• 산업융합연구
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.53-58
• /
• 2020

2015 개정 교육과정은 창의 융합 인재를 키우고자 하는 데 그 목적이 있다. 이에 SW 교육은 컴퓨팅 사고력을 높이기 위한 다양한 융합교육 방법에 대한 연구가 필요하다. 이에 본 연구의 목적은 컴퓨팅 사고력 향상을 위한 독서교육과 로봇활용 교육 중심의 SW융합교육의 효과를 분석하는 것이다. 이를 위해 카드코딩 기반의 로봇을 이용한 SW 교육과 온작품읽기와 상호텍스트성을 토대로한 독서교육을 융합하여 SW 교육 교수학습을 설계하였다. 결국 이러한 독서와 SW의 융합교육은 컴퓨팅 사고력의 개념, 실습, 관점의 3가지 영역을 모두 향상시켰으며 학습자의 만족도를 높였다.

• 한국문헌정보학회지
• /
• 제25권
• /
• pp.445-476
• /
• 1993

This paper is written to clarify the specific details of the Sabu-Songyu­Mongnok(사부송유목록). which is a reading list for recitation and appreciation of Chinese classics edited by Hong Suk-Chu(1774-1842) when he was 56 years old for the stimulation of his younger brother Hyun-Ju (1793-1865)'s reading life. In this study the catalogue's title interpretation. the time of the editing, the motive for the editing and the analysis of the contents are revealed as what they actually are. The main details are as followings. There is no date written on the Sabu-Songyu-Mongnok but the writer estimate it to be around 1829. After Hong Suk-Chu recognized the fact that although his younger brother Hyun-Ju was interested in reading but felt that he was a little too old to begin to read all the books of the whole classes. he selected the classic works from whole subjects, i.e. history, philosophy and anthology, that he thought which would best represent each subject. From these selected works he then picked out the most important chapters or parts of the works. Another motivation of the editing was for the stimulation of the reading life for Hong Suk-chu himself and for people like himself who were getting old and losing their vitality. The Sabu-Songyu-Mongnok consists of four categories. i.e. classics category, history category, philosophy category and anthology category, and in the catalogue, 26 different works are entered. The classics category has ten, the history category has six, the philosophy category has six and the anthology category has four. Each of the works are entered under the title of the book, and hen the chapter heading. The Sabu-Songyu-Mongnok was edited 19 years later than Hong-ssi toksorok(홍씨독서록) or an Annotated Bibliography of Korean and Chinese Books. Comparing each category of the catalogue with the Hong-ssi toksorok, the writer could catch the following characteristics. 1. Although there was no indication of the class heading, the sequence of the arrangement of the entries in the classics categories was the same as the sequence of the classes in the Hong-ssi toksorok. 2. The Zuo-shi Chun-qiu-zhuan(좌씨춘추전) is recorded in the class of Chunqiu of the classics category in the Hong-ssi toksorok, but in the Sabu-Songyu­Mongnok, it belongs to the history category. 3. In the philosophy category of the catalogue, Chuangtzu(장자) writings are included because it is so well written. 4. Unlike the categories of classics, history and anthology, the philosophy category is recorded under the author's name. This is fascinating because it unites with the conventional cataloguing practice of the west. 5. In the anthology category, the writings with the best styles from the Chuci(초사) or the poems of Chou, Wen-xuan(문선), wen-yuan-ying-hua(문여영화) are selected and classified into four parts: (1) poems, (2) proses of Han, Wei and Pre-Qin dynasties. (3) Si-liu-pian-li-wen(사육병려문), (4) classic style of writings of Tang and Song dynasties (당송고문). 6. There was an unusually large number of Han Yu's writings selected from the great eight poets of Tang and Song dynasty writings. (20 categories out of $43: 47\%)$ After comparing the entries of the Sabu-Songyu-Mongnok, it can be concluded that all the entries were also included in the Hong-ssi tokrorok. The fact that the sequence of the entries in the classics category and that the literary works were sequenced under the same subject by the year of editing or writing like as the Hong-ssi toksorok Also it is unusual that there was not even one literary work of a Korean in the catalogue. Anyhow this catalogue is the first recitation catalogue in our country that was edited for the people in the prime of life as well as for old people and is the only one existing today.

• 비교교육연구
• /
• 제18권4호
• /
• pp.187-206
• /
• 2008

이 연구는 러시아의 교육실천가로서 탁월한 업적을 남겨 사회주의 노동 영웅, 우크라이나공화국 공로교사로 표창을 받았고, 레닌 훈장과 마카렌코 훈장을 비롯한 여러 훈장을 수여받았으며, 교육과학 아카데미의 준회원으로 선정된 인물인 와실리 알렉산드로비치 수호믈린스키(Василий Алeкcaндpoвич Сухомлинcкий)의 저작에 나타난 학교교육에 관한 논의를 학교교육의 문제점과 개선 방향으로 나누어 살펴 본 후 이를 통해 우리 교육이 안고 있는 문제점과 해결 방안의 모색에 주는 시사점을 살펴보고자 하였다. 수호믈린스키는 학교교육의 문제점을 교육목표의 불명확성과 학생들의 정신생활에 대한 관심의 부족 그리고 사유 수업의 부족 그리고 암기위주의 교육 등에서 찾았고 그 해결 방안으로서 기초 지식교육의 강화와 독서를 통한 정신생활을 풍요롭게 하는 교육, 휴식과 자유활동 시간의 충분한 제공, 교육평가 방법의 개선등을 주장하였다. 그의 이러한 주장은 현재 우리 교육이 해결해 나가야 주요한 과제 중의 하나이기도 하다. 따라서 그의 교육 실천을 통한 귀중한 경험은 우리 교육이 안고 있는 과제 해결을 위한 좋은 교훈이 될 수 있을 것이다.

• 미술이론과 현장
• /
• 제2호
• /
• pp.27-48
• /
• 2004

Robert Rauschenberg's artistic career has often been regarded as having reached its culmination when the artist won the first prize at the 1964 Venice Biennale. With this victory, Rauschenberg triumphantly entered the pantheon of all-American artists and firmly secured his position in the history of American art. On the other hand, despite the artist's ongoing new experiments in his art, the seemingly precocious ripeness in his career has led the critical discourses on Rauschenberg's art to the artist's early works, most of which were done in the mid-1950s and the 1960s. The crux of Rauschenberg criticism lies not only in focusing on the artist's 50's and 60's works, but also in its large dismissal of the significance of the imagery that the artist employed in his works. As art historians Roger Cranshaw and Adrian Lewis point out, the critical discourse of Rauschenberg either focuses on the formalist concerns on the picture plane, or relies on the "culturalist" interpretation of Rauschenberg's imagery which emphasizes the artist's "Americanness." Recently, a group of art historians centered around October has applied Charles Sanders Peirce's semiotics as art historical methodology and illuminated the indexical aspects of Rauschenberg's work. The semantic inquiry into Rauschenberg's imagery has also been launched by some art historians who seek the clues in the artist's personal context. The first half of this essay will examine the previous criticism on Rauschenberg's art and the other half will discuss the artist's 1955 work Rebus, which I think intersects various critical concerns of Rauschenberg's work, and yet defies the closure of discourses in one direction. The categories of signs in the semiotics of Charles Sanders Peirce and the discourse of Jean-Francois Lyotard will be used in discussing the meanings of Rebus, not to search for the semantic readings of the work, hut to make an analogy in terms of the paradoxical structures of both the work and the theory. The definitions of rebus is as follows: Rebus 1. a representation or words or syllables by pictures of object or by symbols whose names resemble the intended words or syllables in sound; also: a riddle made up wholly or in part of such pictures or symbols. 2. a badge that suggests the name of the person to whom it belongs. Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged. Since its creation in 1955, Robert Rauschenberg's Rebus has been one of the most intriguing works in the artist's oeuvre. This monumental 'combine' painting($6feet{\times}10feet$ 10.5 inches) consists of three panels covered with fabric, paper, newspaper, and printed reproductions. On top of these, oil paints, pencil and crayon drawings connect each section into a whole. The layout of the images is overall horizontal. Starting from a torn election poster, which is partially read as "THAT REPRE," on the far left side of the painting. Rebus leads us to proceed from the left to the right, the typical direction of reading in a Western context. Along with its seemingly proper title. Rebus, the painting has triggered many art historians to seek some semantic readings of it. These art historians painstakingly reconstruct the iconography based on the artist's interviews, (auto)biography, and artistic context of his works. The interpretation of Rebus varies from a 'image-by-image' collation with a word to a more general commentary on Rauschenberg's work overall, such as a work that "bridges between art and life." Despite the title's allusion to the legitimate purpose of the painting as a decoding of the imagery into sound, Rebus, I argue, actually hinders a reading of it. By reading through Peirce to Rauschenberg, I will delve into the subtle anxiety between words and images in their works. And on this basis, I suggest Rauschenberg's strategy in playing Rebus is to hide the meaning of the imagery rather than to disclose it.