SHORT COMMUNICATION Effects of Problem-Based Learning by Learning Style in Medical Education Su-Jin Chae Department of Medical Humanities & Social Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea 의과대학생의학습유형별성향에따른문제바탕학습에대한효과인식 아주대학교의과대학인문사회의학교실 Purpose: Although problem-based learning (PBL) has been popularized in many colleges, few studies have analyzed the relationship between individual differences and PBL. The purpose of this study was to analyze the relationship between learning style and the perception on the effects of PBL. Methods: Grasha-Riechmann Student Learning Style Scales was used to assess the learning styles of 38 students at Ajou University School of Medicine who were enrolled in a respiratory system course in 2011. The data were analyzed by regression analysis and Spearman correlation analysis. Results: By regression analysis, dependent (β=0.478) and avoidant styles (β=-0.815) influenced the learner's satisfaction with PBL. By Spearman correlation analysis, there was significant link between independent, dependent, and avoidant styles and the perception of the effect of PBL. Conclusion: There are few significant relationships between learning style and the perception of the effects of PBL. We must determine how to teach students with different learning styles and the factors that influence PBL. Key Words: Problem-based learning, Learning style 1997년부터 15년동안한국의학교육저널에실린문제바탕학습 (problem-based learning, PBL) 과관련된논문은약 30 개에달하며대부분의논문들은 PBL 의각대학의경험사례 를소개하거나그효과를검증하고있다. 연구자는 30여개의논문들중두편의논문에주목하였다. 하나는 PBL 을경험한학생들중에는동료들과함께공부하기보다는혼자서공부하는것이더효율적일수있다는논문 [1] 과다른하나는 PBL 이자기주도성이나비판적사고능력을함양하는데도움이되지않는다는논문 [2] 이그것이다. 2000년이후많은대학이 Received: August 16, 2012 Revised: September 27, 2012 Accepted: October 1, 2012 Corresponding Author: Su-Jin Chae Department of Medical Humanities & Social Medicine, Ajou University School of Medicine, 206 Worldcup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon 443-721, Korea Tel: +82.31.219.4465 Fax: +82.31.219.4093 email: edujin@ajou.ac.kr This study was presented at the 28th Academic Conference of the Korean Society of Medical Education, 2012. Korean J Med Educ 2012 Dec; 24(4): 347-351. http://dx.doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2012.24.4.347 pissn: 2005-727X eissn: 2005-7288 C The Korean Society of Medical Education. All rights reserved. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 347
Su-Jin Chae : Problem-Based Learning by Learning Style 강의법위주의일제식수업이아닌오후시간을활용하여다양한수업방법을확대하고있지만동시에이에대한학생들의불만이나비판을수업개선에반영하고자하는노력은상대적으로미흡하다고할수있다 [3]. 본연구는 PBL 수업에대한학생들의불만이나비판에체계적인분석이필요하다는문제의식에서출발한다. 기존 PBL 수업의효과에대한연구는주로 PBL 수업에대한만족도에대한학습자의지각성향에중점을두었다 [4]. 그러나아무리좋은수업방법이라고할지라도학습자가불편하고따라가기힘들다면진정한의미의수업효과를얻기가쉽지않을것이다. 따라서학습자의개인차변인에따른 PBL 만족도정도와그효과를분석할필요가있다. 개인차변인중에서특히학습유형은학습하는방법과태도, 그리고배우는방식에대한선호정도를말하는것으로서개인차변인으로학습유형을선정하는것은의미있다고본다 [5]. Cushing & Kerrins [6] 에의하면, 학습자에따라그성격이경쟁적이어서다른학생과의경쟁적인상황에서보다강한학습동기가유발되는학생도있고반대로다른사람과경쟁이나협동하기보다혼자학습할때동기가더욱유발되는학생도있다. 따라서학생들의수업에대한참여와수업의효과를높이기위해서는학생들이자신의학습유형에맞는수업에참여할수있어야한다. 본연구는학습자의학습유형이 PBL 수업만족도에미치는영향력을검증하고, 그리고학습유형과 PBL 수업효과인식에대한관련성정도를알아보는데에목적이있다. 특성을가진두가지의하위유형으로분류되는데독립적- 의존적, 협동적- 경쟁적, 참여적 -회피적등세가지차원, 여섯가지하위유형으로구분된다. 독립적학습양식은혼자서공부하는것을선호하며, 학습자중심의교수방법을즐기는반면, 의존적학습양식은지적호기심이빈약하고교수자의요구에순응하는특징을지닌다. 협동적학습양식은교수및동료들과서로어울려공부하기를즐기며소집단학습을선호하는반면, 경쟁적학습양식은동료들보다더나은성적을얻기위해경쟁을당연한것으로받아들이며, 교수자의관심을얻기위해노력한다. 참여적학습양식은수업에적극적으로좋아하는반면, 회피적학습양식은학습에별로흥미를가지고있지않으며동료들과별로어울리지않는것이특징이다. GRSLSS 학습유형검사는독립적학습양식문항이 6문항, 의존적학습양식은 5문항, 협동적학습양식문항은 9문항, 경쟁적학습양식문항은 7문항, 참여적학습양식과회피적학습양식은각각 10개의문항으로총 47개문항으로구성되어있다. 각문항은 4점척도로구성되어높은점수를받을수록해당학습양식을선호하는것으로해석한다. 본연구에서측정된 GRSLSS 학습유형검사의신뢰도는 0.743이었다. 수업만족도와효과인식에대한조사는 Angleo & Cross 의 Classroom Assessment Techniques [8] 를기초로연구자가수정한 10개문항 (5점척도, 신뢰도 0.923) 을사용하였다. 연구자는연구의목적에맞추어수업만족도, 자기주도학습능력, 전문직업성, 임상추론능력, 의사소통능력등 5개로범주화하고각각 2개문항씩배정하였다. 수집된자료는 SPSS for Windows version 14.0 프로그램 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA) 으로회귀분석과 Spearman 상관분석을실시하여변수간의인과성과방향성을알아보았다. 본연구는아주대학교의과대학 2011학년도 2학기호흡기통합교육과정을수강한 1학년 43명중설문및검사에유기명으로모두응답해준 38명을대상으로하였다. 호흡기과정에서 PBL 은처음시행하는것으로 1개의모듈을사용하고 3 번만남으로이루어졌다. 학습유형검사도구는 Grasha & Riechmann [7] 의 Student Learning Style Scale (GRSLSS) 을사용하였다. GRSLSS 학습유형은 3개의차원으로구분하여각기대립적 회귀분석을통해학습유형이 PBL 수업만족도에어떤영향을미치는지를알아본결과 (Table 1), 의존형과회피형이수업만족도에영향을미치는것으로나타났다. 의존적학습 348 Korean J Med Educ 2012 Dec; 24(4): 347-351.
채수진 : 학습유형별문제바탕학습효과 Table 1. Regression Analysis of Learning Styles and Problem-Based Learning Satisfaction Unstandardized coefficients Standardized coefficients t Sig. B SE β Constant 5.550 2.155 2.575 0.015 Competitive 0.014 0.045 0.051 0.315 0.755 Dependent 0.045 0.060 0.125 0.763 0.451 Independent 0.209 0.077 0.478 2.703 0.011* Collaborative -0.023 0.027-0.134-0.859 0.397 Participant -0.049 0.040-0.254-1.230 0.228 Avoidant -0.149 0.040-0.815-3.709 0.001* SE: Standard error. *p<0.05. Table 2. Correlation Analysis of Learning Styles and Problem-Based Learning Effects *p<0.05. Self directed learning Professionalism Communication Clinical reasoning Independent r -0.120-0.026 0.238 0.292 p-value 0.473 0.876 0.150 0.075 Dependent r 0.134 0.344 0.097 0.004 p-value 0.421 0.034* 0.563 0.980 Collaborative r 0.141 0.081 0.252-0.012 p-value 0.397 0.628 0.126 0.941 Competitive r 0.055 0.209-0.010-0.043 p-value 0.742 0.208 0.955 0.798 Participant r 0.418 0.170 0.127 0.504 p-value 0.009* 0.307 0.447 0.001* Avoidant r -0.452-0.142-0.384-0.510 p-value 0.004* 0.394 0.017 0.001* 유형은 PBL 수업만족도에대해서 0.478 정도의영향력을가지고있으며, 회피적학습유형은표준화계수 -0.815 로음수값을가짐으로써부적방향으로영향력이높다고할수있다. 유의확률은의존형과회피형만이 0.05 수준에서통계적으로유의한반면, 다른학습유형들은유의하지않은것으로나타났다. Table 2는학습유형과자기주도학습, 전문직업성, 의사소통, 임상추론능력등 PBL 효과간의상관분석결과이다. 분 석결과, 의존형, 참여형, 회피형 3가지학습유형만이유의수준 0.05에서유의미한상관을가지고있었다. 의존형은상관계수 0.344로전문직업성에서, 참여형은 0.418, 0.504 로자기주도학습과임상추론능력에서각각정적상관이있었는데, 이는의존형성향이높은학생은전문직업성에서, 참여형성향이높은학생들은자기주도학습과임상추론능력에서 PBL 수업의효과가있다고인식하고있는것으로볼수있다. 반면, 회피형의경우자기주도학습에서 -0.452, 의사소통에서 -0.384, 임상추론능력에서 -0.510 로역상관을보임으로써회피형성향이클수록 PBL 수업의효과에부정적인생각을가 349
Su-Jin Chae : Problem-Based Learning by Learning Style 지고있음을알수있다. 동일한수업을듣는학생이라도그들이습득한지식의수준은같지않다. 이와같은개인차는지능, 인지적통제, 학습유형, 성격등다양한원인을들수있다. 그중에서수업방법이나수업내용의차이가학생들의수업에대한참여나학습성과에중요한영향을미칠수있는데그것은학생들의사고과정이학습에대한그들의태도와배우는방식에대한선호정도에따라차이가있기때문이다. Kim [9] 에의하면, 개별학습자는지적능력이나창의력, 인지양식등인지적특성이다를뿐아니라학습에대한동기나흥미, 주의력, 불안, 교수 -학습에대한태도등정의적특성이다르기때문에학습자가경험하는학습과정이다를수밖에없다. GRSLSS 검사를사용한기존의학습유형연구를보면, 참여적이고협동적인학생들이 PBL 수업에대한만족도가높으며, 독립적이고경쟁적인학생들이전문적지식습득이외의발표능력이나현장대처능력, 리더십등을효과적으로인식하고있는반면, 회피적이거나의존적학생들은 PBL 수업을부담스러워하며교육적효과를느끼지못하는것으로보고하고있다 [4,5]. PBL 수업은학습자중심의소집단협동학습으로이루어지며, 튜터는지식을전수하는강의자가아니라학습을촉진하고안내하는역할을수행한다. 학생들은비구조화된문제를가지고토의와협력을통해서동료들과함께문제를해결하며반성적사고능력, 임상추론능력, 자기주도학습능력등고등정신능력을함양할수있다. 학생들은수동적으로지식을수용하기보다는적극적으로수업에참여하는과정에서자신들의생각과경험을바탕으로자신의지식의체계속에서구조화하여평생교육에서활용할수있는지식을가지게되는것이다. 따라서이러한 PBL 수업의특징을토대로짐작해볼때 PBL 수업은참여형, 협동형성향을가진학생들에게유리할것이다. 그러나일개의과대학의학생을대상으로한이번연구는회피형만기존의타연구들과유사한결과를보일뿐개인의학습유형이 PBL 수업의만족도에큰영향을미치지않는것 으로나타났다. 본연구는참여형이나협동형의학습유형이 PBL 수업만족도에영향을미친다는선행연구들과달리통계적으로유의미한영향력이없었다. 이러한결과는 PBL 수업만족도에영향을주는요인이개인적인학습성향과같은개인의내적요인보다는문제, 튜터, 동료, 환경, 학습분위기등외적요인일가능성을시사한다. 추후연구에서는 PBL 수업의효과에영향을미치는요인들을찾고, 그요인들이어떻게학습유형과관련을맺는지자료를수집하고분석할필요가있다. 또하나본연구에서주목할것은회피형성향이클수록 PBL 수업에대해서부정적인 (negative) 생각을가지고있다는것이다. 이러한연구결과를기반으로교육현장에서는학생들의학습유형을정확하게파악하고의과대학고유의교육방법을개발하여학습효과를높일필요가있다. 또한이러한노력은학습에흥미를느끼지못하고대학생활에적응하지못하는학생들을관리하고그들의학업성취를증진시키는데도움이될것으로기대한다. None. None. None. 1. So YH, Lee YM, Ahn DS. An student's evaluation of the implementation of problem-based learning. Korean J Med Educ 2005; 17: 49-58. 2. Yune SJ, Im SJ, Lee SH, Baek SY, Lee SY. Effects of differences in problem-based learning course length on academic motivation and self-directed learning readiness in medical school students. Korean J Med Educ 2010; 22: 23-31. 3. Park KH, Park CH, Chung WJ, Yoo CJ. Implementation of a problem-based learning program combined with team-based learning. Korean J Med Educ 2010; 22: 350 Korean J Med Educ 2012 Dec; 24(4): 347-351.
채수진 : 학습유형별문제바탕학습효과 225-230. 4. Kang SY, Cho HH, Hong JI, Kim EJ, Park SE. The effect of problem based learning in engineering education. J Eng Educ Res 2005; 8: 24-34. 5. Choi BK. The relationship between learning style and class satisfaction of college student according to the difference of basic elements in cooperative learning [master's thesis]. [Seoul, Korea]: Yonsei University; 2006. 6. Cushing KS, Kerrins JA. Cooperative learning instruction: effects of wanting or not wanting to participate on mathematics achievement. Paper presented at: the Association; 1991 April 3-7; Chicago, USA. 7. Grasha AF, Riechmann SW. A rational approach to developing and assessing the construct validity of a student learning style scales instrument. J Psychol 1974; 87: 213-223. 8. Angleo TA, Cross KP. Classroom assessment techniques: a handbook for college teachers. 2nd ed. San Francisco, USA: Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1993. 9. Kim EJ. A study of the relationship between types and elements of learning styles and curriculum [dissertation]. [Seoul, Korea]: Yonsei University; 2000. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research 351