Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: A Case Study on the

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: A Case Study on the"

민중 삼
5 years ago
Views:

1 Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: A Case Study on the Effects of Discussion Methods in Teaching Profession Courses Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the effects of discussion through the instructional design and reflection. Method: The results of the lecture evaluation and reflection on the discussion class during the 4th semester were analyzed. Results: First, Before the discussion, the preparation of the instructor is important. Learner analysis should be conducted to support discussion activities. Secondly, it is necessary to design the teaching-learning environment for the interaction effect. Third, there is a need to support both personal and cooperative reflection. Fourth, professor and learners must stick to their respective roles for successful discussions. The facilitator needs the role of the facilitator so that the learner can actively participate in the discussion. Specific feedback from the professor on the discussion activity was required. Conclusion: For the successful operation of discussion classes, specific instructional design was needed and teaching strategies and methods should be utilized to increase the effectiveness of interaction. Key words: Discussion Method, Teaching Profession Courses, Interaction, Learning effect, Case Study Corresponding Author: Park, Hye-Jin. Konkuk University, Institute for Innovation in Higher Education, 268 Chungwon-daero Chungju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do, KOREA, phj4858@kku.ac.kr

2 . 21., (, 1998)..,, (, 2011).,,.,,,, (, 2010), (,,, 2015).,,.,,,,,.,.,. (Problem-Based learning), (Team-Based learning), - (, 2018)..,, (Johnson & Johnson, 1988),,,.,,,,. (, 2013). (teaching),

3 (Murphy, Delle, & Edwards, 2004).. (Fosnot, 1996).. (Black & Ammon, 1992),..,, (, 2016)..,., (, 2009).,,,,,,.,, ~4.,

4 . -, - - (,,, ) - (work sheet) - (LMS) - (, ) - ( -, - ) -, - - -, ( ),,. 2 (2 ) 50~60, 30.,.,,., 30 ( ),. (Instruction), (, 2014)., (Instructional Design)., -,

5 ,,,,.,.. (Young, Reiser, & Dick, 1998), -.,. (Goldsmith, 1999).,,. 1) 토의수업운영을위한수업설계 -.. (, 2011), (, 2011)., (,,,, 2011).,,. -. (,, 2012).,,, ,. < -2>.

6 1 - e-syllabus, ( ) -, 2 -.( :,,,,,, PBL ) ( ) ( ) - (1) - (2) - (1) - (2) (ISD) (1) (2) (3) -. ICT. ( :, MOOC, SNS, ) -. -,. - : - : -,,,. -, EBS ADDIE. - Gagne(1970) 9,. - Keller(1983) ARCS, A( ), R( ), C( ), S( ),. - Keller(1983) ARCS.( ) - Clark Kozma, ,, -. * A

7 ,., (Keefer, Zeitz, & Resnick, 2000). 2) 토의수업의상호작용을높이기위한주요교수활동,,,.., -, -,.., (LMS).,.,.,. 16.,. 6~7 12, (LMS)., -. (2014),.

갈등을 해결 하기 보다는 교육현장에서 일어날 수 있는 문제 상황과 학습내용의 이해를 높일 수 있는데 목

8 교육혁신연구, 제28권 제2호 <그림 Ⅱ-1> 上: 학습자들이 작성한 토의 활동지 / 下: 발표에 관한 교수자 개별 피드백 활동 본 연구의 대상은 교직과정을 이수하는 학생들로 토의 주제에 대한 찬반 입장의 갈등을 해결 하기 보다는 교육현장에서 일어날 수 있는 문제 상황과 학습내용의 이해를 높일 수 있는데 목 적을 두고 교수설계를 하였다. 이는 학습내용을 촉진시키는데 도움을 줄 수 있는 교수방법은 토

9 (2015).. Likert 5,. 3, , , ,....,. 4,.,,,,, 103. A 103, < -1>.

10 ( ) (%) (%) 103(100),,,, A. Likert 5, Cronbach's (.78), (.82), (.83), (.78). < -2> , * * * A , ,

11 .,., Moneta Siu(2002),,,, (, 2010)..,. (reflection), (Kennis, 1986). (Dewey, 1997). (Song, Grabowski, Koszalka, & Harkness, 2006).,, (Oliver & Mcloughlin, 1999).,,.,.

12 ., (, 2002) ,,,,, , (28, 27.2%), < -3>. (18) (17) (28) (20) (20) (n) - (8), (10) - (8), (9) - (6), (9), (13) - (5), (9), (6) - (13), (7) (,,,,, 2012).,, (Wals & de Jong, 1997).,,,.. 1) 문제해결능력및창의적사고력.,.

13 ,.. (, ),. (, ),. (, ),. (, ),. (, ),. (, ) 2) 상호작용 (,, 2014).,. (, ),,. (, ),,.. (, ) ( )

14 .,. (, ),. (, ),.. (, ). (, ). (, ) 3) 학습동기,,,. Keller(1983) (attention), (relevance), (confidence), (satisfaction) (,,,, 2015).... (, ),.. (, ),.,. (, ).

15 ,. (, ),. (, ).,. (, ).. (, ) 4) 학습만족도 (Elliott & Healy, 2001),,., (,, ).. (, ).,,,.. (, ).. (, ),.,.. -

16 ,,,. (, 2012).. -.,.,. (, ) ( ). (, ). (, ).,. (, ).,. (, ) 1, 16.,.,..

17 ..,,, (, 2012)., -. -,,., , 4 ( ),..,., (,,, 2007)... (Dewey, 1933), (Mezirow, 1990)., (, 2003)., (Gerlach, 1994)., -.,.

18 (, 2012),..,.,,., 16, (n=28). Pollock, Hamann, Wilson(2011) (, ) ( ).,. (Levine & Moreland, 1991; Rogoff, 1990). (Bonk & Cunningham, 1998),. (,,, 2013), (,,, 2005)., (, 2005;, 2010).,..,,, (, 2016)..,.,. 16,

19 . (Duffy & Jonassen, 1991). (Ashton, 1984).., (, 2016). -,, (, 2004)..,,..,,. (,, 2012). Richert(1992),.,,,. (1998) (2016).. (3),

20 (2012). : , (2014). (Flipped Learning) ,, (2005) (2010).. (3), (2016).. (6), (2011) ,,, (2015). :. (2004)... (2018).,,. (1), ,, (2007). :. (2011).. (2), (2005)...,,,,,,,, (2014). :. (2010). e-..,, (2013).. (4), (2010). -. (1), , (2012).. (4), ,, (2015). :. (1), (2003).. (4), (2002). CSCL..

21 (2012).. (2), ,,, (2011). :. (2), (2013). :. (2014).. (4), ,,,, (2012).. (4), (2015).. (4), (2009).. (2), (2011). PBL :. (4), Ashton, P. T. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 35, Bonk, C. J., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, construtivists, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C. J. Bonk, & S. K. King, (Eds.), Electronic Collaborators. NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Black, A., & Ammon, P. (1992). A developmental-constructivist approach to teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 43(5), Dewey, J. (1933). How we think, a restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, D.C. Heath. Dewey, J. (1997). How we Think.. Dover Publications, Inc.. Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Constructivism : New implications for instructional technology? Conductional Technology, 31(5), Elliott, M. K., & Healy, M. A. (2001). Key factors influencing student satisfaction related to recruitment and retention. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 10(4), Fosnot, C. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. Constructivism: theory, perspectives, and practice. NY: Teachers College Press. Gagne, R. M.(1983). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rienhart and Winston. Gerlach (1994). Collaborative learning. Collaborative learning: Underlying processes and effective techniques. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Goldsmith, G. (1999). Design. Encyclopedia of creativity, 1, Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1988). Critical thinking through structured controversy. Educational

22 Leadership, 45(8), Keefer, M., Zeitz, C., & Resnick, L. (2000). Judging the quality of peer-led student dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 18(1), Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth(Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Kemmis, S. (1986). Action research and the politics of reflection. Reflection, Tturning Experience into Learning. NY: Nichols Pub.. Levin, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1991). Culture and socialization in work groups. Perspectives on socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: American psychology association. Mezirow, J. (1990). How critical reflection triggers transformative learning. Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning. SF: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Moneta, G. B., & Siu, C. M. Y. (2002). Trait intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, academic performance, and creativity in Hong Kong college students. Journal of College Student Development, 43(5), Murlhy, P. K., Delle, A. M., & Edwards, M. N. (2004). The good reacher and good teaching: Comparing beliefs of second-grade students, preservice teachers, and inservice teachers. The Journal of ecperimental education, 72(2), Oliver, R., & Mcloughlin. C. (1999). Curriculum and learning-resources issues arising from the use of web-based course support systems. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 5(4), Pollock, P. H., Hamann, K., & Wilson, B. M. (2011). Learning through discussions: Comparing the benefits of small-group and large-class settings. Journal of Political Science Education, 7, Richer, A. (1992). Voice and power in teaching and learning to teach. In. L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education: Cases and critiques (pp ). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. NY: Oxford University Press. Song, H., Grabowski, B., Koszalka, T., & Harkness, W. (2006). Patterns of instructional design factors prompting reflective thinking in middle school and college problem-based learning environments. Instructional Science, 34, Wals, A. E. J., & de Jong, F. P. M. C. (1997). Community-based environmental education, school culture and lifelong learning. In W. L. Filho (Ed.), Lifelong learning and environmental educatio n(pp ). New York: Peter Lang. Young, A. C., Reiser, R. A., & Dick, W. (1998). Do superior teachers employ systematic instructional planning procedures? A descriptive study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(2), : / : / :

23 :,. :, A 103 ( ). :.,.,., -.,.,..,,,,. :.,,.

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: A study on Characte

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp.381-404 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.28.1.201803.381 A study on Characteristics of Action Learning by Analyzing Learners Experiences