Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

The Korean Earth Science Society (한국지구과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Descriptive Characteristics of the Label Texts Related to Earth Science: Toward Educationally Meaningful Communication

교육적으로 유의미한 의사소통을 위한 지구과학 관련 전시 라벨의 서술 특징

  • Kim, Chan-Jong (Department of Earth Science Education, Seoul National University) ;
  • Park, Eun-Ji (Department of Earth Science Education, Seoul National University) ;
  • Yoon, Sae-Yeol (Department of Teaching and Learning, The University of Iowa) ;
  • Lee, Sun-Kyung (Department of Earth Science Education, Seoul National University)
  • 김찬종 (서울대학교 지구과학교육과) ;
  • 박은지 (서울대학교 지구과학교육과) ;
  • 윤세열 (아이오와 대학교) ;
  • 이선경 (서울대학교 지구과학교육과)
  • Received : 2012.02.01
  • Accepted : 2012.02.21
  • Published : 2012.02.29
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyse the descriptive characteristics of the label texts related to Earth Science at a science museum and a natural history museum in Korea. The data were collected from Korean National Science Museum and Seodaemun Natural History Museum. The analysis framework was modified according to the Systemic Functional Linguistics. As a result, characteristics of the labels are 1) mostly declarative sentences, 2) appropriate amount of scientific information, and 3) mainly 'facts'. Moreover, all of the text genre are 4) 'logical expositions'. Particularly in Korean National Science Museum, the labels present 5) more scientific words among the entire terminologies and 6) more than half subjects omitted or long nominalized. Those results may imply that the labels can lead one-way communication regarding the culture of science rather than two-way. This study presents the descriptive characteristics of the label texts to make educationally meaningful communication possible by building an open structure between visitors' own culture in everyday life and the culture of science.

본 연구는 국내 주요 과학관 및 자연사 박물관의 지구과학 관련 전시 라벨 텍스트의 서술 특징을 분석하고자 하였다. 이를 위해, 국립 중앙 과학관과 서대문 자연사 박물관에서 자료를 수집하였고, 체계기능언어학을 일부 적용한 분석틀을 사용하였다. 연구 결과, 라벨들은 1) 대부분 평서형 문장, 2) 적절한 과학적 정보의 양, 3) '사실' 위주의 정보 제시, 4) 모두 논리적 설명 장르로 구성되어 있었다. 특히, 국립 중앙 과학관의 라벨들은 5) 전체 어휘 중 과학 용어의 비율이 높고 6) 주어의 절반 이상이 생략되거나 긴 명사화 형태였다. 결론적으로, 분석 대상 라벨들은 전시물과 관람객들 사이에서 과학 문화에 관한 양 방향적 의사소통을 이끌기보다 일 방향적인 의사소통을 일으킬 가능성이 높은 것으로 해석할 수 있었다. 이를 토대로, 과학 문화와 관람객의 일상 문화 사이의 열린 구조를 만들어 보다 교육적으로 유의미한 의사소통을 가능하게 하는 라벨 텍스트의 서술 특징들을 제안하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김기상, 허준영, 이선경, 김찬종, 2007, 비형식 교육환경에서 일어나는 부도와 아동의 대화 특성: ZPD 체계를 중심으로. 한국과학교육학회지, 27, 832-847.
  2. 김기상, 이선경, 김찬종, 2009, 자연사박물관에서 일어나는 또래 아동간의 상호작용적 학습 양상. 한국지구과학회지, 30, 127-140. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2009.30.1.127
  3. 김찬종, 신명경, 이선경, 2010, 비형식 과학학습의 이해. 북스힐, 서울, 209 p.
  4. 신명환, 맹승호, 김찬종, 2010, 초.중등 과학 교과서 화산과 지진 관련 단원 글의 언어 구조 비교 분석. 한국지 구과학회지, 31, 36-50. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2010.31.1.036
  5. 이선경, 신명경, 김찬종, 2005, 자연사박물관의 전시에 반영된 과학의 본성. 한국지구과학회지, 26, 376-386.
  6. 이정아, 맹승호, 김혜리, 김찬종, 2007, 교육과정 변천에 따른 초등 과학 교과서 텍스트에 대한 체계기능언어학적 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 27, 242-252.
  7. 이화자, 1989, M.A.K. Halliday's language theory and its implications on literacy instruction. 응용언어학, 2, 25-47.
  8. 정재훈, 1999, 체계.기능 언어 이론의 이해. 언어정보, 2, 219-257.
  9. Aikenhead, G.S., 1996, Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269608560077
  10. Aikenhad, G.S. and Jegede, O.J., 1999, Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Research in Science Teaching, 36, 269-287. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199903)36:3<269::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-T
  11. Allen, S., 2002, Looking for learning in visitor talk: a methodological exploration, In Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K., and Knutson, K. (eds.), Learning conversations in museums. Lawrence Erlbaum Association, NJ, USA, 259-304.
  12. Ash, D., 2003, Dialogic inquiry in life science conversations of family groups in a museum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 138-162. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10069
  13. Belcher, M., 1991, Exhibitions in museums. Leicester University Press, Leicester, UK. 신자은, 박윤옥 공역, 2006, 박물관 전시의 기획과 디자인. 도서출판 예경, 서울, 343 p.
  14. Bitgood, S., Nichols, G., Pierce, M., Conroy, P., and Patterson, D., 1986, Effects of label characteristics on visitor behavior. Psychology Institute, Jacksonville State University, Technical Report No.86-55. 24 p.
  15. Bitgood, S., 1989, Deadly sins revisited: A review of the exhibit label literature. Visitor Behavior, 4, 4-11.
  16. Bloor, T. and Bloor, M., 2004, The functional analysis of English: A Hallidayan approach (2nd ed.). Arnold, London, UK, 315 p.
  17. Borun, M. and Miller, M.A., 1980, What's in a name? A study of the effectiveness of explanatory labels in a science museum. Franklin Institute of Science, Philadelphia, USA, 70 p.
  18. Choi, K., 2004, Developing active role of science museum in educating on ethical issues on science and technology: Four case studies. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 24, 109- 120.
  19. Desjardins, J., Jacobi, D., and Poli, M.S., 1992, The Text in Scientific Exhibitions: Linguistic Constraints in the Production of Labels. Visitor Studies, 4, 256-265.
  20. Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V., and Matiatos, S., 2006, Textual analysis of a science center: Expressive modes and positioning implications. In Chung, K.M. et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the ninth international conference on public communication of science and technology, The International Network on Public Communication of Science and Technology, Seoul, Korea, 542-548.
  21. Eggins, S., 2004, An introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics (2nd ed.). Continuum, London, UK, 384 p.
  22. Falk, J. and Dierking, L., 2002, Lessons without limit: how free-choice learning is transforming education. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, USA, 189 p.
  23. Fang, Z., 2005, Scientific literacy: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. Science Education, 89, 335-347. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20050
  24. Fang, Z. and Schleppegrell, M.J., 2008, Reading in secondary content areas: A language-based pedagogy. The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, USA, 135 p.
  25. Halliday, M.A.K., 1978, Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language meaning. Edward Arnold, London, UK, 256 p.
  26. Halliday, M.A.K., 1993, Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5, 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(93)90026-7
  27. Halliday, M.A.K. and Martin, J.R., 1993, Writing Science: Literacy and discursive power. The Falmer Press, London, UK, 283 p.
  28. Hasan, R. and Martin, J.R., 1989, Language development: Learning language, learning culture. Ablex Publishing Corporation, NJ, USA, 397 p.
  29. Hodges, S., 1978, An ecological approach to the study of zoo visitor behavior: Implications for environmental management and design. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA, 107 p.
  30. Hohenstein, J. and Tran, L.U., 2007, Use of questions in exhibit labels to generate explanatory conversation among science museum visitors. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1557-1580. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701494068
  31. Joshua, P.G., 2006, Labels for open-ended exhibits: using questions and suggestions to motivate physical activity. Visitor Studies, 9, 1-9.
  32. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P.C., Marx, R.W., Bass, K.M., and Fredricks, J., 1998, Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.1998.9672057
  33. Kurth, L.A., Kidd, R., Gardner, P., and Smith, E.L., 2002, Students use of narrative and paradigmatic forms of talk in elementary science conversations. Research in Science Teaching, 39, 793-818. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10046
  34. Lee, S. and Kim, C., 2007, Understanding visitor learning in a natural history museum: A case of dyadic discourse. Journal of Korea Association for Research in Science Education, 27, 134-143.
  35. Lemke, J.L., 1990, Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ablex Publishing Corporation, NJ, USA, 261 p.
  36. Litwak, J.M., 1996, Label length and title type as determinants in visitor learning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, USA, 1-11.
  37. McManus, P., 1989, Oh, yes, they do: How museum visitors read labels and interact with exhibit text. Curator, 32, 174-189. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1989.tb00718.x
  38. McManus, P., 1991, Making sense of exhibits. In Kavanagh, G. (ed.), Museum Language: Objects and Texts. Leicester University Press, Leicester, UK, 180 p.
  39. Meng, A.P.K., 2004, Making history in from colony to nation: a multimodal analysis of a museum exhibition in Singapore. In O'Halloran, K.L. (ed.), Multimodal discourse analysis: systemic functional perspectives. Open Linguistics Series. Continuum, London, UK, 28-54.
  40. Millar, R., 1998, Rhetoric and reality: what practical work in science education is really for. In Wellington, J. (ed.), Practical Work in School Science: Which way now? Routledge, London, UK, 16-31.
  41. Moje, E.B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., and Marx, R.W., 2001, "Maestro, what is 'quality'?": Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1014
  42. Mortensen, M.F., 2011, Analysis of the educational potential of a science museum learning environment: Visitors' experience with and understanding of an immersion exhibit. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 517?545. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500691003754589
  43. Ravelli, L.J., 2006, Museum texts: Communication frameworks. Routledge, New York, USA, 182 p.
  44. Robinson, E.S., 1931, Psychological studies of the public museum. School and Society, 33, 121-125.
  45. Rudolph, J.L., 2005, Inquiry, instrumentalism, and the public understanding of science. Science Education, 89, 803-821. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20071
  46. Serrell, B., 1981, Zoo label study at Brookfield Zoo. International Zoo Yearbook, 21, 54-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-1090.1981.tb01944.x
  47. Serrell, B., 1996, Exhibit labels: An interpretive approach. Altamira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, USA, 261 p.
  48. Spencer, H. and Reynolds, L., 1976, The study of legibility, Readability of Print Unit, Royal College of Art, London, UK, 36 p.
  49. Thompson, D. and Bitgood, S., 1988, The effects of sign length, letter size, and proximity on reading. Visitor studies, 1, 101-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578809445744
  50. Wellingtion, J., 1990, Formal and informal learning in science: the role of the interactive science centres. Physics Education, 25, 247-252. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/25/5/307
  51. Wellington, J., 1994, Using informal learning to enrich science education. In Wellington, J., Henderson, J., Lally, V., Scaife, J., Knutton, S., and Nott, M. (eds.), Secondary Science: contemporary issues and practical approaches. Routledge, London, UK, 284-294.
  52. Wellington, J. and Osborne, J., 2001, Language and literacy in science education (1st ed.). Open University Press, PA, USA, 152 p.