시각에서 상 맺힘 경로에 대한 생물 전공 교사의 오개념 분석
Analysis of the Biology Major Teachers' Misconceptions on the Pathway of Image Formation in Eye Vision
0
조회
0
다운로드
12
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study was to investigate the misconceptions on the pathway of visual image formation and the sources of them. For this study, we analyzed the figures which were drawn by 141 biology major teachers and surveyed whether they choose the correct position of clear image in nearsightedness or not. On the basis of drawing types and the answers of nearsightedness problem, we had a personal interview with the 12 teachers for finding the sources of misconceptions on the visual image formation. There were three drawing types represented the light pathways with only one reflected ray, though two lines are necessary at least, from each point of an object. Only 16% of the teachers had scientific concept on the drawing of light pathway. The 28% of teachers had an error that the image in nearsightedness was formed at the focal point. Especially, the 76% of teachers having ‘drawing type I’ showed a high rate of error for the position of image formation. With a questionnaire, it was revealed that the illustrations of science textbooks were mistaken the long distance luminous source for an object like stick. So biology teachers had misconceptions that stick-like image was formed at the focal distance of eye lens and a focus was equal to the image point. From the results, it was concluded that the confusion between focus and image point was the main factor of misconception for the visual image formation. It was also found that biology major teachers had a tendency to be accepted the illustrations with little understanding because of shortage in scientific concepts on light. Therefore, it is suggested to improve the illustrations of visual image formation at the science (biology) textbooks by the new curriculum.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the misconceptions on the pathway of visual image formation and the sources of them. For this study, we analyzed the figures which were drawn by 141 biology major teachers and surveyed whether they choose the correct position of clear image in nearsightedness or not. On the basis of drawing types and the answers of nearsightedness problem, we had a personal interview with the 12 teachers for finding the sources of misconceptions on the visual image formation. There were three drawing types represented the light pathways with only one reflected ray, though two lines are necessary at least, from each point of an object. Only 16% of the teachers had scientific concept on the drawing of light pathway. The 28% of teachers had an error that the image in nearsightedness was formed at the focal point. Especially, the 76% of teachers having ‘drawing type I’ showed a high rate of error for the position of image formation. With a questionnaire, it was revealed that the illustrations of science textbooks were mistaken the long distance luminous source for an object like stick. So biology teachers had misconceptions that stick-like image was formed at the focal distance of eye lens and a focus was equal to the image point. From the results, it was concluded that the confusion between focus and image point was the main factor of misconception for the visual image formation. It was also found that biology major teachers had a tendency to be accepted the illustrations with little understanding because of shortage in scientific concepts on light. Therefore, it is suggested to improve the illustrations of visual image formation at the science (biology) textbooks by the new curriculum.
참고문헌 (26)
- 고광섭, "빛 개념에 대한 초등학교 교사와 학생의 수업 전후의 개념 조사", 석사, pp.1997
- 고재근, "초․중등학교 과학 교과서의 안경광학 관련 개념의 연계성 분석", 석사, pp.2009
- . 서울: 대한교과서주식회사, "서울:대한교과서주식회사.", 1997
- . 서울: 대한교과서주식회사, "서울:대한교과서주식회사.", 2007
- 권경필, "광학분야에서 학생 개념의 상황 의존성 ; 시각과 거울상을 중심으로", 한국과학교육학회지, 26(3), pp.406~414 (2006), 한국과학교육학회
- 김영민, "케플러의 망막 상 이론 형성 과정에서의 과학적 문제 발견과 귀추적 사고", 한국과학교육학회지, 26(7), pp.835~842 (2006), 한국과학교육학회
- 김영민, "초중등학교 과학 교과서에서의 시각(eye vision) 개념의 연계성과 표현 방식 분석 및 연계성을 고려한 시각 개념 구성의 한 가지 제안", 한국과학교육학회지, 27(5), pp.456~465 (2007), 한국과학교육학회
- 김용진, "식물의 생활사와 생식방법에 대한 오개념", 한국생물교육학회지, 30(3), pp.265~273 (2002), 한국생물교육학회
- 박종석, "고등학생들의 유전에 대한 오인의 확인 및 유전학 지도방향", 한국과학교육학회지, 6(2), pp.35~42 (1986)
- 박지영, "고등학생의 생태계에 대한 오개념 유형", 한국생물교육학회지, 31(3), pp.203~213 (2003), 한국생물교육학회
- 신동훈, "8학년 과학 교과서와 교사, 학생들의 인식에서 나타난 인간의 시지각 오개념 분석", 한국생물교육학회지, 35(2), pp.291~301 (2007), 한국생물교육학회
- 심규철, "가상현실 기법의 활용이 지식 성취도 향상에 미치는 효과: 눈의 구조와 기능 내용을 중심으로", 한국과학교육학회지, 23(1), pp.1~8 (2003), 한국과학교육학회
- 중학교 1학년 과학 ‘빛’ 탐구수업 지도자료2, 빛의 상과 색의 원리: 볼록렌즈로 실상관찰하기, "이성묵", 서울대학교 과학교육연구소, 90~94 (2004)
- 이세영, "생물 영역의 오개념에 관한 연구 동향 분석", 한국생물교육학회지, 34(2), pp.174~184 (2006), 한국생물교육학회
- 이재봉, "광선추적과 스펙트럼에 대한 교사와 중학생의 개념 유형 분석", 한국과학교육학회지, 24(6), pp.1189~1205 (2004), 한국과학교육학회
- 장미영, "빛의 성질과 눈의 구조와 기능에 대한 통합 모듈의 개발 및 적용", 한국생물교육학회지, 35(4), pp.582~600 (2007), 한국생물교육학회
- 정완호, "한국 고등학생의 생물 오개념에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.1993
- 정정인, "초등학교 과학 교과서에서 사용된 보조적 시각 자료의 분류 및 분석", 초등과학교육, 26(5), pp.525~534 (2007), 한국초등과학교육학회
- 정충덕, "한국과 미국 초등학교 과학 교과서 삽화 비교 연구: 3 - 6학년 생명영역을 중심으로", 한국과학교육학회지, 27(7), pp.642~647 (2007), 한국과학교육학회
- 조희형, "선입관의 철학적 배경 및 오인과 과학학습의 관계", 한국과학교육학회지, 4(1), pp.34~43 (1984)
- 황혜린, "소 눈을 이용한 해부 실험이 중학생의 학업 성취도와 해부 실험에 대한 태도에 미치는 영향", 한국생물교육학회지, 34(5), pp.538~550 (2007), 한국생물교육학회
- Andersson, B., "On designing and evaluating teaching sequence taking geometrical optics as an example", Science Education, 89(2), pp.196~218 (2004)
- Gregg, V., "The persistence of a misconception of a about vision after educational interventions", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8(3), pp.622~626 (2001)
- Kim,Y., "How many Korean middle- school students find the same scientific problem as Kepler found in optics and physiology?", J. Korea Assoc. Res. Sc. Edu., 27(6), pp.488~496 (2007)
- Sanders,M., "Erroneous ideas about respiration : The teacher factor", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(8), pp.919~934 (1993)
- Solomon,J., "Prompts, cues and discrimination : the utilization of two separate knowledge systems", European Journal of Science Education, 6, pp.63~82 (1984)