과학 실험 활동 중 도구와의 상호작용에서 나타나는 도구 어포던스 : 전자석 만들기를 중심으로
Tool Affordance from Interactions with Tools during Scientific Experimental Activities
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study is to find out what tool affordances are for tools and materials that interact with students during scientific experimental activities. For this, 22 university students were asked to conduct scientific experimental activities "to make electromagnet and to identify the properties of electromagnets" to collect experimental behaviors and concurrent think aloud, retrospective think aloud, and gaze positions. Based on the collected data, all experimental behaviors of the participants were listed, and the number of participants in each experimental behavior was investigated. Tool affordance, which is the cause of this experimental behavior, was inferred, focusing on unintended experimental behavior among experimental behaviors that appeared in many participants. As a result of the study, 3 kinds of tool affordance were found as follows. “There will be some reaction at a specific location of the tool.”, “When you manipulate tools of different sizes together, manipulate the small ones and keep the large ones still.”, “Do not touch the seemingly dangerous parts.” These tool affordances can lead to incorrect procedural representations, making it difficult to accurately follow the experimental manual. Due to human nature, tool affordance perceived from tools and materials in scientific experimental activities affect the construction of representations of procedures. Therefore, it is necessary to understand tool affordance and produce experimental manuals in order to avoid negative effects from representation of incorrect procedures.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to find out what tool affordances are for tools and materials that interact with students during scientific experimental activities. For this, 22 university students were asked to conduct scientific experimental activities "to make electromagnet and to identify the properties of electromagnets" to collect experimental behaviors and concurrent think aloud, retrospective think aloud, and gaze positions. Based on the collected data, all experimental behaviors of the participants were listed, and the number of participants in each experimental behavior was investigated. Tool affordance, which is the cause of this experimental behavior, was inferred, focusing on unintended experimental behavior among experimental behaviors that appeared in many participants. As a result of the study, 3 kinds of tool affordance were found as follows. “There will be some reaction at a specific location of the tool.”, “When you manipulate tools of different sizes together, manipulate the small ones and keep the large ones still.”, “Do not touch the seemingly dangerous parts.” These tool affordances can lead to incorrect procedural representations, making it difficult to accurately follow the experimental manual. Due to human nature, tool affordance perceived from tools and materials in scientific experimental activities affect the construction of representations of procedures. Therefore, it is necessary to understand tool affordance and produce experimental manuals in order to avoid negative effects from representation of incorrect procedures.
참고문헌 (27)
- Bumbacher, E., "Tools for science inquiry learning : Tool affordances, experimentation strategies, and conceptual understanding", Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, pp.215~235 (2018)
- Bunce D. M., "A procedural problem in laboratory teaching: Experiment and explain, or vice-versa?", Journal of Chemical Education, 83, pp.159~163 (2006)
- 차지현, "초등수학수업에서 시선영상 자기반성을 통한 초보 교사의 시선 변화 분석", Brain, Digital, & Learning, 10(1), pp.107~121 (2020), 뇌·AI기반교육연구소[DOI]
- Davidowitz, B., "Effectiveness of flow diagrams as a strategy for learning in laboratories", Australian Journal of Education in Chemistry, 57, pp.18~24 (2001)
- de Vries, E., "Students’ construction of external representations in design-based learning situations", Learning and Instruction, 16, pp.213~227 (2006)
- Duggan, G. B., "Interleaving reading and acting while following procedural instructions", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Applied, 7, pp.297~307 (2001)
- Duggan, S., "A critical point in investigative work : Defining variables", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, pp.461~474 (1996)
- Gibson, J. J., "Perceiving, Acting and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology", pp.67~82 (1979), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Hofstein, A., "The laboratory in science education : Foundations for the twenty-first century", Science Education, 88, pp.28~54 (2004)
- Johnstone, A. H., "The demands of practical work", Education in Chemistry, 19, pp.71~73 (1982)
- Karelina, A., "Acting like a physicist : Student approach study to experimental design", Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 3, pp.020106~ (2007)
- Keys, C. W., "A study of grade six students generating questions and plans for open-ended science investigations", Research in Science Education, 28, pp.301~316 (1998)
- Khaparde, R. B., "A novel approach to encourage students independent thinking in the physics laboratory", Physics Education, 1311, pp.6255~ (2013)
- 김효정, "선조외 신체 영역에서 도구 행동유도성과 행위 주체감의 상호작용", 인지과학, 24(1), pp.49~69 (2013), 한국인지과학회[DOI]
- 김성운, "교육실습에서 시선 비디오를 활용한 교수 반성의 담화 분석", Brain, Digital, & Learning, 9(3), pp.175~188 (2019), 뇌·AI기반교육연구소[DOI]
- Knoblich, G., "Cognitive Processes in Eye Guidance", pp.355~375 (2005), Oxford University Press
- Lunetta, V., "Handbook of Research on Science Education", pp.393~441 (2007), Lawrence Erlbaum
- Marzin, P., "How can we take into account student conceptions of the facial angle in a palaeontology laboratory work?", International Conference on Learning Science, pp.567~ (2008)
- McGrenere, J., "Affordances: clarifying and evolving a concept", Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2000, pp.179~186 (2000)
- Millar, R., "Investigating in the school science laboratory:Conceptual and procedural knowledge and their influence on performance", Research Papers in Education, 9, pp.207~248 (1994)
- Morgado, J., "Detection of explanation obstacles in scientific texts : The effect of an understanding task vs an experiment task", Educational Studies, 40, pp.164~173 (2014)
- Osiurak, F., "Tool use and affordance : Manipulation-based versus reasoning-based approaches", Psychological Review, 123, pp.534~ (2016)
- Reason, J. T., "Human Error" (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Seagull, J. F., "Using eye-tracking video data to augment knowledge elicitation in cognitive task analysis", Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting, pp.400~403 (2001), Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- 서유지, "과학 수업 중 초등교사의 시각적 주의집중에 대한 신념과 시선 이동 분석", Brain, Digital, & Learning, 9(4), pp.281~292 (2019), 뇌·AI기반교육연구소[DOI]
- Tiberghien, A., "An analysis of labwork tasks used in science teaching at upper secondary school and university levels in several european countries", Science Education, 85, pp.483~508 (2001)
- van Someren, M. W., "The Think Aloud Method: A Practical Guide to Modeling Cognitive Processes" (1994), Academic