Journal of Gifted/Talented Education (영재교육연구)

The Korean Society for the Gifted (한국영재학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effects of Students' Perceptions of Classroom on Self-regulations Strategy Use, Persistent Intention, and Achievement in a Context of Online Science Gifted Education Program

온라인 과학탐구수업에서 학습자의 수업에 대한 인식이 자기조절전략 활용, 수강지속의사, 학업성취도에 미치는 영향

  • 이성혜 (카이스트 과학영재교육연구원) ;
  • 채유정 (카이스트 과학영재교육연구원)
  • Received : 2016.05.16
  • Accepted : 2016.06.27
  • Published : 2016.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study examined the effects of students'perceptions of classroom on self-regulatory strategy use, persistent intention, and achievement in an online Science gifted program. The sample included 434 middle and high school students who participated in the 3-months online gifted program. Participants volunteerly surveyed on their perceptions of classroom (appeal, challenge, choice, meaningfulness, academic self-efficacy), self-regulatory strategy use, and persistent intention. Student achievement data was collected from online learning system. Multiple Regression was conducted to analyze the effect of students'perceptions of classroom on various dependent variables. The results of this study showed that (1) students use of rehearsal strategy was positively related to academic self-efficacy among the sub-variables of students'perceptions of classroom and the use of rehearsal strategy was negatively related to challenge; (2) the use of elaboration strategy was positively related to challenge and meaningfulness; (3) the use of time management strategy was positively related to academic self-efficacy and the use of resource management strategy was positively related to challenge; and (4) students' persistent intention was related to appeal, challenge and meaningfulness, achievement was related to challenge.

본 연구에서는 온라인 과학영재교육에서 중 고등학생의 온라인 수업에 대한 인식이 학습자의 자기조절학습 전략의 활용과 수강지속의사와 학업성취도에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 알아보고자 하였다. 연구 대상은 과학탐구중심 온라인 영재교육 과정을 수강한 중학교 1학년~고등학교 2학년 학생 434명이었다. 연구를 위해 수업에 대한 인식 하위변인(흥미, 도전감, 의미, 선택권, 학업적 자기효능감)을 독립변인으로, 인지조절전략(시연 전략, 정교화 전략, 조직화 전략, 초인지 전략)과 행동조절전략(노력관리, 시간관리, 도움활용)을 종속변인으로 하는 중다회귀분석을 실시하였다. 또한 수업에 대한 인식 하위변인과 학업성취도와 수강지속의사에 대해 중다회귀 분석을 실시하였다. 연구 결과를 살펴보면, 수업에 대한 인식 하위 변인 중 시연 전략 활용에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 변인은 학업적 자기효능감이었으며, 정교화 전략 활용에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 변인은 도전감과 의미였다. 도전감 인식은 시연 전략 활용과 부적인 관련이 있는 것으로 나타났다. 수업에 대한 인식 하위 변인 중 시간관리 전략 활용에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 변인은 학업적 자기효능감이었으며, 도움활용 전략에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 변인은 도전감이었다. 수업에 대한 인식 하위요인 중 흥미, 도전감, 의미에 대한 인식이 높을수록 학습자가 후속 강의를 수강하려는 의지가 높게 나타났으며, 도전감에 대한 인식이 높을수록 탐구학습 점수가 높을 가능성이 있는 것으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. 강명희, 김민정 (2006). e-Learning 환경에서 인식되는 사회적 실재감과 성취도, 만족도, 학습지속도 관계 규명. 교육공학연구, 22(4), 1-27.
  2. 강민석, 김진일, 박인우 (2009). 사이버 e-러닝환경에서 학업성취도에 영향을 미치는 학습 참여 변인 규명. 한국 인터넷 정보학회, 10(5), 135-143.
  3. 권성연 (2011). 온라인 수업에서 교수실재감, 학습전급, 만족도 및 학습효과 인식간의 관계 분석. 교육공학연구, 27(3), 535-560.
  4. 김미량, 김진숙 (2007). 사이버 가정학습에 대한 학습자의 태도 및 만족도 분석. 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 7(10), 44-58.
  5. 김태웅, 오미경, 김미량(2010). 사이버 학습의 지속적 수강의도에 영향을 미치는 요인 분석:EBS 강좌와 사설 이러닝 강좌 수강학생 사례를 중심으로. 교육정보미디어연구, 16(3), 363-383.
  6. 류지헌 (2009). 컴퓨터 기반 학습에서 인지부하 요인과 GSR의 각성 수준이 과제수행에 미치는 영향. 감성과학, 12(3), 279-288.
  7. 박중길 (2012). 체육수업의 가치와 결과기대, 과제관여, 학업성취와의 관계: 과제난이도의 조절효과와 자기효능감의 매개효과. 한국체육학회지, 51(2), 189-201.
  8. 이성혜 (2014). 대학생이 지각하는 Merrill의 제1교수원리가 수업에 적용된 정도가 학습자의 인지적 참여에 미치는 영향. 교육공학연구, 30(1), 77-103.
  9. 이성혜, 최경애 (2016). 온라인 수학․과학 영재교육에서 중학생의 학습과제에 대한 지각과 도전감, 심층학습 및 성취도 간의 관계. 학습자중심교과교육연구, 16(1), 189-212.
  10. 이인숙 (2002). e-Learnig 학습전략 수준 및 학업성취도 규명. 교육공학연구, 18(2), 51-67.
  11. 임효진 (2009). 대학생의 학업성취와 자기조절 학습전략: 아시안 학생을 중심으로 한 다인종비교연구. 아시아교육연구, 10(4), 57-84.
  12. 전명남 (2004). Kolb-McCarthy 학습유형에 따른 심층학습의 차이. 교육심리연구, 18(4), 279-292.
  13. 조석희, 안도희, 한석실 (2004). 영재의 후기 학업성취에 영향을 미치는 아동기 특성 및 환경요인. 교육심리연구, 18(2). 123-141.
  14. 주영주, 김은경, 박수영 (2009). 기업 사이버교육에서 인지적 실재감과 몰입, 만족도, 지속의향과의 구조적 관계. 교육정보미디어연구, 15(3), 21-38.
  15. 주영주, 김소나, 김나영 (2008). 기업 사이버교육에서의 중도탈락 원인규명 척도 개발및 양호도 검증. 교육정보미디어연구, 14(1), 99-121.
  16. 채유정, 이성혜 (2015). 온라인 영재교육 프로그램 성취 수준에 따른 학생의 동기, 자기조절전략, 학습양식 차이 분석. 영재교육연구, 25(6), 905-926.
  17. 최미나, 노혜란 (2011). 대학 이러닝에서 수강동기, 학습만족도가 지속수강 의사에 미치는 영향. 교육공학연구, 27(4), 653-673.
  18. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261
  19. Barron, K. E., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2001). Achievement goals and optimal motivation: Testing multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(5), 706-722. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.5.706
  20. Bong, M. (2001). Between and within-domain relations of academic motivation among middle and high school students: Self-efficacy, task-value, and achievement goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 23-34. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.23
  21. Bowden, J., & Marton, F. (1998). The university of learning. London, England: Kogan Page.
  22. Breton, G. (1999). Some empirical evidence on the superiority of the problem-based learning (PBL) method. Accounting Education, 8(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/096392899331008
  23. Britner, S. L., 7 Pajares, F. (2001). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, race, and gender in middle school science. Journal of Women and Minorities in Science and Engineering, 7(4), 271-285.
  24. Camahalan, F. M. G. (2006). Effects of self-regulated learning on mathematics achievement of selected southeast Asian children. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33(3), 194-205.
  25. Chae, Y., & Gentry, M. (2007). Korean high school student perceptions of classroom quality:Validation research. Gifted and Talented International, 22(2), 68-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2007.11673497
  26. Chae, Y., & Gentry, M. (2011). Gifted and general high school students' perceptions of learning and motivational constructs in Korea and the United States. High Ability Studies, 22(1), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2011.577275
  27. Chemers, M. M., Hu, L., & Garcia, B. F. (2001). Academic self-efficacy and first-year college student performance and adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 55-64. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.55
  28. Cordova, D. L., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning:Beneficial effects of constextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715-730. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.715
  29. Cox, A. E., & Whaley, D. E. (2004). The influence of task value, expectancies for success, and identity on athletes' achievement behaviors. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16(2), 103-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200490437930
  30. Dods, R. F. (1997). An action research study of the effectiveness of problem-based learning in promoting the acquisition and retention of knowledge. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(4), 423-437. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329702000406
  31. Dupeyrat, C. & Marine, C. (2005). Implicit theories of intelligence, goal orientation, cognitive engagement, and achievement: A test of Dweck's model with returning to school adults. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 43-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.01.007
  32. Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motivation (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, LA: Freeman.
  33. Entwistle, N. J., and Tait, H. (1990). Approaches to learning, evaluations of teaching, and references for contrasting academic environments. Higher Education 19(2), 169-194. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00137106
  34. Eley, M. (1992). Differential adoption of study approaches within individual students. Higher Education, 23(3), 231-254. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00145015
  35. Gentry, M., & Gable, R. K. (2001). My class activities: A survey instrument to assess students' perceptions of interest, challenge, choice, and enjoyment in their classroom [Instrument]. Mansfiled Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  36. Gentry, M., Gable, R. K., & Rizza, R. K. (2002). Students' perceptions of classroom activities: Are there grade-level and gender differences? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 539-544. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.539
  37. Gentry, M., Gable, R. K., & Springer, P. (2000). Gifted and non-gifted middle school students:Are their attitudes toward school different as measured by the new affective instrument, My Class Activities...? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 24(1), 74-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320002400104
  38. Gentry, M., Maxfield, L. R., & Gable, R. K. (1998). Construct validity evidence for enrichment clusters and regular classrooms: Are they different as students see them? Educational and Psychological Measurement, 58(2), 258-274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164498058002009
  39. Gentry, M., & Owen, S. V. (2004). Secondary student perceptions of classroom quality:Instrumentation and differences between advanced/honors and nonhonors classes. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16(1), 20-29. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2004-464
  40. Gentry, M., Rizza, M. G., & Gable, R. K. (2001). Gifted students perceptions of their classroom activities: Differences among rural, urban, and suburban student attitudes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 45(2), 115-129. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620104500205
  41. Gentry, M., Rizza, M. G., & Owen, S. V. (2002). Examining perceptions of challenge and choice in classrooms: The relationship between teachers and their students and comparisons among gifted students and other students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(2), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620204600207
  42. Gentry, M., & Springer, P. (2002). Secondary student perceptions of their class activities regarding meaningfulness, challenge, choice, and appeal: An initial instrument validation study. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 13(4), 192-204. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2002-381
  43. Greene, B. A., & Miller, R. B. (1996). Influences on course achievement: Goals, perceived ability, and cognitive engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(2), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0015
  44. Jang, H., Reeve, J., & Deci, E. L. (2010). Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology, 10(3), 588-600.
  45. Kember, D. (2000). Misconceptions about the learning approaches, motivation, and study practices of Asian students. Higher Education, 40(1), 99-121. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004036826490
  46. Koszalka, T., Song, H., & Grabowski, B. (2002). Examining learning environmental design issues for prompting reflective thinking in web-enhanced PBL. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
  47. Kyndt, E., Dochy, F., Struyven, K., & Cascallar, E. (2011). The direct and indirecteffect of motivation for learning on students' approaches to learning throughthe perceptions of workload and task complexity. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(2), 135-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501329
  48. Lee, F. K., Sheldon, K. M., & Turban, D. B. (2003). Personality and goal-striving process: The influence of achievement goal patterns, goal level, and mental focus on performance and enjoyment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 256-265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.256
  49. Lyke, J. A & Kelaher Young, A. J. (2006). Cognition in context: Students' percpetions of classroom goal structures and reported cognitive strategy use in the college classroom. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), p.477-490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-9004-1
  50. Martinez, M. (2003). High attrition rate in e-Learning: Challenges, predictors, and solutions. The E-Learning Developer's Journal, 14(1), 1-8.
  51. Marton, F., and Saljo, R. (1984). 'Approaches to learning', in Marton, F., Hounsell, D.J. and Entwistle, N. J. (Ed.), The Experience of Learning (pp. 36-55). Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
  52. Nie, Y.,& Lau, S. (2010).Differential relations of traditional and constructivist instruction to students' cognition, motivation, and achievement. Learning and Instruction, 20(5), 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.04.002
  53. Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2005). Influence of redesigning a learning environment on student perceptions and learning strategies. Learning Environments Research, 8(1), 67-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-005-7950-3
  54. Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., Gijselaers, W. (2007). The interplay of perceptions of the learning environment, personality and learning strategies: a study amongst international business studies students. Studies in Higher Education, 32(1), 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070601099457
  55. Nijhuis, J., Segers, M., & Gijselaers, W. (2008). The extent of variability of learning strategies and students' perceptions of the learning environment. Learning and instruction, 18(2), 121-134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.009
  56. Pell, A. W. (1985). Enjoyment and attainment in secondary school physics. British Educational Research Journal, 11(2), 123-132. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192850110205
  57. Pintrich, P. R., De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning component of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
  58. Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (Vol. 7, pp. 371-402). Greenwich CT: JAI Press.
  59. Pintrich, P. R., Roeser, R. W., & De Groot, E. A. M. (1994). Classroom and individual differences in early adolescents' motivation and self-regulated learning. Journal of Early Adolescence, 14(2), 139-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/027243169401400204
  60. Ramsden, P. (1992) Learning to teach in higher education. London, Routledge.
  61. Renzulli, J. S., Leppien, J., & Hays, T. (2000). The multiple menu model: A practical guide for developing differentiated curriculum. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  62. Schiefele, U., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1995). Motivation and ability as factors in mathematics experience and achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 163-181. https://doi.org/10.2307/749208
  63. Shin, N. (2003). Transactional presence as a critical predictor of success in distance learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 69-86. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910303048
  64. Shin, N. M., & Chan, J. (2004). Direct and indirect effects of inline learning on distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(3), 275-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0007-1013.2004.00389.x
  65. Sorbal, D. T. (1995). The problem-based learning approach as an enhancement factor of personal meaningfulness of learning. Higher Education, 29(1), 93-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01384243
  66. Trigwell, K. & Prosser, M. (1991). Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education, 22(3), 251-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00132290
  67. Tobias, S. (1995). Interest and metacognitive word knowledge. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 399-405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.399
  68. Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  69. Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Cox, K. C., Logan, C., DiCinto, M., & Thomas, C. T. (1998). Creating contexts for involvement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 730-745. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.4.730
  70. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 315-327). New York, NY: Macmillan.
  71. Wigfied, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 116- 119. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1018
  72. Wilson, K., & Fowler, J. (2005). Assessing the impact of learning environments on students' approaches to learning: comparing conventional and action learning designs. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(1), 87-101. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260293042003251770
  73. Wolters, C. (2004). Advancing achievement goal theory: Using goal structure and goal orientation to predict students' motivation, cognition, and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(2), 236-250. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.96.2.236
  74. Wolters, C., & Pintrich, P. R. (1998). Contextual differences in student motivation and self-regulated learning in mathematics, English, and social studies classrooms. Instructional Science, 26, 27-47. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003035929216
  75. Xiang, P., McBride, R., Guan, J., & Solomon, M. A. (2003). Children's motivation in elementary physical education: An expectancy-value model of achievement choice. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 74(1), 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2003.10609061
  76. Xiang, P., Chen, A., & Bruene, A. (2004). Interactive impact of intrinsic otivators and extrinsic rewards on behavior and motivation outcomes. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 24(2), 179-197.
  77. Yang, Y., Gentry, M., & Choi, Y. O. (2012). Gifted students' perceptions of the regular classes and pull-out programs in South Korea. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(3), 270-287. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12451021
  78. Young, M. R. (2005). The motivational effects of the classroom environment in facilitating self-regulated learning. Journal of Marketing Education, 27(1), 25-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475304273346
  79. Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal-setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029003663
  80. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning:Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51
  81. Zhu, X., Chen, A., Ennis, C. D., Sun, H., Hopple, C., Bonello, M., Bae, M., & Kim, S. (2009). Situational interest, cognitive engagement, and achievement in physical education. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(3), 221-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.05.002