본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

뇌기반 진화적 접근법에 따른 초등 과학 야외학습에서 인지적 영역의 적용․확장 단계 활동에 대한 과학 창의성 평가 방식별 차이 분석

A Study on the Differences of Scientific Creativity according to Methods of Assessment on the Cognitive-furthering Stage Activities in Elementary Science Outdoor Learning by a Brain-based Evolutionary Approach

임채성|박형민
한국생물교육학회 (The Korean Society of Biology Education)|2019.03|생물교육 (BIOLOGY EDUCATION)|제47권 제1호|pp. 1-11|DOI 10.15717/bioedu.2019.47.1.1

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

cognitive domainbrain-based evolutionary approachscience learningscientific creativity assessmentfurthering stage
주제분류교육학

초록

This study analyzed the scientific creativity on Cognitive-Furthering stage activities according to methods of assessment in science outdoor learning by a brain-based evolutionary approach. The brain-based evolutionary approach was originally developed based on the human brain structure and function involved in scientists’ activities and the evolutionary attributes of the science itself and the brain functions. Samples of the study were composed of 3 classes of sixth graders(67) of N elementary school in Seoul, Korea. The comparison group used textbook-based and teachers’ guidebook-based instruction. Experimental group A learned by a brain-based evolutionary approach, and Experimental group B learned science outdoors and in the classroom through the brain-based evolutionary approach. The major results of the study are as follows. First, for test of scientific creativity, a statistically significant difference among comparison group and experimental groups was not found. When the assessment standard was given to the assessors, the standard deviation of scientific creativity of the students decreased. Second, according to the students’ self assessment scores, 7.4% of them believed that creativity comes from originality. In contrast, 5.9% of the students believed creativity comes from being useful to all in life. The rest of the students believed that originality and being useful in life are two important characteristics that are needed in order to fulfill scientific creativity. Third, The students’ self assessment scores on originality and scientific creativity also showed a statistically significant difference among the students who showed a high level of interest, the students who showed a medium level of interest and the students who showed a low level of interest. In the teachers’ assessment of originality, a statistically significant difference was found among the students who received high, medium and low achievement scores. On the basis of the results, the implications for the research in scientific creativity and the science teaching and learning in school are discussed.

Abstract

This study analyzed the scientific creativity on Cognitive-Furthering stage activities according to methods of assessment in science outdoor learning by a brain-based evolutionary approach. The brain-based evolutionary approach was originally developed based on the human brain structure and function involved in scientists’ activities and the evolutionary attributes of the science itself and the brain functions. Samples of the study were composed of 3 classes of sixth graders(67) of N elementary school in Seoul, Korea. The comparison group used textbook-based and teachers’ guidebook-based instruction. Experimental group A learned by a brain-based evolutionary approach, and Experimental group B learned science outdoors and in the classroom through the brain-based evolutionary approach. The major results of the study are as follows. First, for test of scientific creativity, a statistically significant difference among comparison group and experimental groups was not found. When the assessment standard was given to the assessors, the standard deviation of scientific creativity of the students decreased. Second, according to the students’ self assessment scores, 7.4% of them believed that creativity comes from originality. In contrast, 5.9% of the students believed creativity comes from being useful to all in life. The rest of the students believed that originality and being useful in life are two important characteristics that are needed in order to fulfill scientific creativity. Third, The students’ self assessment scores on originality and scientific creativity also showed a statistically significant difference among the students who showed a high level of interest, the students who showed a medium level of interest and the students who showed a low level of interest. In the teachers’ assessment of originality, a statistically significant difference was found among the students who received high, medium and low achievement scores. On the basis of the results, the implications for the research in scientific creativity and the science teaching and learning in school are discussed.

참고문헌 (47)

  1. Alexander, P. A, "Domain knowledge : Evolving themes and emerging concerns", Educational Psychology, 27, pp.33~51 (1992)
  2. Amabile, T, "Creativity in Context" (1996), Westview Press
  3. Ashford, S. J, "Self-assessments in organizations-a literature-review and integrative model", Research in Organizational Behavior, 11, pp.133~174 (1989)
  4. Atwater, L, "Self-other rating agreement : A review and model", Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 15, pp.121~174 (1997)
  5. Barbot, B, "Assessing creativity in the classroom", The Open Education Journal, 4, pp.58~66 (2011)
  6. Bass, B. M, "Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership" (1990), Free Press
  7. Batey, M, "The measurement of creativity: From definitional consensus to the introduction of a new heuristic framework", Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), pp.55~65 (2012)
  8. 조연순, "교실수업 상황에서 학생 창의성을 촉진하는 교수․학습 특성 탐색", 교육방법연구, 23(3), pp.609~634 (2011), 한국교육방법학회[DOI]
  9. Creswell, J. W, "Advanced mixed methods research designs", Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research, 209, pp.240~ (2003)
  10. Cropley, A, "Creativity in Education & Learning : A Guide for Teachers and Educators" (2003), Kogan Page Limited
  11. Falchikov, N, "Student self-assessment in higher education : A meta-analysis", Review of Educational Research, 59(4), pp.395~430 (1989)
  12. Friedlander, M, "A natural science creativity as a prediction of creative thinking in science", Creative Child and Adult Quarterly, 8, pp.211~215 (1983)
  13. Harris, M. M, "A meta‐analysis of self supervisor, self peer, and peer supervisor ratings", Personnel Psychology, 41(1), pp.43~62 (1988)
  14. Hu, W, "A scientific creativity test for secondary school students", International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), pp.389~403 (2002)
  15. Hull, D. L, "Science as a Process : An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science" (2010), University of Chicago Press
  16. 지경준, "과학적 창의성 향상을 위한 가족활동(FAISC) 프로그램의 개발과 적용", 한국과학교육학회지, 33(1), pp.114~131 (2013), 한국과학교육학회
  17. 강경아, "초등학생의 창의성 계발을 위한 방안으로서 아이디어 생성 및 검토 단계에 창의적 사고 기법을 도입한 문제 해결 프로그램의 가능성 탐색", 초등과학교육, 34(1), pp.95~108 (2015), 한국초등과학교육학회[DOI]
  18. Kaufman, J. C, "Beyond big and little : The four C model of creativity", Review of General Psychology, 13(1), pp.1~12 (2009)
  19. Kim, J, "The effect of brain-based evolutionary approach using rapid-cycling Brassica rapa on scientific knowledge and scientific creativity of elementary students", Master’s, pp.2016
  20. Kim, S, "Analyses of interests and scientific creativity after elementary science instruction by a brainbased evolutionary approach using rapid-cycling Brassica rapa. Master’s thesis, Seoul National University of Education, Seoul", Master’s, pp.2016
  21. Lee, J, "A study of the science creativity", The Journal of Lifelong Education, 12(1), pp.153~169 (2003)
  22. Lee, K, "Development of the task-based assessment tools for scientific creativity (TATSC) and method for applying it to the selection of scientifically gifted students", Doctoral, pp.2011
  23. 임채성, "뇌기반 진화적 과학 교수학습 모형의 개발", 한국과학교육학회지, 29(8), pp.990~1010 (2009), 한국과학교육학회
  24. 임채성, "뇌기반 진화적 접근법에 따른 창의적 과학 문제해결 지도 모형 개발", 생물교육, 40(4), pp.429~452 (2012), 한국생물교육학회[DOI]
  25. 임채성, "과학창의성 평가 공식의 개발과 적용", 초등과학교육, 33(2), pp.242~257 (2014), 한국초등과학교육학회[DOI]
  26. Lim, C, "Science Teaching and Learning Using Multiple Intelligences" (2006), Wonmisa
  27. Mayer, R. E, "Handbook of Creativity" (1999), Cambridge University Press
  28. Mayer, R. E, "Problem-solving transfer", Handbook of Educational Psychology, pp.47~62 (1996)
  29. Moon, Y, "Multiple Intelligence" (2009), Business books
  30. Mumford, M. D, "Taking stock in taking stock", Creativity Research Journal, 15(2-3), pp.147~151 (2003)
  31. Newton, D. P, "What teachers see as creative incidents in elementary science lessons", International Journal of Science Education, 32(15), pp.1989~2005 (2010)
  32. 박형민, "뇌기반 진화적 접근법에 따른 과학 야외학습이 초등학생들의 흥미와 성취도에 미치는 영향", 초등과학교육, 34(2), pp.252~263 (2015), 한국초등과학교육학회[DOI]
  33. Podsakoff, P. M, "Self-reports in organizational research : Problems and prospects", Journal of Management, 12(4), pp.531~544 (1986)
  34. Runco, M. A, "Creativity : Theories and Themes : Research, Development, and Practice" (2007), Elsevier
  35. Seo, H. A, "Korean science teachers’ understanding of creativity in gifted education", Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 16(2-3), pp.98~105 (2005)
  36. Simonton, D. K, "Creativity and discovery as blind variation : Campbell’s(1960)BVSR model after the half-century mark", Review of General Psychology, 15(2), pp.158~ (2011)
  37. variation: Campbell’s, "BVSR model after the half-century mark", Review of General Psychology, 15(2), pp.158~ (1960)
  38. Simonton, D. K, "Assessing scientific creativity:Conceptual analyses of assessment complexities", Commissioned paper, The Science of Science and Innovation Policy Conference, National Academy of Sciences (2012)
  39. Sinha, A. K, "Measurement of scientific creativity", Indian Journal of Psychometry and Education, 18, pp.1~13 (1987)
  40. Sternberg, R. J, "Handbook of Creativity" (1999), Cambridge University Press
  41. Taylor, S. E, "Illusion and wellbeing : A social psychological perspective on mental health", Psychological Bulletin, 103(2), pp.193~ (1988)
  42. Treffinger, D. J, "Myth 5 : Creativity is too difficult to measure", Gifted Child Quarterly, 53(4), pp.245~247 (2009)
  43. Treffinger, D. J, "International Handbook of Research and Development of Giftedness and Talent", pp.555~567 (1993), Pergamon
  44. Ward, T. B, "Creative Thought: An Investigation of Conceptual Structures and Processes" (1997), American Psychological Association
  45. Weisberg, R, "Creativity: Genius and Other Myths", pp.Henry Holt & Co, WH Freeman
  46. Weisberg, R. W, "Creativity: Beyond the Myth of Genius" (1993), Freeman
  47. Weisberg, R. W, "Creativity: Understanding Innovation in Problem Solving, Science, Invention, and the Arts" (2006), John Wiley & Sons

관련 논문AI추천

인지적 영역 중심의 뇌기반 진화적 접근법을 적용한 초등 과학 수업에서 학생들의 과학 창의성 분석김성하, 옥찬미, 임채성, 홍준의한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2016 · 제35권 제4호뇌기반 진화적 접근법에 따른 과학 야외학습이 초등학생들의 흥미와 성취도에 미치는 영향김재영, 박형민, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2015 · 제34권 제2호뇌 기반 진화적 접근법을 적용한 초등학교 학생의 과학 자유탐구에서 인지적 영역 분석김재영, 백자연, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2014 · 제33권 제4호뇌 기반 진화적 접근법을 적용한 초등학교 학생의 과학 자유탐구에서 행동 영역 분석김재영, 백자연, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2014 · 제33권 제3호뇌기반 진화적 접근법에 따른 과학 자유탐구에 대한 초등학교 학생의 인식김재영, 백자연, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2015 · 제34권 제1호뇌기반 진화적 접근법을 적용한 초등학생 수준별 자유탐구 안내자료 개발 및 효과임라미, 임채성한국초등과학교육학회 · 초등과학교육2018 · 제37권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)

대학에서의 과학 탐구 수업이 고등학교 과학 동아리 학생들의 과학에 대한 태도 및 학습 동기에 미치는 영향심재호, 이명준pp. 12-24과학관의 역할에 대한 과학관 홈페이지 인사말과 초등학생의 생각 탐색- 텍스트 네트워크 분석기법 활용 -김동렬pp. 25-342009 개정과 2015 개정 교육과정에 따른 생명과학 I 교과서의 탐구활동 비교정은영, 박은경pp. 35-493D 프린터를 활용한 식물의 구조 프랙털 제작 STEAM 수업이 과학 탐구 능력, 창의적 문제해결력 및 과학적 흥미도에 미치는 효과홍승호, 홍진석pp. 50-58문제중심 STEAM 프로그램이 고등학생의 과학 관련 태도와 STEAM 수업에 대한 인식에 미치는 효과심규철, 이지윤pp. 59-71
원문 보기