Current time in Korea 23:40 Oct 29 (Thu) Year 2020 KCS KCS Publications
KCS Publications
My Journal  Log In  Register
HOME > Search > Browsing(JKCS) > Archives

Journal of the Korean Chemical Society (JKCS)

ISSN 1017-2548(Print)
ISSN 2234-8530(Online)
Volume 57, Number 6
JKCSEZ 57(6)
December 20, 2013 

 
Title
Characteristics of Elementary Science-Gifted Education Teachers’ Reflection on Their Science Teaching

초등 과학영재교육 담당교사의 과학영재수업에 대한 반성의 특징
Author
Hunsik Kang*

강훈식*
Keywords
반성 일지, 생산적 반성, 초등 과학영재교육 , Reflective journal, Productive reflection, Elementary science-gifted education
Abstract
이 연구에서는 초등 과학영재교육 담당교사의 과학영재수업에 대한 반성의 특징을 조사했다. 이를 위해, 초등 과학영 재교육 담당교사 33명이 작성한 반성 일지를 ‘생산적 반성’의 관점에서 분석했다. 연구 결과, 대부분 교사들의 반성 일지에는 ‘과학영재 교수전략 및 지도(100.0%)’와 ‘과학영재학생(90.9%)’ 측면이 포함되어 있었다. 두 측면보다 적긴 했지만 ‘과학영재 교 육과정(42.4%)’ 측면에 대한 반성이 포함된 경우도 많은 편이었다. 그러나 ‘과학내용지식’과 ‘과학영재교육 평가’ 측면이 포함 된 경우는 10% 미만이었다. 포함 점수의 평균은 5점 만점 중에 2.48이었으며, 과학영재교육 경력과는 통계적으로 유의미한 상 관이 없었다. 한편, 전혀 통합이 없는 반성 일지는 18.2%, 2가지 측면이 통합된 경우는 66.7%, 3가지 측면이 통합된 경우는 24.2%, 4가지 측면이 통합된 경우는 6.1%였으며, 5가지 측면이 모두 통합된 경우는 없었다. 특히, ‘과학영재학생(81.8%)’이나 ‘과학영재 교수전략 및 지도(81.8%)’ 측면과 다른 측면 간의 통합이 가장 많았으며, ‘과학영재 교육과정’ 측면과 다른 측면이 통합된 경우도 적지 않았다(30.3%). 그러나 ‘과학내용지식(6.1%)’이나 ‘과학영재교육 평가(0.0%)’ 측면과 다른 측면이 통합된 경 우는 매우 적었다. 통합 점수의 평균은 5점 만점 중에 2.12이었으며, 과학영재교육 경력과는 통계적으로 유의미한 상관이 없었다.

This study investigated the characteristics of elementary science-gifted education teachers’ reflection on their science teaching. To do this, the reflective journals of 33 elementary science-gifted education teachers were analyzed in terms of ‘productive reflection’. The results revealed that most of reflective journals included the aspects of ‘instructional strategies and instruction for science-gifted education (100.0%)’ and ‘science-gifted students (90.9%)’. ‘Curriculum for science-gifted education (42.4%)’ was also frequently included although fewer than two previous aspects. However, ‘subject matter knowledge’ and ‘assessment in science-gifted education’ were included less than 10%. The mean score of the inclusion scores was 2.48 on a scale of 5 points and was not significantly correlated with the teaching careers in science-gifted education. 18.2% of the journals showed no integrations, which were unproductive reflection. 66.7% of the journals integrated only two aspects and 24.2% of the journals integrated three aspects. Only 6.1% of the journals integrated four aspects and no journals integrated all five aspects. Especially, the integrations between ‘science-gifted students (81.8%)’ or ‘instructional strategies and instruction for science-gifted education (81.8%)’ and the other aspects were most frequent. The integrations between ‘Curriculum for science- gifted education (30.3%)’ and the other aspects were also frequently included. However, the integrations between ‘subject matter knowledge (6.1%)’ or ‘assessment in science-gifted education (0.0%)’ and the other aspects were hardly included. The mean score of the integration scores was 2.12 on a scale of 5 points and was not significantly correlated with the teaching careers in science-gifted education.

Page
789 - 800
Full Text
PDF