Journal of Science Education (과학교육연구지)

Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development and Application of a Tool for Measuring on a Scientist Image by the Semantic Differential Method

의미분석법에 의한 과학자 이미지 측정도구 개발 및 적용

  • Received : 2024.02.14
  • Accepted : 2024.04.22
  • Published : 2024.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Knowing the learner's image of a subject-related occupation is good data for determining the direction of a teacher's teaching and learning. Existing drawing image analysis tools have the limitation that it takes a long time to analyze images and drawings of a scientist's appearance. The semantic differential method is a widely used method to analyze images of specific objects. However, research using the semantic differential method has the limitation of failing to reflect terms or factors that change over time by using the adjective pairs used in the initial study as they were in accordance with the research content. In this study, we use the semantic differential method to develop a tool to measure middle school students' scientist image and apply it to middle school students to discuss educational implications regarding the usefulness of measuring scientist image.

학습자들이 가지고 있는 교과관련 직업에 대한 이미지를 아는 것은 교사의 교수·학습의 방향성을 결정하는 좋은 자료가 된다. 기존의 그리기 이미지 분석도구는 과학자의 외형적인 이미지 및 그림을 분석하는 데 오랜 시간이 소요된다는 한계점이 있었다. 의미분석법은 특정 대상의 이미지를 분석하는데 널리 사용되는 방법이다. 그러나 의미분석법을 활용한 연구는 초창기 연구에서 사용한 형용사쌍을 연구 내용에 맞추어 그대로 사용함으로써 시대 변화에 따른 용어나 요인들을 반영하지 못하는 한계점이 있었다. 이 연구에서는 의미분석법을 활용하여 중등학생의 과학자에 대한 이미지 측정도구를 개발하고, 이를 중학생에게 적용하여 과학자 이미지 측정도구 활용의 유용성에 대한 교육적 시사점을 논의한다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2021년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2021S1A5B5A17052374).

References

  1. Finson, K. D., Beaver. J. B., & Craomnd, B. L. (1995). Development and field test of checklist for the draw-a-scientist test. School Science and Mathematics, 95(4), 195-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15762.x
  2. Hong, H. (2005). New direction of career education through subject-integrated method in korea. Presented article in the Career Education Society of Korea conference, May 27. Kyonggi University.
  3. Huang, Y., & Li, J. (2015). Comparing personal characteristic factors of imagination between expert and novice designers within different product design stages. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(2), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9276-x
  4. Jang, M., & Lee, M. (2004). The sixth-grade students' conceptions of a scientist's time use. Elementary Science Education, 24(6), 1118-1130.
  5. Ju, N., & Kwon, N. (2022). The Development and Application of Science Career Education Programs for the Lower Grades of Elementary School. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 41(3), 443-456.
  6. Jung, J., & Kim, Y. (2014). A Study on elementary students' perceptions of science, engineering, and technology and on the images of scientists, engineers, and technicians. Korean Association for Science Education, 34(8), 719-730. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.8.0719
  7. Kang, H., & Lee, J. (2010). Elementary School Students' Image of Science Class and Factors Influencing Their Formations. Korean Association for Science Education, 30(4), 519-531.
  8. Kim, I., & Chung, Y. (2009). A study on the image of accounting subjects in business information high school students. Business Education Research, 23(1), 1-28.
  9. Kim, K., & Ham, H. (2016). The attitudes and images of middle school students toward invention. Korean Association for Science Education, 36(1), 63-73. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0063
  10. Kim, K., Shin, S., Lim, H., & Noh, T. (2008). Middle and high school students' awareness on scientific or technological workplaces and relevant professions. Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 890-900.
  11. Kim, Y., & Choi, M. (2001). The parent image of children and adolescents by semantic differential technique. Korean Journal of Play Therapy, 11(4), 3-14.
  12. Kucukaydin, M. A., & ESEN, S. (2023). DAST or VoSAL? Adaptation of the VoSAL to Turkish and a Comparison between the Instruments. International Journal of Science Education, 45(13), 1118-1140. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2187674
  13. Lee, H., & Lim, H. (2020). Elementary Students' and Teachers' Perception on Science-Related Career and Career Education. Journal of Science Education, 44(1), 50-60. https://doi.org/10.21796/JSE.2020.44.1.50
  14. Lee, Y., & Shin, D. (2014). Program development of scientists' episode: Focusing on scientists' joy, anger, sorrow, and pleasure. Korean Association for Science Education, 34(5), 469-478. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.5.0469
  15. Lee, W. (2019). A Study on the Welfare Image of University Students Using the Sematic Differential Technique. The Journal of NGO Studies, 14(1), 83-104.
  16. Lim, J., Jin, Y., & Cho, A. (2016). Youth worker's image perceived by youth. Forum For Youth Culture, 48, 87-108. https://doi.org/10.17854/ffyc.2016.10.48.87
  17. Lim, Y., Min, B., & Hong. H. (2015). Development and application effect of design-based STEAM program for boosting the career consciousness of 5~6th grade elementary school students for natural sciences and engineering. Korean Association for Science Education, 35(1), 73-84.
  18. Norbergh, K. Helin, Y. Dahl, A. Hellze'n, O., & Asplund, K. (2006). Nurses' attitudes towards people with dementia: The semantic differential technique. Nursing Ethics, 13(3), 264-274.
  19. Mattson, R. E., Rogge, R. D., Johnson, M. D., Davidson, E. K. B., & Fincham, F. D. (2013). The positive and negative semantic dimensions of relationship satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 20(2), 328-355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01412.x
  20. Murakami, T., & Kroonenberg, P. M. (2003). Three-mode models and individual differences in semantic differential data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 38(2), 247-283. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3802_5
  21. Reinisch, B., & Krell, M. (2023). Assessing Pre‑service Teachers' Views of Scientists, Their Activities, and Locations: the VoSAL Instrument. Research in Science Education, 53, 139-153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-022-10046-w
  22. Schlag, P. A., Yoder, D. G., & Sheng, Z. (2015). Words Matter: A Semantic Differential Study of Recreation, Leisure, Play, Activity, and Sport. A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, 1, 25-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/1937156X.2015.11949724
  23. Son, C. (2007). Educational Research Methodology (3rd ed.). Seoul: Taeyoung Publishing.
  24. Song, Y. (2020). Physics Image Analysis by Sematic Method and Interest in Physics of Freshman Students in the Engineering College. Journal of Science Education, 44(2), 214-224. https://doi.org/10.21796/JSE.2020.44.2.214
  25. Svidzinskaya, G. B., Baskin, Y. G., & Mezentseva, M. E. (2019). Using the Semantic Differential Method to Assess the Learning Motivation and Attitude of First-year Student's Towards Chemistry in University of Emercom of Russia. International Journal of Education and Practice, 7(2), 88-100.
  26. You, J., & Kwon, D. (2009). The study on the images of elementary school teachers by semantic differential method. The Journal of Elementary Education Studies, 16(1), 85-100.
  27. Wang, H., & Hong, C. S. (2022). A study on Color Convergence of Disposable Coffee Packaging Design Using the Semantic Differential Method. The Korean Society Of Science & Art, 40(1), 219-230. https://doi.org/10.17548/ksaf.2022.01.30.219