• Journal of Korean Home Economics Education Association
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.17-35
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study was to determine the possibility of character education in the middle school home economics program: by extracting learning factors that can cultivate gratitude disposition from the eighth grade in the unit of 'clothing life' of middle school HE text, developing five teaching-learning lesson plans and learning materials, and applying them in classrooms to see any changes in gratitude disposition standards before and after its application. Five teaching-learning lesson plans for the cultivation of gratitude disposition were developed, and completed after three experts in home economics verified their validity and revised them. From June 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010, five classes were to 210 grade students at a Gyeongbuk Junior School, and dispositions were investigated before and after the classes. Gratitude disposition standards used GQ-6, like McCullough, and for before-and-after-inspection comparison, t-test and analysis of open-ended questionnaires were carried out. The results proved the instruction effective. Before the class for the cultivation of gratitude disposition, students had a gratitude disposition average of 2.87(out of 5). After the class, the average was 3.35, which shows that students had improved considerably. Also, in analysis of a open-ended questionnaire, it was said that the class had been provided the opportunity to think about the value of nature and neighbors and that the class content reminded them about appreciation. In conclusion, for the character education in other areas of middle school home economics, teaching-learning lesson plans development must be attained to further this character education program.

• Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.255-275
• /
• 2017

Educating for character was emphasized in 2015 & 2009 reformed Korea natio nal mathematics curriculum. Thus, in this study we basically conducted to reali ze the creativity and character education. The purpose of this study is to succe ssfully lectures in the 'Mathematics Curriculum and Textbook Research' subject that is mathematics education department's major subject in teacher college, and to analyze the results. For the purpose of this study, the following study was carried out. First, we develop a lesson plan, teaching and learning plan, learning materials based on cr eativity and personality. Second, we taught a class based on the creativity and personality. Third, we analyze the effectiveness of the teaching efficacy about p re-service math teacher. Fourth, we conducted a qualitative analysis of the 'Mat hematics Curriculum and Textbook Research' subject lessons through the Classe s observer.

• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.123-145
• /
• 2013

This study was expected to yield the meaningful conclusions from the experimental group who took lessons based on inductive activities using GeoGebra at the beginning of proof learning and the comparison one who took traditional expository lessons based on deductive activities. The purpose of this study is to give some helpful suggestions for teaching proof to mathematically gifted elementary students. To attain the purpose, two research questions are established as follows. 1. Is there a significant difference in proof abilities between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? 2. Is there a significant difference in proof attitudes between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? To solve the above two research questions, they were divided into two groups, an experimental group of 10 students and a comparison group of 10 students, considering the results of gift and aptitude test, and the computer literacy among 20 elementary students that took lessons at some education institute for the gifted students located in K province after being selected in the mathematics. Special lesson based on the researcher's own lesson plan was treated to the experimental group while explanation-centered class based on the usual 8th grader's textbook was put into the comparison one. Four kinds of tests were used such as previous proof ability test, previous proof attitude test, subsequent proof ability test, and subsequent proof attitude test. One questionnaire survey was used only for experimental group. In the case of attitude toward proof test, the score of questions was calculated by 5-point Likert scale, and in the case of proof ability test was calculated by proper rating standard. The analysis of materials were performed with t-test using the SPSS V.18 statistical program. The following results have been drawn. First, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in proof ability than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Second, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in the belief and attitude toward proof than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Third, the survey about 'the effect of inductive activities using GeoGebra on the proof' shows that 100% of the students said that the activities were helpful for proof learning and that 60% of the reasons were 'because GeoGebra can help verify processes visually'. That means it gives positive effects on proof learning that students research constant character and make proposition by themselves justifying assumption and conclusion by changing figures through the function of estimation and drag in investigative software GeoGebra. In conclusion, this study may provide helpful suggestions in improving geometry education, through leading students to learn positive and active proof, connecting the learning processes such as induction based on activity using GeoGebra, simple deduction from induction(i.e. creating a proposition to distinguish between assumptions and conclusions), and formal deduction(i.e. proving).