우리나라 과학 수업에서 이루어지는 교수법에 대한 인식 – PISA 2015 설문을 중심으로
Perception of Science Instruction in Korean Science Classes – Focused on PISA 2015 survey
1
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 PISA 설문 응답 결과를 토대로 우리나라 과학 수업에서 실행되는 교수법을 과학 성취수준 집단별, 성별에 따른 인식 차이를 살펴보고, 과학 교사가 인식하는 과학 교수법과 학생들이 인식하는 과학 교수법의 차이를 분석하였다. 이를 위하여 PISA 2015 학생 설문과 과학 교사 설문 중 교수법 관련 설문 문항을 분석하였다. 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 과학 수업에서 이루어지는 교수법은 과학 성취수준별로 인식의 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 남학생보다는 여학생이 과학 수업에서 교수법의 발생 빈도가 높은 것으로 인식하고 있었다. 셋째, 과학 교사들은 과학 수업에서 탐구 실험보다는 강의와 설명 등을 진행하고 있었으며, 학생들에 비해 과학 수업에서 교수법의 발생 빈도가 더 높은 것으로 인식하고 있었다.
Abstract
Based on the results of the PISA questionnaire, this study examined the differences in perception of science instruction practiced in Korean science classes. Specifically, the difference in perception between the science achievement level group, male and female students, and science teachers and students was examined. For this purpose, among the PISA 2015 student questionnaire and science teacher questionnaire, questionnaires related to science instruction were analyzed. The results of the study are as follows: First, it was found that there was a difference in perception of science instruction in science class according to the level of science achievement. Second, most of the science instructions in science class were perceived male students to be more frequent in class than female students. Third, science teachers were conducting lectures and explanations rather than inquiry experiments in science classes, and perceived that the frequency of science instruction was higher in science classes than students.
참고문헌 (28)
- "교육부 보도자료(2020. 5.)", 2020
- OECD 국제 학업성취도 평가 연구: PISA 2015 본검사 시행 보고서, "구자옥", 한국교육과정평가원, ~, pp.연구보고 RRE 2015-6-2 (2015)
- 김현정, "PISA 2015 과학 영역 성취 특성 분석: 상위국 비교 및 문항 분석을 중심으로", 학습자중심교과교육연구, 19(16), pp.849~869 (2019), 학습자중심교과교육학회[DOI]
- 김현정, "PISA 설문 결과에 나타난 우리나라 과학 수업의 실태 분석", 교육과정평가연구, 22(4), pp.85~104 (2019), 한국교육과정평가원[DOI]
- 김현정, "2015 개정 과학과 교육과정 초등학교 3~4학년 운영 실태 분석", 현장과학교육, 14(3), pp.307~320 (2020), 한국현장과학교육학회[DOI]
- 서울시교육청, "창의지성·감성을 갖춘 미래인재를 기르는 교실혁신 방안 발표", 서울시교육청 보도자료(2018. 12. 12), ~ (2018)
- Aloisi C, "PISA trends, social changes, and education reforms", Educational Research and Evaluation, 23(5-6), pp.180~220 (2017)
- Beaman R, "Differential teacher attention to boys and girls in the classroom", Educational Review, 58(3), pp.339~366 (2006)
- Blanchard MR, "Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction", Science Education, 94(4), pp.577~616 (2010)
- "<다시, 학교> 1부 - 가르치지 않는 학교" (2020)[URL]
- Eliasson N, "Teacherstudent interaction in contemporary science classrooms: is participation still a question of gender?", International Journal of Science Education, 38(10), pp.1655~1672 (2016)
- Furtak EM, "Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis", Review of Educational Research, 82(3), pp.300~329 (2012)
- Gao S, "Relationship between science teaching practices and students’ achievement in Singapore, Chinese Taipei, and the US: An analysis using TIMSS 2011 data", Frontiers of Education in China, 9(4), pp.519~551 (2014)
- Hampden-Thompson G, "Science teaching and learning activities and students’ engagement in science", International Journal of Science Education, 35(8), pp.1325~1343 (2013)
- Jiang F, "The effects of inquiry teaching on student science achievement and attitudes: Evidence from propensity score analysis of PISA data", International Journal of Science Education, 37(3), pp.554~576 (2015)
- Kahle JB, "Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning", pp.542~557 (1994), Macmillan
- Kaya VH, "German students’ environmental literacy in science education based on PISA data", Science Education International, 29(2), pp.75~87 (2018)
- Kaya S, "Multilevel effects of student and classroom factors on elementary science achievement in five countries", International Journal of Science Education, 32(10), pp.1337~1363 (2010)
- Gender Differences in Teacher-Pupil Interactions: Meta-Analytic Review, "Kelly A", University of Manchester, Department of Sociology, ~ (1988)
- Kirschner PA, "Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching", Educational Psychologist, 41(2), pp.75~86 (2006)
- Lau KC, "Instructional practices and science performance of 10 top-performing regions in PISA 2015", International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), pp.2128~2149 (2017)
- Mostafa T, "The Science of Teaching Science: An Exploration of Science Teaching Practices in PISA 2015 (No. 188)" (2018), OECD Publishing
- OECD, "PISA 2015 Results (VolumeⅡ): Policies and Practices for Successful Schools" (2016), OECD Publishing
- OECD, "PISA 2015 Results (Volume Ⅴ): Collaborative Problem Solving" (2016), OECD Publishing
- OECD, "PISA 2018 Results: What Students Know and Can Do. Vol. 1" (2019), OECD Publishing
- Pat-El R, "Effects of formative feedback on intrinsic motivation: Examining ethnic differences", Learning and Individual Differences, 22(4), pp.449~454 (2012)
- Wolf SJ, "Learning environment, attitudes and achievement among middle-school science students using inquiry-based laboratory activities", Research in Science Education, 38(3), pp.321~341 (2008)
- Zhang L, "Is inquiry-based science teaching worth the effort?", Science & Education, 25(7-8), pp.897~915 (2016)