JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Curriculum Development for Nuclear Power and Radiation Education in Elementary, Middle, and High Schools
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Curriculum Development for Nuclear Power and Radiation Education in Elementary, Middle, and High Schools
Lee, Seung Koo; Choi, Yoon Seok; Han, Eun Ok;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
I developed a curriculum reflecting the perspectives of students, science teachers, and professionals in order to carry out standardized, fundamental nuclear power and radiation education in schools. Among elementary, middle, and high schools, 78.4%, 78.6%, and 93.1% respectively exhibited (with high frequency) a need for nuclear power and radiation education. The proposed elementary and middle/high school course titles are "Radiation and Life" and "Nuclear Power and Radiation" respectively. The courses are offered at every grade level and span one semester each year. The duration of each weekly class varies; at the elementary, middle, and high school levels classes meet for 40, 45, and 50 minutes respectively. Thin textbooks containing an abundance of cartoons and photos were requested. The starting points for education were fixed at the sixth grade, second year of middle school, and the first year of high school. It was stipulated that the education be separate from the regular curriculum, and encompass a creative and experimental field study based on the principal and science teachers' needs. Similar trends were observable according to grade levels regarding class hours, textbook format, form of education, and educational necessity. A simulation of the devised curriculum revealed an overall goodness of fit totaling , , and out of five for elementary, middle school, and high school students respectively, which are scores equivalent to 70 and above (out of 100). The significance of this study is that it is the first to propose a curriculum designed to cultivate value judgment based on understanding nuclear power and radiation. However, the realization of nuclear power and radiation education requires that follow-up measures be taken regarding textbook development, amendments to related laws, and the providing of teaching plans.
 Keywords
Nuclear power;Radiation;Curriculum;Education;School;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
1.
DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY AND RADIATION TEXTBOOKS FOR ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE, AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS,;;;;

Journal of Radiation Protection and Research, 2015. vol.40. 3, pp.132-146 crossref(new window)
1.
DEVELOPMENT OF NUCLEAR ENERGY AND RADIATION TEXTBOOKS FOR ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE, AND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS, Journal of Radiation Protection and Research, 2015, 40, 3, 132  crossref(new windwow)
2.
Comparison between a 13-session and One-time Program on Korean Elementary, Middle and High School Students’ Understanding of Nuclear Power, Journal of Radiation Protection and Research, 2017, 42, 1, 56  crossref(new windwow)
 References
1.
한장희, 고영희. 한국수력원자력의 지역공동체 경영을 통한 원전 지역수용성 제고 전략 - 시련의 극복과 새로운 도전-. 한국경영학회지. 2012;16(2):21-28.

2.
Yi JH, Lee JG, Seok DH. Identification of dimensions in organizational safety climate and relationship with safety behavior. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organization Psychology. 2011;24(3):627-650.

3.
Bird DK, Haynes K, Honert RVD et. al. Nuclear power in australia: A comparative analysis of public opinion regarding climate change and the Fukushima disaster. Energy Policy. 2013;65:644-653.

4.
Prati G, Zani B. The Effect of the Fukushima nuclear accident on risk perception, antinuclear behavioral intentions, attitude, trust, environmental beliefs, and values. Environment and Behavior. 2013;45:782-798. crossref(new window)

5.
Siegrist M, Visschers VHM. Acceptance of nuclear power: The Fukushima effect. Energy Policy. 2012;59:112-119.

6.
Yamamura E. Experience of technological and natural disaster and their impact on the perceived risk of nuclear accidents after the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan 2011: A cross-country analysis. The Journal of Socio-Economics. 2012;41:360-363.

7.
Slovic P. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis. 1993;13(6):675-682. crossref(new window)

8.
Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE. SEI Risk and vulnerability programme report 2001-01. International workshop on vulnerability and global environmental change. 2001:1-34.

9.
Epstein S. Integration of the cognitive and the psycho- dynamic unconscious. American Psychologist. 1994;49(8):709-724. crossref(new window)

10.
Cho SK, Oh SK. A theoretical approach to derive perception indicators influencing the acceptability on nuclear energy facilities and policies. Journal of Energy Engineering. 2002;11(4):332-341.

11.
Cho KY, Moon JH. Investigation of perception of nuclear power by the local residents adjacent to nuclear installations. Journal of the Korean Radioactive Waste Society. 2011;9(3):181-189. crossref(new window)

12.
오미영, 최진명, 김학수. 위험을 수반한 과학기술의 낙인효과: 원자력에 대한 낙인이 방사선기술이용 생산물에 대한 인식과 수용에 미치는 영향. 한국광고홍보학회 춘계학술회 논문집. 2007:139-143.

13.
박상태, 최혁준, 김준태 등. 물리 교사들의 방사선 개념에 대한 인식 실태. 한국과학교육학회지. 2005;25(5):603-609.

14.
권성호, 서윤경, 강인경. 초등학교 고학년을 위한 미디어 교육과정 개발에 관한 연구. 교육정보방송연구. 2002;8(2):29-59.

15.
Roberts DA. Scientific literacy. In abell sk. lederman ng(Eds.); Handbook of research on science education. 2007:729-780.

16.
Zeidler DL, Sadler TD, Simmons ML et. al. Beyond STS: A research-based, framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education. 2005;89:357-377. crossref(new window)

17.
Sadler TD. Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2004;41:513-536. crossref(new window)

18.
장지영, 문지영, 유호숙 등. 과학과 관련된 사회 윤리적 문제(SSI)의 맥락에 따른 중학생들의 인성적 태도와 가치관 분석. 한국과학교육학회지. 2012;32(7):1124-1138.

19.
김광선. 초등학생의 융합인재교육(STEAM)에 관한 인식실태 분석 및 활성화 방안. 교육연구논문. 2013:35.

20.
권낙원. 교육과정 총론. 한국교원대학교. 2000.

21.
Hirst PH. Knowledge and the curriculum : A collection of philosophical papers. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul. 1974:1-193.

22.
이규석. 교과용 도서의 새로운 모형 개발을 위한 연구. 토론회 자료집, 한국교육과정 평가원. 1998. 71

23.
Roberts DA. Scientific literacy, science literacy. S.K. Handbook of research on science education. 2007:729-780.

24.
교육과학기술부, 한국직업능력개발원. 교과 통합 진로교육 교수.학습자료 개발 매뉴얼. 교육과학기술부. 2011;63.

25.
홍후조. 일반계 고등학교 교육과정 편성.운영 우수사례 연구. 한국교육개발원. 2013:1-256.

26.
임영은. 2009 교육과정 적용에 따른 중학교 교육과정편성 내실화 방안 연구. 교육연구논문. 2010;32:1-68.

27.
Slovic P. Perception of risk from radiation. In Slovic P. the perception of risk. London: earth scan publication ltd. 2000:264-274.

28.
권영민. 국가 수준 교육과정의 개발 체제 분석 연구: 1954년-1997년 초, 중등학교 교육과정 개발 과정을 중심으로-. 인하대학교. 2004:1-229.

29.
Olson L. Tennessee reconsiders value-added assessment system. Education week. 2004;23(5):9.

30.
Bracey GW. Value-added models, Front and center. Phi delta kappan. 2006;87(6):478-481. crossref(new window)

31.
Glatthorn AA, Boschee F, Whitehead BM. Curriculum leadership: strategies for development and implementation. SAGE publications. 2009:1-552.

32.
한국통합교육과정학회. 2011 초등통합교과 교육과정 개정을 위한 시안 개발 연구. 교육과학기술부. 2011:2.

33.
홍후조, 박순경. 교육과정 개선 방향 설정에 관한 연구- 국가 수준 교육과정 기준의 변화와 질관리 방안의 개선을 중심으로. 2002년도 교육과정 후속 지원연구과제 답신 보고. 2002.

34.
김준옥. 제7차 교육과정과 2007년 개정 교육과정의 슬기로운 생활 삽화 비교 분석. 경인교육대학교 교육대학원. 2009.

35.
정완호. 고등학교 물리, 화학, 생물, 지구과학 I, II 교과서 구성 방향 및 체제, 과학교과의 새 교과서 구성 방향 및 체제. 한국과학교육학회 동계 세미나 자료. 1993:54-72.

36.
김애경. 효과적인 창의.인성교육 정착을 위한 창의적 체험활동 운영 방안. 교육연구논문. 2011;33:1-89.

37.
교육과학기술부 고시 제2009-41호. 고교 과학과 교육과정. 교육과학기술부. 2009.

38.
Piaget J. Intelligence and affectivity: Their relationship during child development. Annual reviews monograph. 1981.1-77.

39.
한국과학기술한림원. 지속가능과학의 본질연구 및 과학 분류체계 작성과 중장기 발전 로드맵 작성에 관한 연구. 한국과학기술한림원 연구보고서. 2011;75:1.

40.
과학기술기본법 제27조. 국가과학기술표준분류체계. 과학기술부 고시 제2008-159.

41.
부경희. 공익광고 메시지의 귀인 효과에 관한 실증연 구: 메시지 프레이밍 중개요인들을 중심으로. 광고학 연구. 2001;12(4):7-35.

42.
Kliebard, HM. Metaphorical roots of curriculum design. In pinar, w(ed.). Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists. 1975;84-85.

43.
안귀덕, 배호순, 현주. 한국 중, 고등학교 학생의 관심 및 요구 조사 연구. 한국교육개발원. 1980:5.

44.
최호성. 교육 민주화의 맥락에서 본 교육과정 개발. 교육 이론과 실천 창간호. 1991;186-187.

45.
초.중등교육법. 법률 제12338호. 2014.

46.
김희백. 최근 과학교육과정 개정의 방향과 쟁점 및 향후 과제: 2007년, 2009년 개정을 중심으로. 교육연구와 실천. 2011;77:113-132.

47.
Marsh CJ, Willis G. Curriculum: alternative approaches, ongoing issues(3rd ed.). upper saddle river, nj: Merrill prentice hall. 2003:1-416.

48.
Hobbs R. The seven great debates in the media literacy movement. Journal of Communication. 1998;48:82-95.