Browse > Article

The Effect of Grouping by Transactional Analysis and Students' Verbal Interaction on the Project method in Technical High School  

Son, ju-min (Daejeon Technical High-school)
Publication Information
대한공업교육학회지 / v.33, no.1, 2008 , pp. 191-212 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to show how to organize small groups on the project method class in technical high school. The subjects of this study were two classes including 40 second-year students (20 students in each class) of architecture design course in D technical high school located in Taejeon metropolitan city. The method of this study was to investigate the ego-state by the ego-gram practicing Transactional Analysis. Total 10 small groups were organized. Each group had 4 members. And the same quality of egostate small group was organized by the 4 students who have high score on NP and AC. The different in kind small group was organized by the 4 students, each of whom has NP leading, A leading, FC leading and AC leading score. After the target small group was video- taped, students' verbal interaction was written into transcripts. Their individual states were analysed by the frame of verbal interaction. The result of this study was that the same quality of TAOK small group had more active interaction(110 times) than different in kind small group(87 times). The frequency of complementary transaction was also higher plenty in the same quality of TAOK small group.
Keywords
small group organization; verbal interaction;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 이기춘.(1990). 교류분석과 상담. 대학 카운슬러연구협의회 편. 상담의 이론과 실제. 서울:중앙적성.
2 Lindly, L. D., & Borgen, F. H. (2000). Personal styles of the strong interest inventory: Linking personality and interests. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 57(1), 22-41.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 Tziner, A. (1985). How team composition affects task performance: Some theoretical insights. Psychological Report, 57(3), part 2, 1111-1119.   DOI
4 유병로.(2001). 수정된 TAPPS 활동이 공업고등학교 학생의 전자회로 고장해결 능력에 미치는 효과. 충남대학교 박사학위 논문.
5 Katz, L. G., & Chard, S. C.(1989). Engaging children's mind. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
6 Hoffman, L. R., & Maier, M. R. F. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solution by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(2), 401-407.   DOI
7 우재현.(2006). 이고그램 243 패턴. 대구:정암서원.
8 Bandura, A. (1969). Principles of behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
9 우재현.(2006). 심성개발을 위한 교류분석(TA) 프로그램. 대구:정암서원.
10 강석진.(2000). 토론과정에서 사회적 합의 형성을 강조한 개념 학습 전략: 교수 효과 및 소집단 토론에서의 언어적 상호작용. 서울대학교 박사학위 논문.
11 George, J. M. (1990). Personality, affect, and behavior in groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(2), 107-116.   DOI
12 손주민, 김판욱.(1995). 공업계 고등학교 실기교육에서 동료지도법을 적용한 협동학습 수업전략, 대한공업교육연구, 31(1). 서울:대한공업교육학회.
13 Chan, K. W., & Galton, M. (1999). Cooperative learning in Hong Kong schools: Attitudes of teachers and pupils toward cooperative group work. ED 435609.
14 Johnson, D. W., R. Johnson. (1997). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. 6th ed. MA:Allyn & Bacon.
15 Furnham, A., & Heaven, P. (1999). Personality and social behaviour (pp. 77-101). London:Arnold.
16 Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in pairs and fours. Jouranl of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10),1099-1114.   DOI   ScienceOn