한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제27권9호
  • /
  • Pages.870-880
  • /
  • 2007
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지

이질 모둠이 수행한 과학탐구실험 과정에서 상호작용의 변화와 특성

Change and Characteristics of Interactions in a Heterogeneous Group in Scientific Inquiry Experiments

  • 발행 : 2007.12.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구에서는 과학실험활동에서 이루어지는 학습자의 상호작용 과정을 심층적으로 분석함으로써,인지수준별 모둠구성에서 나타나는 상호작용의 변화형태와 특성을 확인하여 상호작용 과정에 대한 실질적 이해를 돕고자 하였다. 이를 위해 1년 동안 13개의 탐구실험 활동이 진행되는 동안 교사가 추천한 두 모둠을 관찰 하면서 녹음/녹화하였다. 40차시의 녹음/녹화자료는 모두 전사되었으며,자료는 메모하면서 보고 듣는 과정을 반복하는 방법을 기초로 분석하였다. 이질모둠의 상호작용은 3A(형식적조작초기)학생이 문제해결을 주도하고 나머지 학생들은 상호작용에 참여하지 못한 채 일방적인 설명을 듣거나 답을 베끼는 식으로 변화하였다. 한편 낮은 능력의 학생은 상호작용에서 소외되고 있었으며,중간수준의 두 학생사이에 새로운 상호작용이 형성되고 있었다. 이로부터 상호작용을 강조한 활동의 진행과 모둠구성에 대한 시사점을 얻을 수 있었으며,이에 대해 논의하였다.

The purpose of this study was to understand the change and characteristics of interactions in a heterogeneous group in scientific inquiry experiments. For this purpose, the process of students' interactions in small group activities were analyzed. This study focused on two, small heterogeneous groups of eighth graders. Students were involved in 13 scientific inquiry experiments for one year and students' interactions in each experiments were observed and recorded using video/audio and the data recorded were transcribed. The analysis of data was based on the method of making a note by looking and listening to the data repeatedly. Students' interactions in heterogeneous group changed toward that 3A (early formal operation student solved the problems by oneself and other students only listened to 3A student's explanation or copied the answer. The least able student was alienated from peers' interactions. In the meantime, new interactions of two middle level students were shaped. Educational implications of the progression of activities emphasizing interactions and the organization of grouping were drawn.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 강순민 (2004). 과학적 맥락의 논의 과제 해결과정에서 나타나는 논의과정 요소의 특정. 한국교원대학교 박사학위논문
  2. 김지영, 성숙경, 강성주, 박종윤, 최병순 (2002). 사회적 상호작용을 강조한 과학탐구실혐의 효과. 한국과학교육학회지. 22(4), 757-767
  3. 김조연, 신애경, 박국태, 최병순 (2001). 사회적 상호작용을 강조한 과학탐구실험의 효과 및 인지수준에 따른 상호작용 분석. 대한화학회지, 45(5), 470 -480
  4. 김찬종, 오필석, 오영선, 박영선 (2005). 포트폴리오 체제를 적용한 수업에서 학생들의 소집단내 상호삭용 참여 양상과 포트폴리오 성취도와의 관계. 한국과학교육학회지, 25( 7), 837-848
  5. 김혜심, 이은경, 강성주 (2006) 실생활 소재 탐구 실험 형태에 따른 학생 학생 상호작용에서의 학습 접근 수준 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 26(1), 16-24
  6. 박종윤, 정인화, 남정희, 최경희, 최병순 (2006). 중학교 과학 수업에서 질문과 피드백을 활용한 교사-학생 상호작용 강화 수업 전략의 개발 및 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 26(2), 239-245
  7. 성숙경 (2005). 사회적 상호작용을 강조한 과학탐구 실험에서 언어적 상호작용의 변화와 특성. 한국교원대학교 박사학위논문
  8. 이현영, 장상실, 성숙경, 강성주, 최병순 (2002). 사회적 상호작용을 강조한 과학탐구 실험과정에서 학생학생 상호작용 양상 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 22(3), 660-670
  9. Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in peers & fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099-1114 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199612)33:10<1099::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-N
  10. Anderson, R., Howe, C.. Soden, F, Holliday, J., & Low. J. (2001), Peer interaction and the learning of critical thinking skills in further education students, Instructional Science, 29, 1-32 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026471702353
  11. Berg, C., Bergendahl, V., Lundberg. B., & Tibell, L.(2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experirnent? A comparison of attitude to, and outcomes of, and expository versus open-inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3). 351-372 https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210145738
  12. Bianchini, J. A. (1997), Where knowledge construction, equity and context intersect: Student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039-1065 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199712)34:10<1039::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-S
  13. Chang, H. P., & Lederman. N. G. (1994). The effects of lewis of cooperation with in physical science achieveroent. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 167-181 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310207
  14. Chinn, C.A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluation inquiry task. Science Education, 886, 175-218
  15. Hand. B., Treagust, D.F., & Vance, K. (1997).Student perceptions of the social constructivist classroom. Science Education, 81(5), 561-575 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199709)81:5<561::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-8
  16. Hodson, D. K. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 71 (256).33-40
  17. Jones, M. G. & Carter, G. (1994). Verbal and nonverbal behavior of al: ility grouped dyads. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6),603-619 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310604
  18. Kurth, L. A.,. Gardner, R., & Smith, E. L. (2002). Student use of narrative and paradigmatic forms of talk in elementary science conersations, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 93-818
  19. Lee, S. K., Park, H.J., Myeong, K. O., & Kang, K. H. (2003). A case stud of classroom cultural aspects affecting discussion and discourse; A conceptual ecological approach. Journal of Korean Association Research in Science Education, 23(4), 331-340
  20. Lumpe, A. T., & Styer, .J. R. (1995). Peer collaboration and concept develpment: Learning about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 71-98 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320108
  21. Lunetta, V. M. (1998). The school science laboratory History perspectives and cntext of contemporary teaching, In B. J Fraser, & K.G. Tobin (Eds). International Handbook of science education (pp. 249-262). London Kluwer Academic Publishers
  22. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case: study applications in edu.ation, San-Francisco: Jessey-Bass Publishers
  23. Richmond, G., & Strdey. J. (1996). Making meaning in classroorns: Social proceses in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8),839-858 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199610)33:8<839::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-X
  24. Shepardson, D. P. (1996). Social interactions and the mediation of science learn ug in two small groups of firstgraders. Journal of Reserch in Science Teaching, 33(2), 159-178 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199602)33:2<159::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-T
  25. Solomon, .J. (1998), About argument and discussion School Science Review, 80(291), 57-62
  26. Tien, L. T., Roth, M, & Kanipmeier, J. A. (2002).Implementation of a peeled team learning instructional approach in an undergra luate organic chemistry course. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 606-632 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10038
  27. Wasron, S. B., & Mashall, J. E. (1995). Effects of cooperative incentives am heterogeneous arrangement on achievement and interactio: of cooperative learning groups in a college life science course, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(3), 281-299
  28. Yerrick, F. K, Dostes. E., Mugent, J. S., Parke, H, & Carwley, F. E. (2003) Social interaction and the use of analogy: An analysis of preservice teachers' talk during physics inquiry lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 443-463 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10084