DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Contents and Pedagogical Styles of Food and Nutrition in Middle School 「Technology·Home Economics」 Textbooks from the Constructivist Perspective

구성주의 관점에 기초한 중학교 「기술·가정」 교과서의 식생활 교육내용 및 내용 전달 방식 분석

  • Received : 2019.10.02
  • Accepted : 2019.11.14
  • Published : 2019.12.31

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine how the contents and pedagogical styles of Food and Nutrition in the middle school home economics textbooks could promote constructivist learning. For this, Food and Nutrition contents of 12 current textbooks were analyzed, based upon the learning factors derived from both a practical problem-focused curriculum from the constructivist perspective, and the current home economics curriculum from the objectivist perspective. Pedagogical styles of the texts and exercises were classified into four types- neutral informative, injunctive, persuasive, and participative, out of which 'persuasive' and 'participative', in particular reflect the constructivist perspective. The major findings were as follows: First, the analysis results of Food and Nutrition contents showed that of 14 learning factors, 13 of the textbooks corresponded well to the current curriculum(92.9%). On the other hand, Out of the 26 learning factors, 18 of the textbooks corresponded to the practical problem-focused curriculum(72.4%). Classified into each stage of the practical problem solving processes, only learning factors related with 'the concepts of the valued ends' were fully covered. However, the other learning factors related with the concepts of 'the practical problem', 'the context', 'the action' and 'the consequence', that is the factors particularly related with 'the concepts of the context', were not properly addressed. Besides, learning factors were not addressed from diverse viewpoints, especially from the social perspective. Second, the analysis of pedagogical style related to Food and Nutrition illustrated that the neutral informative(59.9%) in texts, and the participative in exercises(60.4%), were most common. However, persuasive and participative were insufficient in texts(22.1%). Furthermore even though the exercises, are more likely to be described from the constructivist perspective, nearly none of the exercises was considered from the social perspective. In conclusion, this study showed that Food and Nutrition in Korean home economics textbooks need to reflect constructivist learning better.

본 연구는 구성주의 관점에서 중학교 가정교과서 식생활 영역의 교육내용과 내용 전달 방식을 분석하여, 가정교과서의 식생활 영역이 구성주의 학습을 증진시킬 수 있는지를 파악하는데 그 목적이 있다. 이를 위하여 2015 개정 가정과 교육과정에 기초하여 집필된 「기술·가정」교과서 12권을 대상으로 분석하였다. 식생활 교육내용은 객관주의 관점의 2015 개정 가정과 교육과정과 구성주의 관점의 실천적 문제 중심 교육과정을 기초로 각각 추출한 학습요소를 준거로 분석하였다. 교육내용의 전달 방식은 본문과 활동과제를 중립적, 지시적, 설득적, 참여적 정보제공의 네 가지 유형을 준거로 분석하였다. 이 중 설득적, 참여적 정보제공 유형은 구성주의 관점의 내용 전달 방식에 해당한다. 연구의 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 먼저, 식생활 영역의 교육내용을 분석한 결과, 2015 개정 가정과 교육과정의 반영률은 분석 대상 교과서 평균 92.9%로, 학습요소 14개 중 평균적으로 13개의 학습요소가 분석 대상의 교과서에서 충분하게 다루어지고 있었다. 실천적 문제 중심 교육과정의 반영률은 분석 대상 교과서 평균 72.4%로, 학습요소 26개 중 평균적으로 약 18개가 분석 대상의 교과서에서 비교적 충분하게 다루어지고 있었다. 이를 실천적 문제 해결과정별로 보면, '가치 목표 관련 개념'에 해당하는 학습요소를 제외한 '실천적 문제(영양과 건강) 관련 개념', '맥락 관련 개념', '행동(대안) 관련 개념', '결과(파급효과) 관련 개념'에 해당하는 학습요소는 불충분하게 다루어지고 있었으며, 특히 '맥락 관련 개념'에 해당하는 학습요소는 충분하게 다루어지고 있지 않았다. 또한 분석 대상 모든 교과서에는 학습요소들이 단편적으로만 다루어지고 있어 다양한 측면에서 맥락을 고려하고 있지 않았으며 사회적 관점이 배제되어 있었다. 다음으로, 식생활 영역의 내용 전달 방식을 분석한 결과, 본문에서는 구성주의 관점의 내용 전달 방식이 22.1%(설득적: 21.4%, 참여적: 0.7%)로 낮은 비중을 차지하고 있었고, '중립적 정보제공 유형(59.9%)'의 빈도가 가장 높았다. 활동과제에서는 구성주의 관점의 내용 전달 방식이 61.9%(설득적: 1.5%, 참여적; 60.4%)의 비중을 차지하고 있었다. 그러나 '참여적 정보제공' 유형의 경우에도, 자신 및 가족의 삶을 고려한 활동과제는 많았으나, 사회적 관점까지 고려한 활동과제는 전무했다. 결론적으로, 현행 중학교 가정교과서의 식생활 영역은 구성주의 학습을 증진시키기에는 한계가 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. American Home Economics Association [AHEA]. (1989). Home Economics concepts: A base for curriculum development. Alexandria VA.
  2. Baldwin, E. E. (1989). A critique of home economics curriculum in secondary schools. In F. Hultgren, F. H., & D. L. Coomer (Eds.), Alternative modes of inquiry in homeeconomics research:Yearbook, 9/1989 (pp. 236-250). Peoria, IL: Glencoe Publishing.
  3. Brown, M. M. (1978). A conceptual scheme and decision-rules for the selection and organization of home economics curriculum content. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
  4. Cho, Y. N. (2008). Comparative research on the instructional design model of constructivism and objectivism. Secondary Education Research, 56(3), 67-92.
  5. Choi, Y.-J., Chae, J.-H., & Park, M.-J. (2009). A study on the curriculum perspectives of secondary school home economics teachers and the home economics teacher efficacy. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 21(1), 89-106.
  6. Hokkanen, S., & Kosonen, A.-L. (2013). Do finnish home economics and health education textbooks promote constructivist learning in nutrition education?. International Journal of Consumer Studies. 37(3), 279-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12008
  7. Jang, W. M., & Kim Y. K. (2017). Content analysis of food and nutrition unit in middle school textbooks of home economics - focus on the national curriculums from 1st to 2009 revised. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 30(2), 93-112. https://doi.org/10.19031/jkheea.2018.12.30.4.93
  8. Kang, I. A. (1997). 왜 구성주의인가? 정보화 시대와 학습자 중심의 교육환경. [Why constructivist?: Information age and learner-based educational environment]. Seoul: Munumsa.
  9. Kim S. Y., & Lee S. Y. (2007). A study on the recognition with respect to the food and nutrition section of the technology and Home Economics curriculum of middle school students in Gyeonggi province. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 19(4), 1-15.
  10. Kim, Y.-H. (2010). A study on the eating behaviour and nutrition knowledge of middle school students and satisfaction of dietary life instruction in Technology.Home Economics subject. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 22(3), 117-128.
  11. Korean Educational Development Institute. (1990). 외국 교과서 한국 관련 내용 연구의 종합적 검토. [A comprehensive review of Korean textbooks on foreign textbooks]. No. RR90-23.
  12. Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage.
  13. Laster, J. F. (1998). Principles of teaching practice in Family and consumer sciences education. In S. S. Redick, A. Vail, B. P. Smith, R. G. Thomas, P. Copa, C. Mileham, J. F. Laster, C. Fedje, J. Johnson, & K. Alexander (Eds.), Family and consumer sciences: A chapter of ASCD the curriculum handbook (pp. 45-55). Alexandria. VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  14. Lee, B.-D., & Kim, J.-H. (2010). Analysis of elementary mathematics textbooks based on the perspective of constructivism knowledge - with focus on the number and operation contents in 1st and 2nd grades. The Korean School Mathematics Society, 13(3), 415-442.
  15. Lee, K. A. (2015). Current status of out-of-school dietary education for elementary school children and adolescents. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 28(4), 305-326.
  16. Lee, M.-J., & Yoo, T.-M. (2010). Analysis of the practical reasoning process presented in Home Economics textbooks of 2007 revised curriculum. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 22(4), 109-138.
  17. Lee, S.-H. (2010). Future tasks and alternative teaching-Learning strategies to make the best use of Home Economics textbooks in secondary schools based on the newly revised 2007 Home Economics curriculum, Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 22(2), 133-153.
  18. Lee, S.-H., & Yoo, T.-M. (2008). Focus group interview for the development of an in-service educational program on the practical problem focused Home Economics curriculum. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 20(3), 107-129.
  19. Lee, Y.-S. (2010). An analysis on the units of 'adolescence self-management' and 'adolescence consumption life' in technology-home economics textbooks used in middle schools: focusing on how the emphasis of the 2007 curriculum revision is reflected. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 22(3), 55-75. https://doi.org/10.20464/kdea.2016.22.2.3
  20. Ministry of Education. (2015). 실과(기술.가정)/정보과 교육과정. [Home Economics-Vocational Education Curriculum].
  21. Montgomery, B. (1999). Continuing concerns of individuals and families. In J. Johnson & C. Fedje (Eds.), Family and consumer sciences curriculum: Toward a critical science approach (pp. 80-90). Peoria, IL: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.
  22. Montgomery, B. (2008). Curriculum Development: A Critical Science Perspective, Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 26 (National Teacher Standards 3), 1-16.
  23. Oh, K.-S., Ha, J. S., & Lee, S.-H. (2017). Review and alternatives to the internal consistency of Home Economics curriculum components : focused on the clothing & textiles area. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 29(3), 44-75.
  24. Oh, K.-S., Lee, K.-Y., & Lee, S.-H. (2011). The contents selection and organization of the practical problem focused Family and Consumer Sciences curriculum based on the characteristics and goals of the 2007 revised curriculum. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 23(3), 91-119.
  25. Park, T. H. (1999). A study on the development of writing theory in terms of constructivism paradigm: focused on the writing theory of cognitive constructivism and the writing theory of social constructivism. Journal of Elementary Education. 2, 62-95.
  26. Ryu, S. H. (2000). The study on constructivist approach to family life education. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education, 13(3), 99-113.
  27. Staaland, E., & Strom, S. (1996). Family, Food, and Society: A Teacher's Guide. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction Madison, Wisconsin.
  28. Yang, S. J., Chae, J. H., Yu, N. S., & Park, M. J. (2015). The analysis of duplicated contents of 'Food and Nutrition unit' of Home Economics and other subject textbooks for the middle school students. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 27(1), 31-50.
  29. Yoo, T.-M. (2006). The nature of practical problem focused Family and Consumer Sciences curriculum. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association, 18(4), 7-28.
  30. Yoo, T.-M., Chang, H. K., Kim, J. Y., Kim, H. A., & Kim, H. S. (2004). 실천적 가정과 수업I. [The Practical Home Economics InstructionI]. Seoul: Shinkwang.
  31. Yoo, T.-M., & Lee, S.-H. (2010). Practical problem focused family & consumer sciences instruction-the theory & practice. Seoul: Bookkorea.