Journal of Gifted/Talented Education (영재교육연구)

The Korean Society for the Gifted (한국영재학회)
권호 표지

Relationships of the Self-regulated Learning Strategies used in Both Science and English Classes and Motivation to Academic Performance by Science-gifted High School Students

과학영재고등학생의 과학과 영어과목에서의 학습전략 사용 및 동기의 차이와 학업수행과의 관계

  • 성현숙 (KAIST부설한국과학영재학교) ;
  • 김일 (부산광역시 영재교육진흥원) ;
  • 김영상 (경남대학교)
  • Published : 2009.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study investigated the relationships of the self-regulated learning strategies used in both science and English classes and motivation to academic performance of science-gifted high school students. Participants of this study were 144 freshmen of Korea Science Academy It was found out that the use of self-regulation learning strategies and motivation exerts differential influence on the academic performance of science-gifted students, depending on the subjects they study. Results showed that they used more vigorously in science class those self-regulated strategies which consist of cognition, metacognition, and resource management strategies than in English class. In addition, their motivation level in science class was significantly higher than that in English class. Self-regulated strategies did not explain any variance in physics GPA. Task value among the motivation variables accounted for 2 percent of variance in physics GPA. Metacognition and time and study environment variables explained 8 percent and 15 percent of variance in English GPA, respectively. Self-efficacy in motivation accounted for 30 percent of variance in English GPA, These results were discussed in the light of instruction for science-gifted high students.

본 연구는 과학영재 고등학생의 과학과 영어과목에서의 자기조절학습전략 사용 및 동기에서의 차이와 학업성취와의 관계를 알아보았다. 연구대상자는 과학영재 고등학교 1학년 144명이었다. 연구결과, 과학영재는 영어과목보다 과학과목에서 자기조절학습전략에 해당하는 인지전략, 초인지 전략, 자원관리전략을 적극적으로 사용하였고 동기 또한 유의미하게 높았다. 과학영재가 사용한 자기조절학습전략은 물리학점의 개인차를 전혀 설명해주지 못하였고 동기의 변인 중 과제가치만이 물리학점 분산의 2퍼센트를 설명해 주었다. 영어과목에서는 초인지 전략이 영어학점 분산의 8퍼센트를 설명해주고 자원관리전략 중 시간 및 공부환경조절이 15퍼센트를 설명해주는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고, 동기의 변인 중 자기효능감이 영어학점 분산의 30퍼센트를 설명해 주었다. 이러한 연구결과는 동질그룹인 과학영재가 교과목에 따라 어떠한 자기조절 학습전략과 동기를 사용하는 것이 중요한지를 시사해주고 있다. 이러한 결과를 토대로 효율적인 학업수행을 위해 어떠한 점이 교수학습과정에서 도모되어야 하는지 그 시사점이 논의되었다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김정권 (1999) 아동의 학습동기와 자아개념이 학업성적에 미치는 영향. 석사학위논문. 관동대학교
  2. 김지은 (2000). 자기조절학습전략 훈련이 아동의 학습동기 및 학업성취도에 미치는 효과. 석사학위 논문. 부산교육대학교
  3. 문병상 (2000). 영재와 평재간의 학업적 자기조절의 차이. 초등교육연구, 14(1). 181-197
  4. 박수경, 김광휘 (2005). 과학영재학생의 사고양식 유형과 학업성취 및 과학개념과의 관계 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 25(2), 307-320
  5. 성현숙, 곽미용, 이성실 (2006). Relationship of perceived parenting styles to academic performance and self-esteem of science-gifted high school students. 한국심리학학회지:학교, 3(2), 55-67
  6. 정충덕, 강경희 (2007). 과학영재의 과학에 대한 태도와 학습동기 및 학습전략과의 관계. 한국과학교육학회지, 27(9), 848-853
  7. 한기순 (2003) 제 11장 과학영재. 영재교육학원론 (pp.309-365). 서울: 교육과학사
  8. Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Boulder, CO: Westview Press
  9. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitivetheory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
  10. Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25, 729-735 https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.25.5.729
  11. Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum
  12. Cheng, P. (1993). Metacognition and giftedness: The state of the relationship. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 105-112 https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629303700302
  13. Chi, M., Glaser, R., & Farr, M.(Eds.) (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  14. Dover, A. C. (1983). Metacognition and problem solving in gifted children. Unpublished master's thesis in Educational Psychology, McGill University, Montreal
  15. Gallagher, J. J. (1997). Issues in the education of gifted students. N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis in Handbook of Gifted Education (2nd Ed), pp.10-23. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
  16. Gottfried, A. E. (1985). Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 631-645 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.77.6.631
  17. Hannafen, M.J., & Carey, J. O. (1981). Research in progress: Toward a procedure to identify the spontaneous memory strategies of children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, Philadelphia
  18. Kanevsky, L. (1990). Pursuing qualitative differences in the flexible use of a problem solving strategy by young children. Journal lor the Education of the Gifted, 13,115-140
  19. Kardash, C. M., & Amlund, J. T. (1991). Self-reported learning strategies and learning from expository text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 117-138 https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(91)90032-G
  20. MacKinnon, D. W. (1962). The nature and nurture of creative talent. American Psychologist, 17, 484-495 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046541
  21. McNabb, T. (1997). From potential to performance: Motivational issues for gifted students. N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis in Handbook of Gifted Education (2nd Ed), pp.408-415. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
  22. Nicholls, J. C. (1972). Creativity in the person who wi1l never produce anything original and useful: The concept of creativity as a normally distributed trait. American Psychologist, 27, 717-727 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0033180
  23. Pintrich, P. R. (1989). The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In C. Ames & M. Maehr(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Motivation enhancing environments (pp.117-160). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
  24. Pintrich, P. R., & Garcia, T. (1991). Student goal orientation and self-regulation in the college classroom. In M. Maehr & P.R. Pintrich(Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement: Goals and seκ regulatoη processes (pp.371-402). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press
  25. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A Manuallor the Use of the Motivated Strategies lor Learning Questionnaire(MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan
  26. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Prentice-Hall
  27. Renzulli, J. S. (2005). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for promoting creative productivity. In R. J. Stemberg & J. E. Davidson (2nd Ed.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 246-279). New York: Cambridge University Press
  28. Rimm, S. B. (1997). Underachievement syndrome: A national epidemic. N. Colangelo & G.A. Davis in Handbook of Gifted Education (2nd Ed), pp.416-434. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
  29. Roe, A. (1952). The making of a scientist. New York: Dodd, Mead
  30. Sansone, C., Wiebe, D., & Morgan, C. (1999). Self-regulating interest: The moderating role of hardiness and conscientiousness. Journal of Personality, 67, 701-733 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00070
  31. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_2
  32. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and peψrmance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  33. Shore, B. M., & Dover, A. C. (1987). Metacognition, intelligence and giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 31(1), 37-39 https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628703100108
  34. Stemberg, R. J. (1997). A Triarchic view of giftedness: Theory and practice. N.Colangelo & G.A. Davis in Handbook of Gifted Education (2nd Ed), 43-53. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon
  35. VanZile-Tamsen, C., & Livingston, J. A. (1999). The differential impact of motivation on the self-regulated strategy use of high- and low-achieving college students.Journal of College Student Development, 40, 54-60
  36. Warr, P., & Downing, J. (2000). Learning strategies, learning anxiety and knowledge acquisition. British Journal of Psychology, 91, 311-333 https://doi.org/10.1348/000712600161853
  37. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1986). The teaching of learning strategies. In M Wittrock(Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching(pp .315-327). New York Macmillan
  38. Wolters, C. A., & Rosenthal, H. (2000). The relation between students motivational beliefs and their use of motivational regulation strategies. lnternational Journal of Educational Research, 33, 801-820
  39. Xu, J., & Corno, L. (1998). Case studies of families doing third-grade homework. Teachers College Record, 100, 402-436
  40. Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329-339 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.329
  41. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51-59 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51
  42. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Perceptions of efficacy and strategy use in the self-regulation of learning. In D.H. Schunk & J.L. Meece(Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom(pp. 185-207)
  43. Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Journal, 29, 663-676 https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312029003663