한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제39권6호
  • /
  • Pages.767-775
  • /
  • 2019
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

과학교과서에 제시된 과학용어에 대한 명시적 및 암시적 교육 사례 분석

An Analysis of Explicit and Implicit Teaching Cases for Scientific Terms in Science Textbooks

  • 윤은정 (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
  • Yun, Eunjeong (Science Education Research Institute of Kyungpook National University)
  • 투고 : 2019.11.04
  • 심사 : 2019.12.13
  • 발행 : 2019.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구는 2015 개정 교육과정에 따른 과학교과서를 대상으로 교과서에 수록된 과학용어의 명시적, 암시적 교육 사례를 분석하여 과학용어 교육 측면에서 현행 교과서가 가지는 문제점들을 짚어보고 개선 방안을 제안하고자 실시하였다. 2015 개정 교육과정에 따른 초등학교 3학년과 6학년, 중학교 1학년, 고등학교 1학년의 과학교과서 8권으로 부터 사용된 과학용어들을 추출하고, 명시적 및 암시적으로 사용된 사례를 수집 및 분석하였다. 연구 결과를 간략하게 정리하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 2015 개정 과학교과서의 초, 중, 고 과학교과서에는 교과서에 포함된 전체 어휘 대비 약 15~30% 정도의 비율로 과학용어가 사용되고 있었는데, 이는 페이지당 수록 과학용어 개수를 기준으로 외국의 경우와 비교했을 때 평균적으로 5배 이상의 많은 분량에 해당한다. 둘째, 과학교과서에 사용된 과학용어들 가운데 명시적 방법을 통해 의미 교육이 이루어지는 과학용어의 비율은 9.7~18.8%로 20%가 되지 않았으며, 자연적으로 나머지 80% 이상의 과학용어들은 암시적 교육 형태로 제시되어 있음을 의미한다. 셋째, 저학년일수록 명시적 용어 교육의 비율이 높아야 함에도 불구하고 오히려 초등학교의 명시적 용어 교육의 비율이 가장 낮았으며, 6학년의 경우는 10%가 되지 않는 것으로 나타났다.

This study was conducted to analyze explicit and implicit teaching cases of scientific terms in accordance with the 2015 revised curriculum, pointing out the problems of current textbooks in terms of scientific terms education and proposing method to improve them. Scientific terms used in eight science textbooks of 2015 revised curriculum, third and sixth graders of elementary school, first graders of middle school and first graders of high school were extracted, and cases used explicitly and implicitly were collected and analyzed. Brief summary of the results of the study is as follows. First, scientific terms were used in elementary, middle, and high school science textbooks at a rate of about 15 to 30 percent of the total vocabulary contained in the textbooks, which is on average more than five times larger than those in foreign countries based on the number of scientific terms included on each page. Second, among the scientific terms used in science textbooks, the percentage of scientific terms in which semantic education is achieved through explicit means was 9.7 to 18.8 percent, which naturally means that the remaining 80 percent or more of the scientific terms are presented in the form of implicit education. Third, even though the ratio of explicit term education should be higher in the lower grades, the ratio of explicit term education in elementary schools was lower than 10% in the sixth grade.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Al-Homoud, F., & Schmitt, N. (2009). Extensive reading in a challenging environment: A comparison of extensive and intensive reading approaches in Saudi Arabia. Language Teaching Research, 13(4), 383-401. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809341508
  2. Beck, I., & Mckeown, M. (1991). Conditions oF vocabulary acquisition. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research 2 (pp. 789-814). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  3. Bell, T. (2001). Extensive reading: Speed and comprehension. The Reading Matrix, 1(1).
  4. Chen, c., & Truscott, J (2010). The effects of repetition and Ll lexicalization on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 31(5), 693-713. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq031
  5. Ellis, N. C. (1994). Implicit and explicit learning of language. London: Academic Press.
  6. Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle School. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 491-520. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500339092
  7. Flowerdew, J. (1992). Definitions in Science Lectures, Applied Linguistics, 13(2), 202-221. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/13.2.202
  8. Folse, K. S. (2004). Myths about teaching and learning second language vocabulary: What recent research says. TESL Reporter, 37(2), 1-13.
  9. Gernsbacher, M., & Faust, M. (1991). The mechanism of suppression: A component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 17(2), 245-263. https://doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.17.2.245
  10. Groves, F. H. (2016). A longitudinal study of middle and secondary level science textbook vocabulary loads. School Science and Mathematics, 116(6), 320-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12183
  11. Groves, F. H. (1995). Science vocabulary load of selected secondary science textbooks. School Science and Mathematics, 95(5), 231-235. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15772.x
  12. Huckin, T. & Coady, J. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(2), 181- 193. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199002028
  13. Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2005). A Framework For developing EFL reading vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 23-59.
  14. Itza-Ortiz, S., Rebello, N. S., Zollman, D., & Rodriguez-Achach, M. (2003). The vocabulary of introductory physics and its implications for learning physics. The Physics Teacher, 41(6), 330. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1607802
  15. Jenkins, J. R., Stein, M. L., & Wysocki, K. (1984). Learning vocabulary through reading. American Educational Research Journal, 21(4), 767-787. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312021004767
  16. Kim, G. (2003). Vocabulary by grade for Korean education. Pagijoung Press.
  17. Kim, J. (2009). The writing of a definition sentence. The Modern Education of Korean Language, 81, 69-84.
  18. Kim, J. & Im, H. (2012). The interaction effects of exposure frequency and task-induced involvement on English learners' vocabulary development. Foreign Languages Education, 19(4), 349-373.
  19. Ko, S., Choi, K., & Hwang, M. (2010). Comprehension of ambiguous words in children with poor reading comprehension. Communication Sciences and Disorders, 15(3), 348-356.
  20. Lee, E. & Park, M. (2018). The effects of explicit and implicit vocabulary learning through movies on Learners' vocabulary knowledge. Journal of the Korea English Education Society, 17(2), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.18649/jkees.2018.17.2.75
  21. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  22. Matsuoka, W., & Hirsh, D. (2010). Vocabulary learning through reading: Does an ELT course book provide good opportunities? Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 56-70.
  23. Miller, G. A. (1991). The science of words. W. H. Freeman & Co.
  24. Miller, J. (2009). Teaching refugee learners with interrupted education in science: Vocabulary, literacy and pedagogy. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 571-592. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701744611
  25. Mun, J. (2013). Comparative study on the effect of Arabic vocabulary learning depending on the compromise ratio of implicit/explicit vocabulary learning methods The Journal of The Institute of the Middle East Studies, 32(1), 85-121.
  26. Nam, K. (2016). A study on types of defining sentences in science text. Korean Semantics, 52, 111-138. https://doi.org/10.19033/sks.2016.06.52.111
  27. Nation, I. S. P., & Wang, K. (1999). Graded readers and vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign Language, 12(2), 355-380.
  28. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  29. National Institute of the Korean Language (2008). Standard Korean dictionary. National Institute of the Korean Language.
  30. Pavel, S. & Nolet, D. (2001). Handbook of terminology. Public Works and Government Services Canada.
  31. Reeves, C. (2005). The language of science. Routledge
  32. Rott, S. (1999). The effect of exposure frequency on intermediate language leamers' incidental vocabulaty acquisition and retention through reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 589-619. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263199004039
  33. Shin, S. (2005). The abstraction and taxonomy of events. Korean Semantics, 16, 295-317.
  34. Stahl, S. A. (1986). Three principles of effective vocabulary instruction. Journal of Reading, 29(7), 662-668.
  35. Staples, R. & Helselden, R. (2002). Science teaching and literacy. The School Science Review, 83(304), 51-62.
  36. Sokmen, A. J. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 237-257), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  37. Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do leamers leam and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 130-163.
  38. Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050023
  39. Werner, H., & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation: An organismic developmental approach to language and the expression of thought. New York: Wiley.
  40. Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The unity of knowledge. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
  41. Yager, R. (1983). The importance of terminology in teaching K-12 science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 577- 588. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660200610
  42. Yun, E., Yi, Y., & Park, Y. (2013). Analysis of students' word association about the science terminologies used in the "Force and Motion" unit in middle school science textbook. Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 573-582. https://doi.org/10.21796/JSE.2013.37.3.573
  43. Yun, E. & Park, Y. (2013). Research on science teacher's perception of teaching science terminology. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(7), 1343-1353. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.7.1343
  44. Yun, E. & Park, Y. (2015). Test environment factors influencing word association about science terminology in students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(6), 1031-1038. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.6.1031
  45. Yun, E., Kwon, S. G., & Park, Y. (2015). Analysis of problems of current science textbooks perceived by teachers and students in view of learner- centered classroom. Journal of Science Education, 39(3), 404-417. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2015.39.3.404
  46. Yun, E., Kim, J., Nam, K., Song, H., Ok, C., Choi, J., & Park, Y. (2018). Building Korean science textbook corpus (K-STeC) for research of scientific language in education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 38(4), 575-585. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2018.38.4.575
  47. Zahar, R., Cobb, T., & Spada, N. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through reading: Effects of frequency and contextual richness. Canadian Modern Language Review, 57(4), 541- 572. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.57.4.541