DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development and Application of NOS Education Program according to Analyzing the Characteristics of Nature of Science(NOS) in Exhibits of Science Museum

국내 과학관 전시물에 반영된 과학의 본성(NOS) 특징 분석에 따른 프로그램 개발 및 이의 적용

  • Received : 2017.06.08
  • Accepted : 2017.08.24
  • Published : 2017.08.31

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to identify the status of the science museum reflected in the exhibition, and develop and apply Nature of Science(NOS) education programs based on the science museum exhibition. The analyse tool was developed to understand the NOS in the science museum. The researchers recognized the nature of science reflected in four exhibition halls in Korea. Based on the analysis, we developed the NOS education program. NOS education programs were developed and applied to supplement the NOS that appears to be limited to scientific exhibitions based on the prior analysis of science exhibition. The results of the study were as follows. First, we analyzed the nature of science reflected in the exhibition of two main science museums, and it was mostly implicit and most were to understand the relationship among STS(Science-Technology-Society). And also we analyzed the NOS reflected in the exhibition of two national history museum, and it was also mostly implicit and most were about the way of how to find out the knowledge, inference. Second, in order to supplement the NOS of the science museum, we developed the NOS education program based on the exhibits. After applying it to the science museum, we conducted a qualitative study. As a result, there was a positive change only in the aspects of NOS (science is tentative, science is from creativity and imaginative, science is the produce of social and culture, science is from the scientific method) that reflected explicitly. The conclusions derived from this study are as follows : For the cultivation of science in the scientific museum, various factors are needed depending on the theme of the science museum. Also, it is helpful to actively implement the NOS educational programs that utilize the exhibit. Therefore, the exhibit planners' and developers' competencies are critical to develop explicit NOS education programs in its expertise.

Acknowledgement

Supported by : National Research Foundation of Korea

References

  1. 강석진, 김영희, 노태희 (2004). 과학사를 이용한 소집단 토론 수업이 학생들의 과학의 본성에 대한 이해에 미치는 영향. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(5), 996-1007.
  2. 교육과학기술부 (2015). 2015 개정 교육과정 총론 및 각론 확정.발표.
  3. 김도욱 (2015). 과학사 주제에 따른 과학사-역할놀이가 대학생의 과학의 본성의 변화에 미치는 효과 -원자모형의 변천과 멘델레프의 주기율표의 변천 주제를 중심으로-. 39(1), 15-27.
  4. 김영선 (2013). 과학의 본성에 대한 예비과학교사들의 인식 분석. 조선대학교 교육대학원 석사학위논문
  5. 김찬종, 신명경, 이선경 (2010). 비형식 과학학습의 이해. 서울 : 북스힐
  6. 노태희, 김영희, 한수진, 강석진 (2002). 과학의 본성에 대한 초등학생들의 견해. 한국과학교육학회지, 22(4), 882-891.
  7. 박영신, 이정화 (2011). 과학관 도슨트 양성 프로그램의 실태 분석 및 발전 방향 모색. 한국지구과학회지, 32(7), 881-901. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2011.32.7.881
  8. 박영신 (2015a). 상황학습을 통한 과학 도슨트의 전문성 연구. 대한지구과학교육학회지, 8(1), 98-113. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2015.8.1.98
  9. 박영신 (2015b). 2015 과학관 전문인력양성 교육자료집.
  10. 양찬호, 김민환, 노태희 (2015). 2009 개정 교육과정에 의한 융합형 과학이 학생들의 과학의 본성과 STS에 대한 견해, 과학에 대한 흥미 및 포부에 미치는 영향. 한국과학교육학회지, 35(4), 549-555. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.4.0549
  11. 윤혜경, 장병기, 나지연 (2005). 과학 수업시간에 해보는 과학연극. 서울 : 드림웍스21.
  12. 이선경, 신명경, 김찬종 (2005). 자연사박물관의 전시에 반영된 과학의 본성. 한국지구과학회, 26(5), 376-386.
  13. 이영희 (2008). 전래동요 놀이 활동이 유아의 친사회적 행동에 미치는 영향. 전북대학교 교육대학원 석사학위논문
  14. 이영희 (2014). 우리나라 생명과학 관련 분야 재미과학자들은 어떻게 과학의 본성을 이해하고 있는가? 한국과학교육학회지, 34(7), 677-691 https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2014.34.7.0677
  15. 이정원 (2016). 지구과학교육과정에 반영된 과학의 본성 수준과 특징. 조선대학교 교육대학원 석사학위논문
  16. 이정원, 박영신, 정다혜 (2016). 교육과정 개정에 따른 과학의 본성 수준 및 반영정도 탐색: 7차 및 2009 개정교육과정사례 분석. 대한지구과학교육학회지, 9(2), 217-232. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2016.9.2.217
  17. 정감순 (2011). 자연사박물관의 진화관 전시물 패널에 반영된 과학의 본성 분석. 단국대학교 교육대학원 석사학위논문
  18. 최은지 (2013). 과학대중화를 위한 자연사박물관 전시물의 과학커뮤니케이션 반영정도 분석. 조선대학교 대학원 석사학위논문
  19. 한수진, 양찬호, 노태희 (2013). 과학 탐구의 본성에 대한 명시적-반성적 탐구 학습 프로그램의 영향. 대한화학회지, 57(1), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2013.57.1.115
  20. Abd-El-Khalick, F & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
  21. Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teacher's College Press.
  22. Irwin, A. R. (2000). Historical case studies: teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84(1), 5-26. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200001)84:1<5::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-0
  23. Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). The influence of explicit reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
  24. Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331-359. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404
  25. Lederman, N. G. (1998). Avoiding De-Natured Science: Activities that Promote Understandings of the Nature of Science. In McComas, W.F. (1998), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies, pp.83-126. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  26. Lederman, N. G., Schwartz, R. S., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Bell, R. L. (2001). Preservice teachers' understanding and teaching of the nature of science: An intervention study. The Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 1(2), 135-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150109556458
  27. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F. & Bell , R .L. & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  28. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  29. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). How people learn. Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  30. Park, Y-S., Park, J-H., & Ryu, H-S. (2014). Exploring the characteristics of STEAM program developed by docents and its educational impact in the natural history museum. Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 7(1), 75-90. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2014.7.1.075
  31. Solomon, J., Duveen, J., Scott, L., & McCarthy, S.(1992). Teaching about the nature of science through history: Action research in classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 409-421. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290408