활동으로서의 발화: CMC 연구의 분석단위에 대한 일 고찰
Utterance as Activity: A Discussion on Unit of Analysis for CMC Research
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
분석단위는 전체 현상을 그 안에 보존하고 있으면서, 더 이상 작은 단위로 쪼개지지 않는 최소 단위로 정의된다. 분석단위를 무엇으로 삼는가에 따라서 해당 연구가 그리고자 하는 전체 현상의 모습이 달라지며, 역으로 전체 현상에 대한 이론적 가정이 달라짐에 따라 분석단위 또한 다르게 설정된다. CMC 있어서는 다양한 분석단위들이 적용되어 왔으며, 어느 단위가 더 적절할 것인가에 관하여 많은 논의가 있음에도 아직 안정된 합의에는 이르지 못하고 있다. 문제는 이들 논의가 거의 전적으로 신뢰도의 문제, 즉 객관적인 분석단위의 확인, 혹은 구분 방식에 초점을 맞추고 있고, 타당도의 문제, 즉 특정 분석단위를 설정하는 이론적 근거라든지, 그것이 제공하는 이론적 조망의 타당성 등에 관해서는 거의 논하지 않고 있다는 점이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 CMC 연구의 분석단위에 관한 이론적 논의를 탐색적으로 시도하였다. 이를 위해 연구자는 첫째, CMC 연구의 분석단위가 추상적 구조로서의 언어가 아닌, 구체적 실제로서의 발화여야 함을 몇몇 언어학과 수사학의 논의들을 소개함으로써 주장하였다. 둘째, 문화역사적 활동이론에 근거하여 앞서 제시한 분석단위로서의 발화는 활동의 차원에서 이해되어야 하는 당위성을 제시하였으며, 마지막으로 온라인 토론 중의 특정 발화를 Engeström의 활동체제모형을 적용하여 분석, 기술해 봄으로써 활동으로서의 발화를 분석단위로 설정할 때 얻게 되는 이론적 시야의 한 측면을 그려 보고자 하였다.
Abstract
Various kinds of units of analysis have been employed for CMC research. Although there have been lots of discussions, we have little consensus on which unit would be more relevant and objective. A unit of analysis(UOA) is defined as the smallest unit that preserves the totality of a phenomenon, and cannot be devided into smaller units. Different UOA will result in different contours of a phenomenon, and different theoretical assumptions will need different UOA. The problem is that most of the discussions have focused on relibility issues of UOA, but rarely on validity issues which is related to the theoretical foundation of it. The research explored theoretical foundations of the UOA relevant for CMC research, arguing that concrete utterance, not abstract language, should be the UOA of CMC research, and it may be regarded as activity from the perspectives of Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT). To the end, firstly, I introduced theoretical lenses borrowed from linguistics and rhetorics; secondly, stated the rationale for the connection between the CHAT’s concept of activity and the utterance as the UOA for CMC research; and finally, described an emerging activity system from a situation of online classroom discussion based on Engeström(1987)’s activity system model to illustrate the content and scope of an analysis afforded by the utterance as UOA.
참고문헌 (31)
- Austin, J. L., "How to do things with words" (1962), Oxford University Press
- Bach, K., "Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts" (1979), MIT Press
- Bakhtin, M. M., "The dialogic imagination" (1981), University of Texas Press
- Bazerman, C., "Systems of Genre and the Enactment of Social Intentions, In Genre and the new rhetoric", pp.79~101 (1994), Taylor & Francis Ltd
- De Wever, B., "Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review", Computers & Education, 46, pp.6~28 (2006)
- Donnelly, R., "Content analysis of computer conferencing transcripts", Journal of Interactive Learning Environments, 19(4), pp.303~315 (2011)
- Eggins, S., "An introduction to systemic functional linguistics" (1994), Pinter Publishers
- Eggins, S., "Analyzing casual conversation" (1997), Cassell
- Engeström, R., "Voice as communicative action", Mind, Culture, and Activity, 2, pp.192~215 (1995)
- "The activity system" (2011)[URL]
- Engeström, Y., "Learning by expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research" (1987), Orienta Konultit
- Garcia, A. G., "The eyes of the beholder: understanding the turntaking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication", Research on Language & Social Interaction, 32, pp.337~367 (1999)
- Granott, N., "Unit of analysis in transit: From the individual’s knowledge to the ensemble process", Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5(1), pp.42~66 (1998)
- Gunawardena, C. N., "Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing", Journal of Educartional Computing Research, 17, pp.397~431 (1997)
- Halliday, M. A. K., "Introduction to functional grammar(3rd ed.)" (2004), Edward Arnold
- Hara, N., "Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course", Instructional Science, 28, pp.115~152 (2000)
- Henri, F., "Computer conferencing and content analysis, In Collaborative learning through computer conferencing. The Najadon Papers", pp.117~136 (1992), Springer-Verlag
- "The dialectics of the abstract and the concrete in marx’s capital" (1960)[URL]
- Kuhn, D., "Thinking as argument", Harvard Educational Review, 62(2), pp.155~179 (1992)
- Leont’ev, A. N., "Problems of the development of mind" (1981), Progress
- "Activity and consciousness" (2009)[URL]
- Miller, C., "Genre as social action", Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, pp.161~167 (1984)
- Minick, N., "The development of Vygotsky’s thought, In Introduction to Vygotsky", pp.32~56 (2005), Routledge
- Newman, D. R., "A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning", Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 3, pp.56~77 (1995)
- Park, Y., "Graduate students’ discourse activity in synchronous online classroom discussion", 박사, pp.2010
- Rourke, L., "Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing", Journal of Distance Education, 14, pp.51~70 (1999)
- Searle, J., "Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language" (1969), Cambridge University Press
- Strijbos, J., "Content analysis: What are they talking about", Computers & Education, 46, pp.29~48 (2006)
- Vygotsky, L. S., "Thought and language" (1986), MIT Press
- Wells, G., "The role of dialogue in Activity Theory", Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(1), pp.43~66 (2002)
- Wells, G., "The mediating role of discoursing in activity", Mind, Culture & Activity, 14(3), pp.160~177 (2007)