51(1)-12.fm

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "51(1)-12.fm"

광수 시
6 years ago
Views:

1 Journal of the Korean Chemical Society 2007, Vol. 51, No. 1 Printed in the Republic of Korea q l k s {s ii n m -mmo m i Ç l Ç * p q p qu n p ( td) The Influences of Reciprocal Peer Tutoring Strategy and Field Independence-Dependence in Instruction Enhancing Student Questions by Using Weekly Reports Hunsik Kang, Eunkyung Kwon, and Taehee Noh * Department of Chemistry Education, Seoul National University, Seoul , Korea Center for Educational Research, Seoul National University, Seoul , Korea (Received August 8, 2006) k h. r n n v q p x x dnn d s r -rr u r n q t n. v q v q (WR) x v q - d s (WR-RPT) x q, xr x Š, rr p, Š o n x pn 18~f l dnq ff n. r l x r q v q 6 r nq, WR-RPT x r q v q n x q d q Œ n. n, r r -rru n nr r n WR-RPT x r td WR x r td Œ sq qr ~r m. n n rrusr r p WR-RPT x r td WR x r td Œ sq qr ~r mq, r sr r pn x td ~r Œ sq qr x lm., x n rrusr r sr r r n td Œ sq qr ~r m. q, rrusr r sr r WR-RPTn tsq rf q Š. qoh: x, v q, d s, r -rru ABSTRACT. This study investigated the influences of reciprocal peer tutoring strategy and field independencedependence in the instruction enhancing student questions by using weekly reports. Seventh graders (N=152) from a middle school were assigned to WR (weekly reports) and WR-RPT (weekly reports-reciprocal peer tutoring) groups. Students were taught about three states of matter, motion of molecules, and change of states and thermal energy for eighteen class hours and wrote weekly reports six times for the period. The students in the WR-RPT group also conducted reciprocal peer tutoring with the questions of weekly reports which they wrote. The results revealed that the scores of the WR-RPT group were significantly higher than those of the WR group in a conception test regardless of students field independence-dependence. The field dependent students in the WR-RPT group performed better in an achievement test than those in WR group, while there was no significant difference for the field independent stu- 82

2 v q p x x dnn d s r -rru r n 83 dents between the two groups. Additionally, field independent students in each group scored significantly higher than field dependent students in the two tests. Many students, especially having more field independence in the WR-RPT group, perceived WR-RPT positively. Keywords: Student Question,GWeekly Reports, Reciprocal Peer Tutoring, Field Independence-dependence q x q rfr tr f dvn t d r, x q Œ r tr f dvq l d r q rn ss q t d r. 1 ft dn f n r ff x p n x q x q s n r v x mo. 2-6 s v r v q x, r vn nq p?, x, lx t r x q nr?, x, m r f pq r x r q m x q? r x n v q (weekly reports) 7 d r. q v q r tn v ln p v vp q f t, q Œ sq xm d r., r r m p o r x pn v q q t, f o f r r ts d r n r vm m x sr x x dnq x d rq r. 7,8 x x v q n n p t, r x n n v q v n r r dv q l dn v x q x x dv r or t n dn q q p nq, 7,9,10 v q d s q p n d t f n, u dnr d o f n p ftr., v q d s q p r n 8,10 n v q n r x n sr r x q p t x lm. q frr rx t r Šrx tn n q vm fr n rfr o dt d r v. r 11 fr x rn rfr n o r n sr q t x lq r rfr o dt d r vm. x q r u s s 12 q ~n dv q x q r vm d r. v q 13,14 r r q p r r d q n r x n sr q t x q p d r q t v p r. r q r r o n q x q v d s (reciprocal peer tutoring) q v q 15 n r q d r. v q n rfr x n q n tn rfr n sq d r, p q rfr r xm s d r. q tf x n rn q tn rfr t r r dvq r d r, r r x n rfr mšo d vr f r nm w sr q t q d r. q v q n d s q r d s (WR- RPT: weekly reports-reciprocal peer tutoring)q Œ f pq r r d rq r., q r s q Œ v q n rfr x q xt p d rq, v q r r l dn s n s sr sq ~n q. x q r t q r x q t q h r n x q rm 2007, Vol. 51, No. 1

3 84 f q Š r m pr vm dv q x q d rq r., x x dnr x fr m t vn p t p t q f r r -rru (field independence-dependence)r n q q l t r. n m, rrusr n r sr r x x dnr x fn q dvr x q r r nms rpq, 18 n t r r. 16,19 r sr n r n q r r t n nq t n r r rrusr r x fq Œ pq r n. 18 r -rru q x q x q l v r v q rn d s q r d s r n n q d rq r. rn r n n v dnn s WR-RPT, d r, n, dnn rf ƒ n t n., r r -rru n d x t n. i k i d n s 1 r v 1 v n q t n v q v q r WR x v q r x n x q d q Œ WR-RPT x q n. sn ff 1 v s (MS=3.48, F=.01, p=.926) r -rru td(ms=18.48, F=.76, p=.386) x n q n. r r -rru td r vm n n q r sr rrusr q n. r, r sr r td(17.76) rrusr r td (9.78) Œ sq qr ~r m (t=17.01, p=.000). r -rru n x Table 1. Subjects of two groups by field independence-dependence WR group WR-RPT group Field independent Field dependent Total WR: weekly reports; WR-RPT: weekly reports-reciprocal peer tutoring d Table 1. i ny v q d s 8,10 15,16 n q Œ n v dvn s d s q t, rn n o n r, nf dn, dnr d- f r n. w, v dn fd 3~f, ~f dn f r 45 q t m r t7~ v 1 q tq n v q r d r f q t n., v r mš rfr q nm r t q n f r r mš dvq v d vn nq, v q o d s n l nf tr n. dn rsn WR x WR-RPT x n r -rru ff n. WR x n v q r, WR- RPT x n v q r d n o n r ff n. r, n l nf p n. v q r x, w m r f pq r x r q m x q? n n m pq q q x r n x r sn dnn f t fq m d s p d x, pm r tr t dq rfr m r p r x, dn pq r xm r p Œ x r nf l q 20 t n. WR- RPT x n d n do r n r q d Journal of the Korean Chemical Society

4 v q p x x dnn d s r -rru r n 85 vr m t n l nf t n. r l nf q nf dn f n p n. nf dnq dn rs pr x r x pq q 2~ ff n. dnq n r v 1rr v 1 r xr x Š, rr p, Š o n x pn 18~f l x n. r l WR x r q v q r q, WR-RPT x r q v q r rfr x n d q 6 ff n. x r n r o n ff nq, WR-RPT x r n dnn rf ff n. i o v dn fd 3~f t m r t7~ v 1 q tq n WR x WR-RPT x r 3~fr n o dn r v q r n. 8 r, x q v q r x n 3 r x q r p m, ft r r 3 r x q r nq r r 3 sq x q r n. WR-RPT x q rf r r x q sr x o r n q m q d n. n rfr x q rmv r x n nq, r r x p n dn r rp n t q vn. r, q o r n q m qr tq n. r v q r r d q t d d r ov q d x nq, ft dnq ~ r Fig. 1. Examples for second weekly reports of field independent and field dependent students of WR-RPT group. 2007, Vol. 51, No. 1

5 86 f q Š q d nrq r n. Fig. 1q WR-RPT x r r sr rrus r r x vn r v q r nr. dnr r r v q r x, x n r q n f p v r t r x r m p q l n. rn q r ~fr r n x n r t n. WR x n r v q r f q 25 r n, WR-RPT x n r v q r f q d f q d n f n r ~r Œt q 15 r n. r p WR x WR-RPT x r r v q r f r t n v q r r pr s fƒsrx p x r d ~px dv q x q m pq r r. r t q r rfr x q d q Œ tn o d rq r n r n n x n f ~r n. r to x r f pr x r q h d- f r n r ~r Œt n. r -rru x m t n p t q l q ƒt ~ w(find A Shape Puzzle) 21 q p n. r x vmx q r n ~l 20 q m rq, r n n r s f (Cronbach s α).88rn. r x r r n n r q r dvn r t fƒsq t q n 8 r x r dt o n p n. w, fsr q tf nƒ r r dvr q v f d 4 q r x n. r x sn x r n r dvr q q nf Œ r vq h r d r n n n q vr r n. u xr Š q s 3r v 3r q w mq, s f (Cronbach s α).69n. d xfq m, f pr r l r, f pq n sp q ƒt q n x n 8 r x p n. r x f 5x 25 q m rq, r n n r s f (Cronbach s α).83rn. dnn rf x WR-RPT fn pr n x 5, WR WR-RPT x r tn r d, d n r n (, )n rf f n rqn r d n. r, WR-RPT x r q v q q r dn q xtsq x lmx rs f n rfr f q p x l m f q x rq, r n n r r WR WR-RPT x r tn r n n n. v q q r dnq xtsq x lq r r r n n q v q t d nq, r v r p. r 3~5 r q q t, r r q o dn ~t n. w, 3t t (1 )r p os r 3t, sr r 1~2t, 4t t (1 )r p os r 4t, sr r 1~3t, 5t t (2 )r p os r 5t, sr r 1~4t, n r s r 0tq n 17t tq ~t n. rq t lx 2rr r ~ t tq n r r.95r r, r v 1rr lx Journal of the Korean Chemical Society

6 v q p x x dnn d s r -rru r n 87 ~t n. m p n r r Œ ~t q h ~tr f r r n. r n n r u rq r, n, dnn rfrnq, dn v q r RPTr r n n. r o n tdn Œ q r r n WR-RPTr r -rru n ~r r x ll q d n r, r -rru q r, tdo qr r r 1 v s( r : r=.66, p<.01, n : r=.75, p<.01)q rq rp (two-way ANCOVA)q ff n., r rru rp (one-way ANCOVA) q ff n. n r -rru r v qr n x n r r s r rrusr r td ~r Œ sq w q x rp ff n. r t r tr t x ll x r sr rrusr r 1 v sr ~r Œ sq qr x l rq r (WR x : t=1.75, p=.084; WR-RPT x : t=1.81, p=.074), x t- w(independent samples t-test)q ff n. dnn rf r -rru n r q(%) n. m m i r td(17t t)r v ~, t q Table 2o. rp, WR-RPT x r t r WR x r t mq, ~r Œ sq qr n (MS=93.55, F=15.15, p=.000). dn o r -rru rr rp nn (MS=4.63, F=.75, p=.388). r -rru n r sr rrusr r p WR-RPT x r td WR x r td Œ sq qr ~r m (r MS=27.73, F=5.54, p=.021; rru MS=68.51, F=7.99, p=.006). r v q q r d s rn d s q r d s r r -rru n nr r r dvn r r f srq r. r n r f pr r dvn r r p l v q r x n r x q Œ x n r dvn r r p x r sx lm, n r. WR s m m qi m s m i ƒ ³e k š k w e ƒ» y w f» vƒ ù mw k ƒ w k ƒ w ƒ y w» WR-RPT s m m qi m s m i š ³e k ƒ Table 2. Means, standard deviations, and adjusted means of the conception test scores WR group (n=76) WR-RPT group (n=76) M(SD) Adj. M M(SD) Adj. M Field independent 11.9(3.87) (3.40) 12.7 Field dependent 9.6(3.27) (2.51) 12.0 Total 10.8(3.74) (3.10) , Vol. 51, No. 1

7 88 f q Š k w ƒ w» ƒ w» mw w w wp ¾ y w vƒ ù w š w ù r -rru x r x q n r r -rru n nr q x dvr p WR x WR-RPT x r x r u sr r dv n r r p r rnq, ~r x lm. r tn, r n r r d x q rfr x q d q Œ tn q r dvn r d rn n Š q r. w, n rfr x n q r dvn tn r dvn r r x, q r dvn r m p r r r r n rfr mšo dvr f r nm q q d rn n r nq r r., x n r sr r td rrusr r td Œ sq qr ~r m (WR x : t=2.81, p=.006; WR-RPT x : t=2.42, p=.018). w, rrusr r sr r v q rn d s q r d s q Œ r d vn r q r r q Š. r m t vn vp t q f s t r t rrusr n r q x r sr r x x dnn q dvr x q x fn r r nms rpq, x x dn x fq Œ 18 n r rxs ƒ n 16,19 q Š n r o xm d r., r n n r sr r rrusr r dvn r x q u r, q dvr x q pn n q xm q x q x q u sq r r rn o r r. w, rrusr n r sr r v q dn p vn vp q r r dvn r n x q r, rn q r nms rp q Œ v v q r d q r d n r Š d r. r sr r rusr r r x r n l n tf n. m nm m m qi m s m i w 83 ƒ» ƒ w š» k mw 83» v ƒ ù ƒ t w ƒ f w l mw eý e ƒ ý ƒ w ý» e e ƒ ý ƒ w r ƒ y mmonm m m qi m s m i Journal of the Korean Chemical Society

8 v q p x x dnn d s r -rru r n 89 w xk mw 83 e t ƒ f ƒl ƒ y ƒ i } i n td(25t t)r, v ~, t q Table 3n tf n. rp, WR-RPT x r t r WR x r t Œ sq qr ~r mq (MS=46.07, F=4.46, p=.036), dn o r rru rr rp nn (MS=27.21, F=2.63, p=.107). r -rru n r sr r p WR-RPT x WR x r td ~r Œ sq qr x lmq (MS=1.19, F=.14, P=.709), rrusr r pn WR-RPT x r td WR x r td Œ sq qr ~r m. w, v q n d s q r d s r r sr r r t n x x dnr x fn sq q dvr x q r r nms rpq r x rrusr 18 r d xfr m, f pr r l r sp q f rq l d r. r WR x r rrusr r v q n m dvr x, w d x, r x, Œ x n q x, WR-RPT x r pn x q d q Œ tn x n q rfr tn sq q h u rfr t t q o, p q rfr r Œ sq xm d rn r q r. rrusr r d q Œ dnn s sr sq ~n r r n r x prr r., r n r o WR-RPT r sr r n n nn. r r r r q r q r r m p q r dvn r t ƒt, n r r l d xf m dv nr sp q ƒt r r r., r r t n 3~5tq n ƒt r o, n t, o r r s vq ƒt n r sr r n q ƒt x q r., x n r sr r td rrusr r td Œ sq qr ~r m (WR x : t=3.29, p=.002; WR-RPT x : t=2.16, p=.034). w, v q n d s q r n o nr rrusr r sr r n q q Š. r r n o q rrusr r s r r v q r, d, r r sp tn p q sq r x r n Š d r., r xt x q r x fq o r n x v dn n sp pn rxs ƒ n r d r -rru n q nv d r. Table 3. Means, standard deviations, and adjusted means of the achievement test scores WR group (n=76) WR-RPT group (n=76) M(SD) Adj. M M(SD) Adj. M Field independent 18.8(5.03) (4.66) 18.3 Field dependent 15.0(5.13) (4.34) 17.6 Total 16.8(5.40) (4.61) , Vol. 51, No. 1

9 90 f q Š Table 4. Students perceptions of WR-RPT by field dependence-independence Question Usefulness More useful role in learning Positive aspects Response Field independent (n=39) Number 1 (%) Field dependent (n=37) Total (n=76) Strongly agree 11(28.2) 8(21.6) 19(25.0) Agree 14(35.9) 10(27.0) 24(31.6) Not sure 9(23.1) 7(18.9) 16(21.1) Disagree 3(7.7) 5(13.5) 8(10.5) Strongly disagree - 3(8.1) 3(3.9) Tutor 16(41.0) 9(24.3) 25(32.9) Tutee 15(38.5) 14(37.8) 29(38.2) Similar 6(15.4) 4(10.8) 10(13.2) I could easily understand the learning content because my deficiencies 22(56.4) 21(56.8) 43(56.6) were supplemented through it. I was interested in working with my partner and teaching him as a teacher. 11(28.2) 8(21.6) 19(25.0) I could meet various questions and ideas. 9(23.1) 4(10.8) 13(17.1) It reduced my cognitive loads. 3(7.7) 4(10.8) 7(9.2) I could reorganize the learning content. 5(12.8) 1(2.7) 6(7.9) I became more familiar with my partner. 3(7.7) 2(5.4) 5(6.6) I could be aware of what I knew or did not know. 4(10.3) - 4(5.3) It was not be useful in my learning when my partner provided me with irrelevant or unimportant questions. 11(28.2) 6(16.2) 17(22.4) When I wrote WR earlier than my partner did, I should wait until he 5(12.8) 5(13.5) 10(13.2) finished it in order to conduct RPT. Negative aspects I had difficulty in writing weekly reports. 3(7.7) 1(2.7) 4(5.3) It created a disturbance. 3(7.7) - 3(3.9) If I am not familiar with my partner, I will not actively participate in RPT. 2(5.1) 1(2.7) 3(3.9) My partner did not actively participate in RPT. 2(5.1) 1(2.7) 3(3.9) 1 The number of answer is above or below the number of subjects in each group because some participants responded above two or no response. ii m WR-RPTn r rfq Table 4n t n. v q r d q r n pr n? r n r sr r 64.1%, rrusr r 48.6% p (r : 28.2%, rr u: 21.6%) (r : 35.9%, rru: 27.0%) r n. o n vn m n r pr n? r n r rusr r p (24.3%) (37.8%)r n r pr n r r u m, r sr r pn n r n r ( : 41.0%, : 38.5%)r f rn. r (r : 15.4%, rru: 10.8%)q n r pr t f n r n. n r pr n rq q r x q rn n tn f pq r t r d rn (r : 41.0%, rru: 37.8%) r n. n r pr n rqn ff x q f pq r r d rn (r : 33.3%, rru: 16.2%), r q q l d rn (r : 10.3%, rru: 21.6%) r r m. w, q r n fn sr s sq ~n d r Journal of the Korean Chemical Society

10 2007, Vol. 51, No. 1 v q p x x dnn d s r -rru r n 91 q n fn pr n r rnq, r q rrusr r sr n trq l d r. WR WR-RPT x rtn r -rru n nr r t tq o v f pq r r d rn (r : 56.4%, rru: 56.8%) r r r m. m x q t d rn (r : 23.1%, rru : 10.8%), fn r vm n (r : 7.7%, rru: 10.8%), f pq f t d rn (r : 12.8%, rru: 2.7%), nq l, x l d rn (r : 10.3%) r rn. r q, rr usr r sr r WR-RPT rxs ƒ n pr n rf r u nrq r q, r o n n r v. x m q d r m s rn (r : 28.2%, rru: 21.6%) o r trs ƒ n tsq rf sx lm., WR-RPTr tq xr x q vp x lq x q nq p, f n pr l n (r : 28.2%, rru: 16.2%) r r rn, r q rrusr r sr r u m. r q v q r f n ~r p v q m (r : 12.8%, rru: 13.5%) r n. oh r n n v dnn r x q x q v q n d s q r d s q n v dnn sp, d r, n, dnn rf ƒ n t n., r r -rru n d x t n. n, v q n d s q r d s (WR-RPT)r v q q r d s (WR) r -rru n nr r r n sr q Š., r sr rru sr r n f f q Š. dnn rf n q r WR-RPT WR rxs ƒ n pr rf r rn. r x x s n n rfr x n r x q p vx lq q rfr o dt x fn s sq ~n x lq d r n r vr q n r d r. w, r, r sr sq x x dnr x fn pq q l x rrusr r v q r x n x q d q Œ tn rfr t tr r t, rfr tn u sq d rn n Š q r., n rfr x q p d r t n dn n sr s sq ~n q x prq rp q r r. r tn, r n r ft q rn x x s v r v q qp p d r n f tq t d r. w, v q n d s q r d s q dnn sp q h, r sr rrus r r n d q f x x dnq x sr sq x d r q r. n r q tr x r nd t, q q Œ n r d- f r n n r ft q rn p q p r., r n ms n r n vtq x n WR-RPT x r d n r mx r nms rp v m n ms rpq Œ r fr x x, x r dvr x n nms rpr m xn ~r r x sq l

11 92 f q Š m p. n xs n Œ r n fƒsq t p r. r q 2006 t ( d )r spq s r xpq l d n r(no. R ). m k 1. Chin, C.; Brown, D. E.; Bruce, B. C. International Journal of Science Education. 2002, 24, ; n r; p. q x. 1999, 19, r d; t ; xp. q x. 2004, 24, tn ; s. q x. 2002, 22, Chin, C.; Chia, L-G. Science Education. 2004, 88, Marbach-Ad, G.; Sokolove, P. G. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2000, 37, Etkina, E. Science Education. 2000, 84, f; r ; q ; Š. q x. 2006, 26, Etkina, E.; Harper, K. A. Journal of College Science Teaching. 2002, 31, Harper, K. A.; Etkina, E.; Lin, Y. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2003, 40, Mory, E. H. In Handbook of research for educational communications and technology; Jonassen, D. H., Ed.; Macmillan: New York, U. S. A., 1996; p ~u; o ; sx. q x. 2005, 24, r v; ; t. q x. 2000, 20, Vollmeyer, R.; Rheinberg, F. Learning and Instruction. 2005, 15, Š ; n; d. q x. 2005, 25, rqo. qn. 2003, 16, King, A.; Staffieri, A.; Adelgais, A. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1998, 90, x. q Œ fn x s r frr rxmfn rpn n. r nr p q ; r. d q x. 1997, 1, King, A.; Rosenshine, B. Journal of Experimental Education. 1993, 61, Linn, M. C.; Kyllonen, P. Journal of Educational Psychology. 1981, 73, 261. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Study on the Pe

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp.405-425 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.28.1.201803.405 * A Study on the Perceptions and Factors of Immigrant Background Youth