한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제26권2호
  • /
  • Pages.177-190
  • /
  • 2006
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

학교과학교육에서 실험 활동의 목적: 전문가 커뮤니티를 통한 델파이 연구

Aims of Laboratory Activities in School Science: A Delphi Study of Expert Community

  • 발행 : 2006.04.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

많은 과학교육자들이 과학 실험활동의 목적에 대하여 연구해 왔지만, 연구자에 따라 매우 다양하게 제시되고 있다. 그러나 불행하게도 지금까지도 과학교육 전문가 커뮤니티에 의해 합의된 실험목적이 없다. 이 연구의 목적은 델파이 기법을 사용하여 과학실험활동에서 추구되어야 할 목적을 전문가 커뮤니티로부터 합의된 견해를 얻고자 하는 것이다. 전문가 커뮤니티는 4명의 과학자, 4명의 과학교육전문가, 6명의 초등교사, 7명의 중등교사로 구성되었다. 이들로부터 얻은 실힘목적이 수렴되고 있는지를 확인하기 위해 윌콕슨 부호검정을 시행하였다. 연구결과 각 학교급에 따른 실험목적이 얻어졌다. 초등학교 과학 실험 활동의 목적은 7 항목이며, 중등학교 과학 실험 활동 목적은 9 항목, 대학교의 과학 실험 활동 목적은 13개 항목이다.

Numerous aims of laboratory activities have been suggested by a number of researchers in science education; however the lists of aims very according to researcher. As such, there is still no agreement educational goals on the in science laboratory activities by experts in science education. The purpose of this study was to obtain a consensus using the Delphi technique on the aims of laboratory activities from expert community. This expert community consisted of four scientists, four science educators, six elementary school teachers, and seven secondary school teachers. The list of aims obtained from the expert community were tested with the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test to determine whether IQR between 2nd and 3rd was convergent. Results of this study produced, lists of aims of laboratory activities according to school science level. There were seven aims for elementary school science, nine aims for secondary school science, and thirteen aims for university science.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 교육부 (1992). 고등학교 과학과 교육과정해설-공통과학, 물리, 화학, 생물, 지구과학. 교육부 고시 제 1992-19호, 서울: 대한교과서 주식회사
  2. 교육부 (1997). 초.중등학교 교육과정-국민공통 기본 교육과정. 교육부 고시 제 1997-15호[별책 1], 서울: 대한교과서 주식회사
  3. 권용주, Lawson, A. E. (1999). Why do most science educators encourage to teach school science through lab-based instruction?: a neurological explanation. 한국과학교육학회지, 19(1), 29-40
  4. 권치순, 허명, 양일호, 김영선 (2004). 초.중고 학생들의 과학 태도 변화에 대한 학습환경의 원인 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(6), 1256-1271
  5. 김영신, 양일호 (2005). 초등학교 학생들의 과학 태도 변화에 영향을 미치는 요인 분석. 초등과학교육, 24(3), 292-300
  6. 김주훈, 이미경 (2003). 과학과 교육목표 및 내용체계 연구(I). 한국교육과정 평가원, 연구보고 RRC 2003-4, 28-43
  7. 김효남, 정완호, 정진우, 양일호, 김영신 (1999). 초.중고 학생들의 과학 정의적 특성 추이 분석을 위한 단적 연구. 한국과학교육학회지, 19(2), 194-203
  8. 노태희, 최용남 (1996) 초.중.고 학생들의 과학 수업환경 인식 및 태도와의 관계성 조사. 한국과학교육학회지, 16(2), 217-225
  9. 서창교, 김은진, 이영숙 (2001). 웹에 기반한 델파이 의사결정지원시스템의 구현. 정보시스템연구, 10(1), 5-25
  10. 송진웅, 박승재, 장경애 (1992). 초중고 남녀 학생의 과학수업과 과학자에 대한 태도. 한국과학교육학회지, 12(3),109-118
  11. 심규철, 김현섭, 박영철 (2001). 중.고등학생 및 대학생의 과학 관련 태도에 대한 비교 연구. 한국과학교육학회지, 21(3), 558-565
  12. 양일호, 조현준 (2005). 학교 과학수업에서 실험의 목적에 대한 고찰. 초등과학교육, 24(3) , 268-280
  13. 윤덕근, 김성사, 차희영, 이길재, 정완호 (2004). 과학고 학생들의 창의력과 과학적 사고력 향상을 위한 생물 실험 모듈의 적용효과. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(3), 556-564
  14. 이미경, 김경희 (2004). 과학에 대한 태도와 과학성취도의 관계, 한국과학교육학회지, 24(2), 399-407
  15. 이종성 (2001). 델파이 방법. 서울: 교육과학사
  16. 이지현, 남정희, 문성배 (2003). 실험실습법에 의한 수행평가가 중학생의 과학성취도 및 정의적 영역에 미치는 영향. 한국과학교육학회지, 23(1), 66-74
  17. 임청환 (1995). 국민학생과 중학생들의 과학에 관련된 태도연구. 한국과학교육학회지, 15(2), 194-200
  18. 임청환, 남진수 (1999). 초등학생의 정신용량과 인지양식에 따른 과학탐구능력. 한국과학교육학회지, 19(3), 441-447
  19. 장소영, 노석구 (2005). 초등학생의 과학선호도에 영향을 주는 과학수업에 대한 인식 조사. 초등과학교육, 24(4), 435-442
  20. 조연순, 성진숙, 채제숙, 구성혜 (2000). 창의적 문제해결력 신장을 위한 초등과학교육과정 개발 및 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 20(2), 307-328
  21. 허명 (1993) 초.중.고 학생의 과학 및 과학교과에 대한 태도 조사 연구. 한국과학교육학회지, 13(3), 334-340
  22. 홍미영, 정은영, 맹희주 (2002). 초등학교 과학과 교수.학습 방법과 자료 개발 연구. 한국교육과정평가원, 연구보고 RRC 2002-18, 18-20
  23. 홍형득 (2002). 지식정보화사회와 차기정부의 과제. 한국행정학회 2002 추계학술대회 발표논문집, 351-368
  24. AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1989). Science for all americans: a project 2061 report on literacy coaIs in science, mathematics, and technology (pp. 11-15). Washigton, D. C.: AAAS Publication
  25. AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of science). (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy (pp.281-300). New York: Oxford University Press
  26. Amanda, B., Pam, M., Richard, G., & John, L. (1999). Helping students learn from laboratory work. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(1), 27-31
  27. Babikian, Y. (1971). An empirical investigation to determine the relative effectiveness of discovery, laboratory, and expository methods of teaching science concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 8(3), 201-209
  28. Bartholomew, H., Osborn, J., & Ratcliffe, M. (2004). Teaching students 'ideas-about-science': Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88(5), 655-682
  29. Beaumont-Walters, Y., & Soyibo, K. (2001). An analysis of high school students' performance on five integrated science process skills. Research in Science and Technological Education, 19(2), 133-145
  30. Bekalo, S., & Welford, G. (2000) . Practical activity in Ethiopian secondary physical sciences: Implications for policy and practice of the match between the intended and implemented curriculum. Research Papers in Education, 15(2), 185-212
  31. Boud, D. J. (1973). The laboratory aims questionnairea new method for course improbement? Higher Education, 2. 81-94
  32. Boud, D. J. (1980). The aims of science laboratory course: A survey of studnets, graduates and practising scientists. European Journal of Science Education, 2(4), 415-421
  33. Boud, D., Dunn, J., & Hegarty-Hazel, E. (1986). Teaching in laboratories. Guilford: SRHE & NFER-Nelson
  34. Bredderman, T. (1983 ). Effects of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes: A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 53, 499-518
  35. Bybee, R., & DeBoer, G. (1994). Research on goals for the science curriculum. Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 357-387). New York:MacMillan
  36. Chang, C.-Y., & Weng, Y.-H. (2002). An exploratory study on students' problem-solving ability in earth science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 441-451
  37. Clough, M. P., & Clark, R. (1994). Cookbooks and constructivism- a better approach to laboratory activities. The Science Teacher, 61(2), 34-37
  38. Collins, S., Osborne, J., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2001). What 'ideas-about-science' should be taught in school science? A delphi study of the expert community. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association 2001, Seattle, 1-29
  39. Cyphert, F. R., & Gant, W. L. (1970). The Delphi technique: A tool for collecting opinions in teacher education. In Exploring the potential of the Delphi technique by analyzing its application. Syrnposium conducted by AERA in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
  40. Foster, D., & Lock, R. (1987). Teaching science (pp. 11-13). London: Croom Helm
  41. Gardner, B. J. (1975). Attitudes to science: A review. Studies in Science Education, 2, 1-41
  42. Gardner, P., & Gauld, C. (1990). Labwork and students attitudes. In E. Hegarty-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and the science curriculum (pp. 132-156). London: Routledge
  43. Garnett, P. J., Garnett P. J., & Hackling, M. W. (1995). Refocusing the chemistry lab: A case for laboratory-based investigations. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 41(2), 26-32
  44. Garnett, P. J., & O' Loughlin, M. O. (1989). Using practical tests to assess laboratory work in chemistry. Australian Science Teachers Journal. 35(4), 27-37
  45. Germann, P. J., & Aram, R. (1996). Students performance on the science process skills of recording data, analysing data, drawing conclusions and providing evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 773-798
  46. Germann, P. J., Aram, R., & Burke, G (1996a). Identifying patterns and relationships among the responses of seventh-grade students to the science process skill of designing experiments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 79-99
  47. Germann, P. J., Haskins, S., & Auls, S. (1996b). Analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals:Promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 475-499
  48. Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). The use and impact of explicit instruction about the nature of science and science inquiry in an elementary science methods course. Science & Education, 11, 55-67
  49. Gupta, V. (2001). Aims of laboratory teaching. Centre for Development of Teaching and Learning, 4(1), 1-3
  50. Hart, C, Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655-675
  51. Hegarty-Hazel, E. (Ed.). (1990). The student laboratory and the science curriculum. Routledge: London
  52. Hellingman, C. (1982). A trial list of objectives of experimental work in science education. European Journal of Science Mathematics Education, 4(1), 29-43
  53. Hodson, D. (1988). Experiments in science and science teaching. Educational Philosophy Theory, 20(2), 253-266
  54. Hodson, D. (1996). Practical work in school science: Exploring some directions for change. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 755-760
  55. Hodson, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science in and beyond the school laboratory. In J. J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in School Science (pp. 93-108). NY: Routledge
  56. Hofstein, A. (2004), The laboratory in chemistry education: Thirty years of experience with developments, implementation, and research. Chemistry Education, 5(3), 247-264
  57. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201-217
  58. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54
  59. Johnstone, A. H., & Al-Shuaili, A. (2001). Learning in the laboratory: Some thoughts from the literature. University chemistry education, 5(2), 42-51
  60. Karnpourakis, C., & Tsaparlis, G. (2003). A study of the effect of a practical activity on problem solving in chemistry. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice, 4(3). 319-333
  61. Kenyon, L., & Reiser, B. (2005). Students' epistemologies of science and their influence on inquiry practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, April 4-7, 2005. Dallas, TX
  62. Kerr, J. (1963). A Classic enquiry into the nature and purpose of school science practical work, based on a study of 701 teachers in 151 schools. Practical work in school science, Leicester: Leicester University Press
  63. Lazarowitz, R., & Tamir, R. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In D. Gabel (Ed), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 94-128). New York: MacMillan
  64. Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The School Science Laboratory: Historical perspectives and context for contemporary teaching. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education, part 1 (pp. 249-262). Kluwer Academic Publishers
  65. McComas, W. F. (1997). Research on Curriculum, teaching, and learning- TIle laboratory environment: An ecological perspective. Science Education International, 8(2), 12-16
  66. Molitor, L., & George, K. (1976). Development of a test of science precess skills. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 405-412
  67. Nakayama, G. (1988). A study of the relationship between cognitive styles and integrated science process skills. ERIC No. ED 291 592
  68. Nott, M. (1997). Keeping scientists in their place. School Science Review, 78(285), 49-60
  69. Nott, M., & Smith, R. (1995). 'Talking your way out of it', 'rigging', and 'conjuring': What science teachers do when practieals go wrong. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 399-410
  70. Nott, M., & Wellington, J. J. (1996). When the black box springs open: practical work in schools and the nature of science, International Journal of Science Education, 18, 807-824
  71. Oliver, J. S., & Simpson, R. D. (1988). Influences of attitude toward science, achievement motivation, and science self concept on achievement in science: A longitudinal study. Science Education, 72(2), 143-155
  72. Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What 'ideas-about-science' should be taught in school science? A delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692-720
  73. Padilla, M. J., Okey, J. R., & Dillashaw, F. G. (1981). The relationship between science process skill and formal thinking abilities. A Paper Presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting (54th, Grossinger's in the Catskills, Ellenville, NY, April 5-8). ED 201 488
  74. Reynolds, A J., & Walberg, H. J. (1991). A structural model of science achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 97-107
  75. Robertson, M., Line, M., Jones, S., & Thomas, S. (2000). International students, learning environments and perceptions: A case study using the Delphi technique. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(1), 89- 102
  76. Roth, W. M. (1994). Experimenting in a constructivist high school physics laboratory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 197-223
  77. Rowe, G., & Wright, G. (2001). Expert opinions in forecasting: The role of the Delphi technique. International Series In Operations Research and Management Science, -(30), 125-144
  78. Schibeci, R. A. (1983). Selecting appropriate attitudinal objectives for school science. Science Education, 67(5), 595-603
  79. Staer, H., Goodrum, D., & Hackling, M. (1998). High school laboratory work in western australia: Openness to inquiry. Research in Science Education, 28(2), 219-228
  80. Swain, J. R. L. (1974). Practical objectives- a review. Education in Chemistry, 11(4), 152-156
  81. Tasker, R. (1981). Children's views and classroom experiences. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 27, 33-39
  82. Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90(5), 403-418
  83. Trumper, R. (2003). The physics laboratory-a historical overview and future perspectives. Science & Education, 12(4), 645-670
  84. Watson, R. (2000). The role of practical work. In M. Monk & J. Osborne (Eds.), Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say, (pp. 57-71). Buckingham: Open University Press
  85. Wellington, J. J. (1998). Practical work in school: time for a re-appraisal. In J. J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in School Science (pp. 3-15). NY: Routledge
  86. Wellington, J. J. (2000). Teaching and learning secondary science - contemporary issues and practical approaches (pp. 145-155). London and New York; Routledge
  87. White, R. T. (1996). The link between the laboratory and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7). 761-774
  88. Whitman. N. I. (1990). The committee meeting alternative: Using the Delphi Technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(7-8), 30-36