한국학교수학회논문집 (Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society)

  • 제27권1호
  • /
  • Pages.23-41
  • /
  • 2024
  • /
  • 1229-0890(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-4350(eISSN)
한국학교수학회 (The Korean School Mathematics Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

국내 초·중등 수학교육에서 협력학습 연구에 관한 체계적 문헌 고찰

Systematic literature review on collaborative learning research in mathematics education in Korea

  • 박수민 (상명대학교 )
  • Park, Soomin (Sangmyung University)
  • 투고 : 2024.02.13
  • 심사 : 2024.03.11
  • 발행 : 2024.03.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

이 연구의 목적은 국내 초·중등 수학교육에서 협력학습 연구에 대한 체계적 문헌 고찰을 통해 관련 연구의 다양한 주제를 탐구하고 개선점을 논의하는 것이다. 이를 위해 체계적 문헌 고찰의 연구 방법론에 따라 수학교육에서 협동 및 협력을 키워드로 하는 연구를 분석하기 위한 프로토콜을 제시하고, 최종 선별된 연구를 프로토콜을 중심으로 도출된 주제별 특성을 분석한다. 체계적 문헌 고찰 결과 검색 키워드, 소집단 구성 방법, 표본의 추출 방법, 표본의 크기, 분석 방법, 분석틀, 교육목표 영역, 협력학습에서의 수학 교과 역량의 총 8가지 주제를 범주화하였고 이를 바탕으로 협력학습에 관한 연구의 특성을 도출하였다. 연구 결과 첫째, 대상 학교급 또는 연구 방법론에 있어서 고르게 수행되어, 협력학습을 구현하는 다양한 수업 환경에 대한 이해를 돕는 연구들이 많았다. 둘째, 표본의 추출 방법이나 표본의 크기를 선정하는 데 있어서 연구자의 주관적 특성이 많이 반영되었다는 결과를 발견할 수 있었다. 셋째, 협력학습의 인지적 영역은 주로 사전과 사후의 학업성취도 점수를 통해 그 변화를 결과로 제시하고 있기 때문에 협력학습을 협력적 수학 문제해결 즉 학업성취도 점수에 초점을 두고 유사한 결과를 산출하는 연구가 많았다.

This study aims to conduct a systematic literature review on collaborative learning research in elementary and secondary mathematics education in Korea, explore various characteristics related to the research, and discuss areas for improvement. To achieve this, this study presents a protocol for analyzing research in mathematics education with a focus on collaboration and cooperation, following a systematic literature review methodology. Then analyze the selected studies based on the themes derived from the protocol. As a result of the systematic literature review, research characteristics on collaborative learning were categorized into eight main themes: keywords, small group composition methods, sampling methods, sample size, analysis methods, analytical frameworks, domains of educational goal, and collaborative mathematical competencies in collaborative learning. The research findings revealed several key points: First, many studies conducted at the various school grades and methodologies, help to understand various classroom environments that implement collaborative learning. Second, it was found that the researcher's subjective characteristics were largely reflected in the selection of the sample extraction method and sample size. Third, as the cognitive domain of collaborative learning mainly presents changes as results through pre- and post-academic achievement, in relation to mathematics subject competency, there have been many studies that have derived results in relation to collaborative mathematical problem solving.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Ko, H. K. (2003). Students' linguistic interaction with the development of mathematical concepts in collaborative learning using a graphing calculator: A case study. The Mathematical Education, 42(5), 607-622.
  2. Ministry of Education (2015). General curriculum of elementary and middle school (#2015-74 supplement 1). Ministry of Education.
  3. Ministry of Education (2022). General curriculum of elementary and middle school (#2022-33 supplement 1). Ministry of Education.
  4. Kim, M. O., & Kwon, S. Y. (2009). A study on the effects of small group cooperative Learning on strategies for estimating measurement -focused on 5th graders. The Mathematical Education, 48(3), 329-352.
  5. Kim, M. H., & Chang, H. W. (2020). Analysis on the sixth graders' collaborative mathematical problem solving process of a puzzle-enlarging task. School Mathematics, 22(1), 103-124.
  6. Kim. S. K., Kim. J. Y., Lee, S. J., & Lee, B. J. (2018). The cognitive load of middle school students according to problem types in collaborative learning for solving the function problems, The Mathematical Education, 57(2), 137-155. https://doi.org/10.7468/MATHEDU.2018.57.2.137
  7. Kim. S. K., Lee, S. J., Lee, B. J., & Kim. J. Y. (2020). The effect of mathematics collaborative learning using worked examples on cognitive load and motivation. School Mathematics, 22(2), 205-227.
  8. Kim. S. K. (2001). The influence of debate studies through small group activities in ability group to the improvement of the students' learning ability. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 4(1), 91-101.
  9. Kim. J. Y., Lee, S. J., Lee, B. J., & Kim. S. K. (2019). Cognitive load of middle school students while cooperatively learning mathematics using worked examples. School Mathematics, 21(1), 1-19.
  10. Kim, H. J., & Kim, Y. H. (2006). A study on the effect of cooperative learning blended with the TAI and STAD models on the students' ability of problem solving in mathematics. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 9(1), 1-17.
  11. Park, M. R., Moon, J. E., & Ju, M. K. (2015). The effect of mathematics-based Yungbokhap instruction: An analysis of participation structure in small group. School Mathematics, 17(2), 355-376.
  12. Park, Y. H. & Lee, M. H. (2004). Analysis for the influence of cooperative learning in small-group on children's mathematics learning. The Mathematical Education, 43(1), 51-74.
  13. Seo, K. S. & Ahn, J. S. (2003). The inquiry of change of mathematical belief and attitude in elementary cooperative learning class. School Mathematics, 5(4), 541-553.
  14. Song, Y. M., & Na, D. S. (2003). A study on the effect of STAD group study using gradual self-leading learning materials on the accomplishments of math curriculum. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 6(1), 65-85.
  15. Shin, H. J., Kim, S. A., & Shim, K. B. (2011). The effects of pair assistant collaborative learning on academic achievement of second year middle school students in the areas of probability and figures. Communications of Mathematical Education, 25(1), 261-288. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2011.25.1.261
  16. An, J. S. (2010). The effects of the mathematical attitude to the myself evaluation using the peer-evaluation feedback in in-group team teaching. The Mathematical Education, 49(1), 1-14.
  17. An, J. S. (2014a). The effect of academic achievement and cooperative learning attitudes via differentiated cooperative learning in a class. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 17(4), 465-492.
  18. An, J. S. (2014b). Effects on academic achievement and mathematics learning attitudes in a class using level TAI cooperative learning. Communications of Mathematical Education, 28(3), 395-422. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2014.28.3.395
  19. An. J. S. (2018). The effect of mathematical disposition and learning attitude in instruction utilizing STAD cooperative learning model. Communications of Mathematical Education, 32(2), 147-174. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2018.32.2.147
  20. Oh, Y. S., & Park, S. S. (2008). The influence of the grouping method by personality types on mathematical attitude and achievement in small group cooperative learning. Communications of Mathematical Education, 22(2), 211-227.
  21. Yoo, K. J. (2020). Effects of one-to-many tutoring mathematics cooperative learning on the cognitive and affective domains of high school students. Communications of Mathematical Education, 34(2), 161-177. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2020.34.2.161
  22. Lee, B. R., & Park, M. G. (2018). Analysis of collaborative utterances among elementary students in problem-solving process. The Mathematical Education, 57(3), 271-287. https://doi.org/10.7468/MATHEDU.2018.57.3.271
  23. Lee, S. W. (2015). The growth of school mathematics: Korean secondary gifted students' collaborative problem solving using the Wiki. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 25(4), 717-754.
  24. Lee, Y. H., & Kim, Y. H. (2000). A study of the extension of the ability of mathematics through cooperation of group work at the middle school. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 3(1), 177-188.
  25. Lee, J. K. (2006). A study of the extension of the ability of mathematics through cooperation of group work at the middle school. The Mathematical Education, 45(4), 493-505.
  26. Lee, H. C., Huh, N., & Kang, O. K. (2010). Exploring on learning process of higher-level performers during peer tutoring in mathematics. School Mathematics, 12(2), 177-191.
  27. Jun, Y. J., & Jung, W. S. (2002). The effect of cooperative learning at each level on improving problem-solving skills. Communications of Mathematical Education, 13(1), 275-286.
  28. Jun, P. K., & Lee, J. H. (2002). The effect of small group composition and cooperative learning on the affective domain due to mathematical communication anxiety. Communications of Mathematical Education, 13(2), 495-514.
  29. Jung, M. S., & Shin, H. S. (2001). A study on the pattern of usage of problem solving strategy according to its presentation. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 4(2), 135-142.
  30. Lee, J. K. (2006). An instruction of the underachieved students based on cooperative learning. The Mathematical Education, 42(3), 327-335.
  31. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2009). CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare. York Publ. Services.
  32. Colquhoun, H. L., Levac, D., O'Brien, K. K., Straus, S., Tricco, A. C., Perrier, L., Kastner, M., & Moher, D. (2014). Scoping reviews: time for clarity in definition, methods, and reporting. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(12), 1291-1294.
  33. Dodd, C., Athauda, R., & Adam, M. (2017). Designing user interfaces for the elderly: A systematic literature review. In Proceedings of the 28th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, ACIS 2017, December.
  34. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.
  35. Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1990). Cooperative learning in mathematics. In N. Davidson (Ed.), Using cooperative learning in math: A handbook for teachers. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
  36. Kitchenham, B., Brereton, O. P., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-a systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7-15.
  37. Lahann, P., & Lambdin, D. V. (2020). Collaborative learning in mathematics education. In Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 94-95). Springer.
  38. Shamseer, L. (2015). Planning a systemic review? Think protocols. BMC. http://www.prisma-statement.org/Protocols/WhyProtocols
  39. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522-526. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522
  40. Nussbaumer, D. (2012). An overview of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) use in classroom research 2000 to 2009. Educational Review, 64(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2011.553947
  41. Oakley, A. (2012). Foreword. In D. Gough, S. Oliver, & J. Thomas (Eds.), An introduction to systematic reviews (pp. 7-10). SAGE Publications.
  42. Panitz, T. (1999). Collaborative versus cooperative learning: A comparison of the two concepts which will help us understand the underlying nature of interactive learning. PUB TYPE Opinion Papers, 120. http://www.capecod.net/-TPanitz/Tedspage
  43. PRISMA (2024). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. http://www.prisma-statement.org
  44. Rother, E. T. (2007). Systematic literature review X narrative review. Acta paulista de enfermagem, 20(2), 5-6. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-21002007000200001
  45. Slavin, R. E. (1982). Cooperative learning: Student teams. What research says to the teacher. National Education Association Professional Library, PO Box 509, West Haven, CT 06516.
  46. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Ability grouping and student achievement in elementary schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 293-336. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543057003293
  47. Williams, S. R., & Leatham, K. R. (2017). Journal quality in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(4), 369-396.
  48. Walsh, D., & Downe, S. (2005). Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204-211.