Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2013.23.2.237

Development and Application of Program Based on Peer Instruction for Science Gifted Students of Start Period  

Lee, Ji Won (Korea National University of Education)
Kim, Jung Bog (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of Gifted/Talented Education / v.23, no.2, 2013 , pp. 237-256 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to develop program that take a genuine interest in science and motivate students to keep up their study for science gifted children of start period. In this study, we develop and apply the program about sinking and floating for elementary science gifted students, and analyse degree of conceptual change. Students' prior knowledge is analysed for developing the program, and each step is settled about concept of density and buoyancy. Conceptests are arranged into step by step, and we apply the program to 26 science gifted students of 6th grade elementary school. We compare a percentage of correct answers of pre-test and post-test and evaluate Hake gain for analysis of degree of conceptual change. As a result, science gifted students' concepts are changed effectively into scientific concepts by program based on peer instruction for gifted students of start period. And they evaluate the program is novel and useful, also they can be motivated by the program.
Keywords
Talent development model; Elementary science gifted; Peer instruction; conceptest; Conceptual change;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 2  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2004). Classroom demonstrations: Learning tools or entertainment? American Journal of Physics, 72(6), 835.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Feynman, R. P. (1999). The pleasure of finding things out. NY: Basic Books.
3 Finkelstein, N., & Mazur, E. (2009). Are most people too dumb for physics? The Physics Teacher, 47(8), 418-421.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Gagne. F. (2010). Motivation within the DMGT 2.0. framework. High Ablity Studies, 21(2), 81-99.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics course. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Havu. S. (2005). Examining young children's conceptual change process in floating and sinking from a social constructivist perspective. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 259-279.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Hewson, M. G. (1986). The acquisition of scientific knowledge: Analysis and representation of student conceptions concerning density. Science Education, 70(2), 159-170.   DOI
8 Lasry, N., Watkins, J., & Mazur, E. (2008). Peer instruction: From Harvard to the two-year college. American journal of Physics, 76(11), 1066-1069.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Lorenzo, M., Crouch, C., & Mazur, E. (2006). Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroo. American Journal of Physics, 74(2), 118-122.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Loverude, M. E. (2009). A research-based interactive lecture demonstration on sinking and floating. American Journal of Physics, 77(10), 897-901.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A User's Manual. NJ: Prentice Hall.
12 Novak, G. M., Patterson. E. T., Gavrin, A. D., & Christian, W. (1999). Just-in-time Teaching: Blending active learning with web technology. NJ: Prentice Hall.
13 Redish. E. F. (2003). Teaching physics with the physics suite. NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
14 Renzulli. J. S. (2005). The three-ring conception of giftedness. A developmental model for promoting creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.). Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 246-279). NY: Cambridge University Press.
15 Skoumios, M. (2009). The effect of sociocognitive conflict on students' dialogic argumentaion about flouting and sinking. International Journal of Envirinmental & Science Education, 4(4), 381-399.
16 Sokoloff, D. R., & Thornton, R. K. (2001). Interactive Lecture Demonstrations. NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
17 김규환 (2012). 초등 과학수업에서 주제에 따른 Peer Instruction의 효과. 박사학위논문. 한국교원대학교.
18 Stanley, J. C. (1976). The case for extreme educational acceleration of intellectually brilliant youths. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20(1), 66-75.   DOI
19 Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius. P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based On Psychological Science. Association for Psychological Science, 12(1), 3-54.
20 김재우, 오원근 (2002). 밀도 개념 학습의 제약 요인으로서 무게에 대한 범주적 사고. 새물리, 45(2), 123-127.   과학기술학회마을
21 김종원, 김규환, 이지원, 황명수, 김중복 (2012). 과학 교사 연수에서의 동료 교수법의 효과 및 교사의 인식. 과학교육연구지, 36(1), 84-93.
22 류은희, 김중복, 이정숙 (2012). 중학교 과학영재와 일반학생의 Peer Instruction을 통한 인지 갈등: 문항의 난이도에 따른 비교를 중심으로. 영재교육연구, 22(1), 117-139.
23 박현덕 (2012). 대학 물리수업에서 Peer Instruction의 단계 및 구현 유형별 학생 인식. 박사학위논문. 한국교원대학교.
24 서혜애, 이윤호 (2003). 영재교육기관의 교수학습실태 분석. 중등교육연구, 51(2), 69-86.
25 이승희, 최선영 (2012). 초등 과학 수업에서 학생 동료 멘토링 활동이 과학 탐구 능력, 학업 성취도 및 과학적 태도에 미치는 영향. 초등과학교육, 31(3), 311-320.
26 이재봉, 김용진, 백성혜, 이기영 (2010). 과학과 교육 내용 개선을 위한 교육과정 내용 관련 쟁점 분석. 과학교육연구지, 140-154.
27 이지원, 김종원, 김규환, 황명수, 김중복 (2013). 동료 교수법 기반의 과학교사 연수를 위한 단계형 개념검사문항 개발-바늘구멍 사진기의 원리 학습을 중심으로-. 한국과학교육학회지, 33(2), 229-248.
28 이희진 (2011). Peer Instruction을 통한 초등학교 6학년 학생의 과학 개념 변화. 석사학위논문. 한국교원대학교.
29 황명수 (2013). 파동 전파속도에 관한 Peer Instruction에서 예비 물리교사의 정신모델 변화. 박사학위논문. 한국교원대학교.
30 정영란, 손대희 (2000). 협동학습 전략이 중학교 생물학습에서 학생들의 학업성취도와 과학에 대한 태도에 미치는 영향. 한국과학교육학회지, 20(4), 611-623.   과학기술학회마을
31 Bloom, B. S. (1982). The role of figts and markers in the development of talent. Exceptional Children, 48(6), 510-522.   DOI
32 Clement, J., Brown, D., & Zietsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconception: Finding anchoring conceptions for grounding instruction on students' intuitions. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 554-565.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Crouch, C. H. (1998). Peer instruction: An interactive approach for large lecture lasses. Optics & Photonics News, 9(9), 37-41.
34 Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970-977.   DOI   ScienceOn
35 Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children's ideas in science. Milton keynes: Open University Press.
36 Duckworth, A. L., Berstein, H., Kirby, T. A., & Ericsson, K. A. (2011). Deliberate practice spells success: Why grittier competitors triumph at the national spelling bee. Social Psychology and Personality Science, 2(2), 174-181.   DOI
37 Eccles, J. S. (2006). A motivational perspective on school achievement: Taking responsibility for learning, teaching, and supporting. In R. J. Sternberg & R. F. Subotnik (Eds.), Malleable minds, Translating insights from psychology and neuroscience to gifted education. CT: National Center for Research on Giftedness and Talent.
38 Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273-305.   DOI   ScienceOn