• 한국과학교육학회지
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.748-757
• /
• 2004

When teachers for the gifted express metaphors about their teaching, they may develop better understanding and conceptualizing of teaching and enable to choose appropriate teaching strategies for optimizing individualized learning of the gifted. Therefore, the purpose of this study includes to explore metaphors about science teachers' teaching for the gifted in middle schools and classify into types of metaphors. The survey was administered and completed survey instruments by 66 science teachers for the gifted at gifted educational institutions affiliated with local offices of education and 18 science teachers at middle schools were analyzed. It was revealed that science teachers for the gifted described seven types of metaphors about their teaching with characteristics of student-centered (counsel, helper, etc.), teacher-centered (judge, captain, etc.), or student-teacher-interacted (painter, nurse, etc.) types. More than 60% of teachers described their teaching as either student-centered or student-teacher-interacted types. However, percentage of teachers for the teacher-centered and power-oriented type was higher for science teachers for the gifted (33%) than science teachers for regular students (22%). It was also found that female science teachers for the gifted showed higher percentage for teacher-centered and power-oriented (35%) than male teachers (28%) and teachers with BS degree showed higher percentage for student-centered and service-oriented type (33%) than teachers with MS degree (27%). In addition biology teachers for the gifted also were appeared to be more teacher-centered and power-oriented type (60%) than physics (21%), chemistry (6%), and earth science (33%).

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제25권spc5호
• /
• pp.532-547
• /
• 2007

The purposes of this study were to investigate the creative science problem solving (CSPS) process amongst scientifically-gifted students and average students through the qualitative think-aloud research method, and to compare the differences in their CSP, scientific knowledge, scientific process skills, creative thinking, and finally, the affective domain used in their CSPS. For the purposes of this study, two scientifically-gifted 6th grade students and one average student were selected. The results show that one gifted student with good creative thinking skills exhibited better performance in CSPS than the other gifted student, who had the highest level of scientific knowledge. In the case of the average student, in spite of her high level of factual knowledge, she had difficulty in proceeding in CSPS due to her shallow scientific knowledge along with her low level of understanding of the given problem. This study highlights the importance of considering the factors which influence successful CSPS and which can play an important role in the education of scientifically-gifted children. These factors were identified as scientific knowledge, understanding of the scientific process, creative thinking, the affective domain, and science problem solving skills.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제33권3호
• /
• pp.558-565
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study was to compare thinking styles between the gifted students in science and invention The subjects were 191 gifted elementary students in science and 182 gifted elementary students in invention, who enrolled in gifted education program. They were given the Thinking Style Inventory (TSI) that standardized Korea version by Yun (1997), which constructed 13 thinking styles of 5 dimensions (functions, forms, levels, scopes, and leanings of the mental self-government). The collected data were analyzed by independent sampling t-test and ANOVA with SPSS. The findings of this study were as follows: the gifted in science prefer executive, oligarchic, and global thinking styles rather than the gifted in invention. Meanwhile, the gifted in invention prefer legislative, judicial, local, and liberal thinking styles rather than the gifted in science. Both of the gifted in science and invention prefer legislative, executive, monarchic, anarchic, external, and liberal thinking styles. There was statistically significant differences between boys and girls in executive, oligarchic, local, and liberal thinking styles of the gifted in science.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제35권3호
• /
• pp.348-361
• /
• 2016

This study was done by narrative inquiry, suggested by Clandinin and Conelly (2000), in order to gain an in-depth understanding of the loneliness experienced by a scientifically gifted elementary school student. The participant of this study was sixth grade student from the Institute for Science Gifted in C University. The data were gathered via in-depth interviews and observations on the participant and her teachers. Based on these research findings, this study can make the following four conclusions with regard to the loneliness experienced by a gifted elementary school student in science. First, some characteristics of the gifted child may make her feel loneliness in the relationships she has with peers, siblings, and parents. Second, parent's repression makes the gifted child feels lonely. Third, the gifted child who feels lonely get consolation from her own subjective world and wants to get recognition from others. Fourth, the educational institute for the gifted serves as a place of education that fosters the gifted child's cognitive development and simultaneously it is where she can form positive relationships with her peers, as well as being a place of emotional comfort.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.437-445
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to examine about science gifted class student's effect of education for the science gifted class. For this, 21 item-questionnaires were given to 292 students at the 4th, 5th and 6th graders in 3 elementary gifted schools located in Incheon. The results of this study were as follows: First, science gifted students were positive in effect of gifted class. This was more positive as class is low. Second, gifted students are thinking that it is helped to own learning that study at gifted class in cognitive side but appeared relatively low regarding school record or utterance, study method, thinking faculty, creativity. Third, they did not think that is exerting a lot of effects about own habit that study, interest, pride in emotional side. Fourth, they thought that is effective in relation with new friends more than teachers and parents in sociocultural side. Fifth, in private tutoring side they thought that is not influencing to solve academy taking a course of decrease.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.219-227
• /
• 2004

This study aims to investigate science teaching and learning for the gifted in comparison with regular classrooms in elementary schools. A questionnaire was developed to survey gifted and general students＇ perceptions to elementary science teaching and teaming with employing a teaching and learning model for the gifted by Maker and Neilson (1995, 1996). The 28 item questionnaire consisted of four categories of content, teaching and teaming process, student product, and learning environment, and each category included six to nine items. Randomly selected 114 students from gifted classes and 99 students for regular classes responded to the questionnaire through the use of five-point Likert scale. It was found that there are significant differences between gifted and regular classes of science at all four categories of the teaching and learning model for the gifted. Therefore, science teaching and teaming for the gifted seemed to be differentiated from regular classes and emphasized students＇ creativity. However, no differences were appeared in a few items: study of gifted people and research methods (gifted=3.0; regular=.21 F=2.54), students＇ freedom of choice for topics of lessons, tasks, etc., (gifted=3.1; regular=3.0, F=0.31), student product addressed to real audience (gifted=2.8, regular=2.6, F=0.96), and students＇ high mobility to seek for data in library, etc. during class periods (gifted=2.3, regular= 2.3, F=0.01). It was concluded that science education for the gifted in Korea calls for quality improvement in terms of teaching and teaming in various aspects.

• 영재교육연구
• /
• 제11권3호
• /
• pp.85-97
• /
• 2001

현재 각 대학에서 운영되고 있는 과학영재교육센터 사업의 성과를 얻기 위해서는 여러 요소들이 고려되어야 한다. 그 중 과학영재들과 관련되어 그들의 과학과 과학자에 대한 인식도 중요한 한가지 요소가 될 것이다. 이에 과학영재들의 과학과 과학자에 대한 인식과 과학 관련 직업 의식을 조사하여, 이를 바탕으로 과학영재 교육에 대한 시사점을 찾고자 하였다. 조사는 설문으로 이루어졌는데, ‘과학과 사회’, ‘과학과 과학자’, ‘과학과 나’, ‘과학’ 등의 영역에서 8가지 세부 항목에 대해 자유롭게 서술하도록 하였다. 설문 분석 결과 과학 영재들은 과학의 긍정적인 영향으로 주로 생활의 편리성을 들었고, 주로 환경오염 등을 제시하였다. 과학자를 보는 시각은 연구를 하는 사람, 노력하는 사람, 그래서 다른 일에 소홀히 하는 사람으로 보고 있다. 존경하는 과학자로는 아인슈타인이나 에디슨 등 외국 과학자가 많았다. 과학과 관련된 직업으로는 과학자가 주를 이루었고, 과학교사나 연구원 등이 있었다. 한편 모든 직업이 과학과 관련된다고 여기는 과학영재들도 있었다. 원하는 직업으로는 과학자가 많았지만, 의사나 한의사, 사업가, 가수 등도 있었다. 과학이란 단어가 주는 이미지는 신기함이나 어려움, 복잡함, 과학자, 인공위성, 원소, 화학 등 매우 다양하였다.

• 영재교육연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.307-337
• /
• 2007

이 연구의 목적은 초등학교와 중학교의 영재학생들을 대상으로 TTCT(Torrance Test of Creative Thinking)를 실시하여 창의성 영재를 선발하고, 선발된 창의성 영재들의 창의적 특성들이 초등학생과 중학생 간, 수학영재와 과학영재 간 어떤 차이가 있는가를 밝힘으로써 창의성 영재들의 창의적 특성을 규명해 보려는 것이다. 이를 위해 전라북도교육청 산하 17개 영재교육원 학생 중 수퍼영재교육을 희망한 594명을 대상으로 창의성 영재를 선발, 초등학생과 중학생의 창의성 요인의 차이 검증(t-test), 수학영재와 과학영재의 창의성 요인의 차이검증(t-test), 창의성 영재선발에 영향을 미치는 창의성 요인들의 초 중학생 간 및 수학영재 과학영재 간 차이검증(중다회귀분석)을 하였다. 연구결과, TTCT는 창의성 영재 선발과 탈락을 변별하는 역량이 있으나, 창의성 요인 중 '유창성'과 '독창성', '유창성'과 '정교성' 간에는 각각 .78, .50의 상관계수를 보여 창의성 요인의 고유성이 낮을 가능성이 발견되었다. 또 중학생은 초등학생에 비해 유창성(원 그림)과 정교성 요인(그림구성, 그림완성, 원 그림), 제목의 추상성(그림구성)이 유의하게 낮으며, 과학 영재는 수학영재에 비해 독창성(그림구성)과 정교성(그림구성, 그림완성, 원 그림) 요인에서 유의하게 높게 나타났다. 따라서 창의성 영재 선발을 위한 검사의 타당도를 높이기 위한 방법이 계속 연구되어야 하며, 학년이 높아지면서 창의성이 낮아지는 문제의 해결방법과 교과별 영재의 창의성을 기르기 위한 방안이 모색될 필요가 있다.

• 대한지구과학교육학회지
• /
• 제4권3호
• /
• pp.242-250
• /
• 2011

The present study compared the contents and methods of elementary science education in schools and education institutes for the gifted and surveyed the contents and methods of science education for the gifted desired by students in order to set the direction of elementary science education at education institutes for the gifted. For this study, we conducted interviews with a 5th-grade male student and a 6th-grade female student at the science class of the Education Institutes for the Gifted run by Iksan Education Office. Besides, printed materials were collected and used to refer to the contents of education. The results of this study are as follows. First, in school, the student learn according to the curriculum defined by the government and the contents begin with elementary and basic ones and move step by step to deeper and wider scientific principles. On the contrary, in the education institute for the gifted, the contents of teaching materials are decided at the teacher's discretion, and because they target gifted children, their level is higher than that of the science curriculum in school. Second, the most common teaching method in school is lecturing and, next, experiments, group activities, etc. On the contrary, in the education institute for the gifted, experiments are used most frequently, and various educational methods are adopted including lectures, project learning and cyber learning. Third, the contents of science education that gifted children wanted to learn are not limited to any specific area. Science education methods that gifted children wanted were various, including project learning, group activities, experiments, and report making and presentation.

• 한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육
• /
• 제37권4호
• /
• pp.440-454
• /
• 2018

This study aims to compare student self-, teacher-, and objective assessments of elementary science-gifted students' scientific creativity. A science-gifted program on the topic of Hydraulic Machine was implemented to 40 fifth-graders in the Science-Gifted Education Center of an education office in Seoul, Korea for four weeks. The products of the students' activities were assessed by three types of 'Student Self-Assesment', 'Teacher-Assesment', and 'Objective Assessment using Formula'. Based on two essential components of creativity, the scientific creativity is divided into two parts of originality and usefulness. Ideas that satisfy both components can be counted as scientifically creative. The main results of this study are as follows: First, the scores of each week and the average of the overall four-week scores on scientific creativity were significantly correlated. Student self-assessment (r=.687), teacher-assessment (r=.715), and objective assessment (r=.724) appeared consistently over instructional periods. Second, the average scores of student self-, objective, and teacher-assessments were 73.15, 35.72, and 26.60, respectively. The result of student self-assessment on scientific creativity tended to be higher than those of formula and teacher. Third, among the three types of assessment on scientific creativity, a strong correlation appeared between teacher- and objective assessment (r=.974), but neither between student self- and objective (r=.161) nor between student self- and teacher- (r=.213). Fourth, the scores on originality component had a positive correlation between teacher- and objective assessment (r=.713). The scores of student self- and teacher-assessments had a significant correlation too (r=.315), but not between student self- and objective assessment (r=.279). Fifth, the scores on usefulness component did not have a significant correlation between student self- and teacher-assessment (r=.155). Sixth, there was no significant difference on scientific creativity between student self- and objective assessment [${\chi}^2$(1, n=40)=1.667, p<.197]. Not between student self- and teacher-assessment either [${\chi}^2$(1, n=40)=1.616, p<.204]. On the contrary, there was a significant difference between teacher- and objective assessment [${\chi}^2$(1, n=40)=32.593, p<.000]. Seventh, the students were categorized into four groups according to the levels of their scores by student self- and teacher-assessment. The result showed that factors influencing student self-assessment are inherent in the personality traits of gifted individuals, such as self-esteem and perfectionism. The findings suggested that there are challenges for the educators to make efforts to construct consistent assessment methods for scientific creativity.