Acknowledgement
이 논문은 2020년도 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2020S1A3A2A01095782).
References
- Allen, D. (Ed.). (1998). Assessing student learning: From grading to understanding. New York: Teachers College Press.
- Brunner, R. (1976). Lehrer training Grundlagen, Verfahren, Ergebnisse [Teacher training: Basics process result]. Munchen: E. Reinhardt Verlag.
- Chin, Y. & Ham, Y. (2009). The Trends and Tasks about Study of Reconceptualization of Teaching Professionalism. The Journal of Yeolin Education, 17(2), 47-71.
- Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Empowered educators: How high-performing systems shape teaching quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
- Dogan, S., Pringle, R., & Mesa, J. (2015). The impacts of professional learning communities on science teachers' knowledge, practice and student learning: A review. Professional Development in Education, 42(4), 569-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2015.1065899
- Easton, L. B. (2009). Protocols for Professional Learning. Alexandria, VA.
- Galloway, A. (2004). Protocol: How Control Exists After Decentralization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2009). Fourth way: The inspiring future for educational change, CORWIN A SAGE company.
- Jensen, B., Sonnemann, J., Roberts-Hull, K., & Hunter, A. (2016). Beyond PD: Teacher Professional Learning in High-Performing Systems. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy.
- Jones, M., Blonder, R., Gardner, G., Albe, V., Falvo, M., & Chevrier, J. (2013). Nanotechnology and Nanoscale Science: Educational challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 35(9), 1490-1512. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.771828
- Kim, N. (2013). A study on the usefulness and possibility of protocols in the professional learning community. The Journal of Elementary Education, 26(3), 1-20.
- Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity [KOFAC]. (2018). Report on 2017 teacher training achievement of Integrated Science. Seoul: KOFAC.
- Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity [KOFAC]. (2019). Monitoring study on the implementation of the 2015 national science curriculum in elementary and secondary schools. Seoul: KOFAC.
- Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity [KOFAC]. (2020). Analysis of field application of 2015 revised science curriculum. Seoul: KOFAC.
- Kwak, Y. (2020). Trend analysis of curriculum application status of 2015 revised integrated science and scientific laboratory experiment curriculum. Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 13(1), 53-63. https://doi.org/10.15523/JKSESE.2020.13.1.53
- Kwak, Y., & Kim, J. (2016). Features and future tasks of korean teachers' learning communities. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 19(1), 179-198. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2016.19.1.179
- Kwak, Y., Lee, K., & Jeong, E. (2021). Qualitative inquiry into the characteristics of science teacher learning communities: Cases within and across schools. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 41(4), 297-310. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2021.41.4.297
- Louis, K., Kruse, S., & Bryk, A. (1995). Professionalism and community: What is it and why is it important in urban schools? In K. Seashore Louis & S. Kruse (Eds.), Professionalism and community: Perspectives on reforming urban schools (pp. 3 - 22). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- McDonald, J. P., Mohr, N., Dichter, A., & McDonald, E. C. (2013). The Power of Protocols; An Educator's Guide to Better Practice(3rd ed.). Teachers College, Columbia University.
- Nelson, T. (2009). Teachers' collaborative inquiry and professional growth: Should we be optimistic?. Science Education, 93(3), 548-580. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20302
- OECD (2014). TALIS 2013 Results: An International Perspective on Teaching and Learning. Paris: OECD.
- OECD (2018). OECD Future of Education and Skills 2030. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030-project.
- Park, Y., Kim, M., & Chang, J. (2018). A study on the development and applicability of the curriculum literacy protocol for the professional learning community. Journal of Education & Culture, 24(5), 31-56. https://doi.org/10.24159/JOEC.2018.24.5.31
- Peel, D. & Shortland, S.(2004). Student teacher collaboration: Preservice on learning together. Innovation in Education & Teaching International, 41(1), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1080/1470329032000172711
- Raelin, J.(2001). Public reflection as the basis of learning. Management learning, 31(10), 11-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507601321002
- Rieck, J. (2013). Protocol Use in a Professional Learning Community: Teachers' Perceptions of Instructional Design and Understanding of Students' Critical Thinking. Walden University ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
- Seo, K. (2009). Teacher learning communities and professional development. The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 26(2), 243-276. https://doi.org/10.24211/tjkte.2009.26.2.243
- Shim, S. (2020). Exploring How a High School Science Teacher's Understanding and Facilitation of Scientific Modeling Shifted through Participation in a Professional Learning Community. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(1), 29-40. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2020.40.1.29
- Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
- Shulman, L. (1983). Autonomy and obligation: The remote control of teaching. In L.S. Shulman & G. Sykes (Eds.), Handbook of teaching and policy (pp. 484-504). New York: Longman.
- Yang, J., & Choi, A. (2020). Pedagogical Content Knowledge for Science Practice-Based Instruction Developed by Science Teachers in a Teacher Learning Community. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(5), 565-582. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2020.40.5.565