Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지

The Effect of Molecular Level Drawing-based Instruction

분자 수준에서의 그림 그리기를 활용한 수업 모형의 효과

  • Published : 2003.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study investigated the effects of 3-level systematic drawing upon students' achievement, conceptions, learning motivation, perceptions of involvement and attitudes toward science instruction. Two classes of 7th grade at a coed middle school were assigned to the control and the treatment groups. They were taught about change of states and motion of molecules for 8 class periods. Two-way ANCOVA results revealed that the scores of achievement test, a conceptions test, motivation and attitudes toward science instruction tests for the treatment group were significantly higher than those for the control group. But there was no difference in the scores of the perceptions of involvement test.

본 연구에서는 3단계의 체계적인 그림 그리기를 활용한 수업이 학업 성취도, 개념, 학습 동기, 수업 참여도에 대한 인식, 과학 수업에 대한 즐거움에 미치는 효과를 조사 하였다. 서울시 남녀 공학 중학교 1학년 두 학급을 통제 집단과 처치 집단으로 선정하고, '물질의 세 가지 상태'와 '분자의 운동' 단원에 대하여 총 8차시 동안 수업을 실시하였다. 이원 공변량 분석 결과, 처치 집단의 학업 성취도, 개념, 학습 동기, 과학 수업에 대한 즐거움 검사 점수가 통제 집단에 비하여 유의미하게 높았다. 수업 창여도에 대한 인식에서는 두 집단 간 차이가 없었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 교육부(1999). 중학교 교육 과정 해설(I) -수학. 과학. 기술 . 가정-, 서울: 대한 교과서 주식회사
  2. 노태희, 김창민(1999). 협동적인 컴퓨터 보조 수업이 중학생들의 과학 학습에 미치는 효과. 한국과화교육학회지, 19(2), 266-274
  3. 배태수(1990). 원자/분자에 판한 중등학교 학생과 과학 교사의 오인 분석. 한국교원대학교 대학원 석사학위논문
  4. Abraham, M. R., Williamson, V. M., & Westbrook, S. L.(1994). Across age study of the understanding of five chemistry concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 147-165 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310206
  5. Cole, P.(1992). Constructivism revisited: A research for common ground. Educational Technology, 32(2), 27-35
  6. Dove, J. E., Everett, L. A., & Preece, P. F. W.(1999). Exploring a hydrological concept through children's drawings. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 485-497 https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290534
  7. Edens, K. M. & Potter, E. F.(2001). Promoting conceptual understanding through pictorial representation. Studies in Art Education, 42(6), 214-233 https://doi.org/10.2307/1321038
  8. Fraser, B. J.(1981). Test of science-related attitudes: Handbook. Hawthorn: The Australian Council for Educational Research
  9. Gabel, D. L., Briner, D., & Haines, D.(1992). Modelling with magnets. The Science Teacher, 59(3), 58-63
  10. Glynn, S.(1997). Drawing mental models. Science Teacher, 64(1), 30-32
  11. Gobert, J. D. & Clement, J. J.(1999). Effects of student-generated diagrams versus student-generated summaries on conceptual understanding of causal and dynamic knowledge in plate tectonics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 39-53 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199901)36:1<39::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-I
  12. Haidar, A. H. & Abraham, M. R(1991). A comparison of applied and theoretical knowledge of concepts based on the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 919-938
  13. Keller, J. M. & Subhiyah, R(1993). Course interest survey. Florida State University
  14. Lin, H., Cheng, H., & Lawrenz, F.(2000). The assessment of students and teachers' understanding of gas laws. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(2), 235-238 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p235
  15. Meter, P. V.(2001). Drawing construction as a strategy for learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(1), 129-140 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.1.129
  16. Nakhleh, M. B.(1992). Why some students don't learn chemistry: Chemical misconceptions. Journal of Chemical Education, 69(3), 191-196 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed069p191
  17. Nelson, P. L., Martin, S. S., & Baldwin, V. G.(1998). Drawing skills and science concepts in young children: A study of relationships. Studies in Art Education, 39(3), 262-269 https://doi.org/10.2307/1320368
  18. Russell, J. W. & Kozma, R. B.(1997). Use of simultaneous-synchronized macroscopic, microscopic, and symbolic representations to enhance the teaching and learning of chemical concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 74(3), 330-334 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed074p330
  19. Sanger, M. J.(2000). Using particulate drawings to determine and improve students' conceptions of pure substances and mixtures. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(6), 762-766 https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p762
  20. Snowman, J. & Cunningham, D. J.(1975). A comparison of pictorial and written adiunct aids in learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 307-311 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076934
  21. Stein, M., McNair, S., & Butcher, J.(2001). Drawing on student understanding: Using illustrations to invoke deeper thinking about animals. Science and Children, 38(4), 18-22
  22. Trend, R, Everett, L., & Dove, J.(2000). Interpreting primary children's representations of mountains and mountainous landscapes and environments. Research in Science and Technological Education, 18(1), 85-112 https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140050031064
  23. Trickett, E. J. & Moos, R H.(1973). Social environment of junior high and high school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65(1), 93-102 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034823
  24. Walker, B. J. & Wilson, P. T.(1991). Using guided imagery to teach science concepts. Eric Document Reproduction Service Number ED 331022
  25. White, R & Gunstone, R(1992). Probing understanding. The Falmer Press
  26. Williamson, V. M. & Abraham, M. R(1995). The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(5), 521-534 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320508