Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education (한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육)

The Korean Elementary Science Education Society (한국초등과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effect on Manifesting Group Creativity by Empathy Level of Students in the Elementary Science Class

초등 과학 수업에서 공감능력에 따른 집단 구성이 학생들의 집단 창의성 발현에 미치는 영향

  • Received : 2018.09.06
  • Accepted : 2019.01.18
  • Published : 2019.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aimed to identify the effects of students' empathy ability on group creativity, when elementary school students perform scientific activity designed to express group creativity. A total of 12 elementary students from a fifth-grade science club participated in this study. A pretest to examine the students' empathic ability was performed to classify them into three groups: A group with high, low and heterogeneous empathic members. The linguistic interaction was analyzed to determine the process of group creativity manifestation; the results were classified into 'metacognitive', 'cognitive', and 'social-communicative'. As a result, groups with high empathic ability showed more frequent interaction in monitoring, planning, and divergent thinking. On the other hand, in the case of the group with low level of empathy, it was confirmed that there are many interactions related to regulation, convergent thinking, and noncohesive prosocial interaction. Also, in the case of heterogeneous group with empathy ability, group creativity utterance on all sides was relatively higher than other groups. As a result of this study, we could confirm the influence of empathy as a strategy to help the group creativity and discuss the educational implications.

Keywords

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_f0001.png 이미지

Fig. 1. The number of verbal interactions of individual meta-cognitive perspectives (High level of empathy = student 11; Midium level of empathy = student 9, student 12; Low level of empathy= student 10).

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_f0002.png 이미지

Fig. 2. The number of verbal interactions of individual cognitive perspectives (High level of empathy = student 11; Midium level of empathy = student 9, student 12; Low level of empathy = student 10).

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_f0003.png 이미지

Fig. 3. Graph of uncohesive-linguistic interaction frequency of Group C.

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_f0004.png 이미지

Fig. 4. Graph of uncohesive-linguistic interaction frequency of Group B.

Table 1. Differences in empathy ability among the group members participating in the class

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0001.png 이미지

Table 2. Group creativity linguistic interaction analysis framework (Moon, 2016)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0002.png 이미지

Table 3. Meta-cognitive perspective language interaction (bet-ween homogeneous groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0003.png 이미지

Table 4. Cognitive perspective language interaction (between homogeneous groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0004.png 이미지

Table 5. Language interaction in convergent production (between groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0005.png 이미지

Table 6. Prosocial interaction perspective language interaction (between groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0006.png 이미지

Table 7. Meta-cognitive perspective language interaction (bet-ween groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0007.png 이미지

Table 8. Cognitive perspective language interaction (between groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0008.png 이미지

Table 9. Social-communicative perspective language interaction (between groups)

CDRHBB_2019_v38n1_1_t0009.png 이미지

References

  1. Albiero, P., Matricardi, G., Speltri, D. & Toso, D. (2009). The assessment of empathy in 606 adolescence: A contribution to the Italian validation of the "Basic Empathy Scale.". 607 Journal of Adolescence, 32(2), 393-408. 608 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.01.001
  2. Cho, M. & Jin, S. (2016). A phenomenological study on group creativity emerging precess experiences of gifted students in elementary schools. The Korean Creativity Education Association, 16, 35-59.
  3. Chun, O., Yang, H. & Kang, S. (2018). Exploration of empathy factors in the science and development of related scales. Cogent Education, 5(1), 1-23, DOI: 10.1080/2331186X.2018.1499477
  4. Davis, M. H. & American Psychological Association. (1980). A multidimensional approach to 626 individual differences in empathy. Retrieved from 627 https://www.uv.es/friasnav/Davis_1980.pdf. 628
  5. Gazda, G. M. & Evans, T. D. (1990). Empathy as a skill. In MacKay, R. C., Hughes, J. R. & Carver, E. J. (Eds), Empathy in the helping relationships (pp. 65-77).
  6. Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems, 12(4), 436-445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843
  7. Guney, B. G. & Seker, H. (2012). The use of history of science as a cultural tool to promote students' empathy with the culture of science. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(1), 533-539.
  8. Ha, J., Lee, B. & Ruy, H. (2011). Study on the creativity of an individual and a group level, and the effects of rewards in a group level. Korean Society for Creativity Education, 11(1), 89-107.
  9. Kim, J., Ha, J., Park, K. & Kang, S. (2008). The analysis of student-student verbal interactions on the problem-solving inquiry which was developed for creativity-increment of the gifted middle school students. Journal of Gifte-talented Education, 18(1), 1-21.
  10. Kim, J., Seong, S., Park, J. & Choi, B. (2002). The effects of scientific inquiry experiments emphasizing social interaction. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 22(4), 757-767.
  11. Kim, J., Shin, A., Park, K. & Choi, B. (2001). The effects of science inquiry experiments emphasizing social interactions and the analysis of social interactions by cognitive level of the students. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 45(5), 470-480.
  12. Kim, T. (2007). Relationships between verbal interactions in small group creative scientific activities and The cognitive and affective characteristics of high school students. Master's thesis, Korea National University of Education, Chungju, Korea.
  13. Kim, Y. (2006). Possibilities and limitations of collective creativity. The International Journal of Creativity & Problem Solving, Academic Conference, 1-19.
  14. Korean Educational Development Institute (2012). 2012 STEAM program foundation for the gifted. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
  15. Ku, Y., Park, K., Shin, A., Choi, B. & Lee, K. (2006). Characteristics of verbal interactions according to the leader style in MBL experiment class in which discussion was emphasized. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 50(6), 494-505. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2006.50.6.494
  16. Lee, D., Yoon, J. & Kang, S. (2015). The suggestion of design thinking process and its feasibility study for fostering group creativity of elementary-secondary school students in science education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(3), 443-453. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.3.0443
  17. Lee, S., Yoon, J. & Kang, S. (2018). Exploring the possibility of design thinking program as a group creativity development strategy for elementary school students. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(11), 525-554.
  18. Libert, B., Spector, J. & Tapscott, D. (2007). We are smarter than me: How to unleash the power of crowds in your business. Pearson Prentice Hall Press.
  19. Mesmer-Magnus, J. R. & DeChurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 535. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013773
  20. Ministry of Education (MOE) (2015). 2015 revised science curriculum. Ministry of Education 2015-74 [Issue 9].
  21. Moon, S. (2016). Analysis of thinking process in science activities based on group creativity. Master's thesis, Korea National University of Education, Chungju, Korea.
  22. Nijstad, B. A. & Paulus, P. B. (2003). Group creativity: Innovation through collaboration innovation through collaboration. Oxford University Press.
  23. Osborne, J., Erduran, S. & Simmon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
  24. Park, B. & Nam, S. (2016). A study on failure management for enhancing creativity - Applying design thinking methodology and reinforcement theory -. Design Convertgence Study, 15(6), 177-193.
  25. Park, S. (1997). Empathy and pro-social behavior (gonggam-gwa chin-sa-hoe haeng-dong). 719 Muneumsa: Seoul.
  26. Sawyer, R. K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. NY: BasicBooks.
  27. Seelig, T. (2012). inGenius: A crash course on creativity. Hay House, Inc.
  28. Seong, S. & Choi, B. (2007). Change and characteristics of interactions in a heterogeneous group in scientific inquiry experiments. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(9), 870-880.
  29. Shalley, C., Zhou, J. & Oldham, R. G. (2004). The effects of personal and contextual characteristics on creativity: Where should we go from here. Journal of Management, 30(6), 933-958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.007
  30. Tan, J. P. (2014). A dialogic framework for assessing collective creativity in computer-supported collaborative problem-solving tasks. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 9(3), 411-437.
  31. Woo, S., Lee, H. & Kim, J. (2010). A method of design cooperative learning group composition to promote creativity - Elementary school students in the early grades. Archives of Design Research, 23(4), 77-92.
  32. Yang, M. (2011). Exploring the principles of collaborative learning for realization of collective intelligence. The Korean Journal of Educational Methodology Studies, 23(2), 457-483. https://doi.org/10.17927/TKJEMS.2011.23.2.457
  33. Yerrick, R. K., Doster, E., Mugent, J. S., Parke, H. & Carwley, F. E. (2003). Social interaction and the use of analogy: An analysis of preservice teachers' talk during physics inquiry lessons. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5), 443-463. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10084