Search

Temelj učenja predstavlja učenčeva aktivnost, to pa ne velja le za učenje doma, temveč tudi za učenje med poukom. V slovenskem prostoru še vedno močno prevladuje frontalna oblika poučevanja, ki prav tako lahko spodbuja učenčevo aktivnost, in sicer s pomočjo samostojnega izdelovanja zapiskov. Spretnost izdelovanja zapiskov izboljša učenčevo razumevanje, saj vpliva na pozornost in aktivacijo kognitivnih procesov, ustvarjeni zapiski pa so v pomoč pri ponovnem priklicu informacij. Gre za kompleksno spretnost, ki številnim učencem povzroča težave, še posebej tistim z disleksijo. Učenci z disleksijo predstavljajo eno od skupin učencev s primanjkljaji na posameznih področjih učenja (PPPU). Težave imajo pri poslušanju in pisanju, preusmerjanju pozornosti med poslušanjem in pisanjem kot tudi pri vzdrževanju pozornosti, pošiljanju informacij iz dolgoročnega spomina v delovnega in posledično pri povezovanju predznanja z novim znanjem. Osrednji cilj tega raziskovalnega dela je, dobiti vpogled v razlike pri samostojnem izdelovanju zapiskov med učenci z disleksijo in učenci brez disleksije. Prav tako smo želeli raziskati, kaj je vzrok, da nekateri učitelji od učencev zahtevajo, nekateri pa ne zahtevajo samostojnega izdelovanja zapiskov. V raziskavi je sodelovalo 53 učencev z disleksijo, usmerjenih v program s prilagojenim izvajanjem in dodatno strokovno pomočjo, in 53 učencev brez disleksije, ki obiskujejo tretje triletje redne osnovne šole. V raziskavo je bilo vključenih 58 osnovnošolskih učiteljev naravoslovja in/ali biologije. Podatke, ki se navezujejo na učence, smo pridobili s pomočjo petih preizkusov oz. dejavnosti, podatke v zvezi z učitelji pa s pomočjo anketnega vprašalnika. Pri obdelavi podatkov so bile uporabljene metode za deskriptivno analizo podatkov in bivariatno sklepno statistično analizo. Ugotovili smo, da učenci z disleksijo ustvarijo manj kakovostne zapiske kot učenci brez disleksije. Učenci z disleksijo zapišejo manj pomembnih in dodatnih informacij, prav tako pri zapisovanju ne uporabljajo metod, ki so v pomoč pri izdelovanju zapiskov in pri kasnejšem učenju. To so metode uporabe krajšav in simbolov, označevanja pomembnih in manjkajočih informacij, parafriziranja vsebine in grupiranja informacij. Rezultati obeh skupin učencev so se prav tako statistično pomembno razlikovali v zapomnitvi in priklicu slišanih informacij, saj so učenci z disleksijo dosegli manj točk pri testu znanja. Iz rezultatov, ki se navezujejo na skupino osnovnošolskih učiteljev biologije in/ali naravoslovja, je razvidno, da se le-ti najpogosteje poslužujejo frontalne oblike poučevanja, vendar večina pri tem od učencev ne zahteva samostojnega izdelovanja zapiskov. Kot glavni razlog za to navajajo, da so zapiski učencev zelo pomanjkljivi. Na drugi strani pa učitelji, ki od učencev zahtevajo samostojno izdelovanje zapiskov med njihovo učno uro, poudarjajo, da so učenci tako bolj miselno aktivni in si posledično zapomnijo več informacij. Na podlagi omenjenih rezultatov smo dobili vpogled v trenutno stanje v zvezi z izdelovanjem zapiskov osnovnošolskih učencev z disleksijo in učenci brez disleksije, kar je prvi korak vsake kakovostne pomoči ne le učencem z disleksijo, temveč vsem učencem. The foundation of learning is represented by pupil's activity, not only at home, but also during lessons. The Slovenian area is still heavily dominated by frontal methods of teaching, which can promote pupils' activity by means of making notes. The skill of making notes improves pupil's understanding because it affects attention and activation of cognitive processes and the notes created are helpful in recalling information. It is a complex skill that causes problems for many pupils, especially those with dyslexia. Pupils with dyslexia constitute one of the groups of pupils with deficits in certain areas of learning. They have problems with listening and writing, diverting attention between listening and writing as well as in the maintenance of attention, the transmission of information from long-term memory in the working memory and, consequently, connecting prior knowledge with new knowledge. The main objective of this research is to gain insight into the differences in making notes among pupils with dyslexia and those without it. Also, we wanted to explore why some teachers ask pupils to make notes and some do not. The study involved 53 pupils with dyslexia who are in program with special curriculum and additional professional assistance, and 53 pupils without dyslexia who attend third triad of regular primary school. The study included 58 primary school teachers of Science and/or Biology. Data relating to the pupils was obtained with five tests or activities, and data relating to teachers was obtained by using a questionnaire. A descriptive data analysis and a bivariate final statistical analysis were used as data processing methods. We found that pupils with dyslexia produce less quality notes as those without dyslexia. Pupils with dyslexia write less of significant and additional information, also they do not use methods that are helpful in making notes and subsequent learning. These are methods of using abbreviations and symbols, marking important and missing information, paraphrasing the content and grouping of information. The results of both groups of pupils were also statistically significantly different in remembering and recalling the audio information, as pupils with dyslexia achieved fewer points in a test. From the results, which relate to a group of primary school teachers of Biology and/or Science, it is clear that they frequently use frontal method of teaching, but most of them do not require making notes from pupils. The main reason, according to them, is the fact that pupils' notes are very deficient. On the other hand, teachers who ask pupils to make notes during their lessons, emphasize that the pupils are more mentally active and, consequently, they remember more. Based on these results, we have gained an insight into the current situation in relation to the making of notes by primary school pupils with dyslexia and without it, which is the first step of every quality assistance not only to pupils with dyslexia, but for all pupils.

Two monomeric and two dimeric copper(II) benzoate and acetate coordination compounds with 2-aminopyridine were synthesized. The crystal structures of benzoate compounds were determined by X-ray diffraction analyses. The monomeric benzoate form ?$Cu(O_2CC_6H_5)_2(2apy)_2$?(2apy=2-aminopyridine) is composed of trans oriented ligands around central copper(II) atom, where benzoates acts as asymmetrical chelates (Cu-O 1.97 and 2.65 L). On the other hand, dimeric form ?$Cu_2(O_2CC_6H_5)_4(apy)_2$? reveals paddle - wheel type structure where 2-aminopyridine acts as axial ligand via pyridine nitrogen atom. All compounds were characterized by standard physico-chemical methods and tested for their fungal mycelial growth retardation activity for wood fungi Tremetes versicolor and Antrodia vaillantii. Sintetizirani sta bili dve enojedrni in dve koordinacijski spojini bakrovega bnezoata in acetata z 2-aminopiridinom. Z rentgensko difrakcijsko analizo je bila določena kristalna struktura obeh benzoatnih spojin. V enojedrni benzoatni obliki ?$Cu(O_2CC_6H_5)_2(2apy)_2(2apy)=2-aminopiridin$?) so koordinirani ligandi v trans položaju okoli osrednjega bakrovega(II) atoma, kjer so benzoati asimetrični kelati (Cu-O 1.97 in 2.65 L). Po drugi strani dvojedrno obliko ?$Cu_2(O_2CC_6H_5)_4(2apy)_2$? predstavlja strukturni tip mlinskega kolesa z 2-aminopiridinom, ki se veže aksialno preko piridinskega dušikovega atoma. Vse spojine so bile karakterizirane s standardnimi fizikalno-kemijskimi metodami in testirane za njihovo zaviralno aktivnost pri rasti micelija lesnih gliv pisane ploskocevke in bele hišne gobe.