한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육 (Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education)

  • 제40권2호
  • /
  • Pages.162-174
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1598-3099(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-8436(eISSN)
한국초등과학교육학회 (The Korean Elementary Science Education Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

스마트 테크놀로지 활용 과학 수업 계획 시 발생하는 초등 예비교사의 질문과 수업과정안 분석

Analysis of Pre-Service Elementary Teachers' Questions and Lesson Plans in Planning Science Class Utilizing Smart Technology

  • Na, Jiyeon (Chuncheon National University of Education)
  • 투고 : 2021.02.06
  • 심사 : 2021.03.08
  • 발행 : 2021.05.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 초등 예비교사들이 스마트 테크놀로지 활용 과학 수업을 계획할 때 발생하는 질문의 유형과 작성한 수업과정안의 특징을 살펴보았다. 이를 위해 96명의 예비교사들이 작성한 수업과정안과 질문을 수집하였다. 그 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 예비교사들은 시뮬레이션 앱, 정보제공 앱, clicker 평가 앱, 천문관측 앱을 활용하였으며, 수업의 도입 단계에서는 시뮬레이션 앱과 clicker 평가 앱을, 전개 단계에서는 시뮬레이션 앱을, 정리 단계에서는 clicker 평가 앱을 가장 많이 활용하였다. 둘째, 스마트 테크놀로지를 사용하는 주체는 학생인 경우가 교사에 비해 높게 나타났으며, 수업의 전개 단계에서 그 특징이 더 두드러졌다. 셋째, 수업과정안에서 활용한 스마트 테크놀로지의 콘텐츠 유형은 체험형이 가장 높게 나타났으며, 도구형, 자원형 순으로 나타났다. 이에 비해 상호작용지원형이나 학습기회확장형은 상대적으로 적게 나타났다. 넷째, 예비 교사들이 작성한 과정안에는 학생들이 직접 실험이나 체험하는 기회를 제공하는 대신 체험형 스마트 테크놀로지를 활용하여 가상 체험으로 대체하는 경우가 다수 나타났다. 다섯째, 예비 초등 교사들은 스마트 테크놀로지를 활용한 과학 수업을 계획하면서 다양한 질문을 제기하였으며, 총 7개 범주 25개의 질문 유형이 나타났다.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the types of questions raised by pre-service elementary teachers when planning a science class utilizing smart technology and the characteristics of their lesson plans. For this purpose, lesson plans and questions written by the 96 pre-service teachers were collected. The results of this study can be summarized as follows: (1) Pre-service teachers used simulation apps, information offering apps, clicker evaluation apps, astronomical observation apps. Simulation apps and clicker evaluation apps were used the most in the introduction stage of the class, simulation apps in the development stage, and clicker evaluation apps in the finishing stage. (2) In the lesson plans, the activities that elementary school students use smart technology showed more than those used by teachers, and its characteristics were more prominent in the development stage of the class. (3) As for the content type of smart technology, experience type was the highest, followed by tool type and resource type. In comparison, there were relatively few interaction support types and learning opportunity extensions. (4) There were many cases in which pre-service teachers replaced elementary school students with virtual experiences using experience type instead of providing opportunities to experiment or experience directly. (5) Pre-service teachers asked various questions while planning science class utilizing smart technology, and a total of 25 question types appeared in 7 categories.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2017년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2017S1A5A8022612).

참고문헌

  1. Ball, A. L., Knobloch, N. A., & Hoop, S. (2007). The instructional planning experiences of beginning teachers. Journal of Agricultural Education, 48(2), 56-65. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2007.02056
  2. Choi, J. (2017). A study on pre-service teachers' demands by analyzing their questions in the 'Introduction to Physics Education' course. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 67(12), 1460-1472. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.67.1460
  3. Chou, P. N. (2018). Smart technology for sustainable curriculum: Using drone to support young students' learning. Sustainability, 10(10), 3819. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103819
  4. Han, J. Y., Ji, Y.-J., & Lee, J.-Y. (2012). Analysis of students' and teachers' questions posted on chemistry Q&A board in a chemistry education homepage. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 56(1), 137-143. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2012.56.1.137
  5. Hong, M. H. (2017). A study on lesson plans construction using narrative in social studies instruction. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 17(7), 597-619.
  6. Jamali Nasari, A., & Heidari, M. (2014). The important role of lesson plan on educational achievement of Iranian EFL teachers' attitudes. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2(5), 27-34.
  7. Jang, M.-D. (2006). Analysis of pre-service teachers' lesson planing strategies in elementary school science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 25(2), 191-205.
  8. Janssen, N., Knoef, M., & Lazonder, A. W. (2019). Technological and pedagogical support for pre-service teachers' lesson planning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(1), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2019.1569554
  9. Janssen, N., & Lazonder, A. W. (2016). Supporting preservice teachers in designing technology-infused lesson plans. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(5), 456-467. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12146
  10. Jung, J., & Lee, B. (2016). Analysis on the mismatch between instructional design and teaching practice of pre-service science teachers in teaching practicum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(3), 435-443. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.3.0435
  11. Kagan, D. M., & Tippins, D. J. (1992). The evolution of functional lesson plans among twelve elementary and secondary student teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 92(4), 477-489. https://doi.org/10.1086/461703
  12. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK. In AACTE committee on innovation and technology (Ed.), Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators (pp. 3-29). Routledge.
  13. Kim, S.-H. (2011). Exploring theoretical aspects of effective lesson planning. The Journal of Elementary Education, 24(3), 97-115.
  14. Kim, J.-Y., & Choi, W.-H. (2018). Analysis of pre-service science teachers' questions about teaching and learning plans based on the teaching and learning model. The Journal of Education, 38(2), 21-40.
  15. Kim, S.-G., Yeo, S.-I. & Woo, K. W. (1999). A study on students' questioning activity in science classes(II): Analysis of the patterns of students' questions. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 19(4), 560-569.
  16. Kim, S.-W., Yi, S., & Lee, Y. (2020). Changes of preservice teachers' teaching expertise through lesson plan analysis. Journal of The Korea Society of Computer and Information, 25(1), 207-219. https://doi.org/10.9708/JKSCI.2020.25.01.207
  17. Lee, M. (2014). An analysis of types, frequencies, and sources of cognitive backgrounds of the preservice teachers' questions related to earth science knowledge presented in elementary science textbooks. Journal of The Korean Earth Science Society, 35(4), 277-289. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2014.35.4.277
  18. Lim, B., Leem, J., & Sung, E. (2013). What is the concept of smart education and the typology of smart education contents? Journal of Educational Techonology, 29(3), 459-489. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.29.3.459
  19. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
  20. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological peda- gogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers' knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  21. Ministry of Education (2020a). After Covid 19, 10 policy tasks for transitioning future education (Proposed). Retrieved January 20, 2021, from https://if-blog.tistory.com/11190
  22. Ministry of Education (2020b). Comprehensive plan for science, mathematics, information, and convergence education ('20-'24). Retrieved January 20, 2021, from https://blog.naver.com/moeblog/221979230254
  23. Na, J., & Jang, B. (2016). The characteristics of lesson planning of pre-service elementary teachers to develop scientific communication skills for elementary school students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 37(1), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2018.37.1.054
  24. Na, J., & Song, J. (2014). An analysis of trends in science education research on instructional technology and its implications for science teachers' technological peda- gogical content knowledge (TPCK). Teacher Education Research, 53(3), 511-524. https://doi.org/10.15812/TER.53.3.201409.511
  25. Nam, I., & Im, S. (2020). Analysis of the questions pro- duced by pre-service elementary teachers regarding instruction of physics in elementary science. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 70(3), 245-253. https://doi.org/10.3938/npsm.70.245
  26. Owston, R. (2007). Contextual factors that sustain innovative pedagogical practice using technology: An international study. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-006-9006-6
  27. Partnership for 21st Century Skills (2010). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved January 10, 2017, from http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework
  28. Sahin-Taskin, C. (2017). Exploring pre-service teachers' perceptions of lesson planning in primary education. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(12), 57-63.
  29. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Smart technology for self-organizing processes. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0001-8
  30. Schmid, M., Brianza, E., & Petko, D. (2021). Self-reported technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) of pre-service teachers in relation to digital technology use in lesson plans. Computers in Human Behavior, 115, 106586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106586
  31. Schwab, K. (2016). The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Business.
  32. Shim, J.P., Dekleva, S., Guo, C., & Mittleman, D. (2011). Twitter, Google, iPhone/iPad, and Facebook (TGIF) and smart technology environments: How well do educators communicate with students via TGIF? Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 29(35), 657-672.
  33. Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2009). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. (U. Um, M. Choi, & E. Park, Trans.). Academy Press. (Original work published 2007)
  34. Tondeur, J., Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, F., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009
  35. Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2012). 21st Century skills: Learning for life in our times. (KEDI, Ttrans.). Hakjisa. (Original work published 2009)
  36. USB (2016). Extreme automation and connectivity: The global, regional, and investment implications of the fourth industrial revolution. USB White Paper for the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2016. Retrieved January 20, 2017, from https://www.ubs.com
  37. Volman, M. (2005). A variety of roles for a new type of teacher: Educational technology and the teaching profession. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2004.11.003
  38. Zhou, G., Xu, J., & Martinovic, D. (2016). Developing pre-service teachers' capacity in teaching science with technology through microteaching lesson study approach. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(1), 85-103.