$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$

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.

공유 문서를 활용한 과학 수업에서 나타난 학생 담화의 특징 -인식 네트워크 분석(ENA)의 활용-
Exploring Collaborative Learning Dynamics in Science Classes Using Google Docs: An Epistemic Network Analysis of Student Discourse 원문보기

한국과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean association for science education, v.44 no.1, 2024년, pp.77 - 86  

신은혜 (서울대학교 교육종합연구원)

초록
AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

본 연구는 과학 수업에서 공유 문서의 활용이 학생의 담화 패턴과 학습에 미치는 영향을 조사하기 위해 학생들의 담화를 인식 네트워크 분석(Epistemic Network Analysis) 방법으로 분석하였다. 49명의 중학교 2학년 학생을 대상으로 과학 교사인 연구자 본인이 Google Docs를 기반으로 제작된 활동지를 활용한 공유 문서와 동일 내용의 종이 활동지를 활용한 일반 수업을 실시하고, 각 수업에서 수집된 담화를 비교 분석하였다. 분석 결과, 공유 문서 활용 수업에서는 일반 수업에 비해 과제 수행과 관련된 발언의 비율이 더 높았으며, 특히 사진 촬영과 업로드에 대한 담화가 두드러졌다. 그러나 이러한 담화가 교사가 의도한 동료 학습으로 이어지지는 않았다. 성취 수준에 따른 분석 결과에서는 공유 문서 활용 수업에서 하위 수준 학생의 발언 비율이 상대적으로 더 높았으며, 상위 학생과 하위 학생 간의 발언 유형 및 연결 구조에서 차이가 나타났다. 또한 상위 수준 학생이 의견과 설명 제시를 주도하면 하위 학생이 이를 받아 적는 역할 분담이 관찰되었으며, 공유 문서 활용 수업에서 그러한 경향이 더 뚜렷하였다. 마지막으로 인식 네트워크 분석으로 정전기의 원인에 대한 학생의 인식 변화를 시각화하였다. 연구 결과를 바탕으로 공유 문서를 활용하여 협력 학습을 촉진하기 위해 다양한 의견과 산출물의 공유가 가능한 개방적 문제를 포함하는 전략과 인식 네트워크 분석을 활용한 개념 학습 효과 확인 가능성을 제언하였다.

Abstract AI-Helper 아이콘AI-Helper

This study analyzed students' discourse and learning to investigate the impact of using Google Docs in science classes. The researcher, who is also a science teacher, conducted classes for 49 second-year middle school students. The classes included one using Google Docs and another using traditional...

주제어

표/그림 (8)

참고문헌 (53)

  1. Bai, Y., Shen, S., Chen, L., & Zhuo, Y. (2011, July). Cloud learning: A?new learning style. In 2011 International Conference on Multimedia?Technology (pp. 3460-3463). IEEE. 

  2. Blau, I., & Caspi, A. (2009). Sharing and collaborating with Google Docs:?The influence of psychological ownership, responsibility, and student's?attitudes on outcome quality, World Conference on E-Learning in?Corporate, Government, Healthcare and Higher Education, Oct 26,?2009 in Vancouver, Canada. 

  3. Bonham, S. (2011). Whole class laboratories with Google Docs. The Physics?Teacher, 49, 22-23. 

  4. Bowman, D., Swiecki, Z., Cai, Z., Wang, Y., Eagan, B., Linderoth, J., &?Shaffer, D. W. (2021). The mathematical foundations of epistemic?network analysis. In Advances in Quantitative Ethnography: Second?International Conference, ICQE 2020, Malibu, CA, USA, February 1-3,?2021, Proceedings 2 (pp. 91-105). Springer International Publishing. 

  5. Bressler, D. M., Bodzin, A. M., Eagan, B., & Tabatabai, S. (2019). Using?epistemic network analysis to examine discourse and scientific practice?during a collaborative game. Journal of Science Education and?Technology, 28, 553-566. 

  6. Cha, H. J., Ga, S. H., & Yoon, H. G. (2023). Characteristic of pre-service?elementary teachers' TPACK in science lesson planning using VR/AR?contents: Focusing on Epistemic Network Analysis. Journal of the?Korean Association for Science Education, 43(3), 225-226. 

  7. Cho, H. H., & Choi, K. H. (2005). Theory and practice of science education?(2nd Ed.), (pp. 365). Paju: Kyoyookbook Publication Co. 

  8. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge : The Development?of Understanding in the Classroom. Routledge. 

  9. Ercan, T. (2009). Effective use of cloud computing in educational institution,?Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 938-942 

  10. Fan, Y., Tan, Y., Rakovic, M., Wang, Y., Cai, Z., Shaffer, D. W., & Gasevic,?D. (2023). Dissecting learning tactics in MOOC using ordered network?analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(1), 154-166. 

  11. Fuchs, B. (2014). The writing is on the wall: using Padlet for whole-class?engagement. Loex Quarterly, 40(4), 4. 

  12. Gee, J. P. (2015). Social linguistics and literacies : Ideology in discourses.?London; New York: Routledge. 

  13. Gonzalez-Martinez, J. A., Bote-Lorenzo, M. L., Gomez-Sanchez, E., &?Cano-Parra, R. (2015). Cloud computing and education: A state-of-the-art survey. Computers & Education, 80, 132-151. 

  14. Hirsch, B., & Ng, J. W. P. (2011). Education beyond the Cloud:?Anytime-anywhere learning in a smart campus environment. 6th?International Conference on Internet Technology and Secured Transactions,?11-14 December 2011, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. 718-723 

  15. Hong, M. S., Lee, J. B., Kim, S. Y., & Kim, J. B. (2009). Development?of tutorial for concept learning about electrostatics in middle school.?School Science Journal, 3(1), 13-29. 

  16. Jeno, L. M., Adachi, P. J., Grytnes, J. A., Vandvik, V., & Deci, E. L. (2019).?The effects of m-learning on motivation, achievement and well-being:?A Self-Determination Theory approach. British Journal of Educational?Technology, 50(2), 669-683. 

  17. Jeong H. S. (2013). A case study on a collaborative media production and?writing class in a "SMART Education" Environment. Journal of?Elementary Korean Education, 53(0), 301-335. 

  18. Jo, M. J. (2017). An investigation of teaching practices with smart?technologies of science teachers and their opinions of how to apply?smart technologies in science education. Master's thesis, Seoul?National University. 

  19. Karumbaiah, S., & Baker, R. S. (2021). Studying Affect Dynamics Using?Epistemic Networks. In A. R. Ruis & S. B. Lee (Eds.), Advances?in quantitative ethnography. ICQE 2021. Communications in Computer?and Information Science, Vol. 1312 (pp. 362-374). Springer International?Publishing. 

  20. Kim, D. G., Park, S. H., Jung, J. Y., & Lee J. H. (2008). A Study on the?development of learning model for Wiki-based collaborative writing.?Journal of Elementary Korean Education, (37), 5-40. 

  21. Kim, H. J., & Song, J. W. (2020). A Literature Review of Mobile Activities?in Teaching and Learning Science: With Regard to Support for?Learners' Agency. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in?Science Education, 40(5), 451-462. 

  22. Kim, J. Y., Shin, A. K., Park, K. T., & Choi, B. S. (2001). The effects?of science inquiry experiments emphasizing social interactions and the?analysis of social interactions by cognitive level of the students. Journal?of the Korean Chemical Society, 45(5), 470-480. 

  23. Kouh, M. (2016). Whole class laboratories: More examples. The Physics?Teacher, 54(3), 174-177. 

  24. Lee, E. K., & Kang, S. J. (2008). The effect of SWH application on?problem-solving type inquiry modules through student-student verbal?interactions. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science?Education, 28(2), 130-138. 

  25. Lee, H. Y., Chang, S. S., Seong, S. K., Kang, S. J., & Choi. B. S. (2002).?Analysis of student - student interaction in interactive science inquiry?experiment. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science?Education, 22(3), 660-670. 

  26. Lee, J. Y. (2017). Effects of digital collaborative writing- with quantitative?analysis of student writer's response., 11(5), 199-234. 

  27. Lin, Y. T., Chang, C. H., Hou, H. T., & Wu, K. C. (2016). Exploring the?effects of employing Google Docs in collaborative concept mapping?on achievement, concept representation, and attitudes. Interactive?Learning Environments, 24(7), 1552-1573. 

  28. Martin, R., Sexton, C., & Gerlovich, J. (2002). Teaching science for all?children. 2nd ed. Boston:Allyn and Bacon. 

  29. Marquart, C. L., Hinojosa, C., Swiecki, Z., Eagan, B., & Shaffer, D. W.?(2021). Epistemic network analysis (Version 1.7.0) [Software]. Available?from http://app.epistemicnetwork.org 

  30. Mell, P., & Grance, T. (2011). The NIST definition of cloud computing. 

  31. Nachtigall, V., & Sung, H. (2019). Students' collaboration patterns in a?productive failure setting: an epistemic network analysis of contrasting?cases. In Advances in Quantitative Ethnography: First International?Conference, ICQE 2019, Madison, WI, USA, October 20-22, 2019,?Proceedings 1 (pp. 165-176). Springer International Publishing. 

  32. Nguyen, H. (2022). Exploring group discussion with conversational agents?using epistemic network analysis. Communications in Computer and?Information Science, 1522, 378-394. 

  33. Oishi, L. (2007). Working together: Google Apps goes to school. Technology?& Learning, 27(9), 46-47. 

  34. Parrish, J. C., Pleasants, J., Reid, J. W., Mulvey, B. K., Peters-Burton, E.?E., & Recker, A. (2022). Using Card Sort Epistemic Network Analysis?to explore preservice teachers' ideas about the nature of engineering.?Science & Education, 1-26. 

  35. Robert G. J. (2003). Emerging technologies Blog and Wikis: Environments?for on-line collaboration, Language Learning & Technology, 7(2). 

  36. Ruis, A. R., Siebert-Evenstone, A. L., Pozen, R., Eagan, B. R., & Shaffer,?D. W. (2019). Finding common ground: A method for measuring recent?temporal context in analyses of complex, collaborative thinking. In K. 

  37. Sanchez, M., Aguilar, J., Cordero, J., & Valdiviezo, P. (2015, July). Basic?features of a reflective middleware for intelligent learning environment?in the cloud (IECL). In 2015 Asia-Pacific Conference on Computer?Aided System Engineering (pp. 1-6). IEEE. 

  38. Scianna, J., Gagnon, D., Knowles, B. (2021). Counting the game: Visualizing?changes in play by incorporating game events. In A. R. Ruis & S.B.?Lee (Eds.), Advances in quantitative ethnography. ICQE 2021.?Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 1312 (pp.?218-231). Springer International Publishing. 

  39. Shaffer, D. W. (2017). Quantitative ethnography. Madison, WI: Cathcart?Press. 

  40. Shaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic?network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive,?social, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9-45. 

  41. Shaffer, D. W., & Ruis, A. R. (2017). Epistemic network analysis: A worked?example of theory-based learning analytics. In C. Lang, G. Siemens,?A. F. Wise, & D. Gasevic (Eds.), Handbook of learning analytics (pp.?175-187). Society for Learning Analytics Research. 

  42. Shin, E. H. (2021a). An Investigation of Teaching Practices and Opinions?of Teacher about Using Cloud Apps in Interactive Online Science?Class. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction Vol.?21, No. 14, 2021, pp. 811-824. 

  43. Shin, E. H. (2021b). Analysis of the Types of Teachers' Questioning and?Feedback in Science Classes using Cloud Apps. School Science?Journal, 15(2), 135-148. 

  44. Siebert-Evenstone, A., Arastoopour Irgens, G., Collier, W., Swiecki, Z., Ruis,?A. R., & Williamson Shaffer, D. (2017). In search of conversational?grain size: Modelling semantic structure using moving stanza windows.?Journal of Learning Analytics, 4(3), 123-139. 

  45. Suwantarathip, O., & Wichadee, S. (2014). The effects of collaborative?writing activity using Google Docs on students' writing abilities.?Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 148-157. 

  46. Stevenson, M., & Hedberg, J. G. (2013). Learning and design with online?real-time collaboration. Educational Media International, 50(2), 120-134. 

  47. Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Thought and language. MIT press. 

  48. Weiler, D. T., Lingg, A. J., Eagan, B. R., Shaffer, D. W., & Werner, N.?E. (2022). Quantifying the qualitative: exploring epistemic network?analysis as a method to study work system interactions. Ergonomics,?65(10), 1434-1449. 

  49. Wooldridge, A. R., Carayon, P., Eagan, B. R., & Shaffer, D. W. (2018).?Quantifying the qualitative with epistemic network analysis: A human?factors case study of task-allocation communication in a primary care?team. IIE Transactions on Healthcare Systems Engineering, 8, 72-82. 

  50. Yun, J. H. (2017). The influences of individualized learning adapted to?student's conception and small group learning using smart devices in?secondary chemistry classes. Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National?University. 

  51. Zambrano, A. F., Barany, A., Ocumpaugh, J., Nasiar, N., Hutt, S., Goslen,?A., ... & Mott, B. (2023, October). Cracking the Code of Learning?Gains: Using Ordered Network Analysis to Understand the Influence?of Prior Knowledge. In International Conference on Quantitative?Ethnography (pp. 18-33). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. 

  52. Zhang, S., Gao, Q., Sun, M., Cai, Z., Li, H., Tang, Y., & Liu, Q. (2022).?Understanding student teachers'_collaborative problem solving:?Insights from an epistemic network analysis (ENA). Computers &?Education, 183, Article 104485. 

  53. Zioga, C., & Bikos, K. (2020). Collaborative writing using Google Docs?in primary education: development of argumentative discourse. Turkish?Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 133-142. 

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