참고문헌
- American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
- Bybee, R. W. (2010). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30-35.
- Cavanagh, S. (1997). Content analysis: Concepts, methods and applications. Nurse Researcher, 4, 5-16. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr1997.04.4.3.5.c5869
- Celik, S., & Bayrakceken, S. (2006). The effect of a "science, technology and society" course on perspective teachers' conceptions of the nature of science. Research in Science and Technological Education, 24(2), 255-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140600811692
- Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2007). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the United States for inclusion of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(15), 1847-1868. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690601159407
- Choi, Y., & Rye, C. (2007). Analyzing preceding research on the concepts and elements of technological literacy. Korean Technology Education Association, 7(2), 141-153.
- Clough, M. P. (2013). Teaching about the nature of technology: Issues and pedagogical practices. In M. P. Clough, J. K. Olson, & D. S. Niederhauser (Eds.). The nature of technology: Implications for learning and teaching (pp. 345-369). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
- DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating students conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337-1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.495400
- Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.
- Elo, S., & Kyngas, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x
- Feibleman, J. K. (1961). Pure science, applied science, technology, engineering: An attempt at definitions. Technology and Culture, 2(4), 305-317. https://doi.org/10.2307/3100886
- Frank, M. (2005). A system approach for developing technological literacy. Journal of Technology Education, 17(1), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.21061/jte.v17i1.a.2
- Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
- Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
- International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (1996). Technology for all Americans: A rationale and structure for the study of technology (rationale and structure). Reston, VA: ITEA.
- International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (2000). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
- International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (2003). Advancing excellence in technological literacy: Students assessment, professional development, and program standards. Reston, VA: Author.
- International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (2004). Measuring progress: Assessing students for technological literacy. Reston, VA: Author.
- International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (2006). Technological literacy for all: A rationale and structure for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
- International Technology Education Association [ITEA]. (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: Author.
- Kim, U. S. (1998). Information society and ethics: The nature of technology. Paper presented in the 1st conference of the Korean Institue of Communication and Information Science, Seoul, Korea.
- Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
- Lee, H. (2015). Construction of nature of technology framework and its utilization for investigation of changes in college students' perception of nature of technology through SSI-based program (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
- Lee, H., & Lee, H. (2016). Contextualized nature of technology in socioscientific issues. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(2), 303-315. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.2.0303
- Lee, Y., Choi, Y., Lee, H., Han, J., & Bang, J. (2005). A content analysis of technology textbooks for the secondary school students on the point of conceptual structure of technological literacy. The Korean Journal of Technology Education, 5(1), 2-22.
- Lee, Y. H (2013). A proposal of inclusive framework of the nature of science (NOS) based on the 4 themes of scientific literacy for K-12 school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(3), 553-569. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.3.553
- Lee, Y. H. (2018). Suggesting the conceptual framework of the nature of technology(NOT) and examing the conceptions of experts of science, technology, and engineering fields regarding the NOT. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 38(1), 27-42. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2018.38.1.27
- Liou, P. (2015). Developing an instrument for assessing students' concepts of the nature of technology. Research in Science & technological Education, 33(2), 162-181. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2014.996542
- Meichtry, Y. J. (1992). Influencing student understanding of the nature of science: Data from a case of curriculum development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290407
- Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London, England: King's College.
- Mitcham, C. (1994). Thinking through technology: The path between engineering and philosophy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
- Moore, D. R. (2011). Technology litearcy: The extension of cognition. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(2), 185-193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9113-9
- Morgan, D. L. (1993). Qualitative content analysis: A guide to paths not taken. Qualitative Health Research, 1, 112-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239300300107
- National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Research Council [NRC]. (2002). Technically speaking: Why all Americans needs to know more about technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Presss.
- National Research Council [NRC]. (2006). Tech tally: Approaches to assessing technological literacy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Research Council [NRC]. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concept, and core idea. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]. (1982). Science-teachnologyscoety: Science education for the 1980s (An NSTA position statement). Washington, DC: Author.
- Pacey, A. (1983). The culture of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Pearson, G., & Young, A. T. (Eds.). (2002). Technically speaking: Why all americans need to know more about technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
- Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2012). Nursing research: Principles and methods. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
- Rose, M. A. (2007). Perceptions of technological literacy among science, technology, engineering, and mathematics leaders. Journal of Technology Education, 19(1), 35-52.
- Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Science Co-ordinator's and Consultants' Association of Ontario [SCCAO]., & Science Teachers' Association of Ontario [STAO/APSO]. (2006). Position Paper: The Nature of Science. Toronto, ON: Queen's Printer.
- Seo, D., Lee, Y. H., & Jho, H. (2017). Understanding of students at a technical high school about the nature of technology through the course of science and technology course. Biology Education, 45(1), 199-212. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2017.45.1.199
- Smith, M. U., & Scharmann, L. C. (1999). Defining versus describing the nature of science: A pragmatic analysis for classroom teachers and science education. Science Education, 83, 493-509. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199907)83:4<493::AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-U
- Tenner, E. (1996). Why things bite back: Technology and the revenge of unintended consequences. New York, NY: First Vintage Books Edition.
- Waight, N. (2014). Technology knowledge: high school science teachers' conceptions of the nature of technology. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 1143-1168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9452-6
- Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of technology: implications for design, development, and enactment of technological tools in school science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2875-2905. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.698763
- Waight, N. (2013). Technology knowledge: High school science teachers' conceptions of the nature of technology. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1143-1168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9452-6
- Weber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
- Young, A. T., Cole, J. R., & Denton, D. (2002). Improving technological literacy: The first step is understanding what is meant by 'technology'. Issues in Science and Technology, 18(4), 73-79.