한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제40권2호
  • /
  • Pages.191-201
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

고등학생의 증강현실을 활용한 협력적 과학 개념학습에서 나타나는 언어적·물리적 상호작용

High School Students' Verbal and Physical Interactions Appeared in Collaborative Science Concept Learning Using Augmented Reality

  • 투고 : 2020.02.18
  • 심사 : 2020.03.30
  • 발행 : 2020.04.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구에서는 증강현실을 활용한 협력적 과학 개념학습에서 나타나는 학생들의 언어적 상호작용과 물리적 상호작용을 심층적으로 조사하였다. 3개의 소집단으로 구성된 고등학교 1학년 학생 12명이 연구에 참여하였다. 이들은 화학 결합 개념 이해를 목표로 개발된 스마트 기기 기반의 증강현실 어플리케이션을 활용한 수업에 참여하였다. 학생들의 수업 과정은 녹음 및 녹화하였으며, 반구조화된 면담을 실시하였다. 연구 결과, 언어적 상호작용 중 개별 진술 단위에서는 정보 질문과 정보 설명 및 방향 질문과 방향 설명에 관한 진술의 비율이 높았고, 상호작용 단위에서는 교정형 및 누적형 상호작용의 비율이 높았다. 학습 진행에 관한 개별 진술 및 상호작용의 비율도 높게 나타났다. 학생들의 물리적 상호작용은 유의미한 언어적 상호작용 없이 단독으로 이루어진 경우가 가장 많았다. 학생들이 지식 구성 언어적 상호작용을 하며 물리적 상호작용을 할 때는 가상 객체를 응시하거나 활동지 관련 활동을 하는 비율이 높았던 반면, 물리적 상호 작용만 수행하거나 운영 관련 언어적 상호작용을 하며 물리적 상호 작용을 할 때는 증강현실의 마커의 조작과 관련한 다양한 탐색적 활동이 주로 나타났다. 연구 결과를 바탕으로 과학 교과에서 증강현실을 활용한 협력적 개념학습이 효과적으로 이루어지기 위한 방안을 제안하였다.

This study investigated verbal and physical interactions which appeared in collaborative science concept learning using augmented reality. Twelve 10th grade students participated in this study. After being organized into three four-member small groups, they participated in classes using smart device-based augmented reality application developed for the understanding of the chemical bonding concept. Their class activities were audio- and video-taped. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted. The results revealed that within individual statement units of verbal interaction, the proportions of information question/explanation and direction question/explanation were found to be high. Within interaction units, the proportions of reformative and cumulative interaction were relatively high. The proportions of progress were also found to be high within both individual statement units and interaction units of verbal interaction. Students' physical interactions were mainly conducted without meaningful verbal interactions. When their physical interactions were accompanied by knowledge construction-related verbal interactions, the proportions of gazing virtual objects and worksheet-related interactions were high. In contrast, various exploratory activities related to the manipulation of markers mainly appeared when they conducted physical interactions only, or when their physical interactions were accompanied by management-related verbal interactions. On the bases of the results, effective methods for collaborative concept learning using augmented reality in science education are discussed.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Abram, P., Scarloss, B., Holthuis, N., Cohen, E., Lotan, R., & Schultz, S. E. (2002). The use of evaluation criteria to improve academic discussion in cooperative groups. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22(1), 16-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/0218879020220103
  2. Akcayir, M., & Akcayir, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Research Review, 20, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002
  3. Arici, F., Yildirim, P., Caliklar, Ş., & Yilmaz, R. M. (2019). Research trends in the use of augmented reality in science education: Content and bibliometric mapping analysis. Computers & Education, 142, 103647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103647
  4. Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
  5. Bunterm, T., Lee, K., Ng Lan Kong, J., Srikoon, S., Vangpoomyai, P., Rattanavongsa, J., & Rachahoon, G. (2014). Do different levels of inquiry lead to different learning outcomes? A comparison between guided and structured inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 36(12), 1937-1959. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.886347
  6. Chiang, T. H. C., Yang, S. J. H., & Hwang, G.-J. (2014). Students' online interactive patterns in augmented reality-based inquiry activities. Computers & Education, 78, 97-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.006
  7. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10001
  8. Diegmann, P., Schmidt-Kraepelin, M., Eynden, S., & Basten, D. (2015). Benefits of augmented reality in educational environments: A systematic literature review. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference(pp. 1542-1566) Wirtschaftsinformatik, Osnabruck, Germany.
  9. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
  10. Gillies, R. M. (2004). The effects of cooperative learning on junior high school students during small group learning. Learning and Instruction, 14(2), 197-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(03)00068-9
  11. Jang, S.-H., & Kye, B.-K. (2007). Educational application of augmented reality contents [증강현실(Augmented Reality) 콘텐츠의 교육적 적용]. The Korea Contents Association Review, 5(2), 79-85. https://doi.org/10.20924/CCTHBL.2007.5.2.079
  12. Joo, Y., Kim, K., & Noh, T. (2014). A comparison of verbal interaction patterns in science cooperative learning based on grouping by middle school students' collectivism. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(3), 221-233. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.3.0221
  13. Jung, Y., Sung, Y., Lim, S., Ryu, J., Seo, H., & Ahn, H. (2017). A study on the implementation of future digital textbooks [미래형 디지털 교과서 구현 방안 연구]. Seoul: Korea Education & Research Information Service. Report No. CR 2017-4.
  14. Kang, S., Kim, C., & Noh, T. (2000). Analysis of verbal interaction in small group discussion. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 20(3), 353-200.
  15. Kim, K.-H. (2009). The effects of learning activities on the application of augmented reality contents in elementary science instruction. The Journal of Korean Association of Computer Education, 12(5), 75-85. https://doi.org/10.32431/KACE.2009.12.5.007
  16. Korea Education & Research Information Service [KERIS] (2007). Educational understanding of augmented reality. Seoul: Korea Education & Research Information Service. 2007 KERIS Issue Report. Report No. RM 2007-30.
  17. Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science & Creativity [KOFAC] (2015). Science level up. Retrieved Jan 16, 2020, from https://sciencelevelup.kofac.re.kr/
  18. Kye, B., & Kim, Y. (2008). Investigation on the relationships among media characteristics, presence, flow, and learning effects in augmented reality based learning. Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 193-224. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.24.4.193
  19. Lee, H. J. (2011). Conceptual change by peer instruction of 6th grade students in science fields. Master's Thesis, Korea National University of Education, Cheongju.
  20. Lee, J., Noh, T., & Lee, S. (2017). The characteristics of instrumental genesis appearing in the processes of high school students' school scientific inquiries. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(6), 971-980. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2017.37.6.971
  21. Li, N., Gu, Y. X., Chang, L., & Duh, H. B.-L. (2011). Influences of AR-supported simulation on learning effectiveness in face-to-face collaborative learning for physics. Paper presented at the 2011 IEEE 11th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies(pp. 320-322). Georgia, USA.
  22. Liu, P.-H. E., & Tsai, M.-K. (2013). Using augmented-reality-based mobile learning material in EFL English composition: An exploratory case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), E1-E4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01302.x
  23. Matcha, W., & Rambli, D. R. A. (2013). Exploratory study on collaborative interaction through the use of augmented reality in science learning. Procedia Computer Science, 25, 144-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.11.018
  24. Matthews, M. R. (2002). Constructivism and science education: A further appraisal. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11(2), 121-134. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014661312550
  25. Munoz-Cristobal, J. A., Jorrin-Abellan, I. M., Asensio-Perez, J. I., Martinez-Mones, A., Prieto, L. P., & Dimitriadis, Y. (2014). Supporting teacher orchestration in ubiquitous learning environments: A study in primary education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 8(1), 83-97. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2014.2370634
  26. Nielsen, B. L., Brandt, H., & Swensen, H. (2016). Augmented reality in science education: Affordances for student learning. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 12(2), 157-174. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.2399
  27. Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Doubleday.
  28. Pedersen, S., & Irby, T. (2014). The VELscience project: Middle schoolers' engagement in student-directed inquiry within a virtual environment for learning. Computers & Education, 71, 33-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.006
  29. Price, S., & Rogers, Y. (2004). Let's get physical: The learning benefits of interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Computers & Education, 43(1-2), 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.009
  30. Ryu, J., Jo, I., Heo, H., Kim, J., & Kye, B. (2006). The next generation of learning model for augmented reality enhanced in tangible interface. Seoul: Korea Education & Research Information Service. Report No. CR 2006-18.
  31. Schmid, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2017). How an inquiry-based classroom lesson intervenes in science efficacy, career-orientation and self-determination. International Journal of Science Education, 39(17), 2342-2360. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1380332
  32. Seo, H. (2008). Relationships among presence, learning flow, attitude toward usability, and learning achievement in an augmented reality interactive learning environment. Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 14(3), 137-165.
  33. Shelton, B. E. (2003). How augmented reality helps students learn dynamic spatial relationships. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
  34. Verillon, P., & Rabardel, P. (1995). Cognition and artifacts: A contribution to the study of though in relation to instrumented activity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10(1), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172796
  35. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  36. Wu, H.-K., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024
  37. Yuen, S. C. Y., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 4(1), 119-140.
  38. Yun, J., Kang, S., Ahn, I., & Noh, T. (2017). Analyses of verbal interaction among students in small group science learning using smart devices. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 61(3), 104-111. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2017.61.3.104