Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Influence of Paired Think-Aloud Problem Solving on Interactions among PCK Components Considered in the Processes of Making Written Test Items by Pre-Service Chemistry Teachers

해결자·청취자 활동이 예비 화학교사의 지필평가 문항 제작 과정에서 고려된 교과교육학 지식(PCK) 구성 요소 사이의 상호작용에 미치는 영향

  • Received : 2017.05.13
  • Accepted : 2017.06.13
  • Published : 2017.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study investigated the influence of paired think-aloud problem solving on interactions among the pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) components considered in the processes of making written test items by pre-service chemistry teachers. The processes of making written test items using paired think-aloud problem solving in four small groups consisting of two pre-service chemistry teachers were recorded and transcribed. The analysis of the results revealed that the 'assessment in science education' of the five PCK components, regardless of the roles (solver or listener), was most frequently used in making written test items. 'Subject matter knowledge' and 'students' were also frequently used although less than the previous component. However, 'curriculum for science education' and 'instructional strategies and instruction for science education' was a little used. In the aspects of integration, the integrations between two or three components of various types were frequently found. The integrations among four or five components were also slightly found. However, the integrations of 'curriculum for science education' with the other components were less frequently found. The integrations of 'instructional strategies and instruction for science education' with other components were hardly found. The usefulness, limitations, and effective use of paired think-aloud problem solving as a strategy improving competency to make written test items and the PCK of pre-service teachers were discussed on the basis of the results.

이 연구에서는 해결자 청취자 활동이 예비 화학교사의 지필평가문항 제작 과정에서 고려된 교과교육학 지식(PCK) 구성 요소 사이의 상호작용에 미치는 영향을 조사하였다. 2명의 예비교사로 구성된 4개조의 해결자 청취자 활동을 통한 지필평가 문항 제작 활동을 분석한 결과, 해결자와 청취자 역할과 상관없이 PCK 구성 요소 중 과학 평가에 관한 지식 측면을 가장 많이 고려하였으며, 과학 내용에 관한 지식과 학생에 관한 지식 측면에 대한 고려도 비교적 많았다. 그러나 과학교육과정에 관한 지식과 과학 교수 전략에 관한 지식을 고려한 경우는 적었다. PCK 구성 요소 사이의 통합 수준에서는 PCK 구성 요소 중 2가지 측면 또는 3가지 측면의 통합이 다양한 유형으로 많이 나타났으며, 4가지 및 5가지 측면의 통합도 일부 나타났다. 그러나 과학교육과정에 관한 지식 측면 등을 포함한 통합은 비교적 적었으며, 과학 교수 전략에 관한 지식 측면을 포함한 통합은 매우 드물었다. 이를 통하여 예비교사의 지필평가 문항 제작 능력 신장 및 PCK 계발전략으로서 해결자 청취자 활동의 유용성, 제한점, 효과적인 활용방안에 대하여 논하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1998). Blueprints for reform: Science, mathematics, and technology education. New York: Oxford University Press.
  2. Aydin, S., & Boz, Y. (2013). The nature of integration among PCK components: A case study of two experienced chemistry teachers. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 615-624. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RP00095H
  3. Aydin, S., Demirdogen, B., Akin, F. N., & Uzuntiryaki-Kondakci, E. (2015). The nature and development of interaction among components of pedagogical content knowledge in practicum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 46, 37-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.10.008
  4. Beyer, C. J., & Davis, E. A. (2012). Learning to critique and adapt science curriculum materials: Examining the development of preservice elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 96(1), 130-157. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20466
  5. Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2004). Working inside the black box: Assessment for learning in the classroom. Phi Delta Kappan, 86(1), 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170408600105
  6. Cho, H., & Ko, Y. (2008). Re-conceptualization of secondary science teacher's pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) and its application. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(6), 618-632.
  7. Choi, B.-S., Kang, S., Kang, S., Kang, S., Kong, Y.-T., Kwon, H., Kim, J., Nam, J., Noh, S.-G., Park, J., Park, H., Paik, S.-H., Lee, B.-H., Lee, S. K., & Choi, M.-H. (2004). A study on the chemistry teaching materials and instruction [화학 교재 연구 및 지도]. Paju: Freedom Academy Publishing Co.
  8. Falk, A. (2012). Teachers learning from professional development in elementary science: Reciprocal relations between formative assessment and pedagogical content knowledge. Science Education, 96(2), 265-290. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20473
  9. Fernandez-Balboa, J.-M., & Stiehl, J. (1995). The generic nature of pedagogical content knowledge among college professors. Teaching & Teacher Education, 11(3), 293-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(94)00030-A
  10. Fives, H., & Barnes, N. (2017). Informed and uninformed naïve assessment constructors’ strategies for item selection. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(1), 85-101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116668019
  11. Go, M., & Nam, J. (2013). The change in beginning science teachers’ reflective practice in their teaching performance through collaborative mentoring. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 94-113. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.1.094
  12. Goos, M. (1994). Metacognitive decision making and social interactions during paired problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 6(2), 144-165. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217269
  13. Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 11(3), 273-292. https://doi.org/10.1080/13450600500105502
  14. Jeon, K. (1999). Problem solving strategy and paired think aloud problem solving: Instructional effect and small group problem solving process in chemistry class (Doctoral dissertation). Seoul National University, Seoul.
  15. Joung, K., & Kang, H. (2011). A case study on the use of coteaching in science instruction for science-gifted elementary students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(2), 239-255.
  16. Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260903142285
  17. Kwak, Y. (2011). Research on the effectiveness of the mentoring system to support beginning science teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(1), 1-13.
  18. Lee, I., Kim, B.-K., Lee, B., Park, J., Jin, J., Kim, O., Seo, S., Kim, S., Kang, S., Kwon, J., Kim, S.-W., Paik, S.-H., Shin, D.-H., Lee, H., Cho, H.-H., & Cha, H. (2004). An exploratory study of professional standards of Korean secondary school science teacher's assessment of students [과학과 교사의 학생 평가 전문성 신장 모형과 기준] (Research report RRE 2004-5-5). Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.
  19. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge. (pp. 95-132). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  20. Marable, M., & Raimondi, S. (2007). Teachers' perceptions of what was most (and least) supportive during their first year of teaching. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 15(1), 25-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611260601037355
  21. Min, H. J. (2012). Development of assessment expertise model through analyzing realities of science teacher's student assessment and teacher training. (Doctoral dissertation). Korea National University of Education, Cheongju.
  22. Na, Y. J., & Yeo, S.-I. (2015). A case study of elementary teachers’ reflective practices while mentoring a class for the gifted. Teacher Education Research, 54(4), 773-790. https://doi.org/10.15812/ter.54.4.201512.773
  23. Nam, M., Park, S., Song, M., Kim, K., Kim, S., Cho, I., Lim, W., Lee, K., Oh, S., Kang, M., & Kang, J. (2006). A study on teacher's professional competency in students assessment (III) [교사의 학생평가 전문성 신장 연구(III)] (Research report RRE 2006-5). Seoul: Korea Institute of Curriculum & Evaluation.
  24. National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards: Observe, interact, change, learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  25. Noh, T., Kang, S., & Kang, H. (2012). A case study on the use of mentoring as a method of improving novice teachers’ teaching professionalism in secondary science-gifted education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(2), 331-345. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.2.331
  26. Noh, T., Kim, H., Han, J., & Kang, H. (2017). An analysis of the characteristics of the processes of pre-service chemistry teachers in making written test items using think-aloud method. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 37(2), 225-237.
  27. Noh, T., Park, J., & Kang, H. (2016). Interactions among PCK components of pre-service secondary chemistry teachers considered in processes of making written test items. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(5), 769-781. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.5.0769
  28. Noh, T., Yang, C., Kim, Y., & Kang, H. (2012). A case study on the changes of beginning science-gifted education teachers’ teaching professionalism through coteaching. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(4), 655-670. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.4.655
  29. Park, S., & Chen, Y. C. (2012). Mapping out the integration of the components of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): Examples from high school biology classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(7), 922-941. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21022
  30. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualization of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261-284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9049-6
  31. Schwarz, C. V., Gunckel, K. L., Smith, E. L., Covitt, B. A., Bae, M., Enfield, M., & Tsurusaki, B. K. (2008). Helping elementary preservice teachers learn to use curriculum materials for effective science teaching. Science Education, 92(2), 345-377. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20243
  32. Siegel, M. A., & Wissehr, C. (2011). Preparing for the plunge: Preservice teachers’ assessment literacy. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(4), 371-391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9231-6
  33. Stanulis, R. N., Little, S., & Wibbens, E. (2012). Intensive mentoring that contributes to change in beginning elementary teachers’ learning to lead classroom discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(1), 32-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.08.007
  34. Yoon, J. (2014). An examination on the influences and methods of mentoring for improving pedagogical content knowledge of secondary science pre-service teachers. Journal of Leaner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14(11), 309-332.