본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

초등과학영재학생의 발표에 대한 인식 및 발표의 자발성과 과학창의성의 관계 분석

An Analysis of Science-gifted Elementary Students’ Perception of Speech and the Relationship between Their Voluntary Speech and Scientific Creativity

임채성|김민주
한국초등과학교육학회 (The Korean Elementary Science Education Society)|2019.08|초등과학교육 (Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education)|제38권 제3호|pp. 331-344|DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.15267/keses.2019.38.3.331

2

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

scientific creativityscience giftedvoluntary speechspeech attitude
주제분류교육학

초록

This study aims to analyse science-gifted elementary students’ perception of speech in general school class, school science class, and science-gifted class and the relationship between their voluntary speech and scientific creativity. For this, 39 fifth-graders in the Science-Gifted Education Center at Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education in Korea were asked about their frequency of voluntary speech on each class situation, the reasons for such behavior, and their general opinions about speech. Also, researchers collected the teachers’ observation on students’ speech in class. To get the scores for students’ scientific creativity, four different subjects of tasks were presented. The students’ scientific creativity scores were used for correlation analysis with their frequency of speech. The main findings from this study are as follows: First, science-gifted elementary students tended to be passive in science-gifted class compared to general school and school science class. Second, the main reason for the low frequency of students’ speech in school classes is that they do not have many opportunities to make presentations. Third, a survey of students’ general thoughts on speech showed that more students wanted to make a speech voluntarily in class than the opposite. Fourth, the four different scientific creativity tasks had little correlation. Fifth, the correlations between the frequency of voluntary speech and the scores of scientific creativity were mostly low, with significant results only for plant task. Sixth, the correlations between the frequency of voluntary speech and the two components that make up scientific creativity, originality and usefulness, were also mostly low, but significant results for both were found in plant task, with originality having a higher correlation than usefulness. Based on this results, this study discussed the meanings and implications of students’ voluntary speech on elementary science education and creativity education.

Abstract

This study aims to analyse science-gifted elementary students’ perception of speech in general school class, school science class, and science-gifted class and the relationship between their voluntary speech and scientific creativity. For this, 39 fifth-graders in the Science-Gifted Education Center at Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education in Korea were asked about their frequency of voluntary speech on each class situation, the reasons for such behavior, and their general opinions about speech. Also, researchers collected the teachers’ observation on students’ speech in class. To get the scores for students’ scientific creativity, four different subjects of tasks were presented. The students’ scientific creativity scores were used for correlation analysis with their frequency of speech. The main findings from this study are as follows: First, science-gifted elementary students tended to be passive in science-gifted class compared to general school and school science class. Second, the main reason for the low frequency of students’ speech in school classes is that they do not have many opportunities to make presentations. Third, a survey of students’ general thoughts on speech showed that more students wanted to make a speech voluntarily in class than the opposite. Fourth, the four different scientific creativity tasks had little correlation. Fifth, the correlations between the frequency of voluntary speech and the scores of scientific creativity were mostly low, with significant results only for plant task. Sixth, the correlations between the frequency of voluntary speech and the two components that make up scientific creativity, originality and usefulness, were also mostly low, but significant results for both were found in plant task, with originality having a higher correlation than usefulness. Based on this results, this study discussed the meanings and implications of students’ voluntary speech on elementary science education and creativity education.

참고문헌 (35)

  1. 인성 및 창의성 신장 방안, "강충열", 한국교원대학교부설 교과교육공동연구소, ~, pp.연구보고 RR, 99-1 (2001)
  2. 김영채, "창의력의 영역 보편성과 특수성: 쟁점과 TTCT 창의력 검사의 분석", 사고개발, 8(1), pp.1~29 (2012), 대한사고개발학회[DOI]
  3. 金赫坤, "대학생의 社會的 不安 減少를 위한 集團相談 프로그램의 效果", 박사, 교육학, pp.1992
  4. 박은숙, "PBL수업에서의 모바일 프레젠테이션 저작도구의 활용이 학습자의 발표력에 미치는 영향", 인문사회 21, 7(5), pp.605~624 (2016), 인문사회 21[DOI]
  5. 신문승, "초등학생용 창의적 성향 검사의 개발 및 타당화", 초등교육연구, 23(3), pp.267~291 (2010), 한국초등교육학회
  6. 임채성, "뇌기반 진화적 접근법에 따른 창의적 과학 문제해결 지도 모형 개발", 생물교육, 40(4), pp.429~452 (2012), 한국생물교육학회[DOI]
  7. 임채성, "과학창의성 평가 공식의 개발과 적용", 초등과학교육, 33(2), pp.242~257 (2014), 한국초등과학교육학회[DOI]
  8. 임채성, "생명 현상에 대한 정보 제공 유형에 따른 초등학교 학생의 협동적 의미 구성", 생물교육, 36(4), pp.512~522 (2008), 한국생물교육학회[DOI]
  9. 최인수, "유아용 창의성 측정도구에 관한 고찰", 유아교육연구, 20(2), pp.139~166 (2000)
  10. 하주현, "창의적 인성 검사 개발", 교육심리연구, 14(2), pp.187~210 (2000)
  11. 함경애, "초등학생의 완벽주의와 발표불안과의 관계에서 부정적인 자동 사고의 매개효과", 인문학논총, 36, pp.407~429 (2014), 인문과학연구소
  12. Baer, J., "Domain specificity and the limits of creativity theory", The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46(1), pp.16~29 (2012)
  13. Basadur, M. I. N., "Improving the measurement of divergent thinking attitudes in organizations", The Journal of Creative Behavior, 33(2), pp.75~111 (1999)
  14. Beghetto, R. A., "Creative self-efficacy : Correlates in middle and secondary students", Creativity Research Journal, 18(4), pp.447~457 (2006)
  15. Daly, J. A., "Pre performance concerns associated with public speaking anxiety", Communication Quarterly, 37(1), pp.39~53 (1989)
  16. Davis, G. A., "Group inventory for finding interests : (GIFFI)I and II : Instruments for identifying creative potential in the junior and senior high school", The Journal of Creative Behavior, 16(1), pp.50~57 (1982)
  17. Davis, M. A., "Understanding the relationship between mood and creativity : A meta-analysis", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(1), pp.25~38 (2009)
  18. Dietrich, A., "The cognitive neuroscience of creativity", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(6), pp.1011~1026 (2004)
  19. Dietrich, A., "Who’s afraid of a cognitive neuroscience of creativity?", Methods, 42(1), pp.22~27 (2007)
  20. Dietrich, A., "A neurocognitive framework for human creative thought", Frontiers in Psychology, 7, pp.2078~ (2017)
  21. Feist, G. J., "A meta-analysis of personality in scientific and artistic creativity", Personality and Social Psychology Review, 2(4), pp.290~309 (1998)
  22. Fischer, G., "Beyond binary choices: Integrating individual and social creativity", International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(4-5), pp.482~512 (2005)
  23. Han, K. S., "Multiple creativities? Investigating domain-specificity of creativity in young children", Gifted Child Quarterly, 46(2), pp.98~109 (2002)
  24. Hu, W., "A scientific creativity test for secondary school students", International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), pp.389~403 (2002)
  25. Kind, P., "Creativity in science education : Perspectives and challenges for developing school science", Studies in Science Education, 43, pp.1~37 (2007)
  26. Nishimura, S., "Communication style and cultural features in high", low context communication cultures: A case study of Finland, Japan and India. Teoksessa A. Kallioniemi (toim.), Uudistuva ja kehittyvä ainedidaktiikka, 2008, pp.8, 783~796
  27. Rimm, S., "Part II-Self-report inventories and the characteristics approach : Identifying creativity", G, T, pp.1983, 6(4)[DOI]
  28. Rosenfeld, L. B., "Communication apprehension and self‐perceived communication competence of academically gifted students", Communication Education, 44(1), pp.79~89 (1995)
  29. Runco, M. A., "Creativity: Theories and themes:Research, development, and practice" (2006), Academic Press
  30. Runco, M. A., "The standard definition of creativity", Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), pp.92~96 (2012)
  31. Torrance, E. P., "Non-test ways of identifying the creatively gifted", Gifted Child Quarterly, 6(3), pp.71~75 (1962)
  32. Torrance, E. P., "Torrance tests of creative thinking: Streamlined scoring guide (Figural A & B)" (1992), Scholastic Testing Service, Inc
  33. Treffinger, D. J., "Assessing creativity" (2002), The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented
  34. Wang, C. W., "The effects of creative problem solving training on creativity, cognitive type and R&D performance", R&D Management, 32(1), pp.35~45 (2002)
  35. Young, D. J., "An investigation of students’ perspectives on anxiety and speaking", Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), pp.539~553 (1990)

관련 논문AI추천

초등과학영재학생의 과학창의성에 대한 자기 평가, 동료 평가의 비교 분석김민주, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2019 · 제38권 제4호초등과학영재학생의 자기주도성과 과학창의성의 관계김민주, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2017 · 제36권 제4호과학영재교육 프로그램이 초등영재학생들의 과학창의성과 프로그램에 대한 인식에 미치는 영향강민석, 김범기, 신애경과학교육연구소 · 과학교육연구지2011 · 제35권 제1호중학교 과학영재들의 과학 창의성 평가 사례 연구송신철, 심규철한국생물교육학회 · 생물교육2017 · 제45권 제4호초등과학영재학생의 과학지식과 과학창의성의 관계- 생명 영역을 중심으로 -김민주, 김현주, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2020 · 제39권 제3호초등과학영재학생의 과학창의성에 대한 자기 평가, 교사 평가, 객관적 평가의 비교 분석김민주, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2018 · 제37권 제4호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)

초등교사의 경력에 따른 언어적 상호작용 분석 - ‘우리 몸의 구조와 기능’ 단원을 중심으로 -권석원, 신동훈, 박현정pp. 305-316학생들의 과학긍정경험에 영향을 주는 과학교육 선도학교 특성에 대한 질적 탐구이성희, 신영준, 곽영순, 강훈식, 이수영pp. 317-330초등 예비교사들의 과학현장학습 운영 능력 함양을 위한 프로그램의 효과와 개선 방안장명덕pp. 345-359과학 수업에서 정의적․행동적․인지적 영역에 대한 초등학생들의 자기 인식 분석박선이, 임채성pp. 360-374초등학생들의 먹이 피라미드 예측 모형 구성에서 과학적 추론의 역할한문현pp. 375-386
원문 보기