Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Analysis of the Verbal Interaction Patterns of Science-Gifted Students in Science Inquiry Activity

과학 탐구 활동에서 나타나는 과학영재들의 언어적 상호작용 유형 분석

  • Received : 2015.03.20
  • Accepted : 2015.04.27
  • Published : 2015.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzes the verbal interaction patterns used in a social network activity analysis that appeared in a science inquiry activity of 31 small groups of science-gifted students consisting of 5 members each. The results of this study are as follows: The interaction patterns showed eight types. The most prevalent interaction pattern, type 1, is triangle-shaped, interacting with 3 members out of 5 without a central member. Type 2 is wye form, interacting with 4 members and with one alienated member. Type 3 is diamond-shaped, interacting with 4 members. Type 4 is ray form, interacting with 5 around a central member. Type 5 has an alienated member and interacts with 4 members around the central member. Type 6 is triangle-branched, 4 members linked to the central member. Type 7 is wye form linked all around the central member. Type 8 is wye form with a more complex link than type 7. These can be classified in two. One is the participation-type where the rest of the 4 members are linked to the central member. The other is the alienation-type where a member/members is/are alienated without a central member. The participation-type appeared in 9 groups (29%), type 4, type 6, type 7, and type 8. The alienation-type showed in 22 groups (71%), type 1, type 2, type 3, and type 5. On the basis of this study, we propose that the best number of members in a group is three. It helps prevent a free-riding effect or isolation of members. Also, we deem it more fruitful if there is a member playing a central role in a group.

과학 탐구 활동은 학습자들 간의 협동학습을 통해 문제를 해결하는 학습 방법이다. 학습자 중심의 상호작용을 전제로 한 과학 탐구 활동을 구조적 차원에서 분석하는 것이 필요하다. 사회네트워크 분석법은 구성원들의 상호작용을 분석하는데 주로 사용되는 방법이다. 본 연구는 5인 1조 31개 조로 구성된 과학영재들을 대상으로 소집단 과학 탐구실험 활동에서 나타난 구성원 간의 상호작용의 양상을 수치적 특성을 바탕으로 유형화하였다. 이 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 과학영재들의 상호작용 유형은 모두 여덟 가지로 나타났다. 이 중 가장 많은 상호작용 유형은 전체 31개 조 중 모두 9개 조에서 나타나 29%를 차지한 유형 1로 세 명의 구성원이 상호작용 하는 경우였다. 이들 유형은 다시 한 구성원을 중심으로 나머지 구성원들이 모두 연결 관계를 형성하는 참여형과 중심적 역할을 하는 구성원이 없이 소외된 구성원이 존재하는 소외형으로 구분할 수 있다. 참여형은 유형 4, 유형 6, 유형 7, 유형 8로 모두 9개(29%) 조에서, 소외형은 유형 1, 유형 2, 유형 3, 유형 5로 모두 22개(71%) 조에서 나타났다. 즉, 한 구성원을 중심으로 모든 구성원이 상호작용에 참여하는 형태보다는 중심적 역할을 하는 인물 없이 일부 소외된 구성원이 존재하는 가운데 나머지 구성원들이 상호작용하는 유형이 대부분을 차지하였다. 이 연구를 바탕으로 과학 탐구활동에 적절한 집단의 크기는 무임승차효과나 소외된 학생이 없을 것으로 생각되는 3명이 가장 효과적이라고 할 수 있다. 또한 중심 구성원의 유무에 따라서는 있는 경우가 더 효과적일 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Bae, J., & Ok, S. (2009). The effects of elementary science lessons emphasizing social interactions on the metacognition, learning motive and academic achievement. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 28(4), 519-527.
  2. Chang, H. (1997). Social network analysis: Historical development, principles and method. Language information, 1, 62-106.
  3. Choi, M., & Jhun, Y. (2010). Discourse analysis for deriving characteristics of science-gifted elementary students in inquiry activities. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 20(1), 369-388.
  4. Chung, D., & Yoo, D. (2013). A communication structure of science gifted students based on the social network analysis. Journal of Korean Earth Science Society. 34(1), 81-92. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2013.34.1.81
  5. Emirbayer, M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 281-317. https://doi.org/10.1086/231209
  6. Fox, R. (1995). Teaching through discussion. In C. Desforges (Ed.), An introduction to teaching: Psychological Perspectives(pp. 132-149). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
  7. Han, K., Park, H., & Ryu, J. (2011). A case study on the learning characteristics of science-gifted students in jeonnam province -focused on verbal and nonverbal interactions in small group-. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 30(1), 51-60.
  8. Hogan, K. (1999). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), 379-432. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1704_2
  9. Hwang, H., & Kang, J. (2004). The effects of scaffolding instruction by zone of proximal development on motivated learning strategies and academic achievement. 'The Journal of the Korean Society for Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education, 16(1), 35-49.
  10. Jhun, Y., & Hwang, H. (2010). Analysis on student-to-student verbal interaction during small group open inquiry activities. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 21(2), 227-246.
  11. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral interaction in cooperative learning groups: Speaking, listening, and the nature of statements made by high-medium, and low-achieving students. Journal of Psychology, 119(2), 303-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1985.9915450
  12. Kang, E., Kim, C., Choe, S., Yoo, J., Park, H., Lee, S., & Kim, H. (2012). Small group interaction and norms in the process of constructing a model for blood flow in the heart. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(2), 372-397. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.2.372
  13. Kang, S., Kim, C., & Noh, T. (2000). Analysis of verbal interaction in small group discussion. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 20(3), 353-363.
  14. Kim, H., & Choi, B. (2009). Development of the instructional model emphasizing discussion and the characteristics of verbal interactions during its implementation in a science high school. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 29(4), 359-372.
  15. Kim, H., Lee, E., & Kang, S. (2006). Analysis of approachs to learning based on student-student verbal interactions according to the type of inquiry experiments using everyday materials. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 26(1), 16-24.
  16. Kim, J., Seong, S., Park, J., & Choi, B. (2002). The effects of scientific inquiry experiments emphasizing social interaction. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 22(4), 757-767.
  17. Kim, J., Shin, A., Park, K., & Choi, B. (2001). The effects of science inquiry experiments emphasizing social interactions and the analysis of social interactions by cognitive level of the students. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 45(5), 470-480.
  18. Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: The importance of Philos. in organizations. In N. Nohrea & R. G. Eccles (eda.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form and action (pp. 2160239). Massachusetts: Havard Business School Press.
  19. Lee, H., Chang, S., Seong, S., Lee, S., Kang, S., & Choi, B. (2002). Analysis of student-student interaction in interactive science inquiry experiment. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 22(3), 660-670.
  20. Lee, S., Kim, C., Chor, S., Yoo, J., Park, H., Kang, E., & Kim, H. (2012). Exploring the patterns of group model development about blood flow in the heart and reasoning process by small group interaction. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(5), 805-822. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.5.805
  21. Ministry of Education and Science Technology (2010). The future of the republic of Korea through creative human resources, advanced science and technology. Activity report in 2011.
  22. Ministry of Education and Science Technology (2011). Science curriculum. Seoul: MEST.
  23. O'Donnel, A. M., & King, A. (1999). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  24. Park, J. & Kim, H. (2012). Theoretical considerations on analytical framework design for the interactions between participants in group argumentation on socio-scientific issues. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(4), 604-624. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.4.604
  25. Park, J., Nam, J., & Yoo, H. (2000). The effects of a teaching strategy based on the interactive formative assessment in middle school science class. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 20(3), 468-478.
  26. Russell, D. (1993). Vygotsky, Dewey, and Externalism: Beyond the student/discourse dichotomy. Journal of advanced Composition, 13(1), 173-197.
  27. Savery, R. E., & Duffy, T. M. (2001). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-38.
  28. Seong, S. (2005). Change and characteristics of verbal interaction in science inquiry experiments emphasizing social interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Korea National University of Education.
  29. Seong, S., & Choi, B. (2007). Change and characteristics of interactions in a heterogeneous group in scientific inquiry experiments. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 27(9), 870-880.
  30. Settlage, J., & Southerland, S. A. (2007). Teaching science to every child: Using culture as a starting point. New York: Routledge.
  31. Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative Learning: Theory, research, and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  32. Sohn, D. (2010). Social network analysis. Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
  33. Storberg-Waller, J., & Gubbins, C. (2007). Social networks as a conceptual and empirical tool to understand and "Do" HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9(3), 291-311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422306304071
  34. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  35. Yang, I., Jeong, J., Kim, Y., Kim, M., & Cho, H. (2006). Analyses of the aims of laboratory activity, interaction, and inquiry process within laboratory instruction in secondary school science. The Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 27(5), 509-520.
  36. Yoo, M. (2012). A case study on the science-gifted students' verbal interaction in small group inquiry activity according to grouping method considering MBTI personality type. Journal of Science Education for the Gifted, 4(1), 43-64.
  37. You, J., & Noh, T. (2012). An analysis of verbal interaction among science-gifted students in inquiry learning based on analogical experimental design strategy emphasizing understanding and checking stages. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 32(4), 671-685. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.4.671

Cited by

  1. 중등 과학교육에서 소집단을 활용한 교수학습 연구 분석 및 '소집단 연구' 방법론 고찰 vol.45, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2017.45.3.437
  2. Verbal Interaction Types in Science Inquiry Activities by Group Size vol.15, pp.7, 2015, https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/106164
  3. 지구과학 영재들의 소집단 활동에서 의사소통 구조와 집단 내 지위에 따른 언어적 상호 작용의 차이 vol.41, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5467/jkess.2020.41.3.307
  4. 초등학생 소집단 활동에서 성별 구성에 따른 언어적 상호작용 유형과 안정성 분석 vol.39, pp.3, 2015, https://doi.org/10.15267/keses.2020.39.3.323
  5. 중학생의 과학 탐구 활동에서 역할 부여가 언어적 상호작용의 유형 변화와 양상에 미치는 영향 vol.44, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2020.44.2.167
  6. A Case Study of Children’s Interaction Types and Learning Motivation in Small Group Project-Based Learning Activities in a Mathematics Classroom vol.17, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11415