Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

The Effects of Reciprocal Peer Questioning Strategy in Concept Learning on the Three States of Matter and Motion of Molecules

물질의 세 가지 상태 및 분자의 운동에 대한 개념 학습에서 상호동료 질문생성 전략의 효과

  • Published : 2007.08.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, the effects of reciprocal peer questioning (RPQ) strategy upon students' concept learning were investigated. Ninety-two seventh graders at a co-ed middle school were assigned to control, reciprocal peer tutoring (RPT), and RPQ groups. The students were taught about 'three states of matter' and 'motion of molecules' for 12 class hours. Regardless of students' prior science achievement level, the RPQ group showed the highest scores among the three groups in the test of conceptual understanding, and the RPT group performed better than the control group. For high-level students, the scores of the RPQ group were significantly higher than those of the other groups in the test of the concept application, and those of the RPT group were higher than those of the control group. For low-level students, the scores of the RPT and RPQ groups in the concept application test were significantly higher than those of the control group, while those of the RPT and RPQ groups were not significantly different. These results indicated that verbal interaction by reciprocal tutoring helped students to understand chemical concept learning, and that using self-generated questions was more effective. Therefore, RPQ strategy is suggested to become one of the useful instructional methods to facilitate verbal interaction and concept learning in middle school science instructions.

이 연구에서는 상호동료 질문생성 전략이 학생들의 개념 학습에 미치는 효과를 조사하였다. 남녀 공학 중학교 1학년 학생 92명을 통제 집단, 상호동료교수(RPT) 집단 및 상호동료 질문생성(RPT) 집단에 배치하고, '물질의 세 가지 상태'와 '분자의 운동' 단원을 대상으로 12차시 동안 수업을 실시하였다. 사전 과학 성취 수준에 관계없이 RPQ 집단의 개념 이해도 검사 점수가 세 집단 중에서 가장 높았고, RPT 집단은 통제 집단보다도 높았으며 이들 차이가 통계적으로 유의미하였다. 상위 학생들의 경우, RPQ 집단의 개념 응용력 점수는 다른 두 집단보다 유의미한 차이로 높았고, RPT 집단은 통제 집단보다 높았다. 하위 학생들의 경우에는 RPT 집단과 RPQ 집단의 개념 응용력 점수가 통제 집단보다 높았으나, RPT 집단과 RPQ 집단의 점수는 유의미한 차이가 없었다. 이러한 결과는 동료 간 교수 활동에 의한 상호작용이 학생들의 화학 개념 학습을 도와주며, 학생들이 직접 문제를 만드는 경우에 더욱 효과적임을 의미한다. 따라서 RPQ 전략을 중학교 과학 수업에서 학생들의 언어적 상호작용과 개념 학습을 촉진하기 위한 유용한 교수 방법의 하나로 제안한다.

Keywords

References

  1. 노태희, 김소연, 김경순 (2005). 중학교 과학 수업에서 학생들의 구조화된 상호작용을 유도하기 위한 상호 동료교수 전략의 효과. 한국과학교육학회지, 25(4), 465-471
  2. 이윤옥 (2001). 또래 튜터링 질문생성이 학습과 창의성에 미치는 효과. 교육심리연구, 15(4), 423-440
  3. 이윤옥 (2003). 인지양식별 또래 튜터링 질문수업이 학습에 미치는 효과, 초등교육연구, 16(1), 161-177
  4. 장언효, 이윤옥 (2000) 수업내용 질문 생성과 사전 지식 질문 생성이 정보 이해와 언어적 상호작용 수준에 미치는 효과, 교육심리연구. 14(1) 45-70
  5. Chin, C, Brown, D. E., & Bruce, B. C. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Jourral of Science Education, 24(5), 521-549 https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110095249
  6. Fantuzzo, J. W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on mathematics and school adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 331-339 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.331
  7. Fantuzzo, J. W., Dimeff, L. A, & Fox, S. L. (1989). Reciprocal peer tutoring: A multimodal assessment of effectiveness with college students. Teaching of Psychology, 16(3), 133-135 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top1603_8
  8. Ginsburg-Block, M, & Fantuzzo, J. (1997). Reciprocal peer tutoring: An analysis of 'teacher' and 'student' interactions as a function of training and experience. School Psychology Quarterly, 12(2), 134-149 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088955
  9. Griffin, B. W., & Griffin, M. M. (1997). The effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on graduate students' achievement, test anxiety, and academic self-efficacy. The Journal of Experimental Education, 65, 197-209 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1997.9943454
  10. Griffin, B. W., & Griffin, M. M. (1998). An investigation of the effects of peer tutoring on achievement, self-efficacy, and test anxiety. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 298-311 https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0971
  11. King, A. ( 1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effect of teaching children how the question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31 (2), 338-368 https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312031002338
  12. King, A. (2002). Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory Into Practice, 41 (1), 33-39 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4101_6
  13. King, A, & Rosenshine, B. (1993). Effects of guided cooperative questioning on children's knowledge construction. Journal of Experimental Education, 61(2), 127-148 https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1993.9943857
  14. King, A, Staffieri, A, & Adelgais, A. (1998). Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 134-152 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.134
  15. Klecker, B. M. (2003). Fonmtive classroom assessrrent using cooperative groups: Vygotsky and random assignment. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30(3), 216-219
  16. Noh, T., & Scharmann, L. C. (1997). Instructional influence of a molecular-level pictorial presentation of matter on students' conceptions and problem-solving ability. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(2), 199-217 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199702)34:2<199::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-O
  17. Pigott, H. E., Fantuzzo, J. W., & Oement, P. W. (1986). The effects of reciprocal peer tutoring and group contingencies on the academic performance of elementary school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19(1), 93-98 https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1986.19-93
  18. Puchner, L. D. (2003). Children teaching for learning: What happens when children teach others in the classroom? ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 478759
  19. Rittschof, K. A., & Griffin, B. W. (2001). Reciprocal peer tutoring: Re-examining the value of a cooperative learning. Educational Psychology, 21(3), 313-331 https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410123903
  20. Sanders, P. (2001). Peer tutoring: An effective instructional strategy. Parer presented at the Louisiana Educational Research Association, Annual Conference, Baton Rouge, Louisiana
  21. Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21 (1), 43-69 https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1996.0004
  22. Song, S. H. (1998). The effects of motivationally adaptive computer-assisted instruction developed through the ARCS model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Floride State University
  23. Webb, N. M, & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfree (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 841-873). New York: Macmillan