영재교육연구 (Journal of Gifted/Talented Education)

한국영재학회 (The Korean Society for the Gifted)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

일반교사들의 영재교육에 대한 인식변화와 전문성 신장

Professional Development and Perceptual Changes in Gifted Education by Regular Classroom Teachers

  • 투고 : 2014.09.18
  • 심사 : 2014.10.23
  • 발행 : 2014.10.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 일반교사들을 대상으로 영재와 영재교육 관련 이론 강좌와 참관 및 실습 과정의 사전/ 중간/ 사후기록지를 작성하게 하여 영재의 특성, 교수학습, 그리고 영재교사에 대한 인식 변화를 알아보고, 각 과정의 효과성을 알아보았다. 사전 또는 중간기록지에서는 영재학생의 지적 특성은 상위사고력과 창의성을, 정의적 특성으로는 높은 동기나 흥미, 과제집착력 등 주로 기존 문헌이나 교재에 나타난 특성을 많이 언급하였지만, 사후기록지에서는 표현력 부족, 경쟁심, 좌절 등과 같이 실제 관찰했던 특성에 대한 언급이 증가한 것을 볼 수 있었다. 또한 교수학습에서도 사후기록지에 영재들에게 적절한 차별화된 교수학습의 필요성을 인식하고 다양한 교수학습에 대해 강조하는 것을 볼 수 있었으며, 영재교사에 대한 인식도 모든 요소가 사전기록에서보다는 사후기록에서 증가한 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 교사들의 직접 경험을 통하여 이론 강좌와 참관 및 실습의 효과성을 알아본 결과 교사가 될 때 전혀 듣지 못했던 내용으로 한 분야에 전문성을 기르게 되었으며, 이론 강좌와 참관 및 실습 과정이 각각 효과적이었고, 결국 두 과정은 상호보완적으로 그 역할을 하였음을 알 수 있었다. 영재선발에서 교사추천이 강화된 시점에서 본 연구는 일반교사들을 대상으로 영재와 영재교육 전문성 교육을 통한 인식변화를 알아봄으로써 교육현장에 시사점을 알 수 있었다.

The purpose of this study is to examine the change in the beliefs of regular classroom teachers after participating in a gifted education lectures and practicum as well as the effectiveness of the lectures and practicum. Each teacher was asked to complete a pre-/ a mid-/ and post-journal, detailing their expected characteristics and then describing what occurred and how their initial expectations were altered. The teachers mentioned high thinking skills, creativity, fast problem solving skills, and a lack of communication skills as intellectual characteristics of gifted students and high motivation and task commitment as social characteristics. They mentioned the characteristics in textbooks on pre- and mid-journals, but presented their observations in post-journals such as lack of communication skills, competitive spirit, and frustrations. The study found that teachers broadened their view of giftedness, recognized the need to adapt instructions for gifted students, realized the necessity of knowing the students to differentiate instruction patterns, and emphasized teaching-learning strategies for the gifted. These results contribute to the promise of having regular classroom teachers engage in a field experience with gifted students to supplement discussions about gifted education lectures.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 이미순, 조석희, 이현주 (2006). 소외 영재 교사의 영재 및 영재교육에 대한 지각분석. 한국교육, 33(4), 97-120.
  2. Bain, S. K., Bliss, S. L., Choate, S. M., & Sager-Brown, K. (2007). Serving children who are gifted: Perceptions of undergraduates planning to become teachers. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30, 450-478. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2007-506
  3. Bangel, N., Enersen, D. J., Capobianco, B., & Moon, S. M. (2006). Professional development of preservice teachers: Teaching in the Super Saturday Profram. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29, 339-361. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320602900305
  4. Begin, J., & Gagne, F. (1994). Predictors of a general attitude toward gifted education. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 17, 161-179. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329401700206
  5. Chamberlin, S. A. (2002). Analysis of interest during and after model-eliciting activities: A comparison of gifted and general population students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64, 2379.
  6. Chamberlin, S. A., & Moore, A. (2006). Cognizance of gifted education among elementary education professors in MCREL member states. Roeper Review, 29, 49-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190609554384
  7. Chamberlin, M. T., & Chamberlin, S. A. (2010). Enhancing preservice teacher development: Field experiences with gifted students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 33(3), 381-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235321003300305
  8. Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & Gross, M. U. M. (Eds.). (2004). A nation deceived: How schools hold back America's brightest students (Vol.2). Iowa City: The University of Iowa, The Connie Belin & Jacqueline N. Blank International Center for Gifted Education and Talented Development.
  9. Copenhaver, R. W., & McIntyre, D. J. (1992). Teachers' perceptions of gifted students. Roeper Review, 14, 151-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199209553411
  10. Deizman, C. M., & Watters, J. (2001). The collaboration of mathematically gifted students on challenging tasks. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 7-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320102500102
  11. Deizman, C. M., & Watters, J. (2005). Catering for mathematically gifted elementary students: Learning from challenging tasks. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 25, 7-31.
  12. Feldhusen, J. F. (1991). Saturday and summer programs. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 197-208). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  13. Feldhusen, J. F. (1997). Educating teachers for work with talented youth. In N. Colangelo & G. A. Davis (eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 547-555). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  14. Feldhusen, J. F., & Huffman, J. (1988). Teachers of the gifted: Preparation and supervision. Gifted Education International, 5, 84-89. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142948800500206
  15. Feldhusen, J. F., & Ruckman, D. R. (1988). A guide to the development of Saturday programs for gifted and talented youth. Gifted Child Today, 11(5), 56-61.
  16. Gallagher, J. J. (2000). Unthinkable thoughts: Education of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 44, 5-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620004400102
  17. Hanninen, G. E. (1988). A study of teacher training in gifted education. Roeper Review, 10, 139-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198809553109
  18. Hansen, J. B., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Comparison of trained and untrained teachers of gifted students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 38, 115-121. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629403800304
  19. Howell, H., & Bressler, J. (1988). Research on teaching styles of teachers of the gifted. Roeper Review, 10, 144-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198809553110
  20. Joffe, W. S. (2001). Investigating the acquisition of pedagogical knowledge: Interviews with a beginning teacher of the gifted. Roeper Review, 23, 219-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190109554108
  21. McCoach, D. B., & Siegle, D. (2007). What predicts teachers' attitudes toward the gifted? Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 246-255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207302719
  22. National Association for Gifted Children(NAGC). (2005). What is gifted? Retrieved from http://www.nagc.org/index.aspx?id=574&an
  23. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  24. Sriraman, B. (2003). Mathematical giftedness, problem solvng, and the ability to formulate generalization: The problem-solving experiences of four gifted students. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 151-165. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2003-425
  25. Tomlinson, C. A., Tomchin, E. M., & Callahan, C. M. (1994). Preservice teachers' perceptions of and responses to the differential needs of gifted students in their classrooms. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, New Oleans, LA.
  26. Tomlinson, C. A., Callahan, C. M., Tomchin, E. M., Eiss, N., Imbeau, M., & Landrum, M. (1997). Becoming architects of communities of learning: Addressing academic diversity in contemporary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 63, 269-282. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299706300210
  27. Tomlinson, C. A. (2002). Different learners, different lessons. Instructor, 112, 21, 24-26.
  28. Tomlinson, C. A., Brighten, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 119-145. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320302700203
  29. VanTassel-Baska, J. (1988). Curriculum planning and development. In J. VanTassel-Baska, J. Feldhusen, K. Seeley, G. Wheatley, L. Silverman, & W. Foster (eds.), Comprehensive curriculum for gifted learners (pp.23-52). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  30. VanTassel-Baska, J., Quek, C., & Feng, A. X. (2007). The development and use of a structured teacher observation scale to assess differentiated best practice. Roeper Review, 29, 84-92.
  31. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2003). Content-based curriculum for high- ability learners: An introduction. In J. VanTassel-Baska & C. A. Little (Eds.), Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners (pp. 1-23). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
  32. Westberg, K. L., Archambault, F. X., Dobyns, S. M., & Salvin, T. J. (1993). The classroom practices observation study. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16, 120-146. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329301600204