본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

블렌디드 협력학습에서 스캐폴딩, 메타인지 및 협력성향이 문제해결에 미치는 효과

Effects of Scaffolding and Metacognition and Collaborative Preference on Problem-solving in Blended Collaborative Learning

김회수|이순덕
한국교육정보미디어학회 (Korea Association for Educational Information and Media)|2017.03|교육정보미디어연구 (Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media)|제23권 제1호|pp. 83-108|DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.15833/KAFEIAM.23.1.083

2

조회

0

다운로드

9

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

메타인지Metacognition협력성향성찰적 스캐폴딩지원적 스캐폴딩Reflective scaffoldingSupportive scaffolding블렌디드 협력학습Collaborative preferencesBlended collaborative learning
주제분류교육학

초록

본 연구는 블렌디드 협력학습에서 제공하는 스캐폴딩 유형과 학습자의 메타인지 및 협력성향이 문제해결 과정과 결과에 미치는 영향을 분석하는 것이 목적이다. 이를 위해 122명의 대학생을 성찰적 스캐폴딩 집단, 지원적 스캐폴딩 집단, 통제집단에 각각 배치하고 2명씩 짝을 지어 비구조화 문제를 해결하는 협력학습을 실시하였다. 사전검사와 실험처치를 통해 수집한 자료를 다변량공분산분석을 실시한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 비구조화 문제해결 과정과 결과는 스캐폴딩 제공여부와 스캐폴딩 유형에 영향을 받았다. 둘째, 문제해결 과정의 이해․탐색 단계에서 메타인지 수준이 높은 학습자들의 성취가 높았다. 그러나 문제해결 결과물에 대한 성취는 메타인지 수준의 영향을 받지 않았다. 셋째, 문제해결 과정에 스캐폴딩 유형과 메타인지 수준 간에 유의한 상호작용 효과는 없었지만, 선정․평가 단계에서 방향성이 일치하는 결과를 보였다. 넷째, 문제해결 과정과 결과 성취는 학습자의 협력성향 수준에 따라 영향을 받지 않았다. 이러한 결과를 통해, 학습자에게 익숙하지 않은 문제 상황이나 학습 방식을 적용하는 경우에 스캐폴딩을 해주는 것이 효과적임을 확인하였다. 특히, 학습과정에 대한 계획, 점검, 평가활동을 학습자가 수행하도록 유도하는 탐색적 질문을 제시함으로써 메타인지적 활동을 촉진하는 것이 보다 효과적인 전략이 될 수 있다.

Abstract

This study was aimed at analyzing the effects of the scaffolding types and learner’s metacognition and collaborative preferences on problem solving in blended collaborative learning environments. The participants were 122 undergraduate students, who participated to ill-structured problem solving in blended collaborative learning for 4 weeks. The participants were paired and assigned into one of three groups: A reflective scaffolding group, a supportive scaffolding group, and a control group. The results were as follows. In the ill-structured problem solving process and product, there was a positive effect in both scaffolding and scaffolding types. The treatment group was higher than the control group on problem solving process and product. And the reflective scaffolding group was higher than the supportive scaffolding group on problem solving process and product. The high level of metacognition were more effective performances in the identifying the problem and searching solutions of the problem solving processing than the lower. But, there was no significant difference in problem solving product according to the level of metacognition. As for collaborative preferences, there was no significant difference in problem solving process and product as well as no interaction effect between the types of scaffolding and the level of metacognition. This study showed that offering instructional assistance such as scaffolding is effective for learners who are not familiar with the learning situation that they have to solve problems in. Scaffolding can be a more effective strategy for students to facilitate their metacognitive activities by providing explanatory questions which induce planning, monitoring, and evaluation in the process of learning as well as helping domain-specific knowledge.

참고문헌 (67)

  1. 고한중, "학생들의 집단주의 성향에 따른 협동학습 전략의 효과", 대한화학회지, 57(3), pp.389~397 (2013), 대한화학회[DOI]
  2. 김주연, "웹 기반 문제해결학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형과 메타인지 수준이 실재감, 문제해결수행및 성취도에 미치는 영향", 박사, pp.2015
  3. 김회수, "웹 기반 하이퍼텍스트 학습에서 협동학습, 그래픽 조직자와 공유인지가 메타인지와 작동기억 부하 분산 및 상황모형 구축에 미치는 효과", 교육공학연구, 27(2), pp.289~315 (2011), 한국교육공학회
  4. 안수경, "시각적․공간적 작동기억 수준과 스캐폴딩 유형이 수학 문장제 성취에 미치는 효과", 교육공학연구, 29(1), pp.161~183 (2013), 한국교육공학회
  5. 이순덕, "협력학습의 교육적 효과 및 학습자들의 수업 경험", 한국산학기술학회논문지, 17(4), pp.243~254 (2016), 한국산학기술학회[DOI]
  6. 장선영, "온라인 학습 환경에서 문제해결 단계별 스캐폴딩 유형의 효과 분석", 교육공학연구, 30(2), pp.193~220 (2014), 한국교육공학회
  7. 전희정, "웹기반 PBL에서 학습자의 메타인지와 스캐폴딩 유형이 문제해결과정에 미치는 효과", 한국콘텐츠학회 논문지, 7(2), pp.161~169 (2007), 한국콘텐츠학회
  8. Aleven, V, "An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor", Cognitive Science, 26(2), pp.147~181 (2002)
  9. An, Y. J, "Scaffolding wiki-based, ill-structured problem solving in an online environment", MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(4), pp.723~734 (2010)
  10. An, Y. J, "Examining the effects of metacognitive scaffolding on students’ design problem solving and metacognitive skills in an online environment", MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(4), pp.552~568 (2014)
  11. Azevedo, R, "Understanding the complex nature of self-regulatory processes in learning with computer-based learning environments : A introduction", Metacognition and Learning, 2(2), pp.67~65 (2007)
  12. Azevedo, R, "Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self-and socially-regulated learning", Metacognition and Learning, 9(2), pp.217~228 (2014)
  13. Azevedo, R, "Adaptive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents’ self-regulated learning with hypermedia", Instructional Science, 33(5), pp.381~412 (2005)
  14. Azevedo, R, "Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition-Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds", Instructional Science, 33(5), pp.367~379 (2005)
  15. Belland, B. R, "A scaffolding framework to support the construction of evidence-based arguments among middle school students", ETR&D, 56(4), pp.401~422 (2008)
  16. Bixler, B. T, "Supporting college students’ ill-structures problem-solving in a web-based learning environment", Journal of Educational Technology System, 39(1), pp.2010~2011 (2010)
  17. Bransford, J, "How People Learn : Brain, Mind, Experience and School. Washington" (2000), National Academies Press
  18. Bulu, S. T, "Scaffolding middle school students’ content knowledge and illstructured problem solving in a problem-based hypermedia learning environment", ETR&D, 58(5), pp.507~529 (2010)
  19. Cagiltay, K, "Scaffolding strategies in electronic performance support systems : Types and challenges", Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 43(1), pp.93~103 (2006)
  20. Chen, C, "Prompting college students’ knowledge acquisition and ill-structured problem-solving : Web-based integration and procedure prompts", Computers & Education, 55(1), pp.292~303 (2010)
  21. Chen, C. H, "Effectiveness and impact of technology-enabled project-based learning with the use of process prompts in teacher education", Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19(2), pp.141~167 (2011)
  22. Costa, A. L, "Mediating the metacognitive monitoring : A cognitive developmental inquiry", Educational Leadership, 42(3), pp.57~62 (1984)
  23. Cuevas, H. M, "Scaffolding cognitive and metacognitive processes in low verbal ability learners : Use of diagrams in computer-based training environments", Instructional Science, 30(6), pp.433~464 (2002)
  24. Dabbagh, N, "Using web-based pedagogical tools as scaffolds for self-regulated learning", Instructional Science, 33(5), pp.513~540 (2005)
  25. Davis, E. A, "Scaffolding student’s knowledge integration : Prompts for reflection in KIE", International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), pp.819~837 (2000)
  26. "Knowledge management using a corporation intranet" (2000)[URL]
  27. Eby, L. T, "Collectivistic orientation in teams and individual and group-level analysis", Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(3), pp.275~295 (1997)
  28. Ge, X, "Scaffolding novice instructional designers’ problem-solving processes using question prompts in a web-based learning environment", Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(2), pp.219~248 (2005)
  29. Ge, X, "An online support system to scaffold real world problem solving", Interactive Learning Environment, 13(3), pp.139~157 (2005)
  30. Ge, X, "Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions", ETR&D, 51(1), pp.21~38 (2003)
  31. Ge, X, "A conceptual framework for scaffolding ill-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions", ETR&D, 52(2), pp.5~22 (2004)
  32. Goos, M, "Socially mediated metacognition : Creating collaborative zones of proximal development in small group problem solving", Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(2), pp.193~223 (2002)
  33. Gorvine, B. J, "Predicting student success in a psychological statistics course emphasizing collaborative learning", Teaching of Psychology, 42(1), pp.56~59 (2015)
  34. Hannafin, M. J, "Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory", pp.115~140 (1999), Erlbaum
  35. Holton, D, "Scaffolding and metacognition", International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(2), pp.127~143 (2006)
  36. Iiskala, T, "Socially-shared metacognition in peer learning", Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 1(2), pp.147~178 (2004)
  37. Iiskala, T, "Socially shared metacognition of dyads of pupils in collaborative mathematical problem-solving processes", Learning and Instruction, 21(3), pp.379~393 (2011)
  38. Jager, B, "The Development of metacognition in primary school learning environments", School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(2), pp.179~196 (2005)
  39. Janssen, J, "Making the black box of collaborative learning transparent : Combining process-oriented and cognitive load approaches", Educational psychology review, 22(2), pp.139~154 (2010)
  40. Johnson, D. W, "Joining together : Group theory and group skills" (2000), Allyn & Bacon
  41. Johnson, D. W, "The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary and professional settings", Educational Psychology Review, 19(1), pp.15~29 (2007)
  42. Jonassen, D. H, "Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem solving learning outcomes", ETR&D, 45(1), pp.64~94 (1997)
  43. Jonassen, D. H, "Computers as mindtools for schools : Engaging critical thinking" (2000), Prentice-Hall
  44. Jonassen, D. H, "Learning to solve problems : An instructional design guide" (2004), Pfeiffer
  45. Jonassen, D. H, "Structural knowledge: Techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge" (1993), LEA
  46. Kaufmann, D. F, "Self-regulated learning in Web-based environments: Instructional tools designed to facilitate cognitive strategy use, metacognitive processing, and motivational beliefs", Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1), pp.139~161 (2004)
  47. Khosa, D. K, "Promoting effective collaborative case-based learning at university", Studies in Higher Education, 38(6), pp.870~889 (2013)
  48. King, A, "Autonomy and question asking : The role of personal control in guided student-generated questioning", Learning and Individual Differences, 6(2), pp.163~185 (1994)
  49. Kirschner, F, "A cognitive-load approach to collaborative learning : United brains for complex tasks", Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), pp.31~42 (2009)
  50. Kirschner, F, "Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks : Effects on retention and transfer efficiency", Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), pp.306~314 (2009)
  51. Lin, X, "Designing technology to support reflection", ETR&D, 47(3), pp.43~62 (1999)
  52. McLoughlin, C, "A learner-centered approach to developing team skills through web-based learning and assessment", British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(5), pp.571~582 (2002)
  53. McNeese, M. D, "Socio-cognitive factors in the acquisition and transfer of knowledge. Cognition", Technology & Work, 2(3), pp.164~177 (2000)
  54. O'Neil, H, "Reliability and validity of a state metacognitive inventory : Potential for alternative assessment", Journal of Educational Research, 89(4), pp.234~245 (1996)
  55. Panadero, E, "Socially shared regulation of learning : A review", European Psychologist, 20(3), pp.190~203 (2015)
  56. Puntambekar, S, "Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment:What have we gained and what have we missed", Educational Psychologist, 40(1), pp.1~12 (2005)
  57. Roll, I, "Evaluating metacognitive scaffolding in guided invention activities", Instructional Science, 40(4), pp.691~710 (2012)
  58. Salomon, G, "Skill may not be enough : The role of mindfulness in learning and transfer", International Journal of Educational Research, 11(6), pp.623~637 (1987)
  59. Saye, J. W, "Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social-issue multimediasupported learning environments", ETR&D, 50(3), pp.77~96 (2002)
  60. Schutt, M, "Scaffolding for online learning environment: Instructional design strategies that provide online learner support", Educational Technology, 43(6), pp.28~35 (2003)
  61. Shin, N, "Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), pp.6~33 (2003)
  62. Simons, K. D, "The Impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment", Instructional Science, 35(1), pp.41~72 (2007)
  63. Triandis, H. C, "Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), pp.118~128 (1998)
  64. van Merrienboer, J, "Taking the load off a learners mind : Instructional design for complex learning", Educational Psychologist, 38(1), pp.5~13 (2003)
  65. Volet, S, "Self-and social regulation in learning contexts : An integrative perspective", Educational Psychologist, 44(4), pp.215~226 (2009)
  66. Voss, J. F, "The nature of expertise" (1988), Lawrence Erlbaum
  67. Wagner, J. A, "Studies of Individualism-Collectivism : Effects on cooperation in groups", Academy of Management Journal, 38(1), pp.152~ (1995)

관련 논문AI추천

블렌디드 협력학습에서 스캐폴딩, 메타인지 및 협력성향이 협력부하와 지식공유에 미치는 효과김회수, 이순덕한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2016 · 제22권 제4호위키 기반 블렌디드 협력학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형이 창의성에 미치는 효과김회수, 황경양한국창의력교육학회 · 창의력교육연구2021 · 제21권 제2호CSCL에서 스캐폴딩의 유형이 공유 정신 모형에 미치는 영향권숙진, 김동식한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2006 · 제22권 제1호온라인 화상회의 기반 협력학습에서 교수자의 개입에 따른 메타인지 촉진전략이 인지부하와 수행에 미치는 효과김진영, 김회수한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2024 · 제30권 제3호온라인 학습 환경에서 문제해결 단계별 스캐폴딩 유형의 효과 분석장선영한국교육공학회 · 교육공학연구2014 · 제30권 제2호위키 기반 블렌디드 협력학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형이 과학성취도에 미치는 효과 분석김회수, 황경양한국교육정보미디어학회 · 교육정보미디어연구2021 · 제27권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)

초등학교 수업에서 정보통신 테크놀로지 활용에 대한 교사의 인식 연구권성연pp. 1-27박물관 모바일 러닝 분석에 기반한 학교 모바일 러닝 활성화 방안: 학교-박물관 연계 모바일 러닝 모형손정은, 이소현, 강인애pp. 29-56‘교육정보미디어연구’에 나타난 온라인 협력학습에서의 학습자간 상호작용분석 방법 동향이광재, 이영주pp. 57-81교육용 SNS를 활용한 플립드러닝 수업 효과 분석:초등학교 수학과를 중심으로이희명, 엄우용pp. 109-138적응적 수업을 위한 상호작용 어플리케이션 프로토타입 개발이상수, 김춘화, 김현지pp. 139-168
원문 보기