Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지

Relationships Between Student Cognitive . Affective Characteristics and Conceptual Understanding from Individual CAl for Science Learning

과학 학습을 위한 개별적인 CAI에서 학생들의 인지적.정의적 특성과 개념 이해도의 관계

  • Published : 2005.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, relationships between student the cognitive affective characteristics and conceptual understanding from individual computer-assisted instruction were investigated. Tests regarding field dependence-independence, learning strategy, self-regulated ability, visual learning preference, goal orientation, self-efficacy on ability, and computer attitude were administered. After having been taught by means of a CAl program, a conception test on molecular motion was administered. It was found that student conceptual understanding was significantly related to field independence, learning strategy, self-regulated ability among the cognitive characteristics and visual learning preference, goal orientation, self-efficacy on ability among the affective characteristics. Multiple regression analysis of the cognitive characteristics on conceptual understanding found that field dependence-independence was the most significant predictor. Self-regulated ability and a deep learning strategy were also found to have predictive power. Lastly, analysis of the affective characteristics, visual learning preference and self-efficacy on ability exposed them to be significant predictors of student conceptual understanding.

이 연구는 학생들의 인지적 정의적 특성과 컴퓨터 보조 수업을 한 후의 개념 이해도와 관계를 조사하였다. 장의존-장독립성, 학습 전략, 자기 조절 능력, 시각적 학습 선호도, 성취 목적, 능력에 대한 자아 효능감, 개념 검사를 실시하였다. 학생들에게 컴퓨터 보조 수업을 실시한 후에 '분자의 운동'에 관한 개념 검사를 하였다. 학생들의 개념 이해도는 인지적 특성들 중에서 장의존-장독립성, 학습 전략, 자기 조절 능력, 정의적 특성 중에서는 시각적 학습 선호도, 성취 목적, 능력에 대한 자아 효능감과 CAl에 대한 태도와 유의미한 상관이 있었다. 개념 이해에 관한 인지적 특성들의 중다 회귀 분석 결과, 장의존-장독립성은 가장 유의미한 예언 변인이었다. 자기 조절 능력과 심층적 학습 전략도 유의미한 예언 변인 이었다. 정의적 특성들에 관한 분석 결과에서는 시각적 학습 선호도, 능력에 대한 자아 효능감이 학생들의 개념 이해에 유의미한 예언 변인이었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Askar, P., Yavuz, H., & Koksal, M. (1992). Students' perceptions of computer assisted instruction environment and their attitudes towards computer assisted learning. Educational Research, 34(2), 133-139 https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188920340204
  2. Anderman, E. M, & Young, A. J. (1994). Motivation and strategy use in science: Individual differences and effects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(8), 811-831 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310805
  3. Bayraktar, S. (2002). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in science education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(2), 173-188
  4. Entwistle, N. J., & Tait, H. (1994). The Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction
  5. Jelfs, A., & Colboum, C. (2002). Do students' approaches to learning affect their perceptions of using computing and information technology? Journal of Educational Media, 27(112), 41-54 https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498032000045449
  6. Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning, and Instruction. NT: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  7. Joo, Y., Bong, M., & Choi, H. (2000). Self-efficacy for self-regulated learning, academic self-efficacy, and internet self-efficacy in web-based instruction. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 48(2), 5-17 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02313398
  8. Kirby, J. R., Moore, P. J., & Schofield, N. J. (1988). Verbal and visual learning style. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13(2), 169-184 https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(88)90017-3
  9. Kitsantas, A., Reiser, R., & Doster, J. (2004). Developing self -regulated learners: Goal setting, selfevaluation, and organizational signals during acquisition of procedural skills. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(4), 269-287 https://doi.org/10.3200/JEXE.72.4.269-287
  10. Lin, C., & Dwyer, F. (2004). Effect of varied animated enhancement strategies in facilitating achievement of different educational objectives. International Journal of Instructional Media, 31(2), 185-198
  11. Linn, M. C., & Kyllonen, P. (1981). The field dependence-independerce construct: Some, one or none. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73(2), 261-273 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.73.2.261
  12. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for acadermic success. School Psychology Review, 31 (3), 313-327
  13. Mayer, R. E., & Massa, L. J. (2003). Three facets of visual and verbal learners: cognitive ability, cognitive style, and learning preference. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4). 833-846 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.95.4.833
  14. Noh, T., & Scharmann, L. C. (1997). Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students' conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 199-217 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199702)34:2<199::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-O
  15. Pajares, F. (2002). Gender and perceived self-efficacy in self-regulated learning. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 116-125 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_8
  16. Papanastasiou, E., Zembylas, M, & Vrasidas, C. (2003). Can computer use hurt science achievement? The USA result from PISA. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 325-332 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025093225753
  17. Parkinson, A., & Redmond, J. A. (2002). Do cognitive styles affect learning performance in different computer media? ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Proceedings of the 7th annual conference on innovation and technology in computer science education, 34(3), 39-43
  18. Pillay, H. (1998). An investigation of the effect of individual cognitive preferences on learning through computer-based instruction. Educational Psychology, 18(2), 171-182 https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341980180203
  19. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.33
  20. Regina, S., Persichitte, K, & Jones, L. (2001). Relation of student characteristics to learning of basic biochemistry concept from a multimedia goal-based scenario. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New orleans, LA
  21. Riding, R. J., Grimley, M, Dahraei, H, & Banner, G. (2003). Cognitive style, working memory and learning behaviour and attainment in school subjects. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 149-169 https://doi.org/10.1348/00070990360626912
  22. Schmeck, R. R. (1988). Individual differences that affect the way students approach learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 1, 85-124 https://doi.org/10.1016/1041-6080(89)90011-3
  23. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2