한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육 (The Mathematical Education)

  • 제62권1호
  • /
  • Pages.57-78
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 1225-1380(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-9633(eISSN)
한국수학교육학회 (Korean Society of Mathematical Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

개방형 과제를 활용하는 초등 수학 수업에서 학생의 참여 분석

An analysis of students' engagement in elementary mathematics lessons using open-ended tasks

  • 투고 : 2023.01.13
  • 심사 : 2023.02.16
  • 발행 : 2023.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

학생의 수업 참여는 수업의 방향과 성과를 결정지을 뿐만 아니라 학업 성취 및 후속 학습의 지속성에 영향을 미친다. 본 연구는 학생의 수업 참여를 촉진하기 위한 방안으로 개방형 과제를 활용하는 수업이 지닌 시사점을 모색하기 위해 초등학교 5학년 중하위권 학생들을 대상으로 개방형 과제 활용 수업을 진행하여 학생들이 드러내는 수업 참여 양상을 분석하였다. 이로부터 교사의 발문에 자발적으로 답하거나 어려움을 참고 과제를 끝까지 수행하는 행동적 참여, 박수를 치거나 자리에서 일어나는 등의 즐거움을 표현하거나 자신의 감정을 적극적으로 드러내는 정서적 참여의 특징을 찾아볼 수 있었다. 또한 학생들은 자신의 생각을 말할 때 실생활 예를 들어 설명하거나 과제 해결에 사전 지식을 이용하였으며 과제를 다양한 방식으로 해결하려고 노력하는 인지적 참여 양상을 보였고, 친구의 의견을 물어 공동의 아이디어를 구성함으로써 과제를 해결하려고 노력하거나 모둠 활동에서 친구와 적극적으로 도움을 주고 받는 등의 사회적 참여 모습을 보였다. 이상은 개방형 과제를 활용하는 수업이 초등학생들의 수업 참여를 촉진하는 교수학적 방안이 될 수 있음을 시사한다. 나아가 본 연구는 효과적인 개방형 과제 활용 수업을 실행하는 데 교사의 지지와 긍정적인 피드백, 모둠 활동 및 소집단 토론으로 구성된 수업 방법, 놀이 및 게임 활동에 기반한 과제 제시 방식 등이 갖는 잠재적 중요성을 보여준다.

Students' engagement in lessons not only determines the direction and result of the lessons, but also affects academic achievement and continuity of follow-up learning. In order to provide implications related to teaching strategies for encouraging students' engagement in elementary mathematics lessons, this study implemented lessons for middle-low achieving fifth graders using open-ended tasks and analyzed characteristics of students' engagement in the light of the framework descripors developed based on previous research. As a result of the analysis, the students showed behavioral engagement in voluntarily answering teacher's questions or enduring difficulties and performing tasks until the end, emotional engagement in actively expressing their pleasure by clapping, standing up and the feelings with regard to the topics of lessons and the tasks, cognitive engagement in using real-life examples or their prior knowledge to solve the tasks, and social engagement in helping friends, telling their ideas to others and asking for friends' opinions to create collaborative ideas. This result suggested that lessons using open-ended tasks could encourage elementary students' engagement. In addition, this research presented the potential significance of teacher's support and positive feedback to students' responses, teaching methods of group activities and discussions, strategies of presenting tasks such as the board game while implementing the lessons using open-ended tasks.

키워드

과제정보

This study was financially supported by Chonnam National University (Grant number: 2022-0105).

참고문헌

  1. Baek, D. H., & Lee, K. H. (2017). A study on the qualitative differences analysis between multiple solutions in terms of mathematical creativity. School Mathematics, 19(3), 481-494.
  2. Bahr, D. L., & Bahr, K. (2017). Engaging all students in mathematical discussions. Teaching Children Mathematics, 23(6), 350-359. https://doi.org/10.5951/teacchilmath.23.6.0350
  3. Brousseau, G. (2002). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics: Didactique des mathematiques, 1970-1990. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  4. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms : Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20171
  5. Cho, Y. J., & Shin, H. K. (2010). Analysis of pattern of mathematical interaction occurring in the elementary school mathematics class. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 14(3), 681-700.
  6. Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. L. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119-142. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737025002119
  7. Cothran, D. J., & Ennis, C. D. (2000). Building bridges to student engagement: Communicating respect and care for students in urban high schools. Journal of Research & Development in Education, 33(2), 106-117.
  8. De Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge University Press.
  9. Finn, J. D., & Zimmer, K. (2012). Student engagement: What is it and why does it matter? In S. Christenson, A. L. Reschy, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 97-131). Springer.
  10. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  11. Fredricks, J. A., Wang, M. T., Linn, J. S., Hofkens, T. L., Sugn, H., Parr, A., & Allerton, J. (2016). Using qualitative methods to develop a survey measure of math and science engagement. Learning and Instruction, 43, 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.009
  12. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking: From childhood to adolescence. A. Parsons & S. Milgram (Trans.). Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.
  13. Ha, S. S. (2008). A study on the understanding of the concept of implication [Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University]. http://dcollection.snu.ac.kr:80/jsp/common/DcLoOrgPer.jsp?sItemId=000000039997
  14. Herrington, J., Oliver, R., & Reeves, T. C. (2002). Authentic activities and online learning. In A. Goody, J. Herrington, & M. Northcote (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th HERDSA annual conference (pp. 562-567). HERDSA.
  15. Jang, S. B. (2018). Effects of open-ended problems on underachievers. The Journal of Curriculum and Instruction Studies, 11(1), 1-31.
  16. Jeong, E. I. (2012). Exploring the factors that influence college students' class participation: Focus on autonomy support, academic self-efficacy, and task value. The Korean Journal of Educational Methodology Studies, 24(2), 355-378. http://doi.org/10.17927/tkjems.2012.24.2.355
  17. Jo, M. J. (2020). A case study on an individualized instructional programs by analyzing the factors of poor learning in mathematics [Master's thesis, Seoul National University of Education]. http://www.riss.kr/link?id=T15647923&outLink=K
  18. Jung, Y. S., & Choi, H. S. (2006). Factors influencing learner participation in web-based online discussion. Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 12(4), 51-75.
  19. Kang, S. M., & Kim, M. K. (2014). Constructing norms in elementary mathematics classrooms. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 17(2), 207-234.
  20. Kang, W., Kim, S. M., Park, M. G., Paek, S. Y., Oh, Y. Y., & Chang, H. (2014). Theory of teaching elementary mathematics. Kyungmoon Publishers.
  21. Kim, B. M., & Kim, Y. M. (2021). Analysis of collaborative problem solving and student-engaged instruction in middle school mathematics. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 21(21), 499-517. http://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2021.21.21.499
  22. Kim, E. H., & Park, M. G. (2011). An analysis on the responses and the behavioral characteristics between mathematically promising students and normal students in solving open-ended mathematical problems. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 15(1), 19-38.
  23. Kim, N. G., Kim, S. J. , Song, D. H., Oh, M. Y., & Lee, H. J. (2022). A study on analyzing solution spaces of open-ended tasks in elementary mathematics. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 25(1), 81-100. http://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2022.25.1.81
  24. Kim, N. H., & Kim, J. B. (2011). The relationship between student-teacher attachment relationship and academic achievement mediated by basic psychological needs and academic engagement: differences in the meaning and roles of teacher support and student-teacher attachment relationship. Korean Journal of Educational Psychology, 25(4), 763-789.
  25. Kim, Y. C. (2013). Qualitative research methodology. Academy Press.
  26. Kim, Y. J., & Na, G. S. (2009). A Study on the mathematical communication focused on the students' level of mathematical understanding. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 13(2), 141-161.
  27. Ko, E. S., Park, M. S., & Lee, E. J. (2016). Prospective elementary teachers' perceptions on assessment in mathematics. School Mathematics, 18(1), 61-83.
  28. Ko, J. W., Kim, H. J., & Kim, M. S. (2011). The impact of students' college experiences on students' cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes, and instructional satisfaction. The Korean Educational Administration Society, 29(4), 169-194.
  29. Kwon, O. N., Cho, Y. M., Park, J. S., & Park, J. H. (2005). Cultivating mathematical creativity through open-ended approaches : Development of a program and effectiveness analysis. The Mathematical Education, 44(2), 307-323.
  30. Lee, C. Y. (2012). A study for improving mathematics instruction through open problems in the elementary school. The Journal of Educational Research, 10(3), 307-322.
  31. Lee, D. H. (2008). A study on the results of use of open-ended problems for evaluation in elementary mathematics. The Mathematical Education, 47(4), 421-436.
  32. Lee, D. H. (2014). A study on the measurement in mathematical creativity using multiple solution tasks. School Mathematics, 16(1), 1-17.
  33. Lee, D. J. (2004). Inquiry into learners' sense of community in online learning environments. Journal of Educational Technology, 20(3), 53-73. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.20.3.51
  34. Leikin, R. (2009). Exploring mathematical creativity using multiple solution tasks. In R. Leikin, A. Berman & B. Koichu (Eds.) Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 129-145). Sense Publishers.
  35. Levav-Waynberg, A., & Leikin, R. (2012). The role of multiple solution tasks in developing knowledge and creativity in geometry. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.11.001
  36. Ministry of Education (2022). Mathematics curriculum. Ministry of Education Notice 2022-33 [8th Separated Book]. https://www.moe.go.kr/boardCnts/viewRenew.do?boardID=141&boardSeq=93458&lev=0&searchType=null&statusYN=W&page=1&s=moe&m=040401&opType=N
  37. NCSM & NCTM (2020). Moving forward: Mathematics learning in the era of COVID-19. https://www.nctm.org/Research-and-Advocacy/Moving-Forward---NCSM-and-NCTM-Joint-Statement/
  38. NCTM (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. NCTM.
  39. Nam S. I., Ryu S. R., Kwon, S. R., Shin, J. S., Park, S. S., Park, M. G., Choi, G. B., Kwon, J. R., & Lee, J. H. (2017). Theory of elementary mathematics education. Kyungmoon Publishers.
  40. Pang, J. S., & Jeong, H. J. (2006). Elementary school teachers' understanding and practice on learner-centered instruction : Focused on mathematical communication. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 6(1), 297-321.
  41. Park, D. W. (2014). Students' understanding of material implications. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 17(4), 805-816.
  42. Park, J. H., & Kim, A. R. (2021). A survey on implementing mathematics teaching and learning based on 2015 revised curriculum. Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 25(2), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2021.25.2.121
  43. Park, S. Y. (2004). Student and teacher variables improving student engagement. The Journal of Educational Administration, 22(2), 91-108.
  44. Park, W. J., & Jeon, P. K. (2003). An analysis of small-group children's consensus patterns in open-ended problem solving. Education of Elementary School Mathematics, 7(2), 117-129.
  45. Reeve, J. (2013). How students create motivationally supportive learning environments for themselves : The concept of agentic engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(3), 579-585. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032690
  46. Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Baroody, A. E., Larsen, R. A. A., Curby, T. W., & Abruy, T. (2015). To what extent do teacher-student interaction quality and student gender contribution to fifth graders' engagement in mathematics learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 170-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037252
  47. Rowland, T., Thawaites, A., & Jared, L. (2011). Triggers of contingency in mathematics teaching. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proc. 35th conf. of the Int. Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 73-80). PME.
  48. Seo, D. Y. (1999). Investigations on the possibility of teaching of implication in elementary school. School Mathematics, 1(1), 95-107.
  49. Seo, Y. M., & Park, M. G. (2021). The effects of open-ended mathematical problem solving learning on mathematical creativity and attitudes of elementary students. Communications of Mathematics Education, 35(3), 277-293. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmee.2021.35.3.277
  50. Shin, I. S., & Kim, S. M. (2006). An analysis on behavior characteristics between gifted students and talented students in open-end mathematical problem solving. Communcations of Mathematical Education, 20(1), 33-59.
  51. Shulman, L. S. (2005). To dignify the profession of the teacher : The carnegie foundatin celebrates 100 Years. The Magazine of Higher Learning, 37(5), 22-29. https://doi.org/10.3200/CHNG.37.5.22-29
  52. Skilling, K., Bobis, J., Martin, A. J., Anderson, J., & Way, J. (2016). What secondary teachers think and do about student engagement in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(4), 545-566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-016-0179-x
  53. Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children's behaviral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233
  54. Smith, M. S., & Stein, M. K. (2011). 5 practices for orchestrating productive mathematics discussions. NCTM.
  55. Taylor, S. S., & Statler, M. (2013). Material matters : Increasing emotional engagement in learning. Journal of Management Education, 38(4), 586-607. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562913489976
  56. Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G. (2008). The teacher's role in classroom discourse: A review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 516-551. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308320292
  57. Wang, K. S., Jung, H. Y., & Kim, G. Y. (2004). Development of a mathematics instruction model and its application on the social constructivism. The Journal of Elementary Education, 17(2), 389-418.
  58. Yoon, J. E., Cho, H. M., & Kwon, O. N. (2016). Analyzing students' engagement factors in flipped mathematics class. The Mathematical Education, 55(3), 299-316. https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2016.55.3.299