최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기한국과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean association for science education, v.38 no.4, 2018년, pp.467 - 480
This study aims to investigate how flipped learning-based socioscientific issue instruction (FL-SSI instruction) affected middle school students' key competencies and character development. Traditional classrooms are constrained in terms of time and resources for exploring the issues and making deci...
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
플립러닝이란 무엇인가? | 본 연구에서는 SSI 교수학습 상황에서 야기되는 어려움을 해결할 수 있는 방안으로 플립러닝(flipped learning, FL)을 도입하고자 하였다. 플립러닝은 전통적인 교수방법의 순서를 뒤집는 방식으로, 교수자가 사전에 제작한 동영상을 학생들로 하여금 수업 전 미리 시청하도록 함으로써 수업시간에는 토의⋅토론 등 보다 학습자가 중심이 되는 수업에 참여하도록 하는 전략이다(Bergmann & Sams, 2012;Kim et al., 2014; Lee, 2014). | |
과학과 기술이 거듭 발전함에 따라 나타난 다양한 사회⋅윤리적 쟁점들의 예는 무엇이 있는가? | 과학과 기술이 거듭 발전함에 따라 인류는 다양한 사회⋅윤리적 쟁점들에 직면하게 된다. 줄기세포 연구로 인한 인간 존엄성의 위협, 유전자 조작 식품(GMO)의 안정성 논란, 화학물질에의 노출, 미세먼지로 인한 질병 문제 등이 그 예이다. 과학교육 연구자들은 이를 과학 기술관련 사회쟁점(socioscientific issues, 이하 SSI)이라 칭하고, SSI 교육을 통해 과학기술 사회를 살아가는 시민들이 해당 문제에 관심을 갖는 데서 나아가 해결방안 마련을 위해 서로 논의하며 문제를 해결 하는데 참여하는 역량을 기를 것을 강조한다(Zeidler et al. | |
SSI 교육을 통해 무엇을 강조하는가? | 줄기세포 연구로 인한 인간 존엄성의 위협, 유전자 조작 식품(GMO)의 안정성 논란, 화학물질에의 노출, 미세먼지로 인한 질병 문제 등이 그 예이다. 과학교육 연구자들은 이를 과학 기술관련 사회쟁점(socioscientific issues, 이하 SSI)이라 칭하고, SSI 교육을 통해 과학기술 사회를 살아가는 시민들이 해당 문제에 관심을 갖는 데서 나아가 해결방안 마련을 위해 서로 논의하며 문제를 해결 하는데 참여하는 역량을 기를 것을 강조한다(Zeidler et al., 2005). |
Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio-scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 67-90.
Bae, J., Kim, J., Kim, E., & So, K. (2015). The effect of elementary free inquiry lessons utilizing flipped learning with smart devices on the elementary students’ digital literacy, 21st century skills and scientific attitude. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 34(4), 476-485.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Oregon: International Society for Technology in Education.
Bowers, C. (1999). Changing the dominant cultural perspective in education. In G. A. Smith & D. R. Williams (Eds.), Ecological education in action: On weaving education, culture, and the environment (pp. 161-178). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Bryce, T., & Gray, D. (2004). Tough acts to follow: The challenges to science teachers presented by biotechnological progress. International Journal of Science Education, 26(6), 717-733.
Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S. W., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Reconceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 670-697.
Chung, Y., Yoo, J., Kim, S. W., Lee, H., & Zeidler, D. L. (2016). Enhancing student’s communication skills in the science classroom through socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1),1-27.
Colucci-Gray, L., Camino, E., Barbiero, G., & Gray, D. (2006). From scientific literacy to sustainability literacy: An ecological framework for education. Science Education, 90(2), 227-252.
Dreyfus, A., & Roth, Z. (1991). Twelfth-grade biology pupils’ opinions on interventions of man in nature: Agreement, indifference and ambivalence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(1),81-95.
Evagorou, M., Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Osborne, J. (2012). ‘Should we kill the grey squirrels?’A study exploring students’ justifications and decision-making. International Journal of Science Education, 34(3), 401-428.
Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279-296.
Grace, M., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1157-1169.
Gray, D. S., & Bryce, T. (2006). Socio-scientific issues in science education: Implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(2), 171-192.
Heo, H., Lim, K., Seo, J., & Kim, Y. (2011). Developing 21st century teaching and learning activities for supporting future school 1: Modeling 21st century learner competencies and teacher competencies (KR 2011-2). Korea Education and Research Information Service.
Hodson, D. (1999). Going beyond cultural pluralism: Science education for sociopolitical action. Science Education, 83(6), 775-796.
Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups’ ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(4), 341-368.
Kim, J., Ko, Y., & Lee, H. (2016). Effects of socioscientific issues instruction on elementary school students’ character and values as a global citizens. The Journal of Elementary Education, 29(3), 1-25.
Kim, N., Chun, B., & Choi, J. (2014). A case study of flipped learning at college: Focused on effects of motivation and self-efficacy. Journal of Educational Technology, 30(3), 467-492.
Kim, S., Kim, H., Lee, K., & Lee, S. (2000). Focus group method. Seoul: Hyunmoon.
Ko, Y., & Lee, H. (2017). Comparison of the effects of socioscientific issues instruction on promoting college students’ character and values: Based on idiocentrism and allocentrism. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(3), 395-405.
Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310.
Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science & Creativity[KOFAC]. (2010). A Study on creativity and character education for fostering talented person to practice caring and sharing. Seoul: KOFAC.
Lee, M. (2014). Signification of Flipped classroom by sociology of classroom: Focusing on the experience of teachers. Korean Journal of Sociology of Education, 24(2), 181-207.
Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers’ perceptions of the introduction of socioscientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 6(2), 97-117.
Lee, H., Chang, H., Choi, K., Kim, S., & Zeidler, D. L. (2012). Developing character and values for global citizens: Analysis of pre-service science teachers’ moral reasoning on socioscientific issues. International Journal of Science Education, 34(6), 925-953.
Lee, H., Yoo, J., Choi, K., Kim, S.-W., Krajcik, J. S., Herman, B. C., & Zeidler, D. L. (2013). Socioscientific issues as a vehicle for promoting character and values for global citizens. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2079-2113.
Levinson, R. (2004). Teaching bioethics in science: Crossing a bridge too far?. Canadian Journal of Math, Science &Technology Education, 4(3), 353-369.
Ministry of Education (2015). Korea national curriculum standards (2015-74). Sejong: Ministry of Education.
Mun, K., Lee, H., Kim, S. W., Choi, K., Choi, S. Y., & Krajcik, J. S. (2015). Cross-cultural comparison of perceptions on the global scientific literacy with Australian, Chinese, and Korean middle school students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(2), 437-465.
Partnership for the 21st Century Skills [P21]. (2009). A framework for 21st century learning. Washington, DC: P21.
Ratcliffe, M., & Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: Teaching socio-scientific issues. London: Open University Press.
Rivero, V. (2013). Flipping out: A new model to reach all students all ways. Internet@Schools, 20(1), 14-16.
Roth, W. M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2), 263-294.
Ruiz, P. O., & Vallejos, R. M. (1999). The role of compassion in moral education. Journal of Moral Education, 28(1), 5-17.
Sadler, T. D. (2004a). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
Sadler, T. D. (2004b). Moral sensitivity and its contribution to the resolution of socio-scientific issues. Journal of Moral Education, 33(3), 339-358.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues. Science Education, 89(1), 71-93.
Smith, G. A., & Williams, D. R. (1999). Ecological education in action: On weaving education, culture, and the environment. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Sperling, E., & Bencze, J. L. (2010). “More than particle theory”: Citizenship through school science. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(3), 255-266.
Stern, P.C., Dietz, T., & Kalof, L. (1993). Value orientations, gender, and environmental concern. Environment & Behavior, 25, 322-348.
The Ontario Public Service (2016). 21st century competencies: Foundation document for discussion. Phase 1: Towards defining 21st century competencies for Ontario. Ontario, Canada: Queen's Printer for Ontario.
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Zeidler, D. L., &Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Applebaum, S., & Callahan, B. E. (2009). Advancing reflective judgment through socioscientific issues. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 74-101.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.
Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.
*원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다.
Free Access. 출판사/학술단체 등이 허락한 무료 공개 사이트를 통해 자유로운 이용이 가능한 논문
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.