Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Exploring the Difficulties of High School Students in Self-Directed Scientific Inquiry

고등학생의 자기 주도적 과학탐구연구에서 나타난 어려움 탐색

  • Received : 2019.08.13
  • Accepted : 2019.12.11
  • Published : 2019.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The self-directed inquiry to improve students' core scientific competency is an important teaching method. Students experience a variety of difficulties in carrying out their inquiry tasks, sometimes fail to produce the desired results, or fail to perform a meaningless inquiry. This study was conducted to identify the causes of difficulties and failures in students' self-directed scientific inquiry. The study involved 16 high school students with experience in science research at science high schools and science-focused high schools. The data collection consisted of in-depth interviews centered on semi-structured open questions. Qualitative data analysis was imputed by finding paragraphs from the interview material that might reveal the difficulties and failures experienced by participants and the reasons for them. The study found that most of the causes of failure were lack of ability, incomplete procedures, and selection of complicated tasks. A variety of cognitive biases, such as overconfidence, planning fallacy, and groupthink, were also analyzed as causes. Based on the results of the study, it is necessary to develop an educational strategy that students can be fully prepared to reduce their trials and errors in a self-directed inquiry maximally.

학생들의 과학핵심역량을 신장시키기 위하여 학생 중심의 자기주도탐구는 중요한 교수학습법이다. 학생들은 탐구과제를 수행하는 과정에서 다양한 어려움을 경험하게 되고, 때로는 원하는 결과물을 산출하지 못하거나, 예상했던 것에 비하여 의미 없는 탐구를 수행하는 등의 실패를 경험하게 된다. 이 연구는 학생들의 자기주도적 과학탐구에서의 어려움과 실패 원인을 확인하기 위해 진행되었다. 이 연구는 과학고등학교 및 과학중점 고등학교에서 과제연구의 경험이 있는 고등학생 16명을 대상으로 하였다. 자료 수집은 반구조화된 개방형 질문을 중심으로 한 심층면담으로 이루어졌다. 질적 자료 분석은 면담 원자료로부터 참여자들이 경험한 어려움과 실패 상황과 그 원인이 드러낼 수 있는 문단을 찾아 귀납적으로 분석하였다. 연구 결과 대부분의 실패 원인은 능력 부족, 불완전한 절차, 어려운 과제의 선정으로 나타났다. 학생들의 과잉확신, 계획오류, 집단사고 등 다양한 인지편향도 원인으로 분석되었다. 연구 결과들을 토대로 학생들이 자기주도 탐구에서 논리적, 반성적, 합리적 문제해결 역량을 발휘하여 실패와 시행착오의 단계를 최대한 줄이도록 충분한 준비를 할 수 있도록 해주는 교육 전략의 개발이 필요하다.

Keywords

References

  1. Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 366-381. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366
  2. Domin, D. S. (1999). A review of laboratory instruction styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 543. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed076p543
  3. Edmondson, A. C. (2011). Strategies for learning from failure. Harvard Business Review, 89(4), 48-55.
  4. Granger, E. M., Bevis, T. H., Saka, Y., Southerland, S. A., Sampson, V., & Tate, R. L. (2012). The efficacy of student-centered instruction in supporting science learning. Science, 338(6103), 105-108. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1223709
  5. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  6. Ha, M. (2016). Exploring cognitive biases limiting rational problem solving and debiasing methods using science education. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 36(6), 935-946. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.6.0935
  7. Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428-444). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc
  8. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
  9. Jung, H. C., Ryuk, C. R., & Chae, Y. J. (2012). Research and education (R&E) programs in the science high schools and gifted high schools: based on the interview results with the R&E coordinators. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education,, 22(2), 243-264. https://doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2012.22.2.243
  10. Kahneman, D. (2013). Thinking, fast and slow. NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  11. Ketelhut, D. J. (2007). The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An exploratory investigation in River City, a multi-user virtual environment. Journal of science education and technology, 16(1), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9038-y
  12. Kim, H., Kang, N., Kim, M., Maeng, S., Park, J., Baek, Y., Son, J. W., Shim, K., Oh, P. S., Lee, G., Lee, B., Joung, Y., Han, I. (2017). Basic research for next generation science education standards. Seoul: KOFAC.
  13. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquirybased teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
  14. Ministry of Education (2015). 2015 revised Science National Curriculum. Ministry of Education.
  15. Mizrahi, M. (2018). Arguments from expert opinion and persistent bias. Argumentation, 32(2), 175-195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-017-9434-x
  16. Oh, H. R., & Kim, H. B. (2011). A study on the extra curricula sciencerelated hands-on experience programs implemented in science-focused high schools. School Science Journal,, 5(2), 73-83. https://doi.org/10.15737/ssj.5.2.201108.73
  17. Ryu, S. C., Yoon, J., & Lee Y. O. (2014). A case study on curriculum management of science core high schools. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14, 305-328.
  18. Schlosser, T., Dunning, D., Johnson, K. L., & Kruger, J. (2013). How unaware are the unskilled? Empirical tests of the "signal extraction" counterexplanation for the Dunning-Kruger effect in self-evaluation of performance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 39, 85-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.07.004
  19. Schoffstall, A. M., & Gaddis, B. A. (2007). Incorporating guided-inquiry learning into the organic chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(5), 848. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed084p848
  20. Schunk, D. H. (1985). Self-efficacy and classroom learning. Psychology in the Schools, 22(2), 208-223. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(198504)22:2<208::AID-PITS2310220215>3.0.CO;2-7
  21. Thaler, R. & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. London: Penguin Books.
  22. Volz, K. G., Kessler, T., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2009). In-group as part of the self: In-group favoritism is mediated by medial prefrontal cortex activation. Social neuroscience, 4(3), 244-260. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910802553565
  23. Winch, G. (2013) Emotional first aid: Healing rejection, guilt, failure and other everyday hurts. NY: Hudson Street Press.
  24. Xie, Y., Ke, F., & Sharma, P. (2008). The effect of peer feedback for blogging on college students' reflective learning processes. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 18-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.11.001
  25. Zion, M., & Mendelovici, R. (2012). Moving from structured to open inquiry: Challenges and limits. Science Education International, 23(4), 383-399.