계열에 따른 고등학생들의 인식론적 신념과 학습양식에 대한 차이와 인식론적 신념과 학습양식 간의 관계

윤회정; 김지영; 방담이

서지반출

국문초록

이 연구의 목적은 고등학교 학생들의 계열(문과, 이과)별 인식론적 신념과 학습양식의 차이를 살펴보고, 인식론적 신념이 학습양식에 미치는 영향을 알아보는 것이다. 서울소재 공립 고등학교 3학년 학생342명을 대상으로 인식론적 신념과 학습양식을 조사하였다. 인식론적 신념의 7가지 하위 요인(지식의확실성, 지식의단순성, 앎의원천, 앎의정당화, 선천적능력, 빠른학습, 규제된 학습)중, 선천적 능력을 제외한 모든 하위 요인에서 이과 학생들이 문과 학생들보다 높은점수를 나타내어 이과 학생들이 문과학생들에 비해 상대적으로 미성숙한 인식론적 신념 수준을 가지고 있는것으로 분석되었다. 학습양식 검사 결과에 의하면 구체적 경험, 추상적 개념화, 반성적 관찰, 능동적 실험의 4가지 학습능력 중 이과학생은 추상적 개념화, 문과학생은 구체적 경험을 더 선호하는 것으로나타났다. 또한 적응자, 분산자, 수렴자, 융합자의 4가지 학습양식 유형중, 이과에서는 수렴자와 융합자, 문과에서는 분산자의 비율이 높게 나타나 계열 간 차이가 존재함을 알 수 있었다. 인식론적 신념과 학습능력의 관계를 알아보기 위하여 상관분석을 실시한결과, 문과에서는지식의확실성,지식의단순성,규제된 학습이 추상적 개념화, 능동적 실험과 상관이있었다. 반면, 이과에서는 지식의 확실성, 빠른학습, 규제된 학습이 추상적 개념화, 구체적 경험과 상관이있었다. 다중회귀분석을 실시한결과, 인식론적 신념이 학습양식에 미치는 영향은 계열별로 다르게 나타났다. 연구결과를 바탕으로문?이과 통합교육에 대한 시사점을 논의하였다.|The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences in epistemological beliefs and learning style between students in liberal arts and natural sciences. In addition, the influence of epistemological belief on learning style was analyzed. Three hundred and forty two high school students were surveyed. The results are as follows: for epistemological beliefs, the mean scores of students in natural sciences were significantly higher than those of students in liberal arts in all seven dimensions of epistemological beliefs(certainty of knowledge, simplicity of knowledge, source of knowing, justification of knowing, innate ability, quick learning, and regulatory learning) except for innate ability. This means that students in natural sciences have comparatively naive epistemological beliefs. Kolb defined four different modes of learning styles, which are concrete experience, abstract hypothesis, reflective observation, and active learning. Students in natural sciences preferred abstract hypotheses, while students in liberal arts preferred concrete experience. Students' learning styles were divided into four types (converger, diverger, assimilator, accommodator) based on their scores in mode of learning styles. The ercentages of convergers and assimilators were higher in natural sciences while the percentage of divergers was higher in liberal arts. A correlation analysis was performed. For liberal arts students, there was a correlation between certainty of knowledge, simplicity of knowledge, regulatory learning and concrete experience, and active learning. For natural science students, there was a correlation between certainty of knowledge, quick learning, regulatory learning and abstract hypothesis, and concrete experience. The multiple regression analysis showed a difference in the influence of epistemological belief on learning style between liberal

영문초록

The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences in epistemological beliefs and learning style between students in liberal arts and natural sciences. In addition, the influence of epistemological belief on learning style was analyzed. Three hundred and forty two high school students were surveyed. The results are as follows: for epistemological beliefs, the mean scores of students in natural sciences were significantly higher than those of students in liberal arts in all seven dimensions of epistemological beliefs(certainty of knowledge, simplicity of knowledge, source of knowing, justification of knowing, innate ability, quick learning, and regulatory learning) except for innate ability. This means that students in natural sciences have comparatively naive epistemological beliefs. Kolb defined four different modes of learning styles, which are concrete experience, abstract hypothesis, reflective observation, and active learning. Students in natural sciences preferred abstract hypotheses, while students in liberal arts preferred concrete experience. Students' learning styles were divided into four types (converger, diverger, assimilator, accommodator) based on their scores in mode of learning styles. The ercentages of convergers and assimilators were higher in natural sciences while the percentage of divergers was higher in liberal arts. A correlation analysis was performed. For liberal arts students, there was a correlation between certainty of knowledge, simplicity of knowledge, regulatory learning and concrete experience, and active learning. For natural science students, there was a correlation between certainty of knowledge, quick learning, regulatory learning and abstract hypothesis, and concrete experience. The multiple regression analysis showed a difference in the influence of epistemological belief on learning style between liberal

I. 서 론 2
II. 연구 내용 및 방법 4
 1. 연구 대상 4
 2. 검사 도구 2
 3. 자료 분석 및 결과 처리 6
III. 연구 결과 및 논의 6
 1. 문과와 이과 학생들의 인식론적 신념 비교 6 
 2. 문과와 이과 학생들의 학습양식 비교 8
 3. 인식론적 신념이 학습양식에 미치는 영향 10
IV. 결론 및 제언 14
Abstract 20

키워드

인식론적 신념 학습양식 문과 이과 Epistemological belief Learning style Liberal arts Natural science

참고문헌 (47건)

고영남 (2005). 대학생의 학습양식에 따른 학업성취 및 진로결정수준의 관계. 열린교육연구, 13(3), 215-234.
교육부 (2013). 2017년 대입제도. 교육부 보도자료(2013.10.25).
김규선, 진선희 (2004). 활동중심 문학 교수학습의 문제점과 그 극복방안. 한국초등국어교육, 26, 5-37.
송인섭, 김수란 (2012). 다변량 일반화가능도 이론을 통한 인식론적 신념 검사 타당화 연구. 교육방법연구, 24(1), 107-130.
임세영, 이병철, 최현숙, 안미선, 이웅일 (2012). Kolb학습양식검사의 한글버전 개발. 한국실천공학교육학회논문지, 4(1), 30-44.
권정희, 이재경 (2002). 웹기반 학습환경에서 학습양식이 학업성취 및 웹기반 학습자 지원가능 선호에 미치는 영향. 교육공학연구, 18(4). 111-138.
송진웅 (2014). 통합형 과학 교육과정 개정의 배경과 쟁점. 과실연 제82차 오픈포럼 자료집.
신명희, 서은희 (2003). 인지양식유형과 전공계열 및 학업 적응과의 관계. 교육학 연구, 41(1), 139-154.
신재한 (2006). 다중 지능 이론을 적용한 교육 과정 통합 수업이 창의적 사고력에 미치는 효과. 아동 교육, 15(2). 301-317.
이신동 (2005). Kolb 학습양식에 따른 교수방법 선호도 비교. 아시아교육연구, 6(4), 124-144.
조미영, 장지영, 유정숙, 김성원, 이현주 (2010). 교수학습목적 및 과정에 따른 발문유형 분석: 과학 교사 사례 연구. 학습자중심교과교육연구, 10(2), 407-428.
조현철 (2005). 성, 학년 및 전공영역에 따른 대학생들의 인식론적 신념. 청소년학연구, 12(4), 263-281.
홍영기 (2009). 수학․과학 교과의 주제 중심 통합 프로그램의 효과. 통합교육과정연구, 3(2), 42-66.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Caspell, S. (2007). Exploring the influence of the ROC integrated high school program. The Ontario Journal of Outdoor Education, 19(3), 20-27.
Elliott, B., Oty, K., Mcarthur, J., & Clark, B. (2001). The effect of an interdisciplinary algebra/science course on students' problem solving skills, critical thinking skills and attitudes towards mathematics. International Journal of Mathematical Educati
Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57-72.
Franzoni, A. L., & Assar, S. (2009). Student learning styles adaptation method based on teaching strategy and electronic method. Educational Technology and Society, 12(4), 15-29.
Heywood. J. (1997). An Evaluation of Kolb's Learning Style Theory by Graduate Student Teachers during Their Teaching Practice.(Eric Document Reproduction Service. No. ED406 333)
Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and disciplinary differences in personal epistemology. Comtemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378-405.
Hofer, B. K. (2004). Epistemological understanding as a metacognitive process: Thinking aloud during online searching. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 43–55.
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88-140.
Ingram, G. (1997). Something to believe in: the relationship between epistemological beliefs and study strategies. Paper presented in the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
Jehng, J. J., Johnson, S. D., & Anderson, R. C. (1993). Schooling and students' epistemological beliefs about learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 18(1), 23-35.
Karruppan, C. M. (2001) Web-based teaching materials : a user's profile. Internet Research, 11(2), 138-148.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Development reflective judgement: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (2002). The reflective judgement model. In Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.). Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing(pp. 37-61). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331-359.
Morrow, L. M., Pressley, M., Smith, J. K., & Smith, M. (1997). The effect of literature-based program integrated into literacy and science instruction with children from diverse backgrounds. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(1), 54-76.
Muis, K. R., (2007). The role of epistemic beliefs in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 42(3), 173-190.
National Research Council. (2011). A Framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years A Scheme. NY: Holt, Reinhart, & Winston.
Philips, J. (1998). Progressive development of deep learning skills through undergraduate and postgraduate dissertations. Educational Studies, 24(1), 95-105.
Proctor, R. M. J. (2001). Enhancing elementary students' creative problem solving through project-based education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 462941).
Ramsden, P. (1979). Student learning and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education, 8(4), 411-427.
Ravindran, B., Greene, B. A., & DeBacker, T. K. (2005). Predicting preservice teachers' cognitive engagement with goals and epistemological beliefs. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(4), 222-232.
Riding, R., & Rayner, S. (2002). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: Understanding style differences in learning and behavior. NY: David Fulton Publishers.
Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEM mania. Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20-26.
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498-504.
Schommer, M. (1993). Comparisons of beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning among postsecondary students. Research in Higher Education, 34(3), 355-370.
Schommer, M., Course, A., & Rhodes, N. (1992). Epistemological beliefs and mathematical text comprehension: Believing it is simple does not make it so. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 435-443.
Snow, C. P., & Collini, S. (2001). 두 문화 (오영환 역). 서울: 사이언스북스(원저 1959 출판)
Stahl, E., & Bromme, R. (2007). The CAEB: An instrument for measuring connotative aspects of epistemological beliefs. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 773-785.
Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. F. (2001). Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. Lawrence Erlbaun Associates.
Valanides, N., & Angeli, C. (2005). Effects of instruction on changes in epistemological beliefs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(3), 314-330.
Willcoxson, L., & Prosser, M. (1996). Kolb's learning style inventory: Review and future study of validity and reliability. Australia: University of Melbourne.

구매하기 (5,000)

장바구니

국문초록

영문초록

목차

키워드

참고문헌 (47건)