Developing the Education Program for Invention Gifted Students by Reverse Engineering Teaching Methods (Focusing on the development and effectiveness of RSP program)

역공학 교육방법을 활용한 발명영재교육 프로그램의 개발: RSP 프로그램의 개발 및 효과성을 중심으로

An, Duk Geun;Park, Kyungbin

  • Received : 2015.10.13
  • Accepted : 2015.10.28
  • Published : 2015.10.31


The purpose of this RSP program is to enhance the invention gifted students' creative thinking and self-efficacy in studying. This program has 20 subcategories and interesting activities attracting students' attentions which are based on TRIZ's 40 principles of invention. 3-Steps to learning, which are - experiencing, recognizing, and inventing are arranged as teaching methods of RSP program. In the first step, experiencing, students are motivated and get a glimpse of the principles of invention while experiencing innovative products. In the next step, recognizing, students grasp the related scientific principles from the products. In the last step, inventing, students are given keys to solutions for problematic situations and then they create new ideas after repetitive encounters with several products made by similar principles. RSP program is different from other programs in that it has this 'inventing' step, where students can create new ideas based on related basic knowledge. In conclusion, RSP program is systematically well organized with 4 steps(purpose, contents, teaching method and evaluation) and is shown to enhance invention gifted students' creativity and self efficacy in studying. Therefore, the RSP program is shown to be a reliable and useful program, and may be used in the classes for positive results.


Invention;Invention gifted students;RSP;Creative thinking;Self-efficacy


  1. 국가과학기술위원회 (2007). 과학영재 발굴 육성 종합계획('08-'12)(안). 국과위본회의 제 3호 과학영재. 2007. 8. 27.
  2. 김승훈 (2004). 중학생의 과학창의력 측정도구의 개발과 창의력 관련 변인관의 관계. 한국교원대학교 대학원 박사학위논문.
  3. 김영채 (2010). 창의력의 이론과 개발. 경기: 교육과학사.2012, 1, 209-222.
  4. 박경빈 (2012). 한국 영재교육의 연구동향 분석. 영재교육연구, 22(4), 823-840.
  5. 박병기, 채선영 (2005). 학업수행 자기효능감 척도의 개발 및 타당화. 교육심리연구, 19(4),1219-1240.
  6. 신재경, 배동윤, 김효상, 정승오 (2013). 특성화고에서 RESP 교육모형을 적용한 발명교육 프로그램 개발 및 적용 방안. 창의발명교육 연합학술대회, 서울.
  7. 유동희 (2011). TRIZ를 활용한 수업설계 개선 연구. 경북대학교 대학원 박사학위논문.
  8. 이재호 (2011). 발명영재교육 체계화 방안: 발명영재교육의 현 주소 및 발명영재에 대한 다원적 지원 방안. 제1회 지식재산기반 차세대영재기업인 콜로키움. 107-206.
  9. 이재호, 박경빈, 진석언, 류지영, 이상철, 안성훈, 진병욱 (2012). 발명영재상 수립을 위한 발명영재의 특성 이해. 영재교육연구, 22(3), 551-573.
  10. 이찬, 서재흥, 금은정, 김미애, 이유민 (2009). 발명영재 교육운영방안 연구. 서울대학교, 한국발명진흥회.
  11. 최유현, 정호근, 김동하 (2008). 발명영재 교육 및 연구 인프라 구축 방안과 로드맵. 실과교육연구, 14(1), 251-270.
  12. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  13. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Wolfe, R. (2000). New conceptions and research approches to creativity: Implications of a systems perspective for creativity in education. In K. A. Heller, F. J. Monks, R. J. Sternberg, & R. Subotnik(Eds.), International handbook of giftedness and talent (81-93).
  14. Davis, G. A. (2004). Creativity is forever. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Pub.
  15. Rekoff, M. G.(1985). On reverse engineering, IEEE Transactions on Software. Man and Cybernetics, 3(4), 244-252.
  16. Sternberg, R. J. & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R J. Stemberg (Ed), Handbook of creativity(pp3-15), NY: Cambridge University Press.