"°úÇй®È­±³À°"

2007-03-25 (Vol 4, No 3)

·Î±×ÀÎ | À¥Áø | ÇѸ¶´ç

¸ÕÁ£±Û  |  ´ÙÀ½±Û  |  Â÷·Ê

±¹Á¦Àû °úÇб³À°Çмú³í¹® ¿ä¾à°ú ¿Ü±¹ °úÇб³À° ¹× ±¹Á¦È­

International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 2003

Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications.

Osborne, Jonathan,
Simon, Shirley
Collins, Sue

This article offers a review of the major literature about attitudes to science and its implications over the past 20 years. It argues that the continuing decline in numbers choosing to study science at the point of choice requires a research focus on students' attitudes to science if the nature of the problem is to be understood and remediated. Starting from a consideration of what is meant by attitudes to science, it considers the problems inherent to their measurement, what is known about students' attitudes towards science and the many factors of influence such as gender, teachers, curricula, cultural and other variables. The literature itself points to the crucial importance of gender and the quality of teaching. Given the importance of the latter we argue that there is a greater need for research to identify those aspects of science teaching that make school science engaging for pupils. In particular, a growing body of research on motivation offers important pointers to the kind of classroom environment and activities that might raise pupils' interest in studying school science and a focus for future research.

°úÇп¡ ´ëÇÑ Åµµ : ¹®Çå ºñÆò°ú ÇÔÀÇ

ÀÌ ³í¹®Àº °úÇÐÀÇ Åµµ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÁÖ¿ä ³í¹®ÀÇ ºñÆò°ú Áö³­ 20³â°£ ±×°ÍÀÇ ¾Ï½Ã¸¦ Á¦½ÃÇÑ´Ù. ±× ¹®Á¦ÀÇ ¼ºÁúÀÌ ÀÌÇصǰí ÀçÁ¶Á¤µÈ´Ù¸é ±×°ÍÀº °úÇÐÀ» °øºÎÇÏ´Â ÇлýµéÀÇ ¼ö°¡ °¨¼ÒÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ ÇлýµéÀÇ °úÇп¡ ´ëÇÑ Åµµ¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿© ¿¬±¸ÃÊÁ¡À» ¸ÂÃß¾î¾ß ÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ» ¿ä±¸ÇÑ´Ù. °úÇп¡ ´ëÇÑ Åµµ°¡ ¹«¾ùÀ» ÀǹÌÇÏ´ÂÁö¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °í·Á·ÎºÎÅÍ Ãâ¹ßÇؼ­ ÀÌ´Â ±×°ÍµéÀÇ ÃøÁ¤¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿© °íÀ¯ÇÑ ¹®Á¦µé, °úÇп¡ ´ëÇÑ ÇлýµéÀÇ Åµµ¿¡ ´ëÇØ ¾Ë·ÁÁø °Í ±×¸®°í ¼ºº°, ±³»ç, ±³À°°úÁ¤, ¹®È­ µî°ú °°Àº ´Ù¾çÇÑ º¯ÀεéÀ» °í·ÁÇÑ´Ù. ¹®ÇåµéÀº ¼ºº°°ú ±³¼öÀÇ ÁúÀÇ °áÁ¤ÀûÀÎ Á߿伺À» ÁöÀûÇÏ°í ÀÖ´Ù. ÈÄÀÚÀÇ Á߿伺À¸·ÎºÎÅÍ ¿ì¸®´Â Çб³°úÇп¡ ÇлýµéÀ» ²ø¾îµéÀÌ°Ô ¸¸µå´Â °úÇÐ ±³¼öÀÇ Ãø¸éÀ» ¾Ë¾Æ³»´Â ¿¬±¸ÀÇ ´õ Å« ¿ä±¸°¡ ÀÖÀ½À» ÁÖÀåÇÑ´Ù. ƯÈ÷ ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­´Â ÇлýµéÀÇ Çб³°úÇÐÀ» °øºÎÇϴµ¥ Èï¹Ì¸¦ ³ôÀÏ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ±³½Ç ȯ°æ°ú È°µ¿µé ±×¸®°í ¹Ì·¡ ¿¬±¸¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÃÊÁ¡À» Á¦½ÃÇÑ´Ù.

----------------------------------------------------

Skill and will: the role of motivation and cognition in the learning of college chemistry

Zusho, Akane Pintrich, Paul R. Goppola, Brian

This study investigated how students' level of motivation and use of specific cognitive and self-regulatory strategies changed over time, and how these motivational and cognitive components in turn predicted students' course performance in chemistry. Participants were 458 students enrolled in introductory college chemistry classes. Participants' motivation and strategy use were assessed at three time points over the course of one semester using self-report instruments. Results showed an overall decline in students' motivational levels over time. There was also a decline in students' use of rehearsal and elaboration strategies over time; students' use of organizational and self-regulatory strategies increased over time. These trends, however, were found to vary by students' achievement levels. In terms of the relations of motivation and cognition to achievement, the motivational components of self-efficacy and task value were found to be the best predictors of final course performance even after controlling for prior achievement.

´É·Â°ú ÀÇÁö : ´ëÇÐ È­ÇÐÀÇ ÇнÀ¿¡ À־ µ¿±â¿Í ÀνÄÀÇ ¿ªÇÒ

ÀÌ ¿¬±¸´Â ¾î¶»°Ô ÇлýµéÀÇ µ¿±â ¼öÁØ°ú ÀÎÁöÀûÀÌ°í ÀÚ±â Á¶ÀýÀû Àü·«ÀÇ »ç¿ëÀÌ ½Ã°£¿¡ µû¶ó ¾î¶»°Ô º¯ÇÏ´ÂÁö, ±×¸®°í ÀÌ µ¿±â¿Í ÀνÄÀÇ ±¸¼º¿ä¼Ò°¡ È­Çп¡¼­ ÇлýÀÇ ¼ºÃëµµ¿¡ ¾î¶»°Ô °ü·ÃµÇ¾î ÀÖ´ÂÁö ¾Ë¾Æº¸´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ¿¬±¸ Âü°¡ÀÚ´Â ´ëÇÐ ÀÏ¹Ý È­ÇÐ ¼ö¾÷¿¡ µî·ÏÇÑ 458¸íÀÇ ÇлýÀ̾ú´Ù. Âü°¡ÀÚÀÇ µ¿±â¿Í Àü·« »ç¿ëÀº ¡®Àڱ⠺¸°í¼­¡¯¸¦ »ç¿ëÇÏ¿© 1Çб⠰úÁ¤¿¡¼­ 3ȸ ½Ç½ÃµÇ¾î Æò°¡µÇ¾ú´Ù. °á°ú´Â ½Ã°£¿¡ µû¶ó ÇлýÀÇ µ¿±â¼öÁØÀÌ ÀüºÎ °¨¼ÒÇÏ´Â °ÍÀ» º¸¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ½Ã°£¿¡ µû¶ó ÇлýµéÀÇ ¿¬½À°ú Á¤±³È­ Àü·« »ç¿ëÀÌ °¨¼ÒµÇ¾ú´Ù ±×¸®°í ÇлýÀÇ Á¶ÀûÀÌ°í ÀÚ±â Á¶ÀýÀû Àü·«ÀÇ »ç¿ëÀº ½Ã°£¿¡ µû¶ó Áõ°¡Çß´Ù. ±×·¯³ª ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ °æÇâµéÀº ÇлýÀÇ ¼ºÃë ¼öÁØ¿¡ ÀÇÇØ º¯È­ÇÑ´Ù´Â °ÍÀÌ ¹ß°ßµÇ¾ú´Ù. µ¿±â¿Í ÀνÄÀÇ ¼ºÃëµµ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °ü°è¿¡ À־,
ÀÚ±â À¯È¿¼º°ú ¾÷¹«°¡Ä¡ÀÇ µ¿±âÀû ¿ä¼ÒµéÀº »çÀü ¼ºÃëµµ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÅëÁ¦ ÀÌÈÄ¿¡µµ ÃÖÁ¾ ¼ºÃëµµÀÇ °¡Àå Ä¿´Ù¶õ ÁöÇ¥°¡ µÊÀÌ ¹àÇôÁ³´Ù.

----------------------------------------------------

How emotions shape the relationship between a chemistry teacher and her high school students

dos Santos, Flávia Maria Teixeira
Mortimer, Eduardo Fleury


In this article we analyse the interaction between a high school chemistry teacher and her students from two different classes, emphasizing how emotions, affects and feelings contributed to, or obstructed, the dynamic of interactions. The data come from an ethnographic research approach and include videotapes of the lessons, interviews and field notes. Using the distinction introduced by Damasio between primary and secondary emotions, and between emotions and feelings, we describe how the background feelings emerged in different ways in the two classrooms. In class B, the relationships were constructed in a friendly way from the very beginning. The positive emotions that contributed to raising positive background feelings occurred in a high number and frequency. In class A, the picture was completely different, with a higher number and frequency of negative emotions. Thus, emotions and background feelings that were constructed differently in each classroom were at the heart of the different outcomes in terms of attitudes towards chemistry that arose in the two classrooms. In the paper, we also discuss the implication of this kind of analysis for science teaching generally.

¾î¶»°Ô °¨Á¤ÀÌ È­ÇÐ ±³»ç¿Í °íµîÇб³ Çлýµé »çÀÌÀÇ °ü°è¸¦ °áÁ¤Áþ´Â°¡!

ÀÌ ³í¹®¿¡¼­¿ì¸®´Â °íµîÇб³ È­Çб³»ç¿Í ±×³àÀÇ 2¹ÝÀÇ Çлýµé »çÀÌÀÇ »óÈ£ÀÛ¿ëÀ» ºÐ¼®ÇÑ´Ù. À̸¦ À§ÇÏ¿© ¾î¶»°Ô °¨Á¤°ú ºÐÀ§±â°¡ µ¿ÀûÀÎ »óÈ£ÀÛ¿ë¿¡ ±â¿©ÇÏ°í ¹æÇØÇÏ´ÂÁö¸¦ °­Á¶ÇÑ´Ù. µ¥ÀÌÅÍ´Â ¹Ì½Ã±â¼úÇÐ ¿¬±¸¹æ¹ýÀ» ÅëÇؼ­ ¾ò¾îÁ³À¸¸ç ¼ö¾÷ ³ìÈ­, ¸é´ã, Çʵå³ëÆ® µîÀÌ »ç¿ëµÇ¾ú´Ù. Damasio¿¡ ÀÇÇؼ­ ¼Ò°³µÈ Ãʱâ¿Í ÀÌÂ÷ °¨Á¤ ±×¸®°í °¨Á¤°ú ´À³¦ »çÀÌÀÇ Â÷À̸¦ ÀÌ¿ëÇÏ¿© ¿ì¸®´Â ¾î¶»°Ô ºÐÀ§±â°¡ µÎ ¹Ý¿¡¼­ ¾î¶»°Ô ´Ù¸¥ ¹æ½ÄÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª´ÂÁö¸¦ ¼­¼úÇÏ¿´´Ù. B¹Ý¿¡¼­´Â óÀ½ºÎÅÍ ¿ìÈ£ÀûÀÎ ¹æ½ÄÀ¸·Î °ü°è°¡ Çü¼ºµÇ¾ú´Ù. ±àÁ¤ÀûÀÎ ºÐÀ§±â¸¦ ÀÚÁÖ ¹ß»ý½ÃÅ°´Âµ¥ °øÇåÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ±àÁ¤ÀûÀÎ °¨Á¤ÀÌ´Ù. ºÎÁ¤ÀûÀÎ °¨Á¤À» ÀÚÁÖ °®´Â A¹Ý¿¡¼­´Â »óȲÀÌ ¿Ïº®ÇÏ°Ô ´Ù¸£´Ù. ±×·¯¹Ç·Î °¢°¢ÀÇ ±³½Ç¿¡¼­ ´Ù¸£°Ô Çü¼ºµÈ °¨Á¤°ú ºÐÀ§±â´Â µÎ ±³½Ç¿¡¼­ ÀϾ È­ÇÐÀ» ÇâÇÑ Åµµ¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ ´Ù¸¥ °á°úÀÇ ÇÙ½É ¿äÀÎÀÎ °ÍÀÌ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ¿ì¸®´Â ÀÌ ³í¹®¿¡¼­ ÀÌ·± Á¾·ùÀÇ °úÇб³¼öÀÇ ºÐ¼®¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Àǹ̸¦ ³íÀÇÇÑ´Ù.

----------------------------------------------------

Improving high school students' understanding of potential difference in simple electric circuits

Laurent Liégeois, G'erard Chasseigne, Sophie Papin, Etienne Mullet

This paper reports two studies into the understanding of the concept of potential difference in the current-potential difference-resistance context among 8th-12th graders (Study 1), and the efficiency of a learning device derived from Social Judgment Theory (Study 2). These two studies showed that: (a) when asked to infer potential difference from resistance and current information, most participants only relied on current and ignored or greatly underestimated the importance of resistance information; (b) exposure to an electricity course did not much alter the way participants infer potential difference from resistance and current information; (c) a simple learning device considerably improved the way participants infer potential difference from resistance and current information; and (d) this observed improvement promised to be durable, at least in the short term.

´Ü¼ø Àü±â ȸ·Î¿¡¼­ ÀüÀ§Â÷¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °íµîÇб³ ÇлýµéÀÇ ÀÌÇصµ¸¦ Çâ»ó½ÃÅ°±â

ÀÌ ³í¹®Àº 8Çгâ-12Çгâ Çлýµé »çÀÌ¿¡¼­ Àü·ù-ÀüÀ§Â÷-ÀúÇ× ¸Æ¶ô¿¡¼­ ÀüÀ§Â÷ÀÇ °³³ä¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀÌÇØ(¿¬±¸1)¿Í ¡®»çȸ ÆÇ´Ü À̷С¯¿¡ ±Ù°ÅÇÑ ÇнÀµµ±¸ÀÇ È¿¿ë¼º(¿¬±¸2)¿¡ ´ëÇÑ µÎ °¡Áö ¿¬±¸°á°ú¸¦ Á¦½ÃÇÑ´Ù. ÀÌ µÎ ¿¬±¸°¡ Á¦½ÃÇÏ´Â °ÍÀº ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù. (a) ÀúÇ×°ú Àü·ù¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Á¤º¸·ÎºÎÅÍ ÀüÀ§Â÷¸¦ Ãß·ÐÇϵµ·Ï ¿ä±¸ÇßÀ» ¶§ ´ëºÎºÐÀÇ ÇлýµéÀº ´ÜÁö Àü·ù Á¤º¸¿¡ ÀÇÁöÇÏ¿´°í ÀúÇ× Á¤º¸ÀÇ Á߿伺Àº ¹«½ÃÇϰųª °£°úÇÏ¿´´Ù. (b) Àü±âÇÐ °ú¸ñÀ» µé¾îµµ Âü¿©ÀÚµéÀÌ ÀúÇ×°ú Àü·ù Á¤º¸¿¡¼­ ÀüÀ§Â÷¸¦ Ãß·ÐÇÏ´Â ¹æ½ÄÀ» Å©°Ô º¯È­½ÃÅ°Áø ¸øÇß´Ù. (c) °£´ÜÇÑ ÇнÀ µµ±¸°¡ Âü¿©ÀÚµéÀÌ ÀúÇ×°ú Àü·ù Á¤º¸¿¡¼­ ÀüÀ§Â÷¸¦ Ãß·ÐÇÏ´Â ¹æ½ÄÀ» »ó´çÈ÷ Çâ»ó½ÃÄ×´Ù. (d) À§¿Í °°ÀÌ °üÂûµÈ Çâ»óÀº Àû¾îµµ ´Ü±â°£ µ¿¾ÈÀº Áö¼ÓµÈ´Ù.

÷ºÎ
IJSE_V25_N09(2003).hwp

À̺À¿ì
´Ü±¹´ëÇб³ °úÇб³À°°ú

°úÇй®È­±³À°¿¬±¸¼Ò