The Journal of the Korea Contents Association (한국콘텐츠학회논문지)

The Korea Contents Association (한국콘텐츠학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effects of Digital Textbook's Interactivity on the Learning Attitude : With a focus on the Tablet PC-based Digital Textbooks of Social Studies and Science

디지털교과서의 상호작용성이 학습태도에 미치는 영향 : 태블릿PC 기반의 사회와 과학 디지털교과서를 중심으로

  • Received : 2013.12.18
  • Accepted : 2014.02.04
  • Published : 2014.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed the effects of interactivity on the learning attitude in the tablet PC-based digital textbook environment. Most of digital textbook studies focused on comparison of learning effect between digital textbook and paper textbook. This study, instead, focused on the interaction between students and digital textbook, and examined the hypothesis that, in the digital textbook-based learning environment, interactivity factors affect learning attitude. The results showed that active control, two-way communication, and synchronicity have significant effects on the learning attitude. Those findings indicate that it's necessary to effectively realize interactivity in the process of developing digital textbooks. Also, important implication is not the fixed interactivity but how students perceive the digital textbook and make use of it. Therefore, for the interactive digital textbook, perceived user control, two-way communication, and synchronicity should be realized properly.

본 논문은 디지털교과서의 전국적 시행을 앞두고 디지털교과서의 상호작용성이 학생의 학습태도에 미치는 영향을 분석하였다. 그동안 진행되어 온 디지털교과서 연구는 주로 디지털교과서 집단과 서책형 집단의 학습효과 비교가 주를 이루었다. 그러나 본 연구는 매체 풍요도로서의 상호작용성을 도입해 인지된 상호작용성의 관점에서 학습태도에 영향을 미치는 디지털교과서의 상호작용성 요인을 도출하여 연구모형을 설정하고, 사회와 과학 디지털교과서 시범학교의 초등학생을 대상으로 설문조사를 실시해 실증적 검증을 하였다. 연구 결과, 상호작용성 요인인 능동적 제어권, 쌍방향 커뮤니케이션, 동시성이 학습태도에 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다. 본 연구의 결과를 통해, 디지털교과서 개발 시 상호작용성을 효과적으로 구현하는 방향으로 가야 함을 확인하였다. 그러나 디지털교과서의 고정된 상호작용성이 중요한 것이 아니라 사용자인 학생이 이를 어떻게 느끼고 활용하는지가 중요하므로 본 연구에서 확인된 능동적 제어권, 쌍방향 커뮤니케이션, 동시성을 비롯해 디지털교과서에 적합한 상호작용성이 구현되어야 할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. 여운방, 서유경, 서정희, 신성균, 조정우, 채보영, 전자 교과서 설계지침 및 모형 개발 연구-국어, 사회, 수학, 과학 교과를 중심으로, 한국교과서연구재단, 연구보고, 2. 2000.
  2. J. E. Newhagen, J. W. Cordes, and M. R. Levy, "Nightly@nbc. com: Audience scope and the perception of interactivity in viewer mail on the Internet," Journal of communication, Vol.45, No.3, pp.164-175, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1995.tb00748.x
  3. 김회수, 임병노, 임정훈, 김세리, 박인우, 김희배, 박선아, 2011년 디지털교과서 효과성 측정 연구, 한국교육학술정보원, 연구보고 CR 2012-2, 2012.
  4. 류지헌, "태블릿 PC 기반의 디지털교과서 수업에 대한 교실생태학적 분석", 교육공학연구, 제24권, 제2호, pp.271-297, 2008.
  5. R. E. Clark, "The importance of treatment explication," Journal of Educational Computing Research, Vol.1, No.4, pp.389-394, 1985. https://doi.org/10.2190/7DG9-3RC3-1E48-MVCC
  6. R. E. Clark, "Media will never influence learning," ETR & D, Vol.42, No.2, pp.21-30, 1994.
  7. 김미혜, "디지털교과서 내용 구성에 관한 사용자 선호도 분석", 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 제9권, 제12호, pp.900-911, 2009. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.12.900
  8. 양현록, 강경규, 한광파, 김동호, "커팅 효과가 포함된 디지털 과학 교과서의 설계 및 구현", 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 제9권, 제1호, pp.465-474, 2009. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2009.9.1.465
  9. 이승훈, "게임기반 디지털 교과서 활용이 정신지체 학생의 기초연산 수행능력 및 과제집중에 미치는 효과", 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 제12권, 제8호, pp.484-495, 2012. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2012.12.08.484
  10. 곽병선, 강숙희, 김성은, 전자교과서 개발 방안 연구(1), 한국교과서연구소, 1997.
  11. 변호승, 최정임, 송재신, "전자교과서 프로토타입 개발 연구", 교육공학연구 제22권, 제4호, pp.217-240, 2006.
  12. 강숙희, "디지털교과서의 설계를 위한 교육공학적 접근: 유형과 기능을 중심으로", 교육공학연구, 제14권, 제1호, pp.1-22, 1998.
  13. 변호승, 유관희, 유재수, 2005년 전자교과서 개발 표준안 연구, 한국교육학술정보원, 연구보고 CR 2005-22, 2005.
  14. 강신천, "전자교과서 개발을 위한 체제적 접근 전략과 방향 탐구", 교육정보미디어연구, 제8권, 제2호, pp.5-27, 2002.
  15. M. S. Balaji and D. Chakrabarti, "Student interactions in online discussion forum: Empirical research from 'media richness theory'perspective," Journal of Interactive Online Learning, Vol.9, No.1, pp.1-2, 2010.
  16. S. Rafaeli and Y. Ariel, "Assessing interactivity in computer-mediated research," The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology, Oxford University Press, pp.71-88, 2007.
  17. R. L. Daft and R. H. Lengel, "Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design," Management science, Vol.32, No.5, pp.554-571, 1986. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
  18. R. L. Daft, R. H. Lengel, and L. K. Trevino, "Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems," MIS quarterly, Vol.11, No.3, pp.355-366, 1987. https://doi.org/10.2307/248682
  19. S. S. Kahai and R. B. Cooper, "Exploring the core concepts of media richness theory: The impact of cue multiplicity and feedback immediacy on decision quality," Journal of Management Information Systems, Vol.20, No.1, pp.263-300, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2003.11045754
  20. L. Zhu, I. Benbasat, and Z. Jiang, "Let's shop online together: an empirical investigation of collaborative online shopping support," Information Systems Research, Vol.21, No.4, pp.872-891, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1080.0218
  21. P. C. Sun and H. K. Cheng, "The design of instructional multimedia in e-Learning: A Media Richness Theory-based approach," Computers & Education, Vol.49, No.3, pp.662-676, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.016
  22. 서길수, "과업과 특성과 매체 경험이 인지된 매체 풍요도와 사회적 존재성에 미치는 영향", 경영정보학연구, 제8권, 제3호, pp.119-134, 1998.
  23. S. Kiousis, "Broadening the boundaries of interactivity: A concept explication," Annual Conference Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, August, New Orleans, LA, 1999.
  24. S. J. McMillan, "Advertising Age and Interactivity: Tracing Media Evolution through the Advertising Trade Press. In M. Roberts (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the American Academy of Advertising, University of Florida, pp.107-114, 1999.
  25. S. J. McMillan, "Interactivity is in the eye of the beholder: function, perception, involvement, and attitude toward the web site," Proceedings of the Conference-American Academy of Advertising, American Academy of Advertising, 1999, 2000.
  26. I. Miles, "When mediation is the message: how suppliers envisage new markets," Contexts of computer-mediated communication, pp.145-167, 1992.
  27. S. Rafaeli, "Interactivity: from new media to communication," Advancing communication science: merging mass and interpersonal process, Sage, pp.110-134, 1988.
  28. J. Steuer, "Defining virtual reality: dimensions determining telepresence," Journal of Communication, Vol.42, No.4, pp.73-93, 1992.
  29. M. Lombard and J. Snyder-Dutch, "Interactive advertising and presence: a framework," Journal of Interactive Advertising, Vol.1, No.2, pp.56-65, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2001.10722051
  30. J. V. Pavlik and E. E. Dennis, New media technology: Cultural and commercial perspective, Allyn and Bacon, 1998.
  31. T. P. Novak, D. L. Hoffman, and Y. F. Yung, "Measuring the customer experience in online environments: a structural modeling approach," Marketing Science, Vol.19, No.1, pp.22-42, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.19.1.22.15184
  32. M. L. Markus, "Toward a 'critical mass' theory of interactive media," Organization and communication technology, Sage, pp.194-218, 1990.
  33. J. Van Dijk, The network society: Social aspects of new media, L. Spoorenberg (Trans.), Sage, 1999.
  34. E. J. Downes and S. J. McMillan, "Defining interactivity: a qualitative identification of key dimensions," New Media and Society, Vol.2, No.2, pp.157-179, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614440022225751
  35. S. S. Sundar, S. Kalyanaraman, and J. Brown, "Explicating Web site interactivity-impression formation effects in political campaign sites," Communication Research, Vol.30, No.1, pp.30-59, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650202239025
  36. L. Ha and L. James, "Interactivity reexamined: a baseline analysis of early business web sites," Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, Vol.42, No.4, pp.457-474, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159809364462
  37. J. K. Burgoon, J. A. Bonito, B. Bengtsson, C. Cederberg, M. Lundeberg, and L. Allspach, "Interactivity in human-computer interaction: a study of credibility, understanding and influence," Computers in Human Behavior, Vol.16, No.6, pp.553-574, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00029-7
  38. G. Wu, The role of perceived interactivity in interactive ad processing, Unpublished dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 2000.
  39. E. P. Bucy and J. E. Newhagen, "The micro- and macrodrama of politics on television: Effects of media format on candidate evaluations," Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, Vol.43, No.2, pp.193-210, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159909364484
  40. S. Rafaeli, Interacting with media: Para-social interaction and real interaction, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, 1985.
  41. S. Rafaeli and F. Sudweeks, "Networked interactivity," Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol.2, No.4, 1997.
  42. R. T. Rust and S. Varki, "Rising from the ashes of advertising," Journal of Business Research, Vol.37, No.3, pp.173-181, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(96)00067-7
  43. S. S. Sundar, "Theorizing interactivity's effects," The Information Society, Vol.20, No.5, pp.385-389, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490508072
  44. T. Shaw, K. Arnason, and S. Belardo, "The effects of computer mediated interactivity on idea generation: an experimental investigation," Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, Vol.23, No.3, pp.737-745, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1109/21.256546
  45. J. S. Lee, "Interactivity: a new approach," Paper voorgesteld op 2000 Convention of the association for education in journalism and mass, 2000.
  46. G. Wu, "Perceived interactivity and attitude toward website," Proceedings of the conference-American Academy of Advertising, pp.254-262, 1999.
  47. J. E. Newhagen, "Interactivity, dynamic symbol processing and the emergence of content in human communication," Information Society, Vol.20, No.5, pp.395-400, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490508108
  48. 이재신, 인터넷과 상호작용성 그리고 사회연결망 서비스 I, 한국의 인터넷: 진화의 궤적, 커뮤니케이션북스, 2008.
  49. M. G. Moore, "Editorial: three types of interaction," The American Journal of Distance Education, Vol.3, No.2, pp.1-7, 1989.
  50. L. Schrum and Z. Berge, "Creating student interaction within the educational experience: a challenge for online educators," Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, Vol.26, No.3, pp.133-144, 1997.
  51. S. Schar and H. Krueger, "Using new learning technologies with multimedia," IEEE Multimedia, Vol.7, No.3, pp.40-51, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1109/93.879767
  52. L. Brady, The role of interactivity on the effectiveness of an educational science website for middle school students, Unpublished dissertation, Wichita State University, 2004.
  53. A. L. Veerman, and A. E. Veldhuis-Diermanse, "Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education," Proceedings European Perspectives on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning: Euro-CSCL.-Maastricht: Maastricht McLuhan Institute, pp.625-632, 2001.
  54. C. Evans and N. J. Gibbons, "The interactivity effect in multimedia learning," Computers & Education Vol.49, No.4, pp.1147-1160, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.008
  55. B. G. Lee, S. J. Kim, K. C. Park, S. J. Kim, and E. S. Jeong, "Empirical Analysis of Learning Effectiveness in u-Learning Environment with Digital Textbook," KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems (TIIS), Vol.6, No.3, pp.869-885, 2012.
  56. 김아영, 학업동기 : 이론, 연구와 적용, 학지사, 2010.
  57. G. W. Allport, "Attitude" A handbook of social psychology, Clark University Press, 1935.
  58. S. Bennett and L. Lockyer, "The impact of digital technologies on teaching and learning in K-12 education," Curriculum Corporation, 1999.
  59. 이재분, 현주, 김미숙, 류덕엽, 초.중학생의 지적.정의적 발달수준 분석 연구(II) : 초등학생 대상, 한국교육개발원, 2001.
  60. 변호승, 서정희, 류지헌, 최선영, 정문성, 방정숙, 디지털교과서 효과성 측정 연구, 한국교육학술정보원, 연구보고 CR 2008-13, 2008.
  61. 박경숙, 이혜선, 학업에 대한 자아개념.태도.학습습관 검사 개발에 관한 연구, 한국교육개발원, 1976.
  62. 손병길, 서유경, 김혜숙, 김해영, 2004년 전자교과서 학교 시범적용 결과분석 연구, 한국교육학술정보원, 연구보고 RR 2004-4, 2004.
  63. 이재신, 김봉수, "인지된 상호작용성의 선행요인: 영상전화를 중심으로", 한국방송학보, 제23권, 제5호, pp.258-295, 2009.
  64. Y. Liu and L. J. Shrum, "What Is Interactivity and Is It Always Such a Good Thing? Implications of Definition, Person, and Situation for the Influence of Interactivity on Advertising Effectiveness," Journal of Advertising, Vol.31, No.4, pp.53-64, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2002.10673685
  65. 류지헌, 변호승, 서정희 "성별에 따라서 사전지식과 ICT활용능력이 디지털교과서의 학업성취에 미치는 영향", 교육과학연구, 제40집, 제2호, pp.51-75, 2009.
  66. J. F. Jensen, "Interactivity: tracing a new concept in media and communication studies," Nordicom Review, Vol.19, No.1, pp.185-204, 1998.
  67. E. M. Rogers, Diffusion of innovations, 4th ed, Free Press, 1995.
  68. M. Z. Hackman and K. B. Walker, "Instructional communication in the televised classroom: the effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction," Communication Education, Vol.39, No.3, pp.196-206, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1080/03634529009378802
  69. 이학식, 임지훈, 구조방정식 모형분석과 AMOS 16.0, 법문사, 2011.
  70. Y. Liu, "Developing a scale to measure the interactivity of website," Journal of Advertising Research, pp.207-216, June, 2003.
  71. D. Gefen, D. W. Straub, and M. C. Boudreau, "Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice," Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol.4, No.1, 2000.
  72. D. Barclay, C. Higgins, and R. Thompson, "The partial least squares (PLS) approach to causal modeling: personal computer adoption and use as an illustration," Technology studies, Vol.2, No.2, pp.285-309, 1995.
  73. H. H. Teo, K. K. Wei, and I. Benbasat, "Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: an institutional perspective," Mis Quarterly, Vol.27, No.1, pp.19-49, 2003. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036518
  74. J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
  75. B. Wilson and J. Henseler, "Modeling reflective higher-order constructs using three approaches with PLS path modeling: a Monte Carlo comparison," Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy Conference, pp.791-800, 2007.
  76. A. Diamantopoulos and H. M. Winklhofer, "Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development," Journal of Marketing research, Vol.38, No.2, pp.269-277, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.269.18845
  77. D. Gefen and D. Straub, "A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-Graph: Tutorial and annotated example," Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol.16, No.1, pp.91-109, 2005.
  78. C. Fornell and D. F. Larcker, "Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error," Journal of marketing research, Vol.18, No.1, pp.39-50, 1981. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  79. W. W. Chin, "Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling," MIS Quarterly, Vol.22, No.1, pp.7-16, 1998.
  80. K. A. Bollen, "Multiple indicators: internal consistency or no necessary relationship?," Quality and Quantity, Vol.18, No.4, pp.377-385, 1984.
  81. W. W. Chin, "How to write up and report PLS analyses," Handbook of partial least square, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp.655-690, 2010.
  82. M. Tenenhaus, V. E. Vinzi, Y. M. Chatelin, and C. Lauro, "PLS path modeling," Computational statistics & data analysis, Vol.48, No.1, pp.159-205, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2004.03.005
  83. A. Bandura, Self-efficacy: The exercise of control, Freeman, 1997.
  84. D. H. Schunk, Self-regulation through goal setting, ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Student Service, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 2001.