한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제44권5호
  • /
  • Pages.361-378
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

ePCK와 pPCK 간 지식 교환을 통한 초등교사의 pPCK 변화 탐색 -모델링 기반 과학 탐구 수업 사례-

Exploring Elementary Teachers' pPCK Change through the Knowledge Exchange between ePCK and pPCK: The Case of Modeling-based Science Inquiry Instruction

  • 김현주 (서울아주초등학교) ;
  • 임채성 (서울교육대학교) ;
  • 이기영 (강원대학교)
  • Hyun-Ju Kim (Seoul Aju Elementary School) ;
  • Chae-Seong Lim (Seoul National University of Education) ;
  • Ki-Young Lee (Kangwon National University)
  • 투고 : 2024.04.03
  • 심사 : 2024.09.24
  • 발행 : 2024.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구는 모델링 기반 과학 탐구 수업 실행 과정에서 ePCK(실행된 PCK)와 pPCK(개인적 PCK) 간 지식 교환을 통해 초등교사의 pPCK가 어떻게 변화하는지 탐색하였다. 이를 위해 초등교사 3인을 연구참여자로 선정한 뒤 연구참여자가 수업 실행 전⋅후로 두 차례 작성한 CoRe(내용 표상)를 질적 내용 분석하여 pPCK 변화를 포착하고, 연구참여자들이 실행한 모델링 기반 과학 탐구 수업 관련 자료(교수 학습 과정안, 수업 영상, 심층 면담 등)를 근거 이론적 연구 방법으로 분석하였다. 연구 결과, 모델링 기반 과학 탐구 수업 실행 과정에서 ePCK와 pPCK 간 지식 교환으로 초등교사의 pPCK는 교육과정 지식, 학생에 대한 지식, 교수적 지식, 평가 지식 측면에서 변화하였다. 또한 모델링 기반 과학 탐구 수업을 실행한 교사들의 pPCK 변화에는 수업을 계획하고(ePCKP) 수행하며(ePCKT) 성찰하는(ePCKR) ePCK와 pPCK 간 지식 교환이 영향을 미쳤음을 수업 관련 자료 분석을 통해 알 수 있었다. 이러한 연구 결과를 토대로 초등교사의 PCK 영역 간 지식 교환에 영향을 미치는 개인적 요인 규명의 필요성과 효과적인 모델링 기반 과학 탐구 수업 방식 개발의 필요성 등을 제언하였다.

This study explores elementary teachers' PCK change through the knowledge exchange between ePCK (enacted PCK) and pPCK (personal PCK) during modeling-based science inquiry instruction. For this purpose, three elementary school teachers were selected as research participants, and the CoRes(content representations) written by the participants before and after the lessons. The CoRes were, then, analyzed using qualitative content analysis to explore changes in pPCK, and the data related to the modeling-based science inquiry instruction (such as lesson plan, lesson videos, in-depth interviews) were analyzed using grounded theory research methods. The research indicated that the pPCK of elementary teachers who enacted modeling-based science inquiry instruction changed in regard to curricular knowledge, knowledge of students, pedagogical knowledge, and assessment knowledge. The data from the modeling-based science inquiry instruction showed that the changes of the teachers' pPCK was influenced by the knowledge exchange between ePCK and pPCK during the process of planning, teaching, and reflecting on the lessons. Based on the findings, this study discussed the need to identify personal factors that influence elementary teachers' knowledge exchange between PCK realms and suggested the need to develop effective modeling-based science inquiry teaching methods.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Alonzo, A. C., & Kim, J. (2016). Declarative and dynamic pedagogical content knowledge as elicited through two video-based interview methods. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(8), 1259-1286.
  2. Alonzo, A. C., Berry, A., & Nilsson, P. (2018). Capturing and representing the complexity of PCK in action. In A. Hume, R. Cooper, & A. Borowski (Eds.), Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' professional knowledge. New York: Springer.
  3. Alonzo, A. C., Berry, A., & Nilsson, P. (2019). Unpacking the complexity of science teachers' PCK in action: Enacted and personal PCK. Lee, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Chae, Y. (Eds). (2024). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science. Paju: Kyoyookgwahaksa.
  4. Barendsen, E., & Henze, I. (2019). Relating teacher PCK and teacher practice using classroom observation. Research in Science Education, 49, 1141-1175.
  5. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., … Tsai, Y.-M. (2010). Teachers' mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133-180.
  6. Baxter, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (1999). Assessment and measurement of pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 147-161). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  7. Bertram, A., & Loughran, J. (2012). Science teachers' views on CoRes and PaP-eRs as a framework for articulating and developing pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Science Education, 42, 1027-1047.
  8. Brophy, J. (2004). Using video in teacher education. JAI.
  9. Carlson, J., Daehler, K. R., Alonzo, A. C., Barendsen, E., Berry, A., Borowski, A., ... & Wilson, C. D. (2019). The refined consensus model of pedagogical content knowledge in science education. Lee, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Chae, Y. (Eds). (2024). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science. Paju: Kyoyookgwahaksa.
  10. Carpendale, J., & Hume, A. (2019). Investigating practising science teachers' pPCK and ePCK development as a result of collaborative CoRe design. Lee, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Chae, Y. (Eds). (2024). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science. Paju: Kyoyookgwahaksa.
  11. Chamizo, J. A. (2013). A new definition of models and modeling in chemistry' teaching. Science and Education, 22(7), 1613-1632.
  12. Chan, K. K. H., & Yau, K. W. (2021). Using video-based interviews to investigate pre-service secondary science teachers' situation-specific skills for informal formative assessment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 289-311.
  13. Cho, H., Kim, H., Kang, E., Nam, J. (2019). Analysis of Preservice Chemistry Teachers' Modelling Ability and Perceptions in Science Writing for Audiences of General Chemistry Experiment Using Argument-based Modeling Strategy. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 63(6), 459-472.
  14. Clement, J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism. In G. Glover & R. Ronning, C. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity: Assessment, theory and research (pp. 341-381). New York: Plenum.
  15. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative sociology, 13(1), 3-21.
  16. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
  17. Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  18. Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113-136.
  19. Fortus, D., Hug, B., Krajcik, J., Kuhn, L., McNeill, K. L., Reiser, B., ... & Shwartz, Y. (2006). Sequencing and supporting complex scientific inquiry practices in instructional materials for middle school students. In Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
  20. Gaudin, C., & Chalies, S. (2015). Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review. Educational research review, 16, 41-67.
  21. Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education. New York, London: Routledge.
  22. Hand, B., Cavagnetto, A., Chen, Y.-C., & Park, S. (2016). Moving past curricula and strategies: Language and the development of adaptive pedagogy for immersive learning environments. Research in Science Education, 42(2), 223-241.
  23. Hashweh, M. Z. (1996). Effects of science teachers' epistemological beliefs in teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 33(1), 47-63.
  24. Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: A reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(3), 273-292.
  25. Henze, I., van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2008). Development of experienced science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge of models of the solar system and the universe. International Journal of Science Education, 30(10), 1321-1342.
  26. Hume, A. (2015). Getting to the core of the matter: Developing a primary school's science plan. New Zealand Science Teacher, 134, 18-22.
  27. Hume, A., & Berry, A. (2013). Enhancing the practicum experience for pre-service chemistry teachers through collaborative CoRe design with mentor teachers. Research in Science Education, 43, 2107-2136.
  28. Hume, A., Eames, C., Williams, J., & Lockley, J. (2013). The benefits of collaborative content representation (CoRe) design. SET: Information for Teachers, 2, 35-43.
  29. Jang, E., Ko, W., Kang, S. (2012). The Analysis of University Student's Modeling Patterns and Perceptions Through Modeling Experiments. Journal of the Korean association for science education, 32(1), 1-14.
  30. Justi, R. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers' views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369-387.
  31. Kang, N. (2017). Korean Teachers' Conceptions of Models and Modeling in Science and Science Teaching. Journal of the Korean association for science education, 37(1), 143-154.
  32. Kang, N., & Lee, E. (2013). An Analysis of Inquiry Activities in High School Physics Textbooks for the 2009 Revised Science Curriculum. Journal of the Korean association for science education, 33(1), 132-143.
  33. Ke, L., & Schwarz, C. V. (2021). Supporting students' meaningful engagement in scientific modeling through epistemological messages: A case study of contrasting teaching approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(3), 335-365.
  34. Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Thompson, B. J., Santagata, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2012). Measuring usable knowledge: Teachers' analyses of mathematics classroom videos predict teaching quality and student learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 568-589.
  35. Kim, D. (2006). Student's Theory on Classroom-Level Curriculum Implementation: An Analysis from the Perspective of Post-modernism. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 24(1), 1-40.
  36. Kim, H., Lim, C., & Lee, K. (2023). Composition and attributes of modeling instructions and factors of teacher competence in elementary science classes: A qualitative meta-analysis. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education 42(3), 434-454.
  37. Kim, H., Lim, C., & Lee, K. (2024). Exploring the Changes in Elementary Teachers' Modeling pPCK for Science Modeling Instructions Through Knowledge Exchange of the Refined Consensus Model. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 44(1), 105-117.
  38. Kim, N., & Yeo, S. (2023). Structural Relationships between Learning Organizational Culture, Science Epistemological Beliefs, Science Teaching Efficacy, Science Teaching Professionalism Perceived by Elementary School Teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 43(1), 37-47.
  39. Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169-204.
  40. Krauss, S., Brunner, M., Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Blum, W., Neubrand, M., & Jordan, A. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of educational psychology, 100(3), 716-725.
  41. Krell, M., & Kruger, D. (2017). University students' meta-modelling knowledge. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(3), 1-13.
  42. Lee, H. (2006). Development of supporting programs for teaching consultation and pedagogical content knowledge by subjects (RRI 2006-1). Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
  43. Lee, M. (2019). A Practical Analysis on the Modeling Application Lessons of High School Science Teachers : focused on the Experiential Implementation-based Science Teacher Training through the Science Lessons. Doctoral Dissertation, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  44. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1990). Judging the quality of case study reports. Internation Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 3(1), 53-59.
  45. Louca, L. T., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Modeling-based learning in science education: Cognitive, metacognitive, social, material and epistemological contributions. Educational Review, 64(4), 471-492.
  46. Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2006). Understanding and developing science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Dordrecht: Sense Publishers.
  47. Loughran, J., Berry, A., & Mulhall, P. (2012). Understanding and developing science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Sense Publishers.
  48. Loughran, J., Milroy, P., Berry, A., Mulhall, P., & Gunstone, R. (2001). Science cases in action: Documenting science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge through PaP-eRs. Research in Science Education, 31, 289-307.
  49. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370-391.
  50. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95-132). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
  51. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Sage publications.
  52. Mazibe, E. N., Coetzee, C., & Gaigher, E. (2020). A comparison between reported and enacted pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) about graphs of motion. Research in Science Education, 50, 941-964.
  53. Ministry of Education(MOE). (2015). Science curriculum. notification No. 2015-74. Sejong: Ministry of Education.
  54. Mitchell, I., Keast, S., Panizzon, D., & Mitchell, J. (2017). Using 'big ideas' to enhance teaching and student learning. Teachers and teaching, 23(5), 596-610.
  55. Morrison, M., & Morgan, M. S. (1999). Models as mediating instruments. In M. Morrison & M. S. Morgan (Eds.), Models as mediators (pp. 10-37). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  56. Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (2005). Growing the tree of teacher knowledge: Ten years of learning to teach elementary science. Journal of research in Science teaching, 42(7), 767-790.
  57. National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  58. Newman, J. W. (1994). America's teachers: An introduction to education (2nd). Longman Publishing Group.
  59. NGSS Lead States (Ed.). (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  60. Nilsson, P., & Loughran, J. (2012). Exploring the development of pre-service science elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 699-721.
  61. Park, S. (2019). Reconciliation between the refined consensus model of PCK and extant PCK models for advancing PCK research in science. Lee, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Chae, Y. (Eds). (2024). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science. Paju: Kyoyookgwahaksa.
  62. Park, S., & Suh, J. (2019). The PCK map approach to capturing the complexity of enacted PCK (ePCK) and pedagogical reasoning in science teaching. Lee, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Chae, Y. (Eds). (2024). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science. Paju: Kyoyookgwahaksa.
  63. Passmore, C. M., & Svoboda, J. (2012). Exploring opportunities for argumentation in modelling classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(10), 1535-1554.
  64. Rich, P. J., & Hannafin, M. (2009). Video annotation tools: Technologies to scaffold, structure, and transform teacher reflection. Journal of teacher education, 60(1), 52-67.
  65. Rollnick, M., Bennett, J., Rhemtula, M., Dharsey, N., & Ndlovu, T. (2008). The place of subject matter knowledge in pedagogical content knowledge: A case study of South African teachers teaching the amount of substance and chemical equilibrium. International journal of science education, 30(10), 1365-1387.
  66. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Qualitative content analysis in practice, 1-280.
  67. Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632-654.
  68. Shi, F., Wang, L., Liu, X., & Chiu, M. H. (2021). Development and validation of an observation protocol for measuring science teachers' modeling-based teaching performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(9), 1359-1388.
  69. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
  70. Sorge, S., Stender, A., & Neumann, K. (2019). The development of science teachers' professional competence. Lee, K., Park, J., Kim, H., Chae, Y. (Eds). (2024). Repositioning pedagogical content knowledge in teachers' knowledge for teaching science. Paju: Kyoyookgwahaksa.
  71. Stroupe, D. (2015). Describing "Science Practice" in learning settings. Science Education, 99(6), 1033-1040.
  72. Suk, Y., & Yoon, H. (2022). Analysis of elementary students modeling using the globe on the cause of seasonal change. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 41(4), 673-689.
  73. Uhm, J., & Kim, H. (2020). Changes in Teaching Practices of Elementary School Teachers in Scientific Modeling Classes: Focused on Modeling Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK). Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(5), 543-563.
  74. van Driel, J. H., & Abell, S. K. (2010). Science teacher education. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 712-718). Oxford: Elsevier.
  75. van Driel, J. H., & Henze, I. (2012). Extended paper for PCK Summit, Colorado 2012. Retrieved from http://pcksummit.bscs.org.
  76. van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2002). Experienced teachers' knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modeling in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24(12), 1255-1272.
  77. Vo, T., Forbes, C., Zangori, L., & Schwarz, C. V. (2019). Longitudinal investigation of primary inservice teachers' modelling the hydrological phenomena. International Journal of Science Education, 41(18), 2788-2807.
  78. Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers' understandings of model-based inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 783-835.
  79. Yoo, Y., & Oh, P. (2016). Effects of modeling-based science inquiry instruction on elementary students' learning in the unit of seasonal changes. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 35(2), 265-276.
  80. Yoon, H. (2011). Pre-service Elementary Teachers' Inquiry on a Model of Magnetism and Changes in Their Views of Scientific Models. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 30(3), 353-366.