Communications of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈E:수학교육논문집)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis of pre-service teachers' cognition on a teacher education program in technology-friendly flipped classroom

공학 도구 친화적 거꾸로 수업에서 예비교사의 인식 분석

  • Received : 2018.08.28
  • Accepted : 2018.10.23
  • Published : 2018.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate characteristics of pre-service teachers' cognition about learning through the use of technology by employing a teacher education program in the use of technology-friendly flipped classroom. For this purpose, 45 pre-service teachers participated in the study and they completed both pre- and post-surveys including questions about Technology Adopter Category Index(TACI) and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge(TPACK). They were also asked to write self-reflections on mathematics softwares(Geometer's Sketch Pad(GSP), Geogebra, Cabri 3D). Results show that the teacher education program in the use of technology-friendly flipped classroom affected pre-service teachers' cognitions of TACI and TPACK, and they perceived that technology integration helped students' mathematics learning process. Findings from this study indicate that ideas about how to develop a technology-friendly teacher education program are more specified..

본 연구의 목적은 공학 도구 친화적 거꾸로 수업을 통한 교사교육 프로그램에서 예비교사들의 공학 도구 활용에 대한 인식의 특징을 분석하는 것이다. 이를 위해 예비교사 45명을 대상으로 공학 도구 사용 범주 지수(Technology Adopter Category Index), 공학 도구가 추가된 교수학적 내용 지식(Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge), 공학 도구별(Geometer's Sketch Pad(이하 GSP), Geogebra, Cabri 3D) 반영적 검사지를 분석하였다. 그 결과 공학 도구 친화적 거꾸로 수업 교육과정은 예비교사들의 공학 도구 사용 범주 지수와 공학 도구가 추가된 교수학적 내용 지식에 대한 인식 변화에 영향을 미쳤고, 공학 도구 활동이 학생들의 수학 학습 과정에 도움을 줄 수 있다고 인식하였다. 이와 같은 연구 결과를 토대로 공학 도구 친화적 교사를 양성하는 교사교육 프로그램 개발에 구체적인 아이디어를 제공하였다고 볼 수 있다.

Keywords

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0001.png 이미지

[그림 II-1] TPACK framework(Koehler & Mishra, 2009)

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0002.png 이미지

[그림 IV-1] 공학 도구별 반영적 검사지에서 예비교사들의 반응

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0003.png 이미지

[그림 IV-8] 공학 도구 지식 교수학적 내용 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0004.png 이미지

[그림 IV-2] 공학 도구 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0005.png 이미지

[그림 IV-3] 수학 내용 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0006.png 이미지

[그림 IV-4] 교수학적 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0007.png 이미지

[그림 IV-5] 교수학적 내용 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0008.png 이미지

[그림 IV-6] 공학 도구 내용 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_f0009.png 이미지

[그림 IV-7] 공학 도구 교수학적 지식에 대한 인식의 특징

<표 III-1> 공학 도구 친화적 거꾸로 수업의 과정

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0001.png 이미지

<표 III-2> 공학 도구 친화적 거꾸로 수업의 교육과정

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0002.png 이미지

<표 III-3> 공학 도구 사용 범주 지수(Dugas, 2005)

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0003.png 이미지

<표 III-4> 공학 도구 활용 반영적 검사지

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0004.png 이미지

<표 III-5> 공학 도구가 추가된 교수학적 내용 지식 검사지(신태섭, 2013; Schmidt et al., 2009)

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0005.png 이미지

<표 IV-1> 공학 도구 사용 범주 지수의 사전-사후 검사 결과

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0006.png 이미지

<표 IV-2> 공학 도구 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0007.png 이미지

<표 IV-3> 수학 내용 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0008.png 이미지

<표 IV-4> 교수학적 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0009.png 이미지

<표 IV-5>교수학적 내용 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0010.png 이미지

<표 IV-6> 공학 도구 내용 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0011.png 이미지

<표 IV-7> 공학 도구 교수학적 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0012.png 이미지

<표 IV-8> 공학 도구가 추가된 교수학적 내용 지식에 대한 인식 변화

SHGHFM_2018_v32n4_455_t0013.png 이미지

References

  1. Ko, J., & Park, M. (2018). A case study of flipped learning class in pre-service teacher education, Education of Primary School Mathematics, 21(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEC.2018.21.1.1
  2. Ministry of Education (2015). 2015 revised school curriculum, Ministry of Education announcement 2015-80.
  3. Kwak, Y. (2016). The awareness of early childhood teachers about TPACK(Technology Pedagogical And Content Knowledge), The Journal of Early Childhood Education, 36(6), 245-276. https://doi.org/10.18023/kjece.2016.36.6.011
  4. Kwon, S., Kim, N., Ryu, S., & Park, S. (2009). Mathematics education with technology, Seoul, Korea: Kyungmoonsa.
  5. Kim, N., & Park, K. (2008). The use of computer in mathematics education, Seoul, Korea: Kyungmoonsa.
  6. Kim, D.-J., Kim, D., & Choi, S. (2016). Exploring the possibility of application of the flipped classroom of the technology friendly mathematics teacher education program, Studies in Mathematical Education, 2016(3), 164-166.
  7. Kim, S. (2012). Teachers' perspectives on the future mathematics classroom, Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 16(1), 285-324. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2012.16.1.285
  8. Ryu, K., & Lee, Y. (2017). Effects of online teacher learning community activities linked with internship course for the improvement of elementary pre-service teacher's TPACK, The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 34(2), 417-437.
  9. Lew, H., & Shin, D. (1998). Mathematics education and computers, Seoul, Korea: Kyungmoonsa.
  10. Park, S. (2015). Development of the revised model of flipped classroom and analysis of Its educational effects, Research in Social Studies Education, 22(2), 1-21.
  11. Bong, M., & Song, G. (2004). Korean middle school teachers' and students' perceptions and attitudes toward ICT use in mathematics classroom, Journal of Research in Curriculum Instruction, 8(2), 147-165.
  12. So, Y. (2013). Analysis of the structural relations between TPACK(Technology, Pedagogy and Content Knowledge), teaching efficacy, and perceived teaching professionalism in primary school teachers, Asian Journal of Education, 14(4), 125-147. https://doi.org/10.15753/aje.2013.14.4.006
  13. Son, H. (2011). Trend and prospect on using technology in mathematics education in Korea, School Mathematics, 13(3), 525-542.
  14. Sohng, H., & Seo, S. (2016). Effects of project-based flipped classroom on the affective attitude and metacognitive learning strategies of pre-service teachers of English, English Language & Literature Teaching, 22(2), 167-192.
  15. Shin, T. (2013). A relation between pre-service teachers' fixed mindsets regarding their abilities to teach with technology and their perceived TPACK, The Journal of Educational Studies, 44(2), 21-45.
  16. Eom, M., Shin, W., & Han, I. (2011). A survey on the differences of pre-service teachers' perception of the technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge(TPACK), The Journal of Korean Teahcer Education, 28(4), 141-165.
  17. Rim, H. (2009). Study on the effectiveness of team project to improve TPACK of preservice mathematics teachers, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 19(4), 545-564.
  18. Rim, H., & Choi, I. (2012). A case study on the effect of designing instruction according to the ASSURE model to mathematics teacher's TPACK and teaching efficacy, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 22(2), 179-202.
  19. Jeon, S., & Cho, C. (2014). An exploratory study with grounded theory on secondary mathematics teachers' difficulties of technology in geometry class, Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 24(3), 387-407.
  20. Huh, N. (2015). Investigation into pre-math teachers' awareness of flipped learning, Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 18(4), 449-470.
  21. Huh, B., Choi, D., Kim, D., Kim, M., Kim, H., Pak, B., Son, J., Cha, W., Lee, S., & Cho, S. (2009). Designing the general framework for developing classroom-friendly teachers, Korean Journal of Teacher Education, 25(2), 1-23.
  22. Whang, W., & Cha, S. (2002). A study on the effectiveness of dynamic geometry software in solving high school analytic geometry problems, The Mathematics Education, 41(3), 341-360.
  23. Hwang, I. (2017). An analysis on the effects of flipped learning in a university mathematics clinic program, Teacher Education Research, 56(3), 227-246. https://doi.org/10.15812/ter.56.3.201709.227
  24. Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2015). Flipped learning[거꾸로 교실](Translated into Korean by C. P. Jeong & S. H. Lim), Seoul, South Korea: Eduniety. (Original work published 2014)
  25. Dugas, C. A. (2005). Adopter characteristics and teaching styles of faculty adopters and nonadopters of a course management system, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN.
  26. Geiger, V., & Faragher, R. (2010). CAS-enabled technologies as 'Agents Provocateurs' in teaching and learning mathematical modelling in secondary school classrooms, Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22(2), 48-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217565
  27. Heinich, R., Molenda, M., & Russell, J. (1989). Instructional media and the new technologies of instruction, New York: Macmillan Publishing.
  28. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  29. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2008). Introducing TPCK, AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology(Ed.), The handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge(TPCK) for educators(pp. 3-29), New York: Routledge.
  30. Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issue in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70.
  31. Lobato, J., Rhodehamel, B., & Hohensee, C. (2012). "Noticing" as an alternative transfer of learning process, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 433-482. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2012.682189
  32. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers' knowledge, Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  33. NCTM(2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics, Reston, VA: NCTM.
  34. Olofson, M. W., Swallow, M. J., & Neumann, M. D. (2016). TPACKing: A constructivist framing of TPACK to analyze teachers' construction of knowledge, Computers and Education, 95, 188-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.12.010
  35. Schmidt, D., Baran, E., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M., & Shin, T. (2009). Technological pedagogical content knowledge(TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544
  36. Yeh, Y., Hsu, Y, Wu, H., Hwang, F., & Lin, T. (2014). Developing and validating technological pedagogical content knowledge-practical(TPACK- practical) through the Delphi survey technique, British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(4), 707-722. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12078

Cited by

  1. 이차곡선 수업에서 공학도구 사용과 수작업 교구 활동에 대한 예비 수학교사들의 인식 vol.24, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.30807/ksms.2021.24.1.008