과학교육연구지 (Journal of Science Education)

  • 제47권1호
  • /
  • Pages.88-106
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 1225-3944(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-4074(eISSN)
경북대학교 과학교육연구소 (Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

학생 중심 탐구수업을 지향하는 초등교사의 과학수업에 대한 자기인식과 실행 -초등학교 '온도와 열' 단원에 대한 RTOP 분석을 중심으로-

The Self-Perception and Science Teaching Implementation of Elementary School Teacher Aiming for Student-centered Inquiry Classes -Focusing on RTOP Analysis of the Elementary School 'Temperature and Heat' Unit-

  • 투고 : 2023.03.08
  • 심사 : 2023.04.22
  • 발행 : 2023.04.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 초등학교 경력교사를 대상으로 그가 인식하는 자신의 과학수업과 수업 관찰 도구인 RTOP을 활용해 평가한 과학수업을 비교하여 교사의 과학수업에 대한 인식과 학생 중심 탐구수업의 실행에는 어떤 차이가 있는지를 알아보고자 하였다. 이를 위해, 연구 대상의 '온도와 열' 단원 수업 녹화 자료와 교사 면담 자료, 그리고 연구 참여자의 교실 수업 스타일 설문 결과를 수집하였다. 녹화된 수업은 RTOP을 이용하여 분석하였고, 교사의 교실 수업 스타일 설문 결과와 비교하였다. 연구 결과, 연구의 대상 교사는 탐구 지향/학생 중심 수업을 실천하고 있다고 인식하고 있었지만, RTOP 점수로 판단한 결과는 근소한 차이로 과도기적/학생 영향 수업인 것으로 밝혀졌다. H교사는 교육과정에 대한 높은 이해와 내용 지식을 바탕으로 수업을 계획, 실천하였으며 학생과 학생, 학생과 교사의 활발한 상호작용을 촉진하는 과학 교실문화를 조성하였다. 하지만 교수 설계 및 실행에서 여전히 교사 주도적인 측면이 강조되었으며, 프로젝트 주제와 내용이 학생들이 과학 탐구에 대한 전반적인 경험을 하기에는 부적합한 면이 있었다. 결국 탐구 지향/학생 중심 과학수업을 위한 교사의 인식과 실제 수업 실행 사이의 근소한 차이는 '교수 설계 및 실행'이 얼마나 학생 중심적인가, 어떻게 학생의 과학 탐구 과정 경험을 위한 '절차적 지식'이 뒷받침되는 수업을 계획하고 실행할 것인가와 관계있는 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 결과는 교사의 의도와 노력이 실제로 실행되고 있는가를 파악하는 일은 교사의 자기 평가만으로는 부족하며, 외부 관찰자에 의한 과학수업의 객관적 분석과 평가, 결과에 대한 논의가 함께 이루어질 필요가 있다는 점을 말해준다.

This study aims to investigate the disparity between the teacher's perception of student-centered inquiry classes and the actual implementation of such practices. Specifically, we compared an elementary science teacher's self-perception of her science lessons with the observers' evaluation using the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) of the "Temperature and Heat" unit. Research data were collected through classroom teaching survey, interview, and science lessons video which were analyzed using the RTOP. As a result of the study, the teacher recognized that she was practicing inquiry-oriented/student-centered classes, but the results judged by the RTOP score were found to be transitional/student-affected classes by a slight difference. Teacher H planned and practiced classes based on a high understanding and content knowledge of the curriculum and created a science classroom culture that promotes active interaction among students as well as students and teachers. However, teacher-led aspects were still emphasized in teaching design and implementation, and the project theme and content were inappropriate to improve the quality of students' science inquiry experience. In the end, the slight difference between teacher's perception of inquiry-oriented/student-centered classes and actual implementation is related to how student-centered "lesson design" is and how to plan and implement classes supported by "procedural knowledge" for students' experience in the science inquiry process. These results indicate that the teacher's self-evaluation alone is not enough to determine whether the teacher's intentions and efforts are actually being implemented, and that it is necessary to conduct objective analysis, evaluation, and discuss the results of science classes by the external observers.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of educational psychology, 84(3), 261.
  2. Cheon, H. S. (2008). A Study on the Development of Program for Classroom Teaching Support through Methods of Instruction Consulting. Social Studies Education, 47(3), 109-134.
  3. Choo, K., & Sin, J. (2015). A Study on Elementary School Teachers' Perception of Curriculum Integration and Type of Restructuring. Teacher Education Research, 54(1), 120-137. https://doi.org/10.15812/TER.54.1.201503.120
  4. Coskun, S. D., Bostan, M. I., & Rowland, T. (2021). An in-service primary teacher's reponses to unexpected moments in the mathmatics classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 193-213.
  5. Day, C. (2002). School reform and transitions in teacher professionalism and identity. International journal of educational research, 37(8), 677-692. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(03)00065-X
  6. Gallagher, S., A. Stepien, W. J., & Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 195-200. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629203600405
  7. Go, M., & Nam, J. (2013). The Change in Beginning Science Teachers' Reflective Practice in their Teaching Performance through Collaborative Mentoring. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 94-113. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2013.33.1.094
  8. Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial. Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology, 8(1), 23.
  9. Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. NY: Routledge.
  10. Hoban, G. (2000). Using a reflective framework to study teaching-learning relationships. Reflective practice, 1(2), 165-182. https://doi.org/10.1080/713693148
  11. Hudson, P. (2002). Mentors and modelling primary science teaching practices. The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education. 7(1).
  12. Jang, E., & Kwon, C. (2010). Self-concept and Teaching Anxiety of Elementary School Teachers about Inquiry Instruction in the Science Class. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 29(2), 155-165.
  13. Kang, H., Jhun, Y., & Lee, C. (2015). An Analysis of the Consistency between a Unit Related to Thermal Energy on Science Textbook and Student's Everyday Experience. Journal of Energy and Climate Change Education, 5(1), 37-44. https://doi.org/10.4337/eecj.2015.02.03
  14. Kelchtermans, G. (2009). Who I am in how I teach is the message: self-understanding, vulnerability and reflection. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 15(2), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875332
  15. Kersting, N. (2008). Using Video Clips of Mathematics Classroom Instruction as Item Prompts to Measure Teachers' Knowledge of Teaching Mathematics. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68(5), 845-861. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164407313369
  16. Kim, J. -Y. (2017). The Analyzing Practices and Exploring Changes of the Elementary School Science Inquiry Adopting Problem Finding Strategies. Gyeongin National University of Education (Doctoral dissertation). Incheon, Korea.
  17. Kim, J. Y. (2012). Effects of Simulated Instruction Activities through a Constructivist Lens on Preservice Biology Teachers' Epistemological Belief, Science Teaching Efficacy Belief and Teaching Motivation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(7), 1157-1168. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2012.32.7.1157
  18. Kim, S.-U., Yang, I.-H., & Lim, S.-M. (2020). A Study on Status and Perception of Class Operation by Elementary School Science Specialized Teachers in COVID-19 Situation. Journal of Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 13(3), 317-329.
  19. Kurt, U., & Sezek, F. (2021). Investigation of the Effect of Different Teaching Methods on Students' Engagement and Scientific Process Skills. International Journal of Progressive Education, 17(3), 86-101. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2021.346.6
  20. Kwak, M., Ahn, W., Kwon, O., & Martin, S. N. (2015). A Study on Verification Methods for Establishing Reliability of Science and Math Classroom Culture Analysis: Focusing on Use of Constructivist Teaching Observation Protocol(RTOP; Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 15(6), 643-667.
  21. Kwak, Y. S. (2002). Relationship between Preservice Science Teachers' Relativist Epistemology and their Pedagogical Beliefs. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 23(3), 221-233.
  22. Laffey, J., Tupper, T., Musser, D. ,& Wedman, J. (1998). A Computer-Mediated Support System for Project-Based Learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(1), 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299830
  23. Lee, J., & So, K. (2017). Middle School Teachers' Understanding of "StudnetParticipatory Class". Journal of Educational Studies, 48(2), 141-165.
  24. Lee, S. Kang, J., Lee, Y., & Oh, Y. (2012). Teaching Consulting through the Systematic Classroom Activities Analysis. Seoul: Hakjisa.
  25. Lee, S. G. (2006). The Development and Application of Research and Education Project Based Learning Model for Scientifically-Gifted High School Students (Doctoral dissertation). Ewha Woman's University, Seoul, Korea.
  26. Lim, H., & Kim, J. (2007). Elementary School Teachers' Perceptions of Inquiry in Science Classes. The Bulletin of Science Education, 20(1), 73-81.
  27. Lim, S. A. (2020). An Analysis of the Characteristics of Elementary School Exploration Class Using the RTOP Method. The Journal of Elementary Education Studies, 27(2), 69-92.
  28. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2017). 2015 개정교육과정 [2015 Education Curriculum] (#2015-80 [Annex 1]). Sejong, Korea: Author. Retrieved from https://ncic.go.kr
  29. National Association of Geoscience Teachers (NAGT). (2013). Classroom Observation Project: Understanding and Improving our Teaching using the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). Retrieved from https://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/certop/interpret.html
  30. O'Donoghue, T., & Punch, K. (Eds.). (2003). Qualitative educational research in action: Doing and reflecting. London: Routledge.
  31. Osborne, J. F. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science Education, 80(1), 53-82. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199601)80:1<53::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-1
  32. Park, J., Nam, J., Kang, E., Park, J., & Son, J. (2019). The Relationship between Mentor Teachers' Mentoring Characteristics and Mentee Teachers' Reflective Practice in Collaborative Mentoring for Beginning Science Teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(1), 115-128. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2019.39.1.115
  33. Park, J., & Nam, J. (2020). Exploration Factors Affecting Maintenance of the Effect of Mentoring for Beginning Science Teachers. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 64(6), 401-415. https://doi.org/10.5012/JKCS.2020.64.6.401
  34. Park, S.-H. (2005). Elementary Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge and the Related Variables of Science Teaching. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 5(1), 195-214.
  35. Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2003). Teachers' beliefs about issues in the implementation of a student-centered learning environment. Educational technology research and development, 51(2), 57-76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504526
  36. Piburn, M., Sawada, D., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., Bloom, I., & Judson, E. (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP) reference manual (ACEPT Technical Report No. IN00-3). AZ: Arizona Board of Regents [On-line] Retrieved from http://www.acept.asu.edu
  37. Seo, K. H. (2011). Teacher communities developing instructional materials through online collaboration. Journal of Educational Studies, 42(3), 25-53.
  38. Solomon, J. (1994). The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, 23, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269408560027
  39. Sung, K., & Kwon, D. (2022). Anaysis of teacher.student interaction and nonverbal communication behavior patterns in elementary inquiry classes. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 22, 447-464.
  40. Thomas, J. D. (2000). A Review of research on project based learning. San Rafael, CA: The Autodesk Foundation.
  41. Yeo, S.-I., & Sung, S.-M. (2013). Analysis of Elementary Teachers' Professional Performance about Science Teaching Practice according to Their Personal Variables. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 32(4), 535-544. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2013.32.4.535