동료평가가 온라인 토론 양상에 미치는 변화 연구
Effects of Peer Rating on the Web-Based Online Discussion
1
조회
0
다운로드
12
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
이 연구는 웹 기반 교육의 온라인 토론에서 토론 글에 대한 동료평가 실시 여부가 학습자들의 토론 참여와 어떠한 관계를 갖는지 분석함으로써 웹 기반 교수-학습 과정에서 토론 활동 및 동료평가 활용에 유용한 시사점을 제공하고자 하였다. 연구 대상자는 서울에 소재한 E대학의 전공과목 중 온라인으로만 강의가 운영되는 ‘VC’ 교과목의 2006학년도 1학기 수강생 44명이었다. 본 연구에서 웹 기반 온라인 토론은 ‘버츄얼 커뮤니케이션의 미래동향’에 대해 학습한 후 심화 활동으로 주어진 과제로, 두 차례에 걸친 조별 토론에서 각 토론의 기간과 형태, 그룹원 등은 모두 동일하였으며 토론 주제의 난이도도 유사하였다. 토론 운영의 차이점은 온라인 토론 게시글에 대한 동료평가 실시 여부이었다. 연구 결과, 토론 글에 대한 학습자와 교수자의 평가 점수에는 양의 중간 정도의 선형관계(r=.545, p<.01)가 존재하는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 온라인 토론 글에 대한 동료평가 실시 여부에 따라 게시물의 수에 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타났으며(t=3.599, p<.01), 게시물의 조회수(t=-4.437, p<.01)에도 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타났다. 인지적 참여 수준에 있어서 비판적(t=-7.330, p<.01), 재생적(t=3.486, p<.01), 그리고 비생산적(t=3.042, p<.05) 수준에서는 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 나타났으나, 확장적 수준(t=-1.064, p>.05)에서는 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 없었다. 뿐만 아니라 학생들의 토론 점수(t=-2.521, p<.05)에서도 통계적으로 유의한 차이가 있었다.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of peer rating on the content in the web-based online discussion. Online discussion for this study was conducted twice with 44 university students in the Spring Semester, 2006. The students enrolled in an online-course were divided into 10 groups, and they participated in the online-discussion asynchronously. In the first online-discussion, peer rating wasn't carried out. In the second online -discussion, on the other hand, peer rating was carried out. After the discussion, the number of both discussion posting and access on the discussion board were counted. The contents of the discussions were analyzed by units of meaning, based on the four dimensions which were proposed in the ‘on-line learning engagement analysis model’ by Lee(2005). The T-test and the correlation analysis were conducted to analyze the data. The final results are as follows. First, there was a significant difference in the number of discussion messages(t=3.599, p<.01). Second, there was not a significant difference in the number of accessed information. Third, there were significant statistical differences in the critical engagement(t=-7.330, p<.01), reproductive engagement (t=3.486, p<.01), and unproductive engagement(t=3.042, p<.05). Fourth, there was significant statistical difference in the students' evaluation scores(t=-2.521, p<.05). Fifth, there was significant statistical difference in the correlation of the evaluation of messages between the students and the instructor(r=-.545, p<.01).
참고문헌 (36)
- 김민정, "학습 방법으로서의 동료평가 : 평가자 및 피평가자의 역할이 학습자의 초인지, 학업성취, 학습동기에 미치는 영향", 교육공학연구, 21(4), pp.1~28 (2005), 한국교육공학회
- 이의길, "온라인 수업에서 자기조절학습과 협동학습의 관계 및 이들이 인지적 참여수준에 미치는 영향에 대한 경로분석", 교육공학연구, 21(3), pp.61~ (2005)
- 임정훈, "웹 기반 문제해결학습 환경에서 소집단 협동학습전략이 온라인 토론의 참여도와 문제해결에 미치는 효과", 박사, pp.1999
- 정인성, "원격교육의 이해" (1999), 교육과학사
- 조한무, "사회적 구성주의 관점에서 동료평가의 이론적 탐색", 교육논총, 23 (2004)
- 한정선, "웹 기반 학습의 온라인 토론에서 교수자의 참여에 따른 학습자의 토론 참여 양상에 대한 연구", 교육공학연구, 21(4), pp.123~142 (2005), 한국교육공학회
- 홍경선, "웹 기반 협동학습에서의 학습자 상호작용 연구", 교육인류학연구, 2(3), pp.83~99 (1999)
- Bangert-Drowns, R. L., "Teacher rating of student engagement with educational software: An exploratory study", Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), pp.23~33 (2002)
- Ballantyne, R., "Developing procedures for implementing peer assessment in large classes using an action research process", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(5), pp.427~441 (2002)
- Bereiter, C., "Implications of postmodernism for science, or science as progressive discourse", Educational Psychologist, 29(1), pp.3~12 (1994)
- Blom, D., "Peer assessment of tertiary music performance: Oppoetunities for understanding performance assessment and performimg through experience and self-reflection", British Journal of Music Education, 21(2), pp.11~125 (2004)
- Cassidy, S., "Developing emplyability skills: Peer assessment in higher education", Education +Training, 48(7), pp.508~517 (2006)
- Cheng, W., "Having second thoughts: Student perceptions before and after a peer assessment exercise", Studies in Higher Education, 22(2), pp.233~240 (1997)
- Dennen, V. P., "Learning online through asynchronous discussion: Instructional design and facilitation issues. Presented at AERA2002, New Orleans, LA", ~ (2003)
- Davis, P., "Computerized peer assessment", Innovations in Education and Teachingg International, 37, pp.346~355 (2000)
- Drucker, P. F., "자본주의 이후의 사회" (1993), 한국경제신문사
- Falchikov, N., "Product comparisons and process benefits of collaborative peer group and self assessments", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 11, pp.146~166 (1986)
- Falchikov, N., "Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment", Innovations in Education and Training International, 32(2), pp.175~187 (1995)
- Fleiss, J. L., "Statistical methods for rates and proportions" (1981), Wiley
- Fry, S., "Implementation and evaluation of peer marking in higher education", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 15, pp.177~189 (1990)
- Gardner, J., "The predictive validity of peer assessment in law enforcement: A 6 year follow-up", Behavioral Science & the Law, 16(4), pp.473~478 (1998)
- Green, M., "Children as evaluation understanding from the inside in: ART001231356", pp.83~103 (1994), Heinemann
- Harasim, L., "Online education: Perspectives on a new environment" (1990), Praeger Publishers
- Johnson, C. B, "assessment of a complex peer evaluation instrument for team learning and group processes", Accounting Education, 2, pp.21~40 (1997)
- "The nature and value of interaction in distance learning"[URL]
- Lee, S., "Designing a peer rating systems for asynchronous discussion. Presented at AECT 2004, Chicao, Ⅱ", ~ (2004)
- Mayer, R. E., "Cognition and instruction: Their historic meeting within educational psychology", Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), pp.405~412 (1992)
- McLoughlin, C., "Assessment methodologies in transition: Changing practices in web-based learning", Proceedings of ASET-HERDSA 2000 Conference (2000), Qld
- Orsmond, P., "The importance of marking criteria in peer and self-assessment", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(3), pp.239~249 (1996)
- Pope, N., "An examination of the use of peer rating for formative assessment in the context of the theory of consumption values", Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26(3), pp.235~246 (2001)
- Purchase, H. C., "Learning about interfacedesign through peer assessment", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 27(4), pp.341~352 (2000)
- Schunk, D. H., "Learning theories: An educational perspective" (2004), Pearson Prentice Hall
- Smyth, K., "The benefits of students learning about critical evaluation rather than being summatively judged", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 29(3), pp.369~378 (2004)
- Topping, K., "Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities", Review of Educational Research, 68, pp.249~276 (1998)
- Topping, K., "Formative peer assessment of academic writing between postgraduate students", Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(2), pp.149~169 (2000)
- Wen, M. L., "University students' perceptions of and attitudes toward online peer assessment", Higher Education, 51, pp.27~44 (2006)