35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016) http://dx.doi.org/10.15267/keses.2016.35.1.039 39 () The Changes of Students Learning and Identity through Science Class Participations - Focused on Seasonal Change Unit - Lee, Jeong-A (Seoul National University) ABSTRACT This study aimed to understand students learning in elementary science classes in terms of participatory perspective. Participatory perspective is based on the participationist views on learning. Based on the participatory perspective, this study used two concepts of participationism: the changes of learning on commognition of Sfard (2007) and the identity of Wenger (1998/2007). Based on these concepts, four episodes of an elementary science class were analyzed. The results showed that students carried out their learning from objective-level learning to meta-level learning. And students defined who they are by identifying and negotiating scientific meaning during the learning. These results showed students become members of science community through their participations in science class. Key words : participation, participatory perspective, commognition, identity, objective-level learning, meta-level learning, identification, negotiability I. (Sfard, 2006, 2008; Lave & Wenger, 1991/2010)., (Son, 2010: 6), (Sfard, 2006). Piaget Vygotsky. Piaget, (Ginsberg & Opper, 1969/ 2006). Vygotsky (Kellog, 2011). Piaget, Vygotsky (DeVries, 2000).. Sfard(1998) Piaget Vygotsky 2015.12.10 2016.1.19 2016.2.2 2016.2.4 E-mail: wert2030@snu.ac.kr
40 35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016) (acquistition metaphor).,. -,.,?,? (Sfard, 2006, 2008; Sfard & Prusak, 2005). (Wenger, 1998/2007; Sfard, 2008). (Sfard, 2008)., 1) (individualization of the collective),, (communalization of the individual).,., Lave and Wenger(1991/2010) (Community of Practice). (Wenger, 1998/2007). (Lave & Wenger, 1991/2010; Sfard & Prusak, 2005)., (Mason, 1996; Mortimer & Scott, 2003; Ogborn et al., 1996).,. (Brown et al., 2005).,..,,,. Sfard(2007) (Commognition) Wenger(1998/ 2007) (Identity)..,..,?,?
< > : 41.. (),.... II. Sfard(2007). (Sfard, 2008). (communication) (cognition) (commognition).,.., (meta-rule) (Sfard, 2007).,.. (objective-level learning) (meta-level learning),.,.,, (Sfard, 2007). (commognitive conflict).,,.., (discursive) (Ben-Zvi & Sfard, 2007). (the same) idem (Gee, 2001; Sfard & Prusak, 2005)., (Brown, 2004).,, (Brickhouse et al., 2000; Brickhouse & Potter, 2001; Gee, 2001). (personality),,
42 35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016) (Brown, 2004)., (scientific identity) (Brickhouse & Potter, 2001; Nespor, 1994), / (discursive identity)(brown, 2004; Brown et al., 2005), (academic identity) (Reveles et al., 2004).,. Lave and Wenger(1991/ 2010),,. Lave and Wenger(1991/ 2010) Wenger(1998/2007). Wenger(1998/2007). Wenger(1998/2007),.,.. Wenger (1998/2007).,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,. Wenger(1998/2007) Components of identity (Wenger, 1998/2007)
< > : 43, (Fig. 1)..,,,,,,.,.... (Wenger, 1998/2007: 304-305). III. 6 1 3 7....,.,..,.,.., Sfard (2007), Wenger(1998/2007).. Sfard(2007),, Analytic tool for the changes of learning and meta-rules
44 35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016) (objective-level learning) (meta-level learning).,. Table 1. Wenger(1998/2007),,,.. Table 2.,,,.,.,.,...,,,,,..,,,.,. Sfard, Wenger.. 3,.,., 2 (research audit). Framework for analyzing identity,,
< > : 45 IV. 1 ~ ( 3 2) ).. 7. 1 2. 1, (3). 2 ( ) (7). 1,. 2. 1~18 1 2. 2., 1 Episode 1 1 T 2 ss. 3 T 7 T,,,,. 4...?.,,,. (). ( ). 8 ss ( ) 9 s1, s2 ( ) 10 s3 (s2 ) 35? 11 s1 ( ) 32. 1 2 12 s2 (s1)? 1 13 s1 ( ),. 2 14 s4 (s2)?? 15 s2. (, ) 16 s5 ()? 17 T.. 18 s2 ( ) T:, s1: 1, ss: 2
46 35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016),. 1 ~. 1(Table 3) 1 2. 2(Table 4). s3 1 (20), s1 s2 2 (21, 22). 1 2 (23). 1 2,. 1. s2 2 (26). s3 1, s1 s2 (27). 3, s1 s2 2. s1 s2 2. 2 (28~37). (Ben-Zvi & Sfard, 2007).,. 2 ~ (28~37). 2 () 1. 3(Table 5), 60(28~31), 54(32~ 35), 50(36~37). Episode 2 20 s3 21 s2 (s2 )... (s2 ),. ( ). (s3 ). 1 / 1 2 22 s1 (s3).. 2 23 T 24 s2., ( ) 25 T (s2 ) 26 s2 ( ) 27 s3 ( s3 )? s4~s6 s1~s3, 1 2 2
연구논문> 과학수업 참여에 따른 초등학생의 학습과 정체성의 변화 : 이정아 < 47 라 가 다 전구(태양)위치 나 Fig. 2. Globe movement location led by s1 and s2 Table 5. Episode 3 발화차례 발화주체 고도측정계를 읽으며) 60. 발화내용 28 s1 ( 29 s2 59? 30 s1 31 s2 32 s2 아니, 아니. 진한 건 60이잖아. 어어. 60. (지구본 위치를 다 로 옮기며) 다음은 다. 33 s4 52? 34 s5 54? 35 s1 54. 36 s2 ( 37 s6 ( 지구본 위치를 라 로 옮기며) 우리 맞았지? 지구본 쪽으로 몸을 굽히며) 50? 38 s5 맞아? s3은 실험상황에 참여하지 않고 상황을 지켜보고 있음 태양의 남중고도는 계절별로 다르다 에 위배되는 결과로 귀결된다. 이 때문에 에피소드 3(Table 5)에 서 보듯이 메타규칙 2에 준하여 실험을 주도적으로 학습흐름 객관적 수준학습 과학공동체 담화지지 할 수 없음 인식 커모그니티브 갈등 발생 수행하는 s2도, 이것을 따르고 있던 s5도 무언가 잘 못되었음을 인식하게 된다(36~38). 바로 이 지점에 서 이들에게 커모그니티브 갈등이 나타나게 된다.
48 초등과학교육 제35권 제1호, pp. 39~53 (2016) 4) 새로운 메타규칙 수용을 통한 메타수준 학습 에피소드 3(Table 5)에서 보듯 s1과 s2가 주도적 으로 수용했던 메타규칙 2에 따른 객관적 수준의 학습으로는 과학공동체의 담화를 지지할 수 없게 되었다. 에피소드 4(Table 6)에서는 s3가 발화차례 20번에서 그가 지지하고자 했던 메타규칙 1을 다시 라 가 다 전구(태양)위치 나 Fig. 3. Globe movement location led by s3 Table 6. Episode 4 발화차례 발화주체 발화내용 학습흐름 이상해 뭔가. 내 생각에는 이 자전축이 (지구본을 가 위치에 두며) 이렇게 있었잖아. 그리 메타규칙1 제시 39 s3 고 (자전축을 고정시킨 채 나, 다, 라 위치로 움직이며) 이렇게 있고 이렇게, 이렇게. 40 s6 그런데 아까 이게(태양고도계) 저쪽에(전구 반대편) 가더라. 메타규칙2 고수 41 s3 그건 이렇게(지구본을 회전시켜 태양고도계가 전구 쪽으로 향하게 함) 돌리면 되잖아. 메타규칙2 수용과 메타규칙1 제시 42 s5 (s3과 동시에)얘를(지구본) 돌리면 돼. 43 s2 (쑥스러운 듯 웃으며)다시, 보고. 메타규칙1 수용 44 s1 (전구를 켜고 전구의 위치를 맞춤) 45 s3 (주도적으로 실험을 시작함) 62. 46 s4 62야? 메타수준학습 47 s3 어. 48 s3 (지구본의 위치를 나로 바꿈) 어? 넘어가. 한 20? (s1)을 보며 그치? s1은 이전 담화 상황과는 달리 자신의 의견을 주장하지 않으며, 묵묵히 s3의 의견에 따라 실험을 수행해 감
< > : 49 (39). s3 2 1. 1 2, s3, (39~41). s5 2. s5 s3 2 1 s3 (42). 1 2 (43~44), s3 (45~48)..,. 1 1~4. 1~4.. Episode 1 1 T,,,. 4...? 2 ss. 3 T 7 T.,,,. (). ( ). 8 ss ( ) - 9 s1, s2 ( ) 10 s3 (s2 ) 35? 11 s1 ( ) 32. 12 s2 (s1)? 13 s1 ( ),. 14 s4 (s2)?? - 15 s2. (, ) 16 s5 ()? - 17 T.. 18 s2 ( )
50 35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016),.,.,. 1(Table 7), (T) (s1~s6).,. 1.. s3 35, s1 32 (10), s2 s1, s1 (12)., 1, s1. s1. 2(Table 8) s1 s2, s3. 2. s3 1 s1 s2, (20). s1 s2 (21~22, 26). s2 s1 (26), s3 (27). s1, s2, s3 2 s4~s6. 3(Table 9) s1 s2,. Episode 2 20 s3 21 s2 (s2 )... (s2 ),. ( ). (s3 ). 22 s1 (s3).. 23 T, ( ) 24 s2. - 25 T (s2 ) - 26 s2 ( ) 27 s3 ( s3 )?
< > : 51 s1 s2,. s1 s2 s3., 33~35 s4 s5 s1 s1. 3 s2, s6, s5 (36~38) s1, s1 s3. 4 s3 s1 s2, s6, s5. s3 41, s6 (40) s3. s5 s3 Episode 3 28 s1 60. 29 s2 59? 30 s1,. 60. 31 s2. 60. 32 s2 ( ). 33 s4 52? 34 s5 54? 35 s1 54. 36 s2 ( )? - 37 s6 ( ) 50? - 38 s5? - Episode 4 39 s3. ( ). (,, ),. 40 s6 (). 41 s3 ( ). 42 s5 (s3 )(). 43 s2 ( ),. 44 s1 ( ) 45 s3 ( ) 62. 46 s4 62? 47 s3. 48 s3 ( )?. 20? (s1)? s1, s3
52 35 1, pp. 39~53 (2016) Trajectory of transformation students identities 1 2 3 4 s1~s6 s1~ss3 s1, s2, s4~ss6 s1~ss6 - s4~ss6 s3 - s1, s2 s1 s1, s2, s5 s1~ss5 s3 s2, s3 s1, s2, s4 s3, s6 s1 s1, s2, s3 s3, s1 s3 s3 (42). s2 s1 s3 (43~48). 1~4 Table 11.,. s3 s1 s2. V...,.,..,,.,,.. (, ),,..,.
< > : 53.. Ben-Zvi, D. & Sfard, A. (2007). Ariadne s thread, daedalus wings and the learners autonomy. Education & Didactique, 1(3), 117-134. Brickhouse, N. W. & Potter, J. T. (2001). Young women's scientific identity formation in an urban context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 965-980. Brickhouse, N. W., Lowery, P. & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of a girl does science? The construction of school science identities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 441-458. Brown, B. A. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implications for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 810-834. Brown, B. A., Reveles, J. M. & Kelly, G. J. (2005) Scientific literacy and discursive identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning. Science Education, 89, 779-802. DeVries, R. (2000). Vygotsky, Piaget, and education: a reciprocal assimilation of theories and educational practices. New Ideas in Psychology, 18(2-3), 187-213. Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25(2000-2001), 99-125. Ginsburg, H. P. & Opper, S. (2006). Piaget s theory of intellectual development [ ] (J. M. Kim, Trans.). Seoul: Hakjisa. (Original work published 1969). Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Some grammatical problems in scientific English. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 69-85). London: The Falmer Press. Kellog, D. (2011). Мышление и речь [ ] (H. C. Bae, & Y. H. Kim, Trans.). Seoul: Salimteo. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (2010). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation [ : ] (M. H. Son, Trans.). Seoul: Kanghyun. (Original work published 1991). Mason, L. (1996). An analysis of children's construction of new knowledge through their use of reasoning and arguing in classroom discussions. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 9(4), 411-433. Mortimer, E. F. & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Nespor, J. (1994). Knowledge in motion: Space, time, and curriculum in undergraduate physics and management. Washington, DC: Falmer. Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I. & McGillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press. Reveles, J. M., Cordova, R. & Kelly, G. J. (2004). Science literacy and academic identity formulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1111-1144. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sfard, A. & Prusak, A. (2005). Telling identities: In search of an analytic tool for investigating learning as a culturally shaped activity. Educational Researcher, 34(4), 14-22. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Education Researcher, 27(2), 4-13. Sfard, A. (2006). Participationist discourse on mathematics learning, In J. Maasz & W. Schloeglmann (Eds.), New mathematics education research and practice (pp. 153-170). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Sfard, A. (2007). When the rules of discourse change, but nobody tells you: Making sense of mathematics learning form a commognitive standpoint. The Journal of the Learning Science, 16(4), 565-613. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communication: Human development, the growth of discourse, and matematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Son, M. H. (2010). Preface. In J. Lave & E. Wenger Situated learning. (pp.3-16). Seoul: Ganghyun. (Original work published 1991). Wenger, E. (2007). Communities of practice [: ] (M. H. Son & E. K. Bae, Trans.). Seoul: Hakjisa. (Original work published 1998).