Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

Comparison of the Science Education Curriculum and the Environmental Education Curriculum for Promoting Environmental Education

환경교육 활성화를 위한 과학과 교육과정과 환경과 교육과정 비교

  • Yoon, Jin-A (Department of Earth Science Education, Pusan National University) ;
  • Nam, Younkyeong (Department of Earth Science Education, Pusan National University)
  • 윤진아 (부산대학교 지구과학교육과) ;
  • 남윤경 (부산대학교 지구과학교육과)
  • Received : 2020.02.18
  • Accepted : 2020.04.27
  • Published : 2020.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze the 2015 revised Science Curriculum and Environment Curriculum, and to provide implications for the correlation and complementarity between the two standards. For the analysis of the curriculum, the contents system of the two standards was reorganized based on the four categories of knowledge, attitude, inquiry, participation and practice, which are common literacy elements of science and environment, based on previous studies. Content Analysis was performed on content elements and detailed performance expectation. As a result of this study, there was a difference in terms of the core competencies and goals. The Environment Curriculum emphasized sustainable development and social participation while the Science Curriculum emphasized scientific inquiry and literacy. The contents system analysis results according to the four literacy factors are as follows. First, in terms of attitude, both standards deal with research ethics in common. However Environment Curriculum values learners' values and views on the environment more than Science Curriculum which emphasizes the science attitude as science investigators. Second, there was a serious problem in the knowledge linkage between two standards. In same grade groups, the level of content knowledge dealt in two standards was not consistent. Third, in the inquiry aspect, the Environment Curriculum deals with interdisciplinary topics in the purposefully designed inquiry unit, whereas the Science Curriculum presents various research activities based on related science concepts in every unit. Fourth, in the participation and practice aspect, the Environment Curriculum focused on participation and practice while the Science Curriculum focused on sustainable science and technology development and improvement, scientific interest and decision-making ability. This study provide implications for education for sustainable development(ESD) by providing the complementary potentials between Science Curriculum and Environment Curriculum.

본 연구는 우리나라 과학교육에서 통합교육의 주제로 다루어지는 환경문제와 관련하여 환경교육의 현황과 교육과정을 비교 분석하여 상호연계성과 시사점을 제공하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 2015 개정 환경과 교육과정과 2015 개정 과학과 교육과정을 분석대상으로 선정하고, 각 교과의 교육과정과 그 변천에 대한 문헌연구와 내용분석(Content Analysis)을 수행하였다. 교육과정 분석은 선행연구를 토대로 핵심역량과 교육목표를 비교하고, 과학과 및 환경과의 공통 소양 요소인 지식, 태도, 탐구, 그리고 참여와 실천의 4가지 범주를 도출하여 분석틀을 구안하고 이를 토대로 내용체계를 재구성하였다. 연구결과 핵심역량과 목표에서 환경교과는 총론기반의 지속가능한 사회참여를, 과학교과는 과학탐구능력과 과학적 소양이 강조되는 차이가 있었다. 또한 내용체계에서는 환경교과가 학습자의 관점을 중시한다면 과학교과는 과학탐구자로의 자세를 강조하였으며, 내용지식의 체계를 중요시하는 과학교과에 비해, 환경교과는 학년간 경계가 거의 없이 과학개념이 적용되는 것으로 나타나 국가 교육과정에서 교과간 내용 지식 연계성에 대한 충분한 정보를 제공할 필요성이 제기되었다. 또한 환경교과가 참여와 실천에 목적을 둔다면 과학교과는 지속가능한 과학기술개발과 개선, 과학적 흥미와 의사결정능력을 기르는데 초점을 두고 있어 체계적인 지속가능발전 교육을 위해 과학과 및 환경과 교육과정이 상호보완 될 필요가 있으며 과학과 교육과정에서 탐구활동의 주제를 더욱 다양하고 통합적인 주제로 다룰 필요가 있음을 제안하였다. 이를 통해 탐구 중심의 통합 교과서에서 보다 과학적 문제해결과 평생학습과 참여 역량을 강조하는 교과서로 바꿀 수 있는 기반이 될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다. 본 연구는 지속가능발전 교육을 위해 과학과 및 환경과 교육과정의 상호보완에 대한 시사점과 함께 과학교육이 환경교육의 버거운 역할을 분담할 수 있기를 기대한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Berryman, T., & Sauve, L., 2016, Ruling relationships in sustainable development and education for sustainable development. The Journal of Environmental Education, 47(2), 104-117. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1092934
  2. Choi, J., Ko, Y., Lee, H., 2019, Comparative analysis of socioscientific issues presented in the 2015 integrated science and social studies textbooks. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(16), 1233-1256. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2019.19.16.1233
  3. Conrad, C. C., & Hilchey, K. G. (2011). A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 176(1-4), 273-291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1582-5
  4. Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E., 2005, Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative health research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
  5. Jang, M., Lim, S., Jeon, P., 2019, Development of social environmental education in korea: focusing on the related research trends in the korean journal of environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3), 276-303.
  6. Jeong, M., 2004, What should environmental education as a separate subject be? Journal of Environmental Education, 17(2), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1986.9941401
  7. Ji, D., Maeng, H. J., Son, Y, A., 2019, Awareness of elementary and secondary science teachers on the integration of education for sustainable development and science education. The Korean Society for Environmental Education confrence, 233-242.
  8. Kim, D., Ahn, S., Lee, K., Shin, Y., Kang, H., 2018, Environmental Education Comprehensive Plan for Sustainable Development of Jeollanam Province in Korea. Journal of Environmental Education, 31(4), 303-317
  9. Kim, J. H., Park, Y. K., Gi, D. Y., Bae, K. S., Kang, S., & Son, Y. A., 2019, Integrated science IV. detailed goal analysis of SDGs included in the environment and energy 'Unit. The Korean Society for Environmental Education conference, 169-176.
  10. Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI), 2018, A survey research on school environmental education in Korea. KEDI research report.
  11. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation (KICE), 2014, Educational study on curriculum development direction. KICE research report, CRC 2014-7.
  12. Kwon, Y., Lee, J., Kim, C., Ahn, J. J., Seo, E., Nam, Y., Park, E., Choi, S., Ahn, Y., 2016, The 2015 revised national curriculum for "Environment" subject: Major changes in contents and approaches. Journal of Environmental Education, 29(4), 363-383.
  13. Lee, D. G., 2015, The 20th anniversary evaluation of the Korean secondary school 'Environmental Department' and the environmental educational implications. Korea Environmental Education Association Conference. 19-30.
  14. Lee, H. J., 2018, What is SSI education? education for social participation and practice on social issues related to science and technology. Seoul: PYStory.
  15. Lee, S. Ch., Choi, D. H., 2010, A historical study on the paradigm shift of environment subject curriculum in korea. Journal of Environmental Education, 23(1), 27-35.
  16. Lee, S., Cho, S., 2019, A study on the current status of school environmental education in korea. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(2), 205-221.
  17. Lee, S. K., Lee, J. Y., Lee, S., Lee, Y., Min, G., Shim, S., Kim, N., & Ha, K., 2006, The awareness of teachers and college students towards sustainable development and education for sustainable development. Journal of Environmental Education, 19(1), 1-13.
  18. Chosunilbo, March 16, 2019, "The world's number one plastic consumption." https://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2019/03/15/2019031501633.html
  19. Ministry of Education, 1992a, Middle school curriculum. 7th national environment curriculum and manual.
  20. Ministry of Education (MOE), 2015a, 2015 revised elementary and secondary school curriculum general statement. MOE Notification No. 2015-80[supplement1].
  21. Ministry of Education (MOE), 2015b, 2015 revised elementary curriculum. MOE Notification No. 2018-162 [supplement2].
  22. Ministry of Education (MOE), 2015c, 2015 revised middle school curriculum. MOE Notification No. 2018-162? [supplement3].
  23. Ministry of Education (MOE), 2015d, 2015 revised high school curriculum. MOE Notification No. 2018-162 [supplement4].
  24. Ministry of Education and Science Technology (MEST), 2009, High school curriculum and manual: Environment and green growth.
  25. Ministry of Environment (ME), 2015a, Environment white paper.
  26. Ministry of Environment (ME)., 2015b, Policy research for the establishment of the 2nd comprehensive environmental education plan, Research Report.
  27. Ministry of Environment (ME), 2016, A study on the development plan of environmental education promotion system at the national dimension. Ministry of Environment report.
  28. Ministry of Environment (ME)., 2017a, Environment white paper.
  29. Ministry of Environment (ME), 2017b, A Study on establishment of national environmental education promotion System. Research Report.
  30. Moon, S., Lee, Y. H., & Son, Y. A., 2015, Analysis of middle school environmental education textbooks using the environmental literacy based on the four themes of scientific literacy. Journal of Environmental Education, 28(1), 1-14.
  31. Moon, S., Kim, S. K., Nam, Y. S., 2019, Analysis of Content Elements of Education for Sustainable Development Related to Restoring Oriental Stork in 2015 Revised Environmental Curriculum and Textbook. Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3), 361-377.
  32. National Research Council (NRC), 2012, A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas; National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 2012.
  33. NGSS Lead States., 2013, Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press.
  34. OECD, 2003, Definition and selection of competencies: Theoretical and conceptual foundations (DeSeCo) Background paper. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/41529556.pdf
  35. Park, J. K., Lee, K. H., 2011, A comparative analysis of content elements related to environment education in elementary school curriculum. Journal of Science Education. 35(2), 250-260. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2011.35.2.250
  36. Park, J. H., 2019, 2015 Core science competencies required in the student activities of general science textbooks for the 10th grade in 2015 revised korean national science curriculum. Korea National University of Education, Master's thesis.
  37. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L., 2004, The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88(1), 4-27. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10101
  38. Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L., 2005, The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71-93. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20023
  39. Seo, E. J., 2016, The operation of environmental education curriculum focused on the actual state of 'environment' subject selection and the ratio of EE-major teachers in korean secondary schools. Journal of Environmental Education, 29(3), 251-262.
  40. Seo, E. J., 2017, An exploration of competencies in the 2015 revised national curriculum for the environment subject. Journal of Environmental Education, 30(3), 237-250.
  41. Shin, Y., 2017, Analysis on contents related to appropriate technology, sustainable development, climate change and energy of the 2015 revised national curriculum. Jounral of Energy and Climate Change Education, 7(1), 15-23. https://doi.org/10.22368/ksecce.2017.7.1.15
  42. Sinakou, E., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Goossens, M., & Van Petegem, P., 2018, Academics in the field of Education for Sustainable Development: Their conceptions of sustainable development. Journal of cleaner production, 184, 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.279
  43. Song, J., Na, J., 2015, Directions and issues of 2015 national science curriculum and their implications to science classroom culture. School Science Journal, 9(2), 72-84. https://doi.org/10.15737/SSJ.9.2.201507.72
  44. UNESCO, 2009, Review of the context and structure for education for sustainable development learning for sustainable world. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000184944