (2002). Performance Strategies of Problem Solving Tasks Among Cognitive Style Students Reflective-Impulsive, Journal of Educational Sciences,1(15), 159-264.

Jonassen, D. (2000). Toward a Design Theory of Problem Solving. Journal of Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85.

Kagan, J., & Kogan, N. (1970). Individual Variation in Cognitive Process in P.Mussen (Ed): Carmichaels Manual of Child Psychology, New York: Wiley Sons.

Kozhevnikov, M. (2007). Cognitive styles in the context of modern psycholgy: Toward an integrated framework of cognitive style. Psychological Bulletin, 133(3), 464-481.

Laruen, D. (2014). The Impact of Goals and Constraints in Problem Construction and Creative Problem Solving.Student Research and Creative Activity Fair, University of Nebraska:usa.

Liu, C .(2015). Relevant Researches on Tolerance of Ambiguity.Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(9), 1874-1882.

Marks, J., & Furnham, A. (2013). Tolerance of Ambiguity: A Review of the Recent Literature.Journal of Scientific Research, 4(9), 717-728.

Mclian, L. Kefallonitis, E. & Armani, K. (2015). Ambiguity tolerance in organizations: definitional clarification and perspectives on future research. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 (344), 1-7.

Mhesen, A. (2005). Cognitive Styles and its Relationship with some Emotional and Cognitive Variables Among Students of Al-Aqsa University in Gaza. Unpublished Master Thesis, Al-Aqsa University, Gaza : Palestine.

Nore, M. (2007). Tolerance of Cognitive Ambiguity of Distinguished Males and Females Students in Mosul City Center Nineveh Governorate, Journal of Research College of Basic Education, 5(2), 98-115.

Qadore, A., & Benzahe, M. (2017). The Relationship between Cognitive Style Ambiguity Tolerance and Alienation Within Youth and Sports Directorate in Temnrast, Journal of Scientific Horizons, 9(2), 225-249.

Sarhed, H. (2013). Cognitive Style (Reflection– Impulsivity) and its Relation with Achievement in Physics and the Ability of Problems Solving Skills of Students in the Fourth Grade Scientific, Journal of Faculty of Education, 20(11), 354-385.

Shafrir, U. & Eagle, M. (1995). Response to Failure, Stratrgic Flexibility and Learning. Journal of Behavioral Development, 18(14):677-700.

Sternberg, R., & Sternberg, K. (2012). Cognitive Psychology .USA, Blmont :Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Taghi, A. (2013). Problem-solving Model for Managing Stress and Anxiety, Journal of Applied Sciences, 6(12), 2257-2263.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.35682/966

Published by
MUTAH UNIVERSITY