Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: ICT * Exploring the Re

Similar documents
Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Analysis on the E

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * Strenghening the Cap

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: * Suggestions of Ways

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: 3 * Effects of 9th

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on Teache

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: * A Analysis of

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: : Researc

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: IPA * Analysis of Perc

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

27 2, 17-31, , * ** ***,. K 1 2 2,.,,,.,.,.,,.,. :,,, : 2009/08/19 : 2009/09/09 : 2009/09/30 * 2007 ** *** ( :

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp.1-16 DOI: * A Study on Good School

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: The Effect of Caree

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: * The

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: Awareness, Supports

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Mediating Eff

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: (NCS) Method of Con

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: An Exploratory Stud

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Effect of Paren

歯14.양돈규.hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Grounds and Cons

., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, 23 3 (, ) () () 25, (),,,, (,,, 2015b). 1 5,


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

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp DOI: * Review of Research

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

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on the Opti

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp DOI: * Early Childhood T


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: 3 * The Effect of H

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: - K * The Analysis

232 도시행정학보 제25집 제4호 I. 서 론 1. 연구의 배경 및 목적 사회가 다원화될수록 다양성과 복합성의 요소는 증가하게 된다. 도시의 발달은 사회의 다원 화와 밀접하게 관련되어 있기 때문에 현대화된 도시는 경제, 사회, 정치 등이 복합적으로 연 계되어 있어 특

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp DOI: * Experiences of Af

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp.1-19 DOI: *,..,,,.,.,,,,.,,,,, ( )

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A S

27 2, * ** 3, 3,. B ,.,,,. 3,.,,,,..,. :,, : 2009/09/03 : 2009/09/21 : 2009/09/30 * ICAD (Institute for Children Ability

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: A Study on Organizi

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp DOI: NCS : G * The Analy

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Structural Rel

특수교육논총 * ,,,,..,..,, 76.7%.,,,.,,.. * 1. **

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: (LiD) - - * Way to

230 한국교육학연구 제20권 제3호 I. 서 론 청소년의 언어가 거칠어지고 있다. 개ㅅㄲ, ㅆㅂ놈(년), 미친ㅆㄲ, 닥쳐, 엠창, 뒤져 등과 같은 말은 주위에서 쉽게 들을 수 있다. 말과 글이 점차 된소리나 거센소리로 바뀌고, 외 국어 남용과 사이버 문화의 익명성 등

<353420B1C7B9CCB6F52DC1F5B0ADC7F6BDC7C0BB20C0CCBFEBC7D120BEC6B5BFB1B3C0B0C7C1B7CEB1D7B7A52E687770>

상담학연구,, SPSS 21.0., t,.,,,..,.,.. (Corresponding Author): / / / Tel: /

(5차 편집).hwp

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * Discussions on

ePapyrus PDF Document

상담학연구. 10,,., (CQR).,,,,,,.,,.,,,,. (Corresponding Author): / / 567 Tel: /

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * Relationship among



<30382E20B1C7BCF8C0E720C6EDC1FD5FC3D6C1BEBABB2E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * Research Subject

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp DOI: : A basic research

인문사회과학기술융합학회

54 한국교육문제연구제 27 권 2 호, I. 1.,,,,,,, (, 1998). 14.2% 16.2% (, ), OECD (, ) % (, )., 2, 3. 3

,,,.,,,, (, 2013).,.,, (,, 2011). (, 2007;, 2008), (, 2005;,, 2007).,, (,, 2010;, 2010), (2012),,,.. (, 2011:,, 2012). (2007) 26%., (,,, 2011;, 2006;

,......


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: * The Participant Expe

:,,.,. 456, 253 ( 89, 164 ), 203 ( 44, 159 ). Cronbach α= ,.,,..,,,.,. :,, ( )

歯5-2-13(전미희외).PDF

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Research Trend

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA


118 김정민 송신철 심규철 을 미치기 때문이다(강석진 등, 2000; 심규철 등, 2001; 윤치원 등, 2005; 하태경 등, 2004; Schibeci, 1983). 모둠 내에서 구성원들이 공동으 로 추구하는 학습 목표의 달성을 위하여 각자 맡은 역할에 따라 함께

.,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,, (, 2011)..,,, (, 2009)., (, 2000;, 1993;,,, 1994;, 1995), () 65, 4 51, (,, ). 33, 4 30, (, 201

,......

<313120B9DABFB5B1B82E687770>

<C7D1B1B9B1B3C0B0B0B3B9DFBFF85FC7D1B1B9B1B3C0B05F3430B1C733C8A35FC5EBC7D5BABB28C3D6C1BE292DC7A5C1F6C6F7C7D42E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp DOI: NCS : * A Study on


. 45 1,258 ( 601, 657; 1,111, 147). Cronbach α=.67.95, 95.1%, Kappa.95.,,,,,,.,...,.,,,,.,,,,,.. :,, ( )

27 2, 1-16, * **,,,,. KS,,,., PC,.,,.,,. :,,, : 2009/08/12 : 2009/09/03 : 2009/09/30 * ** ( :

Kor. J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 라이프스타일은 개인 생활에 있어 심리적 문화적 사회적 모든 측면의 생활방식과 차이 전체를 말한다. 이러한 라이프스 타일은 사람의 내재된 가치관이나 욕구, 행동 변화를 파악하여 소비행동과 심리를 추측할 수 있고, 개인의

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp DOI: * The Meaning of Pl

< FC3D6C1BEBCF6C1A45FB1E2B5B6B1B3B1B3C0B0B3EDC3D E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: * The Basic Study on t

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: : - Qualitative Met


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: * A Critical Review

서론 34 2

부산교육 311호

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Parents Perception

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp DOI: Educational Design

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 4, pp DOI: * A Study on the Recog

¨ë Áö¸®ÇÐȸÁö-¼Û°æ¾ðOK

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: A Critical Reflecti

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * Relationship Betw

Kor. J. Aesthet. Cosmetol., 및 자아존중감과 스트레스와도 밀접한 관계가 있고, 만족 정도 에 따라 전반적인 생활에도 영향을 미치므로 신체는 갈수록 개 인적, 사회적 차원에서 중요해지고 있다(안희진, 2010). 따라서 외모만족도는 개인의 신체는 타

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2019, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp DOI: : * A Study on the

<BFCFBCBA30362DC0B1BFECC3B62E687770>


Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2016, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp DOI: * The Effect of Boa

<30392EB9DAB0A1B6F72CC1A4B3B2BFEE2E687770>

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2018, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp DOI: The Exploratory Stu

DBPIA-NURIMEDIA



시안

50-5대지05장후은.indd

Transcription:

Journal of Educational Innovation Research 2017, Vol. 27, No. 2, pp.23-48 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21024/pnuedi.27.2.201706.23 ICT * Exploring the Relationships between College Students ICT Self-efficacy and their Perceptions of Flipped Learning Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationships between college students ICT self-efficacy and their perceptions of flipped learning in higher education. Method: For this purpose, this study conducted an orientation for introducing the concepts and process of flipped learning to 120 students in the courses of Educational Technology, D university, Busan city. In addition, this study administered the students perception test of flipped learning and the test for assessing their ICT self-efficacy, and analyzed the data. Results: From the results, first, there was significantly positive relationship between college students perception of flipped learning and their ICT self-efficacy. Specifically, there were significantly positive relationship between preference toward online class as one sub-area of the perception of flipped learning and self-directed learning based ICT self-efficacy as one sub-area of ICT self-efficacy. Second, the college students perception of flipped learning could be explained by the variables of self-directed learning based ICT self-efficacy and scaffolding based ICT self-efficacy significantly. Third, there were positive relationships between the level of the students experiences of the course including discussion, and the levels of self-directed learning based ICT self-efficacy and scaffolding based ICT self-efficacy. Conclusion: The overall results imply that colleges should offer their students with individualized and specialized programs and instructional design for supporting their flipped learning activities by considering the level of learning experiences of discussion and the level of ICT self-efficacy. Key words : flipped learning, ICT self-efficacy, self-directed learning based ICT self-efficacy, scaffolding based ICT self-efficacy *. Corresponding Author: Park, Young-Hee. Dong-A University, Graduate School of Education, Nakdong-Daero, 550 beon-gil Saha-gu, Busan, Korea. e-mail: pyh2149@dau.ac.kr

..,..,,..,,. (flipped learning), (Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Reeve & Tseng, 2011).,, (, ),,..,, (, 2014).,.,,..,, (,, 2015), (, 2015;, 2016)... ICT ICT

. ICT ICT, (, 2008; Compeau & Higgins 1995; Torkzadeh, Pelughoeft, & Hall, 1999). ICT (,,, 2010;,, 2001;, 1998;,, 2004).,,,, ICT. ICT,. ICT,., ICT (,, 2016)., ICT.. 1. ICT? 2. ICT? 3. (, (LMS),, )? 4. (, (LMS),, ) ICT? 5.?

., (, 2015)., 1:1,,, (blended learning) (, 2014).,, - - - - (,, 2014)..,., (, 2015).,,,,.,, (Reeve & Tseng, 2011),, (, 2015)., Hamdan, McKnight, McKnight Arfstrom(2013) 4, 1) (flexible environment), 2) (authentic task) (learning culture), 3) (the intended learning content), 4) (professional educator). 4., (2013),,,,.

...,, MOOC, (LMS).. (face to face) (Bergmann & Sams, 2012)., (2016),,.,,.,,,., (2015) 4 MOOC.., (2014).,,,. (2015).... Enfield(2013).,,.,

.,, (, 2017;, 2016)., Strayer(2012).,,. Roach(2014) Texas Tech University 96. 76%, 94%.. (November & Mull, 2012),... Kim, Kim, Khera Getman(2014) USC(University of Southern California) 115. (Engineering), (Social Studies), (Humanities) 3 (Learner Presence), (Cognitive Presence), (Student Centeredness), (Teaching Presence), (Social Presence),., 25%..., 85%..,,,..

ICT (Young, 1996)., ICT,, (, 2004).,., ICT (, 2011). ICT.,, ICT (,, 2016)., ICT. ICT,,., ICT., (1999) 90.,. (2001) 3 78 ICT ICT., ICT., (2012) 213 ICT,,., ICT, ICT.. ICT,.

. 1) 연구대상자의배경변인별특성 4 D 120. < III-1>. 80.8%(97 ). 3 52.5%, 4 35.0%, 2 12.5%. D (LMS), 1 3 68.8%, 4 6 15.8%, 15.0%, 7 3.3%. 1 3 45.8%, 4 6 31.7%, 7 20.8%, 1.7%. 7 77.5%, 4 6 17.5%, 1 3 5.0%.,,,,. n % 23 19.2 97 80.8 2 15 12.5 3 63 52.5 4 42 35.0 18 15.0 (LMS) 1~3 79 68.8 4~6 19 15.8 7 4 3.3 2 1.7 1~3 55 45.8 4~6 38 31.7 7 25 20.8 0 0.0 1~3 6 5.0 4~6 21 17.5 7 97 77.5

1) 플립러닝에대한인식 Johnson(2013). 17, Likert 5 ( 1 5 ).,,,,,., (Cronbach s α=.87). 2) ICT 자아효능감 ICT Holden Rada(2011) ICT, (2016). ICT 10, Likert 5 ( 1 5 ). ICT (Cronbach s α=.94). ICT. < III-2>. ( ) Cronbach s α 1 17(17).87 ICT 1 10(10).94,., [ III-1]..

, ICT.,,,,.,,.,,.,, D., ICT.,,,. 1., ICT 2. : 3. 4. 5. 6. ICT 7.,, SPSS/Win 22.0. ICT Mplus 6.11(Muthén & Muthén, 2010)..,., (Exploratory Factor Analysis: EFA) (Confirmatory Factor Analysis: CFA). Cronbach s α., ICT.,, (LMS),,

(One-way ANOVA), (Scheffe).,, (LMS),, ICT (One-way ANOVA), (Scheffe). (enter) (Multiple regression analysis). IV. ICT (EFA) (CFA) (Kline, 2005). 1) 플립러닝에대한인식척도 Johnson(2013). 4. 2, 7, 4, 2..50.85 (ps <.001). < IV-1>. 2) ICT 자아효능감척도 Holden Rada(2011) ICT, (2016). ICT 2. ICT 4 ICT 6. < IV-1>..68.93. (ps <.001).

( ) (M) (SD) (range) (β) Cronbach s α (2) 4.,. 11. ( ). 2.63 1.13 1.0-5.0.37 -.71.77 2.90 1.03 1.0-5.0.15 -.67.80.767 1.,. 3.52.88 1.0-5.0 -.58.04.78 2.,. 3.60 1.04 1.0-5.0 -.66.66.74 (7) 3.,. 5.,. 12.,. 3.75 1.03 1.0-5.0 -.60 -.40.58 2.80 1.01 1.0-5.0.29 -.41.51 3.48.81 1.0-5.0 -.55.87.85.875 16.,. 3.35.90 1.0-5.0 -.29 -.07.78 17.,. 3.48.97 1.0-5.0 -.55.13.76 (4) 9.. 10.. 13.. 14.,. 3.62 1.02 1.0-5.0 -.39 -.76.59 3.08.96 1.0-5.0 -.34 -.54.50 3.60.96 1.0-5.0 -.51 -.25.86 3.08 1.08 1.0-5.0.07 -.83.80.779 (2) 6.,. 15.. 3.54.95 1.0-5.0 -.38 -.32.75 3.55.96 1.0-5.0 -.64 -.07.68.689

( ) ( ) (M) (SD) (range) (β) Cronbach s α 1.. 3.98 1.02 1.0-5.0-1.17 1.07.75 ICT (4) 2.. 3. ( ). 4.07.89 1.0-5.0-1.34 2.37.88 4.11.89 1.0-5.0-1.10 1.12.93.904 4.. 4.11.79 1.0-5.0 -.83.64.79 5.,. 4.23.65 1.0-5.0 -.82 1.76.77 6.. 4.19.70 1.0-5.0 -.73.88.68 7.. 4.31.73 1.0-5.0-1.09 2.19.86 ICT (6) 8. ( ). 4.19.77 1.0-5.0 -.90.85.83.922 9.. 4.37.64 1.0-5.0 -.74.40.85 10.. 4.29.71 1.0-5.0-1.05 2.47.88. < IV-1>.

(skewness) (kurtosis). < IV-1>.07 1.34,.04 2.37 <3.0, <7.0 (Kline, 2005)... < IV-2>. < IV-2>.07 rs.94. ICT (r=.20, p.01). ICT (r=.22, p.05), ICT (r=.16, p.05)., ICT (r=.22, p.05). ICT (r=.20, p.05) ICT (r=.21, p.05). 1 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 2 2-1 2-2 1. 1.00 1-1..74 ** 1.00 1-2..86 **.50 ** 1.00 1-3..71 **.51 **.35 ** 1.00 1-4..67 **.41 **.51 **.36 ** 1.00 2. ICT.20 *.17.12.20 *.15 1.00 2-1. ICT.22 *.22 *.17.16.14.89 ** 1.00 2-2. ICT.16.11.07.21 *.14.94 **.70 * 1.00 49.98 5.53 24.02 13.32 7.10 37.77 12.17 25.60 9.09 1.94 4.91 3.13 1.67 5.70 2.56 3.59 24.00 2.00 9.00 5.00 2.00 15.00 3.00 10.00 72.00 10.00 34.00 20.00 10.00 45.00 15.00 30.00 -.38.28 -.57 -.45 -.57 -.87-1.24 -.84.25 -.53.46 -.41.20 1.38 1.78 1.83 * p <.05, ** p <.01

, (LMS),, < IV-3>. M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) 2 5.66(2.02) 24.60(4.62) 13.86(2.41) 7.46(1.30) 51.60(7.60) 3 5.63(2.05) 23.73(5.30) 13.79(3.26) 6.93(1.77) 50.09(9.74) 4 5.33(1.77) 24.26(4.47) 12.42(3.02) 7.21(1.64) 49.23(8.66) F.338.261 2.720.752.379 (LMS) 5.33(2.05) 24.55(5.33) 13.27(3.02) 6.61(1.94) 49.77(10.55) 1 3 5.67(2.07) 23.58(5.04) 13.39(3.23) 7.07(1.68) 49.72(9.48) 4 6 5.21(1.31) 24.84(3.76) 13.21(3.08) 7.68(1.33) 50.94(5.51) 7 5.25(1.50) 26.50(5.56) 12.75(2.98) 7.00(1.41) 51.50(10.63) F.390.792.065 1.298.130 5.00(1.41) 23.00(1.41) 15.50(.70) 8.50(2.12) 52.00(4.24) 1 3 5.38(2.10) 22.67(5.18) 12.67(3.26) 6.74(1.57) 47.47(9.25) 4 6 5.78(1.77) 25.44(3.92) 13.44(3.04) 7.13(1.69) 51.81(8.94) 7 5.52(1.93) 24.92(5.21) 14.40(2.79) 7.72(1.69) 52.56(8.12) F.374 2.885 * 2.175 2.520 2.729 * Scheffe - 4 6 > 1 3 - - 4 6 > 1 3 1 3 5.16(1.60) 23.00(3.89) 12.50(3.72) 6.33(1.50) 47.00(8.39) 4 6 5.38(1.82) 23.00(5.53) 13.14(3.00) 6.80(1.91) 48.33(9.46) 7 5.59(2.00) 24.32(4.83) 13.41(3.15) 7.21(1.62) 50.54(9.05) F.209.754.282 1.164.846 * p <.05

< IV-3>, 2 3, 4.. (LMS) < IV-3>.. (LMS). < IV-3>,. 7 52.56 1 3 47.47 (F=2.729, p.05)., 4 6 25.44 1 3 22.67 (F=2.885, p.05)..., (LMS),, ICT < IV-4>. ICT 2 3, 4 ICT. ICT. (LMS) ICT < IV-4>. ICT. ICT (LMS). ICT. 7 41.44 1 3 37.21, 4 6 36.10 (F=5.244, p.05)., ICT 7 13.52 1 3 11.94, 4 6 11.57 (F=3.381, p.01). ICT 7 27.92 1 3 25.27, 4 6

24.52 (F=5.244, p.01). ICT < IV-4>. ICT., ICT 7 12.74 4 6 10.85 (F=3.543, p.05). ICT ICT M(SD) M(SD) M(SD) 2 12.13(2.77) 25.80(3.52) 37.93(5.82) 3 11.98(2.83) 25.26(3.88) 37.25(6.15) 4 12.47(2.05) 26.02(3.17) 38.50(4.93) F.462.577.605 ( LMS) 11.77(2.96) 24.72(4.67) 36.50(7.24) 1 3 11.97(2.65) 25.56(3.31) 37.54(5.45) 4 6 13.15(1.70) 26.00(3.65) 39.15(5.16) 7 13.25(1.25) 28.25(2.87) 41.50(3.87) F 1.486 1.168 1.295 13.00(.00) 26.00(2.82) 39.00(2.82) 1 3 11.94(2.18) 25.27(2.74) 37.21(4.45) 4 6 11.57(3.10) 24.52(4.49) 36.10(7.22) 7 13.52(2.10) 27.92(2.81) 41.44(4.05) F 3.381 * 5.278 ** 5.244 ** Scheffe 7 > 4 6 7 > 4 6, 7 > 1 3 7 > 4 6, 7 > 1 3 1 3 12.16(2.22) 25.83(2.56) 38.00(4.51) 4 6 10.85(3.05) 25.09(2.73) 35.95(5.18) 7 12.47(2.39) 25.69(3.82) 38.17(5.84) F 3.543 *.252 1.310 Scheffe 7 > 4 6 - - * p <.05, ** p <.01

... 1) 플립러닝에대한인식 ICT ICT ICT. < IV-5>, ICT 2 ICT ICT (F=3.20, p.05), 5.2%. ICT ICT ICT. Β(SE) β t R² AdjR² F ICT * p <.05, ** p <.001 39.91(5.89) 6.77 ** ICT ICT.79(.45).22 1.75.01(.32).00.06.052.036 3.20 * 2) 플립러닝에대한인식의하위요인 3 1), 2), 3), 4) ICT ICT ICT. < IV-6>. (1) ICT

ICT. < IV-6>, ICT 2 ICT ICT (F=3.32, p.05), 5.4%., ICT (β=.28, p.05). Β(SE) β t R² AdjR² F ICT 4.04(1.26) 3.20 ** ICT ICT.21(.09).28 2.21 *.04(.06).08.63.054.038 3.32 * ICT ICT 21.78(3.21) 6.78 *** ICT ICT.48(.24).25 1.97.14(.17).10.81 8.65(2.04) 4.24 *** ICT ICT.03(.15).02.21.16(.11).19 1.49.037.021 2.27.044.028 2.72 ICT 5.42(1.10) 4.92 *** ICT ICT.05(.08).09.69.03(.06).08.62.025.008 1.47 * p <.05, ** p <.01, *** p <.001 (2) ICT ICT. < IV-6>, ICT 2 ICT ICT (F=2.27, p.05).

(3) ICT ICT. < IV-6>, ICT 2 ICT ICT (F=2.72, p.05). (4) ICT ICT. < IV-6>, ICT 2 ICT ICT (F=1.47, p.05)...,., ICT.,, ICT. ICT,, (2010),, (2001), (2004)., ICT., ICT,,., ICT.,.

., ICT 2 ICT ICT. (, 2017;, 2016)., (, 2015).,, ICT.,, ICT.,,,, ICT,.,,, ICT,,.,.,, 2 3, 4.,,,,.,. (in-class).,,,,., ICT.,

, 2 3,4 ICT,., ICT,, ICT,., ICT 2 ICT ICT., ICT ICT. ICT., ICT ICT,, ICT.,,,.,,,,.,, MOOC,. (2015). Flipped Learning. (2), 231-245. doi:10.14697/jkase.2015.35.2.0231. (2015). MOOC.. (2008).. 63-86.

,, (2010).. (9), 153-160. (2015)... (2017).. (1), 529-550., (2001). ICT. (4), 91-122. (2016). < >. 149-181. (2015).. (6), 5-38., (2016).,. (1), 199-226., (2016). :. (1), 169-178., (2015). (Flipped Classroom). (1), 81-97., (2014). (Flipped Learning). (4), 299-319. (2014). flipper classroom.. (2014). :. (1999)... (2013). (Flipped Learning). The Journal of Digital Policy & Management, 11(12), 83-92. (2014). (Flipped classroom) :. (2), 181-207., (2016).,,. (4), 567-576., (2012).,,. (3), 195-219. (2004).,

LMS. (4), 97-106. (2016). (flipped learning) :. (1), 165-199., (2016).,. (4), 809-836. (2011)... (2017).. (4), 215-235., (2004). ICT,. (2), 123-146., (2015). flipped learning. (2), 77-88. (2015)... (2016).. (4), 41-61. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education. Compeau, D., & Higgins, C. (1995). Computer self-efficacy: development of a measure and initial test. MIS Quarterly, 19, 189-211. doi:10.2307/249688. Enfield, J. (2013). Looking at the impact of the flipped classroom model of instruction on undergraduate multimedia students at CSUN. TechTrends, 57(6), 14 27. doi:10.1007/s11528-013-0698-1. Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. M. (2013) A review of flipped learning. Flipped Learning Network. Holden, H., & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology self-efficacy on teachers technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4), 343-367. doi:10.1080/15391523.2011.10782576. Johnson, G. B. (2013). Student perceptions of the Flipped Classroom. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia. doi:10.14288/1.0073641. Kim, M. K., Kim, S. M., Khera, O., & Getman, J. (2014). The experience of three flipped classrooms in urban university : an exploration of design principles. Internet and Higher Education, 22, 37-50. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2014.04.003.

Kline, R. B. (2005). Principle and practice of structural equation modeling(2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus. Los Angeles: Muthén and Muthén. November, A., & Mull, B. (2012). Flipped learning: A response to five common criticisms. e School News. Retrieved June, 3, 2015, from http://novemberlearning.com/educational-resources-for-educators/ teaching-and-learning-articles/flipped-learning-a-response-to-five-common-criticisms-article/ Reeve, J., & Tseng, M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of student engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257-267. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002. Roach, T. (2014). Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. International Review of Economics Education, 17, 74-84. Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation and task orientation. Learning Environments Research, 15(2), 171-193. doi:10.1016/j.iree.2014.08.003. Torkzadeh, R., Pelughoeft, K., & Hall, L. (1999). Computer self-efficacy, training effectiveness and user attitudes: An empirical study. Behavior& Information Technology, 18(4), 299-309. doi:10.1080/014492999119039. Young, J. D. (1996). The effect of self- regulated learning strategies on performance in learner controlled computer- based instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 17-27. doi:10.1007/bf02300538. : 2017.4.28 / : 2017.5.18 / : 2017.6.20

ICT : ICT. :, 4 D 120., ICT,. :,, ICT.,, ICT., ICT 2 ICT ICT., ICT ICT ICT. :, ICT.