• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.338-352
• /
• 2020

This study analyzed and compared the characteristics in plan and practice of elementary school teachers' science-gifted classes and invention-gifted classes based on pedagogical content knowledge (PCK). To do this, we selected eight elementary school teachers with experience in conducting elementary science-gifted classes and/or invention-gifted classes were selected at the gifted education institutes in Seoul and conducted individual in-depth interviews. The analysis of the results reveal that the teachers tended to organize the science-gifted classes with a focus on the exploration of causes and application activities for scientific phenomena, but tended to organize the invention-gifted classes with a focus on producing creative output based on methodology. They were all emphasizing the enhancement of creativity in planning and practicing both science-gifted classes and invention-gifted classes. However, there were also some differences in the elements of creativity required by each class. They tended to select subjects for science-gifted classes based on regular science curriculum, while selecting subjects for invention-gifted classes focused on creative design rather than considering the practical art curriculum related to invention-gifted education. They tended to pursue and practice STEAM education in both science-gifted classes and invention-gifted classes. In a way that conforms to these class goals and points, they were using experiments and practices, providing feedback to students, and conducting evaluations. However, some shortcomings were also revealed in the processes. Educational implications of these findings are discussed.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.64-73
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to analyze the difficulties of teachers who teach gifted students in invention and to help address their concerns. To this end, the researcher interviews four teachers with more than three years of experience in guiding gifted students in invention. As a result, they have the difficulties such as difficulties in themselves, relationship with parents, in teaching students, relationship with school and relationship with education office. Supporting measures are 1) strengthening incentives for inventive gifted teachers, 2) continuing in service education, 3) improving the student selection process for gifted students in invention, 4) improving parents' perception of gifted students in invention, 5) improving awareness of school administrators, 6) consistent and continuous administration.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.558-565
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study was to compare thinking styles between the gifted students in science and invention The subjects were 191 gifted elementary students in science and 182 gifted elementary students in invention, who enrolled in gifted education program. They were given the Thinking Style Inventory (TSI) that standardized Korea version by Yun (1997), which constructed 13 thinking styles of 5 dimensions (functions, forms, levels, scopes, and leanings of the mental self-government). The collected data were analyzed by independent sampling t-test and ANOVA with SPSS. The findings of this study were as follows: the gifted in science prefer executive, oligarchic, and global thinking styles rather than the gifted in invention. Meanwhile, the gifted in invention prefer legislative, judicial, local, and liberal thinking styles rather than the gifted in science. Both of the gifted in science and invention prefer legislative, executive, monarchic, anarchic, external, and liberal thinking styles. There was statistically significant differences between boys and girls in executive, oligarchic, local, and liberal thinking styles of the gifted in science.

• 대한공업교육학회지
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.1-18
• /
• 2014

This study took existing invention intellectual property related textbooks being utilized in secondary vocational education, analyzed the formation status of 'key learning elements' reflection ratio and drew optimum key learning elements formation ratio by invention intellectual property education content required in secondary vocational education in the future. For this, the study task was set up as 'what kind and how much of invention intellectual property key learning elements are in the invention intellectual property textbook education content now and what is the desirable ratio of each key learning elements in the future'. To resolve this task, 3 specialists analyzed the invention intellectual property education content reflection status and optimum reflection ratio by invention intellectual property education content required in the future is suggested by Delphi survey. The results of this study are as following. First, the result of analysis on invention intellectual property key learning elements included in the invention patent recognition books being utilized in secondary vocational education was that the books included all key learning elements; however, some textbooks have the trend of concentrating in D area (problem-solving activities). Second, the result of analysis on the reflection ratio by invention intellectual property education content area in the invention patent recognition books being utilized in secondary vocational education was that there was the trend in most textbooks that they concentrate in intellectual property creation area; while some textbooks deal with intellectual property protection area and intellectual property utilization area. Regarding by achievement type, knowledge area was main in all textbooks. Meanwhile, function area is dealt in invention patent basic, invention and problem-solving and design textbooks. Attitude area is not dealt or is dealt insufficiently in most textbooks. Third, the optimum reflection ratio of invention intellectual property education key learning elements required in secondary vocational education in the future as obtained by specialists' delphi survey was that it is necessary to decrease D (problem-solving activities) 17.7% area, E(invention fusion knowledge) 2.9% area, K(patent application) 6.9% and L(patent information investigation) area 9.6%. Regarding the optimum reflection ratio of invention intellectual property education content, it is suggested that the invention literacy area 3.1%, intellectual property creation area 4.5% and intellectual property protection area 10.6% would be decreased; while intellectual property utilization area 17.7% would be increased. Regarding optimum reflection ratio of achievement type, it is suggested that knowledge area 52% would be decreased; while function area 32.3% and attitude area 19.6% would be increased.

• 대한공업교육학회지
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.209-226
• /
• 2014

This study investigates invention and patent specialized high school teachers' understanding of terminology and their meaning differences in the realm of invention, career-specific, and freestyle Invention according to background variables. The population of this research consists of 333 teachers currently employed in invention and patent specialized high school and complete enumeration survey has been used. To analyze the terminology understanding and their meaning differences, total of 216 questionnaires have been collected and 211 of them (63.4%) were used, excluding the ones with insincere answers. The results of this study are as follows. First, in regard to invention, carrer-specific, freestyle Invention terminology understanding, established teachers showed higher results over new teachers. In addition, experienced teachers showed higher results over inexperienced teachers, and teachers with in-service training experiences showed higher results over the ones without. Second, when it came to understanding the terminology differences in the three realms, the new teachers showed higher results than the established teachers, inexperienced teachers over those with teaching experiences, and ones who have never taken any in-service training showed higher results than the ones with training experiences. The ones who answered 'don't know' regarding the meaning differences among terminology were established teachers over new teachers, experienced teachers over inexperienced teachers, and in-service training recipients over the ones without.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.677-701
• /
• 2005

Nowadays, according as the portion of official invention grows up larger, the disputes about the amendment of official invention system like the possession and compensation are being more happened. This paper aims to review the trends of revision in foreign countries and to study the key issues of the bill of revision in our country on official invention system.

• 대한공업교육학회지
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.155-174
• /
• 2015

The purposes of this study were to analyze the property of educational needs of teachers for educational contents of invention and intellectual property in secondary vocational education and provide fundamental data for the development of job training programs so as to develop the capabilities of teachers, the base for effective education of invention intellectual property in secondary vocational education. To achieve them, educational needs for the educational contents of invention intellectual property and the priority of the educational needs in secondary vocational education based on the recognition of the teachers were analyzed and suggested. Concrete results of this study can be suggested as follows. First, the average of educational needs of the teachers for the educational contents of invention intellectual property in secondary vocational education was 5.02. There were 23 items of the educational contents whose educational needs were higher than the average of the whole items and for those items and the average of each item, there were F4(The average of patent applications) 6.72, F5(Modification and supplementation of specification sheets) 6.46, F2(Writing of patent floor plans) 6.39, F3(Writing of patent specification sheets and abstraction) 6.31, A5(Invention method and activity) 6.27, E6(Invention design project) 6.15, H3(Invention commercialization) 5.97, F1(Patent information and application) 5.90, E5(Design obligation) 5.78, E3(Designing process of inventional design) 5.77, A4(Invention and problem solving) 5.57, G2(Patent investigation and classification) 5.47, C2(Thinking method of inventional problem solution) 5.45, E4(Production of inventional design product) 5.45, B5(Inventional patent project) 5.42, A2(Creativity development) 5.26, C4(Inventional problem solving project) 5.26, H4(Invention marketing) 5.26, H2(Analysis on invention commercialization) 5.20, D4(Invention and management) 5.16, C3(Problem solving activity) 5.14, E2(Inventional design devise and expression) 5.11, B3(Actuality of inventional method) 5.08 in order. Second, for the priority of educational needs of the teachers for the educational contents of invention intellectual property in secondary vocational education, there were 13 items of the educational contents for the first rank, 10 for the second rank and 17 for the third rank. The items of the educational contents for the first rank were A4(invention and problem solving), A5(inventional method and activity), B5(Invention patent project), C2(Thinking method of inventional problem solution), C4(Inventional problem solving project), E3(Inventional design process), E4(Production of inventional design product), E5(Design obligation), E6(Invention design project), F1(Patent information and application), F2(Writing of patent floor plan), F3(Writing of patent specification sheet and abstract), and H3(Invention commercialization. The items of the educational contents for the second rank were A2(Creativity development), B3(Actuality of inventional method), C3(Problem solving activity), D4(Invention and management), E2(Invention design devise and expression), F4(Range of patent demand), F5(Modification and supplementation of specification sheet), G2(Patent investigation and classification), H2(Analysis on invention commercialization), and H4(Invention marketing). The items for the third rank were the educational contents except the ones of the first rank and the second rank.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.651-658
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to analyze the invention-related content of foreign science curricula and investigate the perception of science educators about the degree of relevance between science curriculum and invention. For the analysis of foreign science curricula, we investigated the programs of 10 nations, including the US, Canada, UK, Japan, Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, France, Finland and China. To analyze the relevance between Korean science curriculum and invention, we examined common topics such as science, integrated science, and science inquiry experiment, and investigated that the elements related to invention education were included in each 'achievement standard' and 'teaching and evaluation methods'. Science educators including science teachers were asked to evaluate the degree of relevance of invention education. The results were as follows. First, science curricula in many countries contained invention-related content. Second, science educators recognized that invention education was related to science curriculum, but the systematic connection was insufficient. Third, because it is mainly limited to the results of designing and device design, they recognized that the relevance of invention education, which focuses on various processes such as problem design, inventive techniques and intellectual property, was not revealed. Therefore, it is necessary to be process-oriented when developing invention education teaching-learning methods and related materials in science education for the future.

• 발명특허
• /
• v.31 no.10 s.364
• /
• pp.52-55
• /
• 2006

• 발명특허
• /
• v.31 no.10 s.364
• /
• pp.48-51
• /
• 2006