$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

연합인증

연합인증 가입 기관의 연구자들은 소속기관의 인증정보(ID와 암호)를 이용해 다른 대학, 연구기관, 서비스 공급자의 다양한 온라인 자원과 연구 데이터를 이용할 수 있습니다.

이는 여행자가 자국에서 발행 받은 여권으로 세계 각국을 자유롭게 여행할 수 있는 것과 같습니다.

연합인증으로 이용이 가능한 서비스는 NTIS, DataON, Edison, Kafe, Webinar 등이 있습니다.

한번의 인증절차만으로 연합인증 가입 서비스에 추가 로그인 없이 이용이 가능합니다.

다만, 연합인증을 위해서는 최초 1회만 인증 절차가 필요합니다. (회원이 아닐 경우 회원 가입이 필요합니다.)

연합인증 절차는 다음과 같습니다.

최초이용시에는
ScienceON에 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 로그인 (본인 확인 또는 회원가입) → 서비스 이용

그 이후에는
ScienceON 로그인 → 연합인증 서비스 접속 → 서비스 이용

연합인증을 활용하시면 KISTI가 제공하는 다양한 서비스를 편리하게 이용하실 수 있습니다.

[국내논문] 과학기술 연구자들의 경험을 통해 살펴본 학제간 협업 -인식, 어려움 그리고 극복전략을 중심으로-
Interdisciplinary Collaboration in the Experiences of Science and Technology Researchers: Focusing on the Perceptions, Difficulties, and Overcoming Strategies 원문보기

한국과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean association for science education, v.43 no.2, 2023년, pp.151 - 166  

이준기 (전북대학교) ,  황효정 (전북대학교) ,  백수복 (전북대학교) ,  신세인 (충북대학교)

초록
AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

이 연구에서는 학제간 융합 연구를 수행해본 경험을 가진 과학기술 연구자들이 학제간 협업에 대하여 어떠한 인식을 가지고 있으며 협업과정에서 경험하는 어려움 및 그 어려움을 극복하고자 세우는 전략들에는 어떠한 유형이 있는지 확인하고자 하였다. 이를 위하여 학제간 협업에 대한 태도를 확인하는 5점 리커트 척도 문항들과 협업 경험에서 겪는 어려움 및 어려움 극복전략에 관해 서술하는 개방형 문항들이 혼합된 형태의 설문지를 개발하여 국내 과학기술 연구자 79명에게 투입한 후 자료를 수집하였으며 수집한 자료는 양적·질적으로 분석되었다. 연구결과, 과학기술 연구자들의 협업 태도 하위구인 중 협업의 효능감 인식이 협업의 의도에 중요한 영향을 미치는 것으로 확인되었으나 협업의 효능감 대한 연구참여자들의 인식 수준은 비교적 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 또한 학제간 협업과정에서 겪는 어려움은 4가지 유형(가치지향 상충, 사고방식 차이, 용어나 개념 차이, 상대분야에 대한 편견과 상호 몰이해)으로 나타났으며 이를 극복하기 위한 전략은 7가지 유형(협상과 타협을 통한 상호 양보, 공통의 언어나 매개물의 설정과 유지, 명확한 역할의 분담, 지속적인 만남과 토의, 용어의 의미조율과 모델과 가정에 대한 사전 규정, 상대 분야에 대한 있는 그대로의 인정, 타자에 대한 배려와 관심)으로 확인되었다. 이와 같은 연구 결과를 바탕으로 현대 과학의 주요한 본성인 다원주의적 특성과 그 안에서 이루어지는 다양한 협업의 특성을 반영하는 융합교육이 이루어져야 함을 제언하였다.

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

This study identified the perceptions of science and technology researchers about interdisciplinary collaboration and the difficulties experienced in the collaboration process and the types of strategies they set up to overcome them. For this study, a questionnaire was developed with five-point Like...

Keyword

#융합교육   #학제간 협업   #과학기술 연구자   #통약불가능   #협업의 효능감  

표/그림 (5)

참고문헌 (73)

  1. Ahn, H. Y. (2012). The Biologism within consilience: How physics makes？an effect on the shape of biology. Korean Journal of General Education,？6(3), 691-719. 

  2. Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Kim, R., Schulz, J., Henrich, J., Shariff, A., Bonnefon,？J. F., & Rahwan, I. (2018). The Moral Machine experiment. Nature,？563(7729), 59-64. 

  3. Bak, H. J. (2007). Perceptions and evaluation of norms of science among？Korean scientific community. Journal of Science & Tecnology Studies,？7(2), 91-124. 

  4. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral？change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. 

  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social？Cognitive Theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

  6. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual？Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26. 

    상세보기

  7. Bochatay, N., Bajwa, N. M., Blondan, K. S., Perron, N. J., Cullati, S., &？Nendaz, M. R. (2019). Exploring group boundaries and conflicts: a？social identity theory perspective. Medical Education, 53(8), 799-807. 

    상세보기

  8. Bueno, O. (2011). When physics and biology meet: The nanoscale case.？Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 42, 180-189. 

  9. Bueno, O. (2012). Styles of reasoning: A pluralist view. Studies in History？and Philosophy of Science, 43, 657-665. 

  10. Chang, H. (2014). Pluralism as a new Framework for integrated HPS. Korean？Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 17(2), 153-173. 

  11. Cho, Y., Woo, C., & Choi, J. (2017). Performance analysis on collaborative？activities of multidisciplinary research in government research？Institutes. Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society, 20(4),？1089-1121. 

  12. Collins, H. (2004). Interactional expertise as a third kinds of knowledge.？Phenomenology and cognitive Science, 3, 125-143. 

  13. Collins, H. (2011). Language and practice. Social Studies of Science, 41(2),？271-300. 

    상세보기

  14. Collins, H., Evans, R., Gorman, M (2007). Trading zones and interactional？expertise. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 38, 657-666. 

  15. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing？among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE？Publications. 

  16. Crombie, A. C. (1994). Styles of scientific thinking in the European tradition？(3 volumes). London: Duckworth. 

  17. Dorner, D., & Funke, J. (2017). Complex problem solving: What it is and？what it is not. Frontiers in Psychology 8(1153), 1-11. 

  18. Funke, J. (2012). Complex problem solving. N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia？of the Sciences of Learning (682-685). Heidelberg: Springer. 

  19. Fuselier, L., MacFadden, J., & King, K. R. (2019). Do biologists' conceptions？of science as a social epistemology align with critical contextual？empiricism?. Science & Education, 28(9). 1001-1025. 

  20. Galison, P. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics.？Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. 

  21. Gorman, M. E. (2002). Level of expertise and trading zones: A framework？for multidisciplinary collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 32(5/6).？933-938. 

  22. Gorman, M. E., Groves, F., & Shrager, J. (2004). Societal dimensions of？nanotechnology as a trading zone: results from a pilot project. In D.？Baird, A. Nordmann, & J. Schummer (Eds.), Discovering the？Nanoscale, Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press. 

  23. Hacking, I. (1985). Styles of scientific thinking. In J. Rajchman & C. West？(Eds.), Postanalytic philosophy (pp. 145-165). New York: Columbia？University Press. 

  24. Han, K. (2016). Convergence, consilience and reduction. The Journal of？Human Studies, 41, 173-194. 

  25. Humphreys, P. (2018). Knowledge transfer across scientific disciplines.？Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 

  26. Jung, S. M. (2001). Molecular Biology and Incommensurability. Korean？Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 4(2), 1-31. 

  27. Kim, A. Y., & Sinatra, G. M. (2018). Science identity development: an？interactionist approach. International Journal of STEM Education,？5(51), 1-12. 

  28. Kim, B. G. (2017). Deciphering the Genetic Code in the RNA Tie Club:？Observations on Multidisciplinary Research and a Common Research？Agenda. Journal of Science & Technology Studies, 17(1), 72-115. 

  29. Kim, E., & Lee, S. (2018a). Application and selection status of National？Research Fund of Korea(NRF)'s interdisciplinary convergent research？project and implication for convergence researcher. Asia-Pacific？Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and？Sociology, 8(3), 499-510. 

  30. Kim, E., & Lee, S. (2018b). The experiences and satisfaction of researchers？supported by the Interdisciplinary research projects. Asia-Pacific？Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and？Sociology, 8(1), 33-50. 

  31. Kim, E., Lee, S., & Song, J. Y. (2018). The Influence of the Positive and？Negative Experiences of the Convergent Researchers on the Retry？Intention, Satisfaction, Continuing Intention, and Recommendation？Intention of Convergent Research. Asia-Pacific Journal of Multimedia？Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology, 8(5),？279-291. 

  32. Kim, H. J., Kim, E. J., & Lee, S. Y. (2018). Successful convergent research？method to overcome trial and error of interdisciplinary convergent？researcher. Culture and Convergence, 40(1), 183-214. 

  33. Kim, H. S. (2011). Beyond both biological and sociological reductionism.？Kookmin Social Science Reviews, 23(2), 143-173. 

  34. Kim, H. S. (2012). Climate change, science and community. Public？Understanding of Science, 21(3), 268-285. 

    상세보기

  35. Kim, M. (2017). Understanding children's science identity through classroom？interactions. International Journal of Science Education, 40(1), 24-45. 

  36. Kim, S. R. (2020). Ethical and legal difficulties and solutions that need to？be solved before autonomous vehicles are commercialized - Focused？on ethical guidelines and moral machine experiments. IT & Law？Review, 21, 171-214. 

    상세보기

  37. Kuhn, S. T. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The University？of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL. 

  38. Lee, G. (2022). Exploring the essence of 'science content' and 'science？education': Focus on 'essential-holistic' perspective and practices.？Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 42(4),？449-474. 

  39. Lee, J. K., Hwang, H., & Shin, S. (2022). Diversity of implicit premise？in different academic major group: Focusing on the case of pre-service？science teachers' arguments on race concept. Korean Journal of？Teacher Education, 38(3), 5-38. 

    상세보기

  40. Lee, J. K., Lee, T. K., & Ha, M. (2013). Exploring the evolution patterns？of trading zones appearing in the convergence of teachers' ideas: The？case study of a learning community of teaching volunteers 'STEAM？teacher community'. Journal of the Korean Association for Science？Education, 33(5), 1055-1086. 

  41. Lee, J. K., Shin, S., & Ha, M. (2015). Comparing the Structure of Secondary？School Students' Perception of the Meaning of 'Experiment' in Science？and Biology. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education,？35(6), 997-1006. 

  42. Lee, J. K., Shin, S., & Ha, M. (2018). Complex problems in complex problem？solving: Types, levels, and meaning in the filed of science education.？School Science Journal, 12(4), 417-436. 

  43. Lee, J. K., Shin, S., & Ha, M. (2020). Pre-service teachers' perception of？the complexity, difficulty, interesting, and willingness to problem？solving during complex problem solving: Focusing on real-life？contextual cases. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and？Instruction, 20(19), 241-269. 

    상세보기

  44. Lee, J. W. (2022). Effect of theme-based convergence education program？using bio-art on bioethical awareness and scientific attitude of high？school students. School Science Journal, 12(4), 417-436. 

  45. Macfarlane, B., & Cheng, M. (2008). Communism, universalism and？disinterestedness: re-examining contemporary support among？academics for Merton's scientific norms. Journal of Academic Ethics,？6(1), 67-78. 

    상세보기

  46. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science. University of Chicago Press. 

  47. Ministry of Education (2022). 2022 revised science curriculum. Ministry of？Education 2022-33 [issue 9]. 

  48. Moon, J. (2020). Making a linguistic connection for interdisciplinary research？between conservation science and ceramic history: The case of？"Analytical report of the royal kiln complex at Gwangju in Gyeonggi？province". Journal of Conservation Science, 36(6), 578-590. 

  49. Ng. T. W., & Lucianetti, L. (2016). Within-individual increases in innovative？behavior and creative, persuasion, and change self-efficacy over time:？A social-cognitive theory perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology,？101(1), 14-34. 

    상세보기

  50. Noh, Y., & Park, J. (2021). A study on the trend analysis of interdisciplinary？convergence research. The Journal of Humanities and Social science,？12(1), 3359-3374. 

  51. Oh, H., & sung, E. (2013). Competency Modeling of Convergence Talent.？Asian Journal of Education, 14(4), 201-228. 

  52. Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R., & Duschl, R. (2003). What？"ideas-about-science" should be taught in school science? A Delphi？study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science？Teaching, 40(7), 692-720. 

    상세보기

  53. Park, M. (2015). The AIP and the conflict between pure physicists and？applied physicists. The Korean Journal for the History of Science,？37(1), 41-58. 

  54. Park, S. U. (2015). A dynamic modeling of the system of sciences. Journal？of Humanities, 45, 297-316. 

  55. Park, W., & Song, J. (2019). Between realism and constructivism: A sketch？of pluralism for science education. In E. Herring, K. Jones, K.？Kiprijanov, & L. Sellers (Eds.), The past, present and future of？integrated history and philosophy of science (pp. 228-247). London:？Routledge. 

  56. Park, Y., Park, J. Y., Kim, J., Won, Y. H. (2020). The patterns of scientific？collaboration in the field of climate change: the analysis of a？co-authorship network and the role of brokers. Journal of Korea？Technology Innovation Society, 23(1), 162-180. 

    상세보기

  57. Radder H. (2009). The philosophy of scientific experimentation: a review.？Automated Experimentation, 1, 1-8. 

  58. Rozin, P. (2005). The Meaning of "Natural": Process More Important Than？Content. Psychological Science, 16(8), 652-658. 

  59. Schunk, D. H., & Usher, E. L. (2012). Social cognitive theory and？motivation," In: Ryan, R.M. (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human？Motivation, New York Oxford University Press, pp. 11-26. 

  60. Seo, D. I., & Oh, H. (2014). A Study of the Interchanging Experiences？at the Trading Zone: Focusing on the Case of Interdisciplinary？Researchers. Asian Journal of Education, 15(2), 111-140. 

    상세보기

  61. Shin, S. C. (2011). Border language and singularity production: The？application of Guattari's polysemiotic framework. 

  62. Shin, S., Ha, M., Lee, J. K., Park, H. J., Chung, D. H., & Lim, J. K. (2014).？The development and validation of instrument for measuring high？school students' attitude toward convergence. Journal of the Korean？Association for Science Education, 34(2), 123-134. 

  63. Song, Y., & Paik, S. H. (2020). Exploring the Research Trend Changes？on Convergence Education of Before and After 2011 in Science？Education. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education,？40(5), 531-542. 

  64. Star, S. L. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects？and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In M. Huhns & L.？Glasser (Eds.), Readings in Distributed Artificial Intelligence. Menlo？Park, CA: Morgan Kaufman. 

  65. Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin？of a concept. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 35(5), 601-617. 

    상세보기

  66. Star, S. L., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, 'translations', and？boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals on Berkeley's museum？of vertebrate zoology. Social Studies of Science, 19, 387-420. 

  67. Stephens, N., Kahn, I., & Errington, R. (2018). Analysing the role of？virtualisation and visualisation in interdisciplinary knowledge exchange？in stem cell research processes. Palgrave Communications, 4(78), 1-13. 

  68. Stephenson, J. (2017). What does energy mean? An interdisciplinary？conversation. Energy Research & Social Science, 26, 103-106. 

  69. Vincent-Ruz, P, & Schunn, C. D. (2018). The nature of science identity？and its role as the driver of student choices. International Journal of？STEM Education, 5(48), 1-12. 

  70. Vorms, M. (2014). The birth of classical genetics as the junction of two？disciplines: Conceptual change as representational change. Studies in？History and Philosophy of Science, 48, 105-116. 

  71. Wong, S., & Hodson, D. (2010). More from the horse's mouth: What？scientists say about science as a social practice. International Journal？of Science Education, 32(11), 1431-1463. 

    상세보기

  72. You, H. S., Marshall, J. A., & Delgado, C. (2017). Assessing students'？disciplinary and interdisciplinary understanding of global carbon？cycling. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55 (3), 377-398. 

  73. Ziman, J. (2000). Real science: What it is, and what it means. Cambridge:？Cambridge University Press. 

저자의 다른 논문 :

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.

관련 콘텐츠

오픈액세스(OA) 유형

FREE

Free Access. 출판사/학술단체 등이 허락한 무료 공개 사이트를 통해 자유로운 이용이 가능한 논문

이 논문과 함께 이용한 콘텐츠

저작권 관리 안내
섹션별 컨텐츠 바로가기

AI-Helper ※ AI-Helper는 오픈소스 모델을 사용합니다.

AI-Helper 아이콘
AI-Helper
안녕하세요, AI-Helper입니다. 좌측 "선택된 텍스트"에서 텍스트를 선택하여 요약, 번역, 용어설명을 실행하세요.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.

선택된 텍스트

맨위로