[논문]영어 평가 지문 읽기에서 영어 영재 학생과 일반 중학생의 메타인지 읽기전략 사용 차이에 대한 연구

방준

doi:10.5392/jkca.2020.20.01.345

[국내논문] 영어 평가 지문 읽기에서 영어 영재 학생과 일반 중학생의 메타인지 읽기전략 사용 차이에 대한 연구
Differences in Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategy Use in English Test-typed Text Reading between Gifted English Language Learners and General Middle School Learners 원문보기

한국콘텐츠학회논문지 = The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, v.20 no.1, 2020년, pp.345 - 355

방준 (부산광역시영재교육진흥원 연구팀)

초록
AI-Helper

본 연구의 목적은 영어 영재 학생들과 일반 중학생의 영어 평가 지문을 읽는 동안 메타인지 읽기전략사용의 차이점을 알아보고자 하는데 있다. 이를 위해, C시의 영어 영재 74명과 일반 중학생 90명을 대상으로 연구를 실시하였다. 두 그룹의 연구 대상자들의 메타인지 읽기전략을 살펴보기 위해 학기 말에 두 연구대상자들에게 MARSI 설문지를 배포하여 작성하게 하였다. 연구 대상자들의 메타인지 읽기전략의 차이점을 분석하기 위해 빈도 분석과 t-검정을 실시하였다. 그 결과, 일반적으로 영어 영재 학생들과 일반 중학생들이 영어 평가 지문을 읽는 동안의 메타인지 읽기전략 사용에는 차이를 보였다. 다시 말해, 영어 영재 학생들이 일반 중학생들에 비해 영어 평가 지문 읽기에서 더 자주 메타인지 읽기전략을 사용하는 것으로 나타났다. 개별 전략에 대해 말하자면, 영어 영재 학생들이 일반 중학생들에 비해 총체적 전략과 문제해결 전략을 더 자주 사용하는 것으로 나타났다. 하지만, 두 그룹의 연구대상자들은 지원전략의 사용에서는 통계적으로 유의미한 차이를 보이지는 않았다. 이 연구 결과를 바탕으로 본 연구는 영어 영재 학생들과 일반 중학생을 위한 효과적인 영어 읽기 지도에 대한 교육적인 시사점을 제공할 것이다.

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

The purpose of this study was to explore the differences of the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies which gifted English language learners (GELLs) and general middle school learners (GMSLs) used while reading English test-typed texts. 74 GELLs in a gifted program of C city and 90 GMSLs in the southern part of C city participated in this study. The MARSI questionnaire was administered to the GELLs and GMSLs at the end of the semester. Frequency and t-test were used to examine the differences in metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use between GELLs and GSMLs when reading the English test-typed texts. Based on the analysis, the study discovered that GELLs were likely to use metacognitive awareness of reading strategies more frequently than GMSLs. Also, GELLs tended to use more global and problem-solving strategies than GMSLs. However, there is no significant difference in support strategy use between the two groups. In conclusion, the study suggests pedagogical implications for GELLs and GMSLs' effective English reading.

Keyword

표/그림 (9)

표 Table 1. Detailed information about the participants
표 Table 2. Difference of global, problem-solving, and support strategy use
표 Table 3. Global strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs
그림 Figure 1. Global strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs
표 Table 4. Problem-solving strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs
그림 Figure 2. Problem-solving strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs
표 Table 5. Support strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs
그림 Figure 3. Support strategy use between gifted English language learners and general middle school students
표 Table 6. Top and bottom five strategies between GELLs and GMSLs

AI 본문요약
AI-Helper

* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.

문제 정의

The purpose of this study was to explore the differences in metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs while reading test-typed texts in English. In order to do so, the study investigated the differences of metacognitive reading strategies GELLs and GMSLs used while reading the English texts.
The study showed that gifted learners in language tended to use more metacognitive awareness of reading strategies than gifted learners in math and science and general learners. These studies provided useful insights about the differences of metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use within gifted learners or between gifted learners and general ones while they read texts. However, few studies have been conducted about metacognitive awareness of reading strategies which GELLs used in their English reading compared to GMSLs.
The purpose of this study was to examine the differences in metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs in the English test-typed text reading. As a result of data analysis, it was found that GELLs used a greater number of metacognitive awareness of reading strategies than GMSLs, which is consistent with the findings in Choi and Jin's study[3].

제안 방법

The purpose of this study was to explore the differences in metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs while reading test-typed texts in English. In order to do so, the study investigated the differences of metacognitive reading strategies GELLs and GMSLs used while reading the English texts. Also, it examined the differences in the subscales of metacognitive awareness of reading strategies between two groups when reading the texts.
For this study, the MARSI questionnaire was translated from English into Korean. After the translation, the questionnaire was revised to help the participants understand each question better by asking three middle school learners to read for checking whether they could understand the questionnaire.
The participants read the English test-typed texts, which consisted of 5 English passages and 4 questions about each passage. After reading, the questionnaire was administered to participants directly.

대상 데이터

The participants are 74 GELLs enrolled in a program for gifted learners in C city and 90 GMSLs matriculated in the middle of the Southern part of C city. [Table 1] below shows the detailed information of the participants.
As [Table 1] shows, all the participants are middle school students. The GELLs are 57 female learners and 17 male ones. The first grade GELLs are 36 and the second ones are 38.

데이터처리

Descriptive statistics were used to find out frequency, percentages, means, and standard deviations. The paired t-test was employed to figure out the differences in metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use between GELLs and GMSLs.

성능/효과

The study showed that gifted learners in language tended to use more metacognitive awareness of reading strategies than gifted learners in math and science and general learners.
Based on the findings, some pedagogical implications can be provided. First, the findings showed that GMSLs used less metacognitive awareness of reading strategies than GELLs, suggesting that GMSLs should be encouraged and motivated to use more metacognitive awareness of reading strategies more effectively and frequently in their English reading. Second, the results indicated that both groups tended to use fewer support strategies than the two others, which means that learners, in general, were unlikely to analyze or evaluate text information.
First, the findings showed that GMSLs used less metacognitive awareness of reading strategies than GELLs, suggesting that GMSLs should be encouraged and motivated to use more metacognitive awareness of reading strategies more effectively and frequently in their English reading. Second, the results indicated that both groups tended to use fewer support strategies than the two others, which means that learners, in general, were unlikely to analyze or evaluate text information. Thus, the learners should be provided trainings to practice analyzing and evaluating the information which they get from the texts by asking themselves question about texts or taking notes while reading.

참고문헌 (25)

C. Y. Ahn and M. S. Han, "A study on the use of high school students' metacognitive strategies in accordance with the degree of difficulty of reading passages and the students' level," Journal of Learner-Center Curriculum and Instruction, Vol.16, No.5, pp.787-809, 2016.
M. A. Jung and N. K. Kim, "Reading strategies in L1 and L2: Comparison of Korean EFL learners' reading strategy use," Studies Modern Grammar, Vol.68, pp.211-240, 2012.
S. I. Choi and S. K. Jin, "Exploring of the validity of reading metacognition inventory for identifying gifted students' in languages," The Journal of the Korean Society for the Gifted and Talented, Vol.14, No.3, pp.103-126, 2015.
E. Berlowwitz and T. Cicchelli, "Metacognitive strategy use in reading of gifted high school achieving and gifted underachieving middle school students in New York City," Emotion and Urban Society, Vol.37, No.1, pp.37-57, 2004.
C. R. Fehrenbach, "Gifted / average readers: Do they use the same reading strategy?," Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol.35, pp.125-127, 1991.

상세보기
H. J. Feldhusen, Individualized teaching of gifted children in regular classroom, New York:D.O.K., 1989.
J. S. Renzulli, What Makes Giftedness?, New York:Chronicle Guidance, 1978.
A. H. Passow, "The nature of giftedness and talent," Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol.25, pp.5-10, 1981.

상세보기
A. M. Blackburn, L. Cornish, and S. Smith, "Gifted English language learners: Global understanding and Australian perspectives," Journal for the Education of the Gifted, Vol.39, No.4, pp.338-360, 2016.

상세보기
T. Deveau, "Strategies for gifted second language learners," Academic Exchange Quarterly, March 22, 2006.
K. Gallagher, Deep Reading, Portland:Stern house, 2004.
P. Hoh, "The linguistic advantage of the intellectually gifted child: An empirical study of spontaneous speech," Reeper Rev., Vol.27, No.3, pp.178-185, 2005.

상세보기
J. VanTassel-Baska, "The on-going dilemma of effective identification practices in gifted education," The Communicator, Vol.31, pp.87-99, 2000.
D. Durkin, "Matching classroom instruction with reading abilities: An unmet need," Remedial and Special Education, Vol.11, No.3, pp.23-28, 1990.

상세보기
N. F. Jackson, "Precocious Reading ability: What does it mean?," Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol.32, pp.200-204, 1988.

상세보기
B. Clark, Grouping up gifted, Columbia: Merrill/ Practice Hall, 1997.
J. A. Dole and P. J. Adams, "Reading curriculum for gifted readers: A survey," Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol.27, pp.64-72, 1983.

상세보기
C. Dooley, "The challenge: Meeting the needs of gifted readers," Reading Teacher, Vol.46, pp.546-551, 1993.

상세보기
S. Kaplan, "Reading strategies for gifted readers," Teaching for High Potential, Vol.1, No.2, pp.1-2, 1999.
D. Levande, "Identifying and serving the gifted reader," Reading Improvement, Vol.30, pp.147-150, 1993.

상세보기
J. H. Flavell, "Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry," American Psychologist, Vol.34, pp.906-907, 1979.

상세보기
K. E. Snyder, J. L. Nierfeld, and L. Linnenbrink-Garcia, "Giftedness and metacognition: A short-term longitudinal investigation of metacognitive monitoring in the classroom," Gifted Child Quarterly, Vol.55, No.3, pp.181-193, 2011.

상세보기
M. Carr and G. Taasoobshirazi, "Metacognition: A recent review of research, theory, and perspective," M. F. Shaughness, M. V. J. Veenman, and C. Kleyn-Kennedy(eds.), Metacognition in the Gifted : Connections to Expertise, New York:Nova, Chapter 6, pp.109-125, 2008.
K. Mokhtari and R. Sheorey "Measuring ESL students' awareness of reading strategies," Journal of Development Education, Vol.25, No.3, pp.2-10, 2002.
J. Bang, "Metacognitive reading strategy use in L1 and L2 reading between general middle school learners and gifted English language learners," Advanced Science Letters, Vol.23, No.10, pp.10451-10455, 2017.

상세보기

활용도 분석정보

상세보기

다운로드

내보내기

활용도 Top5 논문

해당 논문의 주제분야에서 활용도가 높은 상위 5개 콘텐츠를 보여줍니다.
더보기 버튼을 클릭하시면 더 많은 관련자료를 살펴볼 수 있습니다.

표제어: PCR

동의어: Packet Collision Rate

용어 설명 출처 목록 (6)

용어 설명: PCR은 세균 특이성이 있는 primer를 이용하여 적은 수의 세균이 있을지라도 쉽게 검출할 수 있는 유용한 방법이며, 이를 이용하여 구강 내 치면세균막이나 타액에서 직접 세균을 검출할 수 있게 되었다[8].

내보내기 구분	파일저장 인쇄 메일전송
구성항목	기본정보 상세정보 관리번호, 논문명, 저널/프로시딩명, 저자 , 발행년, 권, 호, 시작페이지, 끝페이지, 발행기관 관리번호, 논문명, 대등논문명, 저자 , 저널/프로시딩명, 발행기관, 발행년, 발행언어, 권, 호, 시작페이지, 끝페이지, ISBN, ISSN, 주제분야, 키워드, 초록(한글), 초록(영문), 저자(소속기관)
저장형식	Text(ASCII format) Excel format RefWorks Direct Export RIS format (for Reference Manager, ProCite, EndNote), Scholar's Aids, Mendeley
메일정보	받는사람 (필수) @ 보내는사람 (선택) @ 제목 내용 KISTI 검색결과 이메일 서비스
안내	총 건의 자료가 검색되었습니다. 다운받으실 자료의 인덱스를 입력하세요. (1-10,000) 검색결과의 순서대로 최대 10,000건 까지 다운로드가 가능합니다. 데이타가 많을 경우 속도가 느려질 수 있습니다.(최대 2~3분 소요) 다운로드 파일은 UTF-8 형태로 저장됩니다. 파일의 내용이 제대로 보이지 않을실 때는 웹브라우저 상단의 보기 -> 인코딩 -> 자동선택 여부를 확인하십시오. ~ Text(ASCII format) Excel format