Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis of the Scientific Research Process of a Participant in Undergraduate Research Program by Cultural Historical Activity Theory

문화역사적 활동이론을 통한 학부생 연구지원 프로그램 참여자의 과학연구 수행과정의 분석

  • Received : 2018.03.21
  • Accepted : 2018.05.26
  • Published : 2018.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, the first experience of the whole research process of a novice scientist (student A) who participated in the Undergraduate Research Program (URP) was analyzed. The data were collected through observation, interviews, and document analysis with the cultural historical activity theory being used as a theoretical lens. At the beginning of novice's research, the mentor guided him in setting a research goal and provided mediating artifacts. Student A formed a research team based on the vertical relationship without a shared mental model. Two major contradictions occurred and they were the sources of changes of student A's activity system. The first contradiction was between the mentor's educational philosophy and the mentee's educational needs, which was resolved in a way that student A asked and used the mentor's network to obtain his needs about task-specific details. The second contradiction arose because the team members wanted horizontal relationship while student A wanted to stick to the vertical relationship. After student A accepted the opinions of the team members, they cooperatively changed the division of labor in the activity system. Student A decided to become a scientist and not a physics teacher, even if his major is physics education after finishing his URP research process. His URP experience also created and expanded his network in the academic field, and his negative attitude toward collaboration changed positively. Through the analysis of the structure and changes in the activity system of URP research, implications for instructional method and support system of the apprenticeship can be obtained.

이 연구에서는 학부생 연구지원 프로그램(Undergraduate Research Program: 이하 URP)에 참여한 물리교육과 3학년인 한 초심자(학생 A)의 연구과정을 질적으로 분석하였다. 자료는 참여관찰, 심층인터뷰, 문서분석을 통해 수집되었고, 분석을 위한 이론적 틀로서 문화역사적 활동이론이 사용되었다. 먼저, 초심자의 연구를 위한 활동체계가 어떻게 구성되었는지를 살펴보았다. 연구 초기에 멘토가 대략적인 연구목표와 목표달성을 위한 매개체를 초심자에게 제공하였다. 연구주체인 학생 A는 동료 두 명을 모아, 자신이 이끄는 수직적 관계로 연구팀을 구성하였다. 이러한 역할분담은 과제특정지식, 연차, 그리고 참여율이 높을수록 의사결정권이 크다는 암묵적 규칙에 근거한 것이다. 다음으로, 활동체계의 변화 과정을 살펴보면, 크게 두 가지 모순이 변화의 원천이 되었다. 먼저 연구 초기에 멘토의 교육철학과 멘티의 교육적 요구 간의 모순이 발생하였다. 학생 A는 멘토의 인적 네트워크를 이용하여 외부의 활동체계에서 필요한 지식을 얻는 방식으로 모순에 의한 갈등을 극복하였다. 이렇게 획득한 지식을 이용하여 활동체계의 매개물(실험도구과 이론)을 정교화하였다. 두 번째 모순은 수평적 역할분담을 요구하는 팀 구성원들과 기존 역할분담을 고수하는 학생 A 간에 발생하였다. 학생 A가 팀 구성원들의 의견을 받아들인 후, 활동체계의 노동 분담 방식은 협력적으로 변화하였다. 마지막으로, 학생 A의 변화를 살펴보면, 학생 A는 연구 경험을 통해 교사의 길을 포기하고 과학자가 되기로 결심하였다. 또 학계 내의인적 네트워크를 생성하고 확장하게 되었으며, 협업에 대한 부정적인 마음가짐이 긍정적으로 바뀌게 되었다. 연구 초심자의 연구과정에 대한 활동체계의 구성과 변화의 분석을 통하여 사사교육의 지도 방식과 지원체계에 대한 시사점을 얻을 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Adedokun, O. A., Bessenbacher, A. B., Parker, L. C., Kirkham, L. L., & Burgess, W. D. (2013). Research skills and STEM undergraduate research students’ aspirations for research careers: Mediating effects of research self‐efficacy. Journal of Research in Science teaching, 50(8), 940-951. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21102
  2. Bargar, R. R., & Duncan, J. K. (1982). Cultivating creative endeavor in doctoral research. The Journal of Higher Education, 53(1), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.2307/1981536
  3. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2003). Research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon
  4. Burgin, S. R., & Sadler, T. D. (2016). Learning nature of science concepts through a research apprenticeship program: A comparative study of three approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(1), 31-59. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21296
  5. Converse, S., Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. Individual and group decision making: Current issues, 221.
  6. Chemers, M. M., Zurbriggen, E. L., Syed, M., Goza, B. K., & Bearman, S. (2011). The role of efficacy and identity in science career commitment among underrepresented minority students. Journal of Social Issues, 67(3), 469-491. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01710.x
  7. Dolan, E., & Johnson, D. (2009). Toward a holistic view of undergraduate research experiences: An exploratory study of impact on graduate/postdoctoral mentors. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(6), 487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9165-3
  8. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsult.
  9. Engestrom, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960-974. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401300409143
  10. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of education and work, 14(1), 133-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747
  11. Engestrom, Y. (2009). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. Learning and expanding with activity theory, 303-328.
  12. Fletcher, J. K., & Ragins, B. R. (2007). Stone center relational cultural theory. The handbook of mentoring at work: Theory, research, and practice, 373-399.
  13. Gardner, S. K. (2005). If it were easy, everyone would have a Ph. D. Doctoral student success: Socialization and disciplinary perspectives.
  14. Gardner, S. K. (2008). “What’s too much and what’s too little?”: The process of becoming an independent researcher in doctoral education. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(3), 326-350.
  15. Hathaway, R. S., Nagda, B. A., & Gregerman, S. R. (2002). The relationship of undergraduate research participation to graduate and professional education pursuit: an empirical study. Journal of College Student Development, 43(5), 614-631.
  16. Hunter, A. B., Laursen, S. L., & Seymour, E. (2007). Becoming a scientist: The role of undergraduate research in students’ cognitive, personal, and professional development. Science education, 91(1), 36-74. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20173
  17. Johnson, W. B., Behling, L. L., Miller, P., & Vandermaas-Peeler, M. (2015). Undergraduate research mentoring: obstacles and opportunities. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 23(5), 441-453. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2015.1126167
  18. Kardash, C. M. (2000). Evaluation of undergraduate research experience: Perceptions of undergraduate interns and their faculty mentors. Journal of educational psychology, 92(1), 191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.92.1.191
  19. Laursen, S., Hunter, A. B., Seymour, E., Thiry, H., & Melton, G. (2010). Undergraduate research in the sciences: Engaging students in real science. John Wiley & Sons.
  20. Lee, G. H. (2009). An Educational Program of Undergraduate Research Participation in Science and Engineering Field. KAIST.
  21. Lopatto, D. (2004). Survey of undergraduate research experiences (SURE): First findings. Cell biology education, 3(4), 270-277. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.04-07-0045
  22. Lopatto, D. (2007). Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(4), 297-306. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.07-06-0039
  23. Lovitts, B. E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from doctoral study. Rowman & Littlefield.
  24. Lovitts, B. E. (2005). Being a good course‐taker is not enough: a theoretical perspective on the transition to independent research. Studies in higher education, 30(2), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500043093
  25. Lompscher, J. (2006). The cultural-historical activity theory. Critical perspectives on activity: Explorations across education, work, and everyday life, 35-51.
  26. Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning. (2013). The master plan for the identifying and nurturing of the science gifted students. Gwacheon: Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning.
  27. Nagda, B. A., Gregerman, S. R., Jonides, J., von Hippel, W., & Lerner, J.S. (1998). Undergraduate student-faculty research partnerships affect student retention. The Review of Higher Education, 22(1), 55-72. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.1998.0016
  28. Paglis, L. L., Green, S. G., & Bauer, T. N. (2006). Does adviser mentoring add value? A longitudinal study of mentoring and doctoral student outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), 451-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-9003-2
  29. Robnett, R. D., Chemers, M. M., & Zurbriggen, E. L. (2015). Longitudinal associations among undergraduates’ research experience, self‐efficacy, and identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 847-867. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21221
  30. Roth, W. M., Lee, Y. J., & Hsu, P. L. (2009). A tool for changing the world: possibilities of cultural‐historical activity theory to reinvigorate science education. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 131-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260903142269
  31. Sawchuk, P. H. (2003). Adult Learning and Technology in Working-Class Life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  32. Sawchuk, P., Duarte, N., & Elhammoumi, M. (Eds.). (2006). Critical perspectives on activity: Explorations across education, work, and everyday life. Cambridge University Press.
  33. Slovacek, S., Whittinghill, J., Flenoury, L., & Wiseman, D. (2012). Promoting minority success in the sciences: The minority opportunities in research programs at CSULA. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(2), 199-217. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20451
  34. Thiry, H., Laursen, S. L., & Hunter, A. B. (2011). What experiences help students become scientists? A comparative study of research and other sources of personal and professional gains for STEM undergraduates. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(4), 357-388.
  35. Villarejo, M., Barlow, A. E., Kogan, D., Veazey, B. D., & Sweeney, J. K. (2008). Encouraging minority undergraduates to choose science careers: career paths survey results. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 7(4), 394-409. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.08-04-0018
  36. Youn, C., & Park, S. (2012). Theoretical development of cultural historical activity theory and implications to lifelong education. Journal of Lifelong Education, 18(3), 113-139.