Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education (한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육)

The Korean Elementary Science Education Society (한국초등과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Comparative Study of Articulation on Science Textbook Concepts and Extracted Concepts in Learning Objectives Using Semantic Network Analysis - Focus on Life Science Domain -

언어 네트워크 분석을 이용한 초등학교 과학 교과서 개념과 성취 기준 추출 개념의 연계성 비교 연구 - 생명과학 영역을 중심으로 -

  • Received : 2016.08.10
  • Accepted : 2016.08.25
  • Published : 2016.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Whether textbooks faithfully reflect the curriculum contents is an important educational issue. The previous studies on the textbooks did not analyze the relationship described in the textbooks or the structure. In this regard, this study aims to analyze how the concept of life science area in the elementary school science textbooks developed on the basis of the 2009 revised curriculum is linked. In addition, it seeks to analyze how the concept presented in the learning content achievement standards of the curriculum is connected to other concepts. Towards this end, the conceptual linkage of eight units in the life science domain of elementary school science textbooks based on the 2009 revised curriculum was analyzed. The contents of the life science domain in the science textbooks were analyzed through a semantic network analysis, and the semantic network on the concept linked to the one described in curriculum's learning objectives was also analyzed. The results are as follows: 1) It will be difficult for students to understand the concept due to the complexity of the semantic network resulting from a number of concepts. 2) The curriculum's learning objectives presented in the curriculum are not faithfully reflected in the textbooks. 3) The textbooks are described on the basis of specific curriculum's learning objectives. Based on the findings of this study, the number of concepts described in the elementary school science textbooks needs to be significantly reduced so that the concepts can be meaningfully linked to each other.

Keywords

References

  1. Angus, C. H. (2004). Is textbook obsolete in new education? A critical analysis on the value of textbook in an inquiry curriculum, with special reference to the new primary general studies curriculum in Hong Kong. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 490764).
  2. Cho, H. & Shin, Y.(2014). A study on the scientific terms in the life domain of science textbooks by the 2007 revised curriculum for 3rd and 4th grade elementary school students. The Journal of Education, 34(3), 1-28.
  3. Doerfel, M. L. & Barnett, G. A. (1999). A semantic network analysis of the international communication association. Human Communication Research, 25(4), 589-603. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1999.tb00463.x
  4. Han, K. (2003). The meaning and research agenda in network analysis as social science methodology - Based on semantic network analysis. Research in Social Studies Education, 10(2), 219-235.
  5. Jang, H. & Barnett, G. A. (1994). Cultural differences in organizational communication: A semantic network analysis. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology, 44(1), 31-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/075910639404400104
  6. Jang, S. & Lim, H. (2006). Suggestions for improving the new elementary science textbooks for students’ effective science learning. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 6(2), 337-352.
  7. Jeong, D., Lee, J., Kim, S. & Park, K. (2013). An analysis on congruency between educational objectives of curriculum and learning objectives of textbooks using semantic network analysis - Focus on earth science I in the 2009 revised curriculum-. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 34(7), 711-726. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2013.34.7.711
  8. Jeong, J., Yoon, J., Son, J., Lee, T. & Kim, Y. (2010). A study on the recognition about cell and gene domain to be taught in elementary, secondary schools by secondary biology teacher. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education 30(5), 636-646.
  9. Jo, I. (2008). Effects of social network measures on individual and team performances in a collaborative learning situation. Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 295-317. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.24.4.295
  10. Jo, W. & Choi, B. (1990). A comparative study on the science 1 of new curriculum and biology 1 of former curriculum in the high school. Journal of Science Education, 17, 53-83.
  11. Kim, J., Lee, Y., Hwang, J. & Lee, H. (1997). Curriculum and educational evaluation. Seoul: Kyoyookboo Publication Co.
  12. Kim, Y., Yoon, J. & Soon, J.(2009). An analysis of the recognition about animal and plant domain to be taught in elementary and secondary schools by secondary school teacher. Biology Education, 37(2), 256-268. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2009.37.2.256
  13. Koh, Y. & Kim, H. (2016). Content analysis of life science area in science textbooks according to Korean elementary curriculum change. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(2), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.2.0203
  14. Lee, J. & Ha, M. (2012a). Semantic network analysis of science gifted middle school students' understanding of fact, hypothesis, theory, law, and scientificness. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(5), 823-840. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.5.823
  15. Lee, J. & Ha, M. (2012b). The comparison of science gifted elementary and middle school students' understanding of 'scientificness'. Journal of Science Education for the Gifted, 4(1), 29-42.
  16. Lim, S. & Kim, Y. (2015). An analysis of articulation in life science revision 2009 curriculum with semantic network analysis. Biology Education, 43(1), 84-96. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2015.43.1.84
  17. Lim, S. (2014). Analysis of conceptual linkage errors of cell division and development and application of teaching-learning strategies based on semantic network analysis. Doctoral dissertation, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
  18. Mun, Y. & Hyeon, D. (2010). A comparative analysis of the systems of contents of year 3 and 4 elementary school science textbooks of the seventh and year 2007 revised curriculums. Journal of Education Science 12(1), 1-18.
  19. Oh, Y. & Jeong, E. (2012). Comparative analysis of inquiry activities on the unit related 'nutrition of plants' in middle school science textbooks by the 7th and 2007 revision curriculum. Journal of Science Education, 36(1), 35-48. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2012.36.1.35
  20. Park, H. & Leydesdorff, L. (2004). Understanding the KrKwic: A computer program for the analysis of Korean text. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society, 6(5), 1377-1387.
  21. Park, K. & Chung, D. (2013). The characteristics of earth system thinking of science gifted students in relation to climate changes. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 24(2), 271-288. https://doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2014.24.2.271
  22. Park, K., Chung, D. & Cho, K. (2013). An analysis of the changes of high school students' conceptual structure about sedimentary rocks before and after the field trip using the semantic network analysis. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society, 34(2), 173-186. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2013.34.2.173
  23. Park, W. & Kim, E. (1999). The analysis of inquiry scopes in high school general science textbook based on the 6th curriculum-Emphasizing the analysis of inquiry experiment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 19(4), 528-541.
  24. Son, Y. & Lee, D. (2004) A study on transition of the science textbooks for elementary school students. Journal of the Science Education, 27, 147-174.

Cited by

  1. An Analysis of Semantic Network in Photosynthesis Unit on Middle School Textbook based on the 2009 Revised National Science Curriculum vol.46, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2018.46.1.63
  2. Comparison of Conceptual Networks in Plant Nutrition of Middle School Science Textbook and Students’ Learning vol.46, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2018.46.1.97
  3. Comparison of Conceptual Networks in Plant Structure and Function of Elementary School Science Textbook and Students’ Learning vol.46, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2018.46.3.330