Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

The Comparisons of Perception for Operation Form among Science Academy, Science High School, and Ordinary High School : Focusing on Educational Experiences of Beneficiaries of Science-Gifted Education

과학영재학교, 과학고, 일반고의 운영 형태에 대한 인식 비교 - 과학영재교육 수혜자들의 교육 경험을 중심으로 -

  • 박경진 (KAIST 과학영재교육연구원) ;
  • 류춘렬 (KAIST 과학영재교육연구원)
  • Received : 2017.05.23
  • Accepted : 2017.07.03
  • Published : 2017.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare the differences in the operation form of science academy, science high school, and ordinary high school. We tried to find what kinds of variables differ in operation form based on the perception of the beneficiaries. For this purpose, 288 beneficiaries were surveyed. The groups were divided into three groups according to the high school they graduated from and then the differences among the groups were compared. The results are as follows. First, as a result of comparing the operation form according to high school using the most similar system design, it was confirmed that there are differences in curriculum and teacher variables. Second, as the result of analyzing the perception of curriculum and teacher professionalism based on the education experience of the beneficiary, the satisfaction for science academy was higher, but the satisfaction for science in ordinary high school was lower. Third, the key variables showing the differences in the operation forms between science academy and science high school were the learning contents, learning process and learning environment. The results of this study are expected to be used as basic data for future improvement of gifted education curriculum.

이 연구는 과학영재학교, 과학고, 일반고의 운영 형태 측면에서 어떤 차이가 있는지 비교하고, 이 중 고등학교 유형에 따라 차이가 큰 핵심 변인은 무엇인지 과학영재교육 수혜자의 인식을 토대로 알아보기 위한 것이다. 이를 위하여 수혜자 288명을 대상으로 고등학교 교육 경험에 대한 설문을 실시한 후 응답 결과를 졸업한 고등학교 유형에 따라 과학영재학교, 과학고, 일반고의 세 집단으로 구분하고 일원배치분산분석을 실시한 후 집단 간 차이를 비교하였다. 분석 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 최대유사체계 분석기법을 활용하여 고등학교 유형별 운영형태를 비교한 결과 교육과정 및 교원 운영 관련 변인에 차이가 있음을 확인하였다. 둘째, 수혜자들의 교육경험을 토대로 과학영재학교, 과학고, 일반고의 교육과정 운영 및 교사 전문성 측면에 대한 인식을 분석한 결과 모든 영역에 걸쳐 과학영재학교일수록 만족도가 높고 과학고, 일반고로 갈수록 만족도가 낮았다. 셋째, 고등학교 유형별 운영형태에 대한 수혜자들의 인식을 비교한 결과 과학영재학교와 과학고의 운영 형태에 차이를 보이는 핵심 변인은 교육과정 측면의 교육내용, 교수-학습과정 및 학습 환경으로 나타났다. 이 연구결과는 향후 영재 교육과정 개선을 위한 기초자료로 활용될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Cho, S., Yoon, J., Park, S., Kim, H., Kim, S., Jung, H., & Kim, T. (2004). Expansion and development of special high schools for the scientifically gifted. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
  2. Gallagher, J. & Gallagher, S. A. (1994). Teaching the gifted child. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  3. Han, K. & Yang, T. (2009). Analysis of the effectiveness of a university affiliated science-gifted educational program: The case of C gifted education center. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 29(2), 137-155.
  4. Jung, H. & Heo, N. (2015). Elements and changes of teacher expertise for the science gifted: Focused on mathematics and science teachers in science high schools. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 25(2), 183-194. https://doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2015.25.2.183
  5. Jung, H., Kim, H., Lee, Y., & Chae, Y. (2011). A study on the improvement of the gifted science high school. Daejeon: KAIST Global Institute For Talented Education.
  6. Jung, H., Seo, H., Choi, H. Son, J., & Yoo. H. (2006). A study on the reform of high school system for the gifted in science. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
  7. Kang, C. (2011). A comparative study on the health insurance system of Korea and Taiwan. Social Science Research Review, 27(1), 351-374.
  8. Kang, K. & Chung, C. (2012). The perception of scientifically gifted students of a university-affiliated gifted education center toward its educational programs. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(4), 751-759. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.4.751
  9. Kim, J. (2013). Applying the mixed cases design: A cross cases analysis of the parliamentary stability in Fiji, Vanuatu, and Samoa. Comparative Democratic Studies, 9(2), 109-128.
  10. Kim, K. & Sim, J. (2008). Scientifically gifted students' perception of the impact of R&E program based on KAIST freshman survey. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(4), 282-290.
  11. Kim, Y. & Kim, H. (2010). A study of recognition for the gifted science education programs of middle school students being educated at local centers for the gifted. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 30(2), 192-205.
  12. Koh, E. & Jeong, D. (2014). Study on korean teachers' perception in accordance with the trends of core competencies in science education worldwide. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(6), 535-547. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.6.0535
  13. Kwon, J. & Sim, J. (2010). A comparative study of science curriculum management between general high school, science high school and science academy. Biology Education, 38(1), 84-101. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2010.38.1.84
  14. Lee, J. & Kim, H. (2007). The comparison and reform of curriculum of the high school for the gifted. The Journal of the Korean Society for Gifted and Talented, 6(1), 5-22.
  15. Maker, C. J. & Nielson, A. B. (1996). Curriculum development and teaching strategies for gifted learners (2nd ed.). Texas: Austin.
  16. Min, C., Kim, W., Park, K., Um, M., Park, Y., & Woo. S. (2010). Research for amending the law and regulation of securing talented students. Seoul: Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science & Creativity.
  17. Park, K., Ryu, C., Choi, J., & Jung, H. (2016). An analysis on the science gifted education recipients' perception for education program using an importance-performance analysis. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 26(3), 427-447. https://doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2016.26.3.427
  18. Park, K. & Seo, H. (2005). Students' and teachers' perceptions to educational program of Korea Science Academy. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23(3), 159-185.
  19. Renzulli, J., Smith, L., White, A., Callahan, C., & Hartman, R. (1976). Scales for rating the behavioral characteristics of superior students. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Center.
  20. Seo, H. & Son, J. (2007). Teachers and students' perceptions to curriculum implementation in science high schools. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25(2), 197-219. https://doi.org/10.15708/kscs.25.2.200706.008
  21. Seo, H., Jung, H., Son, J., Choi, K., Ha, B., Park, J., & Seong, Y. (2006). Directions for establishment of a science academy in Gyeonggi-Do. Gyeonggi: Gyeonggi Research Institute.
  22. Stake, J. E. & Mares, K. R. (2005). Evaluating the impact of science-enrichment programs on adolescents' science motivation and confidence: The splashdown effect. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 359-375. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20052
  23. Tyler, R. (2007). School innovation in science: A model for supporting school and teacher development. Research in Science Education, 37, 189-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9022-9
  24. Yeum, S., Jang, K., Kim, S., Chung, B., & Park, J. (2008). Evaluating the impact of educational programs at science education center for the gifted by its graduates who are currently attending college. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(1), 100-110.
  25. Yuk, K. & Moon, J. (2004). A longitudinal study of the achievement and effects of the scientifically gifted students who have taken a ultra high speed accelerated education for the early entrance of KAIST. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 14(2), 1-18.

Cited by

  1. 수학·과학 성취도의 요인 분석으로 본 과학고등학교 학생들의 화학 교과에 대한 인식 연구 vol.64, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2020.64.2.119