我的学习策略的反思(教育心理学)

我的学习策略的反思

在学习认知策略这一章节之后，我明白了这样的一个道理：知识固然重要，学习策略、方法有时比知识更重要。同时，我也需要反思自己的学习策略和方法，找出缺点，弥补不足，提高自己的学习效果和效率。

每个学习者使用最原始的方法，我也不例外，通过一定时间的学习也能够达到对学习材料掌握的程度，但是效果不怎么好，效率当然也不会高。比如我们英语专业的学生，背单词，每天一遍一遍的朗读，只要有足够的时间，最终也能记住一大部分的单词，但保持时间不会太长，记忆也不会牢固。

每个学习者的学习策略和方法都不尽相同，但是一定会制定一套学习方案，每天按部就班完成任务。但是每个人都不可能是先为每项学习制定出详细周全的计划，但可以为同一类型的学习制定基本相同的程序股则或者说是套路和途径。

在学习策略这一章中，我们主要学习了三大策略：认知策略，元认知策略和资源管理策略。认知策略是加工信息的策略；元认知策略是对自己认知过程进行调控的策略；资源管理策略则是辅助学生管理可用的环境和资源的策略。在我们学习中，每个人都会有意无意的使用这三种策略。下面就结合这些策略和方法探讨和反思我的学习方法。

我学习计划中，每天都需要背诵一些英语美文，在背诵的同时，我会偶尔抄写，画线，复述。这就是认知策略中的复述策略和画线策略，这种方法可以将我的注意力始终保持在我的学习材料上，提高我对学习内容的实际效率。画线，其实就是对信息的选择，就是在学习中将比较重要的信息勾画出来，帮助我快速识别学习材料中的重要信息，方便记忆和复述。同时，我也将这种方法使用在英语的精度课上，，对课文或段落中的主题句、重点句画线，这样才能突出重点。另外，我在画线的同时，也会在旁边做一些注释，将画线和圈点批注结合起来使用，以此来提高我的学习效率和认知效率。此外，我也会将新学的知识和旧知识进行联系，是新信息更有意义，从而促进对新信息的理解和记忆，这也就是精加工策略。比如我今天学习了happiness这个单词，那么我会将学过的单词happy和unhappy与它进行联系，进行类比记忆。这种深加工可以对记忆材料补充细节。此外我还会采用谐音法来记忆单词，比如说agony意思是极度的痛苦，我的记忆方法是：爱过你（agony），我极度痛苦。于是，通过这种方法，用相同或类似的

读音将无意义材料变成有意义材料，让我快速记住。另外，我也会使用想象的方法来记忆单词，比如说essay文章这个单词，我把e看成是一的谐音，第一个s 看成一条蛇，say是说的意思，于是就想象成一条蛇在说文章，非常有意思。联想时，想象越奇特而又合理，加工就越深入细致，记忆就越牢。

最后一种我最常使用的学习策略就是寻求支持管理策略，它属于资源管理策略的一种。这种方法就是快速寻找资源，并合理利用。我学习英语的时候，经常会碰到不懂的生词和看不懂的语法。这时，我都需要去寻找各种资源来帮助我理解，问老师，问同学等等，我最常上网搜寻自己需要的资料，因为网上的资源非常多，如果没有，还可以寻求热心网友的帮助。

在实际学习中，我使用的多种学习策略，这些策略有效的帮助我掌握和记忆了各种知识和信息。同时，我也发现了我的不足，很多有效的学习策略和方法还没有掌握。相信在以后的学习生活中，我会不断反思自己的学习策略，提高自己的学习效率和认知效率。

外国语学院

09301089

于野

Summary of Chapter Five

In this chapter, we meanly talk about the notion of SEMANTICS. It can be simply defined as the study of meaning. In this chapter, we will limit ourselves to the study of meaning from a linguistic point of view.

The following part is to talk about some views concerning the study of meaning. One of the oldest notions concerning meaning, and also the most primitive one, was the naming theory proposed by the ancient Greek scholar Plato. There are several obvious limitations of this theory. Fist, it seems applicable to nouns only. Besides, some nouns which refer to things do not exist in the real world.

So there comes the conceptualist view, which is more sophisticated. It holds that there is no direct link between a linguistic form and what it refers to. That is to say, there is no direct contact between language and the real word. Then Ogden and Richards reached a conclusion, it can be best illustrated by the classic semantic triangle or triangle of significance. Let’s look at the following diagram.

Thought/Reference

Symbol/Form Referent

In the diagram, symbol or form refers to the linguistic elements, the referent refers to the object in the world of experience, and thought or reference refers to concept. From the chart, we can have a whole view of triangle of significance.

And second view is contextualism, which bases meaning on context. The contextualist view of meaning is based on the presumption that one can derive meaning from or reduce meaning to observable contexts. It has two kinds: the situational context and the linguistic context. The former one means every utterance occurs in a particular spatiotemporal situation, which various objects and events existent in the situation. And the latter one is concerned with the probality of a word’s co-occurrence or collocation with another word.

The third view is behaviorism. It can be summarized into this: situation in which the speaker utters it and the response it calls forth in the hearer.

Next, we learn lexical meaning. Firstly, sense and reference, two relating but different aspects of meaning, are two terms often encountered in the study of word meaning. Sense is concerned with the inherent meaning of a linguistic form, it is abstract and de-contextualized. And reference means what a linguistic form refers to in the real, physical world. It is obvious that linguistic forms having the same sense may have different references in different situations. On the other hand, there are also occasions when linguistic forms with the same reference might differ in sense.

Besides, there are some major sense relations. First, synonymy refers to the sameness or close similarity of meaning. And according to the way they differ, synonyms can be divided into the following groups: dialectal synonyms (synonyms used in different regional dialects), stylistic synonyms (synonyms differing in style), synonyms that differ in their emotive or evaluative meaning, collocational synonyms, semantically

different synonyms. The second one, polysemy means different words may have the same or similar meaning, the same one word may have more than one meaning. The third one, homonymy refers to the phenomenon that words having different meanings have the same form. The fourth one, hyponymy refers to the sense relation between a more general, more inclusive word and amore specific word. The word which is more general in meaning is called the superordinate, and the more specific words are called its hyponyms. The fifth one, antonymy is used for oppositeness of meaning, that it to say, words that are opposite in meaning are antonyms. There are three kinds of it: gradable antonyms, complementary antonyms and relational opposites.

After the lexical meaning, we come to the sense relations between sentences. And they are analyzed in terms of truth conditions. First, X is synonymous with Y. Second, X is inconsistent with Y. Third, X entails Y or Y is an entailment of X. Fourth, X presupposes Y or Y is a prerequisite of X. Fifth, X is a contradiction. Sixth, X is semantically anomalous.

Therefore, we should learn the analysis of meaning. There are two methods: componential analysis and predication analysis. The former one means a way to analyze lexical meaning. The later one means a way to analyze sentence meaning.

于野

09301089