한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제22권4호
  • /
  • Pages.768-778
  • /
  • 2002
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지

중고등학생들의 과학 그래프 작성 및 해석 능력

The Comparison of Graphing Abilities of pupils in grades 7 to 12 based on TOGS(The Test of Graphing in Science)

  • 발행 : 2002.12.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

그래프의 상징적인 의미를 학생들이 해석할 수 있다고 교사들이 종종 가정하는 반면, 이러한 가정은 견고한 연구에 기초를 두고 있지 않다. 따라서 그래프를 구성하거나 해석하는 능력을 학생들이 지니고 있는지 알아보는 연구가 필요하다. 또한 불행하게도 많은 학생들이 이러한 그래프 기능을 제대로 갖추지 못하고 있다는 연구결과들을 결부시켜 생각해 볼 때, 이 영역이 연구할 가치와 내용이 많음을 알 수 있다. 따라서 우리나라 7학년에서 12학년에 이르는 학생들의 그래프 능력은 어떠한지 알고자 TOGS(The Test of Graphing in Science) 검사를 실시하였다. 학년이 올라감에 따라 그래프 능력도 점차적으로 향상되는 결과를 보였다. 그러나 그래프 능력의 하위요소로 선정된 9가지 요소 중에서 그래프를 작성하는 능력과 관련된 세 가지 하위 요소, 즉 축에 눈금을 매기는 기능, 축에 관련된 변수를 지정하는 기능 및 경향을 알도록 실험데이터로부터 적절한 하나의 선을 그리는 기능에서 부족함을 보였다. 이러한 결과는 그래프와 관련된 교육에서 그래프를 작성하는 것보다 해석하는 쪽에 상대적으로 더 치중하였음을 시사해준다. TOGS 검사에서 좋은 점수를 받은 학생들일수록 이러한 차이점이 더 두드러지게 나타났다.

Science teachers often suppose that students are able to know the symbolical meaning of graphs when they see the graphs. But such a assumption is not based on the firm theories but a mere image. And we need to search them for holding the abilities to construct and to interpret. In addition, unfortunately, many researchers show that they scarcely have the graphing skills. And then, The Test of Graphing in Science(TOGS) was administered to 535 7th to 12th graders, for we search them for holding the graphing abilities to some degree. Though the higher grade, the better score, they lack the first three among 9 objectives of TOGS which are scaling axes, assigning variables to the axes, using a best fit line, plotting points, translating a graph that displays the data, selecting the corresponding value for y(or x), interrelating/extrapolating graphs, describing the relationship between variables, interrelating the results of the two graphs. It was concluded from this that subjects' graph construction is lower than their graph interpretation in graph skills. It suggests that school science have a bias toward graph interpretation. This tendency represents more strikingly in the case of upper students in TOGS than the others'.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 권재술, 김범기, 우종옥, 정완호, 정진우, 최병순(1998). 과학교육론. 교육과학사
  2. 김언주(1990). 인지 심리학. 정음사
  3. 김태선(1998). 고등학생들의 과학관련 그래프 해석능력. 한국교원대학교 석사학위논문
  4. 문충식, 김범기(1998). 선 그래프 해석과 이해의 지각 . 인지과정에 관한 모형. 물리교육, 16(3), 249-259
  5. Adams, D. D.(1988). The effects of microcomputer-based laboratory exercise on the acquisition of line graph construction and interpretation skills by high school biology students. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 61st, Lake of the Ozarks, MO.
  6. Bohrens, J.(1988). Misconceptions of ninth grades surrounding graph construction skills of science data. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake of the Ozaks, MO.
  7. Brasell, H. M.(1987). The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic representations of distance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 24, 385-395 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660240409
  8. Brasell, H. M.(1990). Graphs, graphing. and graphers. What Research Says to the Science Teacher, 6, 69-85
  9. Brasell, H. M., & Rowe. M. B.(1993). Graphing skills among high school physics students. School Science and Mathematics, 93(2), 63-70 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1993.tb12196.x
  10. Berg, C. A., & Phillips, D. G.(1994). An investigation of the relationship and thinking structures and the ability to construction and interpret line graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(4), 323-344 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310404
  11. Berg, C. A., & Smith, P.(1994). Assessing students' abilities to construct and interpret line graphs: Disparities between multiple-choice and free-response instruments. Science Education, 78(6), 527-554 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730780602
  12. Dibble, E., & Shaklee, H.(1992). Graph interpretation: A translation problem? Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
  13. Fisher, M. A.(1992). Categorization, or schema selection in graph comprehension. A Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco. CA.
  14. Linn, M. C., Layman, J. W., & Nachmias, R.(1987). Cognitive consequences of microcomputer-based laboratories: Graphing skills development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 244-253 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(87)80029-2
  15. McKenzie D., & Padilla, M.(1986). The construction and validation of the test of Graphing in Science(TOGS). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 369-383
  16. Padilla, M. J., McKenzie, D. L., & Shaw, E. L.(1986). An examination of the line graphing ability of students in grades seven through twelve. School Science and Mathematics, 86(1), 20-26 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1986.tb11581.x
  17. Pinker, S.(1990). A theory of graph Comprehension. In R. Freedle(Ed.). Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Testing. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, 73-126
  18. Roth, W-M, & McGinn, M. K.(1997). Graphing: Cognitive ability or practice? Science Education, 81, 91-106 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199701)81:1<91::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-X
  19. Roth, W-M. Bowen, G. M., & McGinn, M. K.(1999). Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 977-1019 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199911)36:9<977::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-V
  20. Shah, P.(1995). Cognitive processes in graph comprehension. Doctoral dissertation, Carnegie-mellon university(UMI Dissertation services NO. 9622441)
  21. Wavering, M. J.(1989). Logical reasoning necessary to make line graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(5), 373-379 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660260502