한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제43권3호
  • /
  • Pages.225-236
  • /
  • 2023
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

초등 예비교사의 VR/AR 활용 과학 수업 계획 과정에서 나타나는 TPACK 특징 -인식적 네트워크 분석을 중심으로-

Characteristics of Pre-service Elementary Teachers' TPACK in Science Lesson Planning Using VR/AR Contents: Focusing on Epistemic Network Analysis

  • 투고 : 2023.04.03
  • 심사 : 2023.05.01
  • 발행 : 2023.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구에서는 인식적 네트워크 분석(ENA)을 통해 초등 예비교사의 VR/AR 콘텐츠 활용 과학 수업 계획 과정에서 나타나는 TPACK의 특징을 알아보고자 했다. 연구자들은 기존의 TPACK 프레임워크에 기초하여 7개의 TPACK 코딩 요소를 귀납적으로 추출하였다. 그리고 초등 예비교사들이 과학 수업을 계획하며 나누는 담화를 TPACK 요소에 따라 코딩하고 이를 ENA Web Tool로 분석하였다. 두 모둠의 담화를 분석하고 비교하였는데 연구자들이 질적으로 분석한 두 모둠의 담화의 차이는 ENA 그래프를 통해 명확하게 드러났다. 이러한 연구 결과를 바탕으로 연구자들은 ENA 방법이 기존 TPACK 연구와 달리 테크놀로지 지식(TK), 내용 지식(CK), 교수 지식(PK)의 복합적 상호작용을 분석할 수 있는 유용한 연구 방법임을 주장하였다. 그리고 두 모둠의 담화에서 나타나는 특징을 통해 예비교사의 TPACK 역량 함양을 위한 시사점을 논의하였다.

This study investigated the characteristics of pre-service elementary teachers' TPACK in science lesson planning using VR/AR content based on epistemic network analysis (ENA). Seven TPACK coding elements were derived inductively based on the existing TPACK framework. Then, the pre-service elementary teachers' discourse in science lesson planning was coded according to the seven TPACK coding elements and analyzed using the ENA Web Tool. The discourses of the two groups were analyzed and compared, and the differences between the two groups, which the researchers analyzed qualitatively, were clearly shown on the ENA graph. Based on these findings, the researchers argued that the ENA method is a useful research tool for analyzing the complex interactions of technology knowledge (TK), content knowledge (CK), and pedagogical knowledge (PK), which is different from previous TPACK research. Also, the researchers discussed the implications for the TPACK competency development of pre-service teachers by comparing the characteristics of the two groups' discourse.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2021년도 정부(교육부)의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 기초연구사업임(NRF-2021R1I1A3040733).

참고문헌

  1. Akcayir, M., & Akcayir, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Research Review, 20, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002
  2. Alfalah, S. F. M. (2018). Perceptions toward adopting virtual reality as a teaching aid in information technology. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2633-2653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9734-2
  3. Arastoopour, G., Shaffer, D. W., Swiecki, Z., Ruis, A. R., & Chesler, N. C. (2016). Teaching and assessing engineering design thinking with virtual internships and epistemic network analysis. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(3B), 1492-1501.
  4. Archambault, L. (2016). Exploring the use of qualitative methods to examine TPACK. In M. C. Herring, M. J. Koehler, & P. Mishra (Eds.), Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for Educators (pp. 65-86). New York, NY: Routledge.
  5. Azuma, R. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355
  6. Baran, E., Chuang, H. H., & Thompson, A. (2011). TPACK: An emerging research and development tool for teacher educators. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 370-377.
  7. Chang, G., Morreale, P., & Medicherla, P. (2010). Applications of augmented reality systems in education. Paper proceeding at the 32nd annual conference of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, San Diego, CA, USA.
  8. Chiang, T. H. C., Yang, S. J. H., & Hwang, G.-J. (2014). Students' online interactive patterns in augmented reality-based inquiry activities. Computers & Education, 78, 97-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.006
  9. Choi, K., & Paik, S.-H. (2020). The difference of measurement results between the questionnaire and performance assessment of pre-service teacher's TPACK competency. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 40(4), 437-449. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2020.40.4.437
  10. Choi, K., & Paik, S.-H. (2021). Development of pre-service teachers' TPACK evaluation framework and analysis of hindrance factors of TPACK development. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 41(4), 325-338. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2021.41.4.325
  11. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles: SAGE.
  12. Csanadi, A., Eagan, B., Kollar, I., Shaffer, D. W., & Fischer, F. (2018). When coding-and-counting is not enough: Using epistemic network analysis (ENA) to analyze verbal data in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(4), 419-438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9292-z
  13. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
  14. Durukan, A., Artun, H., & Temur, A. (2020) Virtual reality in science education: A descriptive review. Journal of Science Learning, 3(3), 132-142. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v3i3.21906
  15. Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., & Tondeur, J. (2015). Teachers' beliefs and uses of technology to support 21st-century teaching and learning. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers' beliefs (pp. 403-418). New York: Routledge.
  16. Gartner, Inc. (2017) Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2018. Retrieve from https://www.gartner.com/ngw/globalassets/en/information-technology/documents/top-10-strategic-technology-trends-for-2018.pdf
  17. Gee, J. P. (2015). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. London; New York: Routledge.
  18. Jang, S. J., & Chen, K. C. (2010). From PCK to TPACK: Developing a transformative model for pre-service science teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19(6), 553-564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9222-y
  19. Kang, S., & Jang, M. (2016) On secondary mathematics teachers' technology integration self-efficacy. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education Series A: The Mathematical Education, 55(4), 523-538.
  20. Karumbaiah, S., & Baker, R. S. (2021). Studying Affect Dynamics Using Epistemic Networks. In A. R. Ruis & S. B. Lee (Eds.), Advances in quantitative ethnography. ICQE 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 1312 (pp. 362-374). Springer International Publishing.
  21. Kim, K., Yoon, J., Park, J., Hoh, T. (2011). The components of pedagogical content knowledge considered by secondary science pre-service teachers in planning and implementing teaching demonstrations. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(1), 99-114. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2011.31.1.099
  22. Ko, Y., & Shin, W. S. (2020). Examining TPACK for teaching and learning with technologies: Online vs. AR/VR based learning. The Korean Journal of Educational Methodology Studies, 32(2), 233-254.
  23. Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Yahya, K. (2007). Tracing the development of teacher knowledge in a design seminar: Integrating content, pedagogy, and technology. Computers & Education, 49(3), 740-762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.012
  24. Koehler, M. J., Shin, T. S., & Mishra, P. (2012). How do we measure TPACK? Let me count the ways. In R. N. Ronau, C. R. Rakes, & M. L. Niess (Eds.), Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact: A research handbook on frameworks and approaches (pp. 16-31). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
  25. Koh, J. H. L., & Chai, C. S. (2017). Seven design frames that teachers use when considering technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computer & Education, 102, 244-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.003
  26. Koh, J. H. L., Chai, C. S., & Lim, W. Y. (2017). Teacher professional development for TPACK-21CL: Effects on teacher ICT integration and student outcomes. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(2), 172-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116656848
  27. Kozhevnikov, M., Gurlitt, J. & Kozhevnikov, M. (2013). Learning relative motion concepts in immersive and non-immersive virtual environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(6), 952-962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9441-0
  28. Lahtevanoja, A., Holopainen, J., Vesisenaho, M., & Hakkinen, P. (2021). Developing design knowledge and a conceptual model for virtual reality learning environments. In G. Akcayir & C. Demmans Epp (Eds.), Designing, deploying, and evaluating virtual and augmented reality in education (pp. 100-123). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  29. Lee, C.-J., & Kim, C. (2014) An implementation study of a TPACK-based instructional design model in a technology integration course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(4), 437-460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9335-8
  30. Lee, D.-H., & Whang, W.-H. (2017). Development and validation of TPACK measurement tool for mathematics teachers. Journal Korean Society Math Education Series A: The Mathematical Education, 56(4), 407-434.
  31. Lee, E. A. L., Wong , K. W., & Fung , C. C. (2010). How does desktop virtual reality enhance learning outcomes? A structural equation modeling approach. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1424-1442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.006
  32. Liu, P.-H. E., & Tsai, M.-K. (2013). Using augmented-reality-based mobile learning material in EFL English composition: An exploratory case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(1), E1-E4. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01302.x
  33. Lu, S. J., & Liu, Y. C. (2015). Integrating augmented reality technology to enhance children's learning in marine education. Environmental Education Research, 21(4), 525-541. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2014.911247
  34. Marquart, C. L., Hinojosa, C., Swiecki, Z., & Shaffer, D. W. (2018). Epistemic Network Analysis (Version 0.1.0) [Software]. Available from http://app.epistemicnetwork.org.
  35. Ministry of Education (2022). Science curriculum. Sejong: Ministry of Education.
  36. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  37. Niess, M. L. (2011). Investigating TPACK: Knowledge growth in teaching with technology. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(3), 299-317. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.44.3.c
  38. Oner, D. (2020a). An epistemic network analysis approach for assessing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Working Paper (BAP 17D02P1). Bogazici University.
  39. Oner, D. (2020b). A virtual internship for developing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(2). 27-42. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5192
  40. Scianna, J., Gagnon, D., Knowles, B. (2021). Counting the game: Visualizing changes in play by incorporating game events. In A. R. Ruis & S. B. Lee (Eds.), Advances in quantitative ethnography. ICQE 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 1312 (pp. 218-231). Springer International Publishing.
  41. Shaffer, D. W. (2017). Quantitative ethnography. Madison, WI: Cathcart Press.
  42. Shaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9-45. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.3
  43. Shin, W.-S., Han, I.-S., & Eom, M.-R. (2012). Influence of technology integration course on preservice teachers' technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of The Korean Association of information Education, 16(1), 71-80.
  44. Siebert-Evenstone, A. L., Arastoopour Irgens, G., Collier, W., Swiecki, Z., Ruis, A. R., & Shaffer, D. W. (2017). In search of conversational grain size: Modeling semantic structure using moving stanza windows. Journal of Learning Analytics, 4(3), 123-139. https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2017.43.7
  45. Wu, H.-K., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024
  46. Zhang, J., Sung, Y. T., Hou, H. T., & Chang, K. E. (2014). The development and evaluation of an augmented reality-based armillary sphere for astronomical observation instruction. Computers & Education, 73, 178-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.003
  47. Zhang, S., Liu, Q., & Cai, Z. (2019). Exploring primary school teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in online collaborative discourse: An epistemic network analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3437-3455. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12751