본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

면대면 수업과의 관련, 교수자의 관여수준에 따른 온라인 협력학습의 과정과 결과

The Process and Result of Online Collaborative Learning

이성주
한국교육공학회 (Korean Society Of Educational Technology)|2009.09|교육공학연구 (Journal of Educational Technology)|제25권 제3호|pp. 35-56

1

조회

0

다운로드

16

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

상호작용interaction면대면 수업teacher interventiononline collaborative learning온라인 협력학습교사관여face-to-face teaching
주제분류교육학

초록

본 연구는 온라인 협력학습 설계를 위한 시사점을 얻기 위해 면대면 수업과의 관련 유무, 교수자의 관여수준에 따라 온라인 협력학습 상황을 달리하여 그에 따른 온라인 협력학습의 과정과 결과를 살펴보았다. 면대면 수업과의 관련 유무는 전통 교실수업과의 관련 유무로, 교수자 관여수준은 0수준부터 2수준까지 각각 학습자 통제 상황, 교수자 촉진상황, 교수자 통제 상황으로 처치하였다. 자료 분석에는 양적, 질적 방법이 모두 사용되었으며 특히 학습과정의 경우 온라인 협력학습에서 생성된 메시지의 분석을 통하여 참여수준, 메시지 수준, 개인수준의 상호작용, 집단수준의 상호작용으로 나누어 살펴보았다. 학습과정을 보면 참여수준은 교수자 촉진집단이 학습자 통제집단, 교수자 통제집단보다 높게 나타났다. 메시지 수준은 면대면 수업관련 유집단이 무집단보다 높게 나타났다. 개인별 메시지 내용분석을 통해 알아본 개인수준의 상호작용을 보면 면대면 수업관련 무집단의 사교적 상호작용 빈도가 유집단보다 의의 있게 높았으며, 학습자 통제집단의 절차적 상호작용 빈도가 교수자 통제집단보다 의의 있게 높았다. 메시지 지도를 통해 본 집단수준의 상호작용을 보면 <면대면 수업관련 유-학습자 통제집단>은 ‘빈도 빈약-관계 빈약형’을, <면대면 수업관련 무-학습자 통제집단>은 ‘빈도 풍성-관계 빈약형’을, <면대면 수업관련 유-교수자 촉진집단>은 ‘자기반추형’을, <면대면 수업관련 무-교수자 통제집단>은 교수자 중심의 ‘중앙집중형’을 나타냈다. 학습결과를 보면 면대면 수업관련 유집단의 학업성취가 무집단보다 의의 있게 높았으며, 교수자 촉진집단의 학업성취가 학습자 통제집단이나 교수자 통제집단보다 의의 있게 높았다. 이러한 결과는 온라인 협력학습 과정에서 생성된 상호작용의 양과 내용이 학습의 결과로 이어진다는 것을 보여주는 것으로, 학습과제와 관련된 상호작용이 발생하도록 지원하는 온라인 협력학습 설계의 필요성을 보여주고 있다.

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to identify the conditions of online collaborative learning for improving teaching-learning effect. For the purpose of this study examined the effect of face-to-face teaching existence and the levels of teacher intervention on learning process and result. In this study face-to-face teaching existence meant the connection with traditional classroom lecture. The levels of teacher intervention was divided into three from level 0 to level 2; learner-control, teacher-facilitator and teacher-control. In the data analysis both quantitative method and qualitative method are used. For learning process participation level, message level, individual-level interaction and group-level interaction were examined. The results related to learning process were as follows: In the participation level, the teacher-facilitator situation was higher than learner-control or teacher-control. For the message level, the group without face-to-face teaching was higher than the group with face-to-face teaching. In case of individual-level interaction, from analyzing individual message content, the social interaction frequency in the group without face-to-face teaching was significantly higher than in the group with face-to-face teaching. And learner-control group’s procedural interaction frequency was significantly higher than teacher-control group’s. In the group level interaction, 4 types of interaction discovered through message mapping. The type of ‘frequency poorness-relationship poorness’ came out in the learner-control group with face-to-face teaching. The type of ‘frequency richness-relationship poorness’ came out in the learner-control group without face-to-face teaching. The type of ‘self-reflection’ was from the teacher-facilitator group with face-to-face teaching and the type of ‘centralization’ from learner-control group without face-to-face teaching. The results related to learning achievement were as follows: The group with face-to-face teaching got better scores in academic achievement test, and teacher-facilitator group had higher academic achievement than learner-control or teacher-control group. These results show the interactions of online collaborative learning process are closely connected with learning result.

참고문헌 (42)

  1. 강이철, "웹 기반 가상토론 환경이 학습자의 관점변화에 미치는 영향:사회과 상조적 의사결정모형 활용", 교육공학연구, 16(1), pp.3~27 (2000)
  2. 정은정, "컴퓨터 매개 통신을 이용한 협력학습 환경에서 질문생성훈련이 문제해결과정에 미치는 영향", 교육공학연구, 16(1), pp.201~222 (2000), 한국교육공학회
  3. Ahern,T.C, "Improving the instructional congruency of a computer-mediated small-group discussion: a case study in design and delivery", Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(3), pp.385~399 (2000)
  4. Arvaja, M, "Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context", Learning and Instruction, 17, pp.448~459 (2007)
  5. Azevedo,R, "Beyond intelligent tutoring systems: using computers as METAcognitive tools to enhance learning?", Instructional Science, 30, pp.31~45 (2002)
  6. Banks, A. P, "Running shared mental models as a distributed cognitive process", British Journal of Psychology, 91, pp.513~531 (2000)
  7. Bonk, C. J., "Time to “connect”: synchronous and asynchronous case-based dialogue among preservice teachers. In Electronic Collaborations" (1998), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers
  8. Bransford, J. D, "The abstraction of linguistic idea", Cognitive Psychology, 2, pp.331~350 (1971)
  9. Biggs, J. B, "Evaluating the quality of learning: the SOLO taxonomy, Educational psychology" (1982), Academic Press
  10. Carrell,P.L, "Some causes of text-boundedness and schema interference in ESL reading. In Interactive Approaches to Second Langusge Reading" (1988), Cambridge University Press
  11. Dilla,W, "Computer-mediated communication and structured interaction in transfer pricing negotiation", Journal of Information Systems, 6(2), pp.149~ (1992)
  12. "Collaborative learning and the internet"[URL]
  13. Garrison, D. R, "Critical Inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education", The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), pp.87~105 (2000)
  14. Greek,C.E, "The cutting edge", Federal Probation, 64(2), pp.64~69 (2000)
  15. Hathorn, L. G, "Online Collaboration: Making it work", Educational Technology January-February. (2002)
  16. Henri,F, "Computer conferencing and content analysis. In Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing" (1992), Springer-Verlag
  17. Janassen, J, "Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning", Computers in Human Behavior, 23, pp.1105~1125 (2007)
  18. Kim,C.H, "How computer based instruction can be more effectively used in our instruction", Journal of Educational Technology, 8(1), pp.239~245 (1993)
  19. Kneser, C, "Collaboration on the basis of complementary domain knowledge: observed dialogue structure and their relation to learning success", Learning and Instruction, 11, pp.53~83 (2001)
  20. "Assessing process in CSCL: an ontological approach"[URL]
  21. Kwok, R. C. W, "Effect of GSS on knowledge acquisition", Information & Mangaement, 34, pp.307~315 (1998)
  22. Lea,M, "Computer conferencing and assessment: new ways of writing in higher education", Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), pp.163~188 (2001)
  23. Mason,L, "Sharing cognition to construct scientific knowledge in school context: the role of oral and written discourse", Instructional Science, 26, pp.359~389 (1998)
  24. Macdonald,J, "Assessing online collaborative learning: process and product", Computers & Education, 40, pp.377~391 (2003)
  25. McNeil, S. G, "Facilitating interactiion, communication and collaboration in online course", Computers & Geosciences, 26, pp.699~708 (2000)
  26. Naidu, S., "Analyzing CMC content for what?", Computers & Education, 46, pp.96~103 (2006)
  27. Newman, D. R, "Evaluating the quality of learning in computer-supported co-operative learning", Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6), pp.484~495 (1997)
  28. "Technology as small group face-to-face collaborative scaffolding. Computers & Education"[URL]
  29. Oliver, R, "Exploring student interaction in collaborative world wide web computer-based learning environments", Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hyperamedia, 7(2), pp.263~287 (1998)
  30. Peterson,P.W, "The debate about online learning: key issues for writing teachers", Computers and Composition, 18, pp.359~370 (2001)
  31. Ragan. T. J, "What we have here is a failure to communicate: the criticality of writing in online instruction", Computers and Composition, 18, pp.399~409 (2001)
  32. Schrie,S, "Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: going beyond quantitative analysis", Computers & Education, 46, pp.49~70 (2006)
  33. Sherry,L, "The nature and purpose of online discourse: a brief synthesis of current research as related to the WEB project", International Journal of Educational Telecommunication, 6(1), pp.19~52 (2000)
  34. Soller, A, "What makes peer interaction effective? Modeling effective communication in an inteligent CSCL", American Association for Artificial Intelligence, ~ (1999)
  35. Strijbos, J. W, "Designing for interaction: Six steps to designing computer-supported group-based learning", Computers & Eduations, 42, pp.403~424 (2004)
  36. Thomas, P, "Using a phenomenographic approach in evaluation hypermedia stories", Computer & Education, 50, pp.513~626 (2008)
  37. Tiene,D, "Online discussion: A survey of advantages and disadvantages compared to face-to-face discussion", Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(4), pp.371~384 (2000)
  38. "What is the collaborative classroom?"[URL]
  39. Tolmie, A, "Factors influencing the success of computer-mediated communication (CMC) environments in university teaching: a review and case study", Computers & Education, 34, pp.119~140 (2000)
  40. Van Boxtel, C, "Collaborative learning task and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge", Learning and Instruction, 10, pp.311~330 (2000)
  41. Van Drie, J, "Effects of representational guidance on domain specific reasoning in CSCL", Computers in Human Behavior, 21, pp.575~602 (2005)
  42. Veerman, A. L, "Learning through synchronous electronic discussion", Computers & Education, 34, pp.269~290 (2000)

관련 논문AI추천

학습과제 유형에 따른 온라인 협력학습 과정이성주한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2008 · 제24권 제4호온라인 협동학습에서 긍정적 상호의존성과 그룹 프로세싱이 학습자의 상호작용에 미치는 상대적 효과남창우한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2009 · 제25권 제2호대형 온라인 강좌에서의 학습자간 상호작용과 협력적 지식형성 분석이지연한국성인교육학회 · Andragogy Today: Interdisciplinary Journal of Adult & Continuing Education (IJACE)2011 · 제14권 제2호온라인 팀 협력 학습 결과의 군집유형에 따른 학습 과정과 협력 학습에 대한 흥미의 차이김민정한국교육방법학회 · 교육방법연구2022 · 제34권 제4호웹기반 게시판을 활용한 협력학습에서의 상호작용 유형과 지식형성 과정이지연한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2005 · 제21권 제4호면대면 학습 환경과 온라인 실시간/비실시간 학습 환경에서의 상호작용 패턴 분석이상수한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2004 · 제20권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)

교사의 인식론적 신념과 수업설계 행위와의 관련성 탐색박기용, 강이철, 조자경pp. 1-33사회적 자본의 관계적 차원이 지식창출과정에 미치는 영향이윤경, 조일현pp. 57-78수업 관심단계에 따른 수업설계 수행에 관한 연구강이철, 박기용, 전현정pp. 79-103이러닝 학습환경에서 디지털 텍스트 구조의 시각 표상 설계원리 개발연구성은모pp. 105-133어포던스 관점에서 디지털 교과서 사용편의성에 영향을 미치는 요인분석 연구박형주, 송해덕pp. 135-155
원문 보기