Journal of the Korean earth science society (한국지구과학회지)

The Korean Earth Science Society (한국지구과학회)
권호 표지

Development of Programs to Enhance the Scientific Creativity - Based on Theory and Examples -

과학 창의성 계발을 위한 프로그램 개발 - 이론과 예시를 중심으로 -

  • Han, Ki-Soon (Department of Education, University of Incheon) ;
  • Kim, Byung-No (Department of Earth Science, Seoul National University) ;
  • Choe, Seung-Urn (Department of Earth Science, Seoul National University) ;
  • Jung, Hyun-Chul (Department of Earth Science, Seoul National University)
  • 한기순 (인천대학교 교육학과) ;
  • 김병노 (서울대학교 지구과학교육과) ;
  • 최승언 (서울대학교 지구과학교육과) ;
  • 정현철 (서울대학교 지구과학교육과)
  • Published : 2002.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study we have developed programs to enhance the scientific creativity by reviewing literature on the creativity and analyzing the theoretical models related to gifted education. The scientific creativity is regarded as the process of problem solving and problem finding, in particular, solving and finding the ill-defined but significant problems. In general, the important components of the scientific creativity are considered as the scientific knowledge, process skill, divergent/critical thinking, ill-defined problem, and problem finding. The program developed for the purpose of the study is composed of three stages based on Renzulli's model : general exploratory activities, group training activities and individual and small group investigations of real problems. The developed program in this study consists of 4 themes, 15 school hours in the earth science area. The process and products of the program development as well as the background of the present research are described and discussed in detail.

본 연구에서는 문헌을 통해 과학 창의성의 구성요소를 밝히고 창의성 계발 교육에 중요성을 두고 있는 영재 교육과정을 분석하여 과학 창의성 계발을 위한 프로그램을 개발하였다. 문헌연구를 통하여 본 연구에서는 과학 창의성을 특수한 문제(특히 잘 정의되지 않은 문제) 해결의 과정 또는 새로운 문제의 발견으로 보았다. 과학 창의성이 발현되는 중요 요소로서 과학지식, 과정지식, 확산적/비판적 사고, 문제의 종류, 문제의 발견력을 제시하였다. 과학 창의성 계발을 위해 3단계의 구분된 교수-학습 모형을 제시하였다. 1단계는 주제의 도입단계, 2단계는 소규모 과정 훈련단계 그리고 3단계는 실제문제를 해결하는 독립연구단계로 구성된다. 본 연구에서 개발된 프로그램은 지구과학영역에서 4개 주제 15차시 분량이다. 본 연구의 프로그램 개발과정과 산출물뿐만 아니라 프로그램의 특징, 운영 시 문제점들이 논의되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 교육부, 1997, 과학과 교육과정. 교육부, 102 p
  2. 김병노, 2002, 과학영재를 위한 프로그램 개발. 서울대학교 석사학위 논문, 120 p
  3. 김주훈. 이은미. 최고운. 송상헌. 1996, 과학영재판별도구 개발연구 I. 한국교육개발원, 서울, 170 p
  4. 성진숙, 2001, 과학에서의 창의적 문제해결력에 영향을 미치는 제 변수 분석: 확산적 사고, 과학지식, 내. 외적 동기, 성격특성, 및 가정환경. 이화여자대학교 박사학위논문, 204 p
  5. 조연순, 2001, 창의성 계발을 위한 교수. 학습 및 평가 방법. 창의성 계발을 위한 교육전략연구세미나, 한국교육개발윈, 서울, 47-69
  6. 최경희, 1996, STS 교육의 이해와 적용, 교학사, 서울, 265 p
  7. 최경희. 조연순. 조덕주, 1998, 창의적 문제 해결력 신장을 위한 중학교 파학 교육과정 연구-현행 교육과정과 수업 현장 분석을 중심으로-. 한국과학교육학회지, 18(2), 149-160
  8. Adams, C.M. and Callahan, C.M., 1995, The reliability and validity of a performance task for evaluating science process skills. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39(1), 14-20 https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629503900103
  9. Amabile, T.M., 1983, The social psychology of creativity. Springer-Verlag, NY, 345 p
  10. Amabile, T.M., 1996, Creativity in Context. Westview Press Inc, Colorado, 345 p
  11. Hunt, E., 1994, Problem Solving. In Stemberg, R.J., (ed), Thinking and problem solving, Academic Press, SD, 572 p
  12. Barron, F. and Harrington, D.M., 1981, Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual review of psychology, 32, 439-476 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.002255
  13. Barsalou, L.W., 1982, Context independent and context dependent information on concepts. Memory and Cognition, 10, 82-93 https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197629
  14. Barsalou, L.W., 1983, Ad hoc categories. Memory and Cognition, 11, 211-227 https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196968
  15. Davis, G.M. and Rimm, S.B., 1998, Education of the Gifted and Talented. Allyn and Bacon, MA, 491 p
  16. Dunbar, K., 1999, Science. In Runco, M.A. and Pritzker, S.R., (ed) Encyclopedia of creativity, Academic Press, CA, 2, 525-531
  17. Fowler, M., 1990, The Diet Cola Test. Science Scope, 13(4), 32-34
  18. Gallagher, S.A., 2001, Adapting Problem-Based Leaming for Gifted Student. In Kames, F.A. and Bean, S.M., (ed) Methods and Materials for Teaching the Gifted, Prufrock Press Inc., TX, 369-398
  19. Getzels, J.W. and Csilkszenmihalyi, M., 1968, The value orientation of art students as determinants of artistic specialization and creative performance. Studies in Art Education, 10, 5-16 https://doi.org/10.2307/1319665
  20. Greeno, J.G., 1978, Natures of problem solving abilities. In Estes, W.K., (ed), Handbook of learning and cognitive processes, Vol. 5: Human information processing, Erlbaum, NJ, 239-269
  21. Guilford, J.R, 1950, Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444-454 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0063487
  22. Guilford, J.P., 1967, The nature of Human Intelligence. McGraw-Hill, NY, 300 p
  23. Houtz, J.C., 1994, Creative Problem Solving in the Classroom: Contributions of Four Psychological Approaches.In Ronco, M.A., (ed) Problem Finding, Problem solving, and Creativity, Ablex Publishing Corporation, NJ, 153-174
  24. Hoover, S.M. and Feldhusen, J.F., 1994, Scientifoc Problem solving and problem Snding: A theoretical model, In Ronco, M.A., (ed) Problem finding, Problem solving and creativity, Ablex Publishing Corporation, NJ, 201-219
  25. Hunt, E., 1994, Problem solving, In Stemberg, R.J. (ed) Thinking and Problem solving. Academic Press Ltd., London, 135-150
  26. Hunt, Isaksen, S.G. and Treffinger, D.J., 1985, Creative problem solving: The basic course. Buffalo, NY, 230 p
  27. Kasperson, C.J., 1978, Psychology of the scientist: XXX-VII. Scientific creativity: A relationship with infoimation channels. Psychological Reports, 42, 691-694 https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1978.42.3.691
  28. Larkin, J.H., McDermott, J., Simon, D.R, and Simon, H.A., 1980, Models of competence in solving physics problems. Cognitive Science, 4, 317-345 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(80)80008-5
  29. Lubart, T.I., 1994, Creativity. In Stemberg, R.J., (ed), Thinking and Problem Solving, Academic Press, CA, 290-333
  30. MacKinnon, D.W., 1962, The nature and nurture of creative talent. American Psychologist, 17, 484-495 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046541
  31. Mayer, R.E., 1999, Problem Solving. In Runco, M.A. and Pritzker, S.R. (ed) Encyclopedia of creativity, Academic Press, CA, 2, 295-300
  32. Mumford, M.D., Mobley, M.I., Uhlman, C.E., Reiter-Pal-mon, R., and Doares, L.M., 1991, Process analytic models of creative capadties. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 91-122 https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419109534380
  33. Newell A., Shaw, J., and Simon, H., 1962, The processes of creadve thinking. In Gmber, H., Terrell, G., and Wertheimer, M., (ed), Contemporary Approaches to Creative Thinking, Atherton, NY, 63-119.
  34. Pames, S. and Brunnelle, 1967, The literature on creativity, Part I. Journal of Creative Behavior, 1, 52-109 https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2162-6057.1967.tb00010.x
  35. Renzulli, J.S., and Reis, S.M., 1997, The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A How To Guide for Educational Excellence. Creative Learning Press, Inc., CT, 411 p
  36. Renzulli, J.S., 2001, Enriching Curriculum for all students. SkyLight Training and Publishing Inc., IL, 195 p
  37. Scott, T.E., 1999, Knowledge. In Runco, M.A. and Piitzker, S.R., (ed) Encyclopedia of creativity, Academic Press, CA,2, 119-129
  38. Stemberg, R.J., 1988, A three-facet model of creativity. In Stemberg, RJ., (ed), The nature of creativity: Contemporary psychological perspectives, Cambridge University Press, MA, 125-147
  39. Stemberg, R.J. and Lubart, T.I., 1993, Creative giftedness a multi-variate investment approach. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37(1), 7-15 https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629303700102
  40. Trefz, R., 1996, Maximizing your classroom time for authentic science: Differentiating science curriculum for the gifted. ED 400 188, Paper presented at the Global Summit on Science and Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA
  41. Weisberg, R.W., 1999, Creadvity and Knowledge : A Challenge to Theoiies. In Stemberg, R.J., (ed), Handbook of creativity, Cambridge University Press, MA, 226-250