|
| |
|
|
개념적 이해를 위한 수업이론의 형성적 연구
파일 
개념적 이해를 위한 수업이론의 형성적 연구.hwp
[Size :
60 Kbyte
]
개념적 이해를 위한 수업이론의 형성적 연구.hwp
[Size :
60 Kbyte
]
분량 20 Page
가격 2,000 원
×
링크주소가 복사 되었습니다.
원하는 곳에 붙혀넣기 하세요
원하는 곳에 붙혀넣기 하세요
카트
|
다운받기
|
 네이버 ID로 다운 받기  카카오 ID로 다운 받기  구글 ID로 다운 받기  페이스북 ID로 다운 받기 |
뒤로
|
자료설명
한편 학습과제의 특성에 따른 최적의 수업 방법을 처방하려는 접근으로 메릴(Merrill, 1983)의 구인전시이론(Component Displa...
본문/내용
한편 학습과제의 특성에 따른 최적의 수업 방법을 처방하려는 접근으로 메릴(Merrill, 1983)의 구인전시이론(Component Display Theory)과 롸이거루스(Reigeluth, 1983)의 정교화이론(Elaboration Theory) 등이 있다. 이들 이론은 적성-처치 상호작용 모형을 바탕으로한 수업방법의 약점을 극복할 수 있는 노력으로 평가받고 있다(Jonassen, 1982). 그러나 이들 접근은 수업관리전략으로써 학습자 통제에 대한 언급 이외에는 학습자 특성에 대한 체계적인 관심이 결여되었다. 이러한 문제점은 학습과제의 한 유형으로써 이해에 관한 수업이론에 대하여 실시한 두개의 형성적 연구(Roma, 1990; Simmons, 1991)에서 지적된 바 있다.
로마(Roma, 1990)는 롸이거루스(Reigeluth)의 `이해 이론`을 수정한 뒤 일종의 사례연구방법인 형성적 연구(Reigeluth, 1989)를 실시하였다. `이해 이론`에 의하면 이해를 위한 수업처방(수업방법)은 이해의 연관성 혹은 측면(수업조건)에 따라서 제시된다. 로마는 제안된 이론이 어떠한 점에서 강점 혹은 약점을 가지는가를 규명하고, 또한 그 수업이론을 개선하기 위하여 형성적 연구를 실시하였다. 로마에 의하면 `이해 이론`은 `비유의 사용`과 `안내적 발견` 등의 강점을 가지고 있으며, `학습자 선행지식과의 연계`, `이해의 측면들간의 순서`, 그리고 `다이어그램의 제시순서` 등으로 약점을 지니고 있다.
비슷한 맥락의 후속연구로써 시몬스(Simmons, 1991)의 `이해를 위한 수업이론`(Sohn, Bloom, & Reigeluth, 1990)에 대한 형성적 연구가 확인한 강점으로써 `선행 조직자,` `명명된 시각적 제시`(labeled illustration), 그리고 `피이드백` 등이 있다. 개선될 점으로 `학습자 참여의 증대`, `설명적/발견적 방식의 선택가능성,` 그리고 `학습자 통제의 증대` 등이 확인되었다.
참고문헌
Ausubel, D. P. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. New York : Grune & Striation.
Ausubel. D. P. ()1967.A cognitive structure theory of school learning. In L. Siegel(Ed.), Instruction : Some contemporary viewpoint San Francisco . Chandler Publishing.
Chung, J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional prescriptions for learner control. Educational Technology, October,14-20.
Cronbach, L. J. & Snow, R.E. (1977). Aptitude and instructional methods : A handbook for research on teaching. New York : Irving Press.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985). The systematic design of instruction(2nd ed.). Glenview, IL : Scott Foreman.
Gasne, R. M. & Briggs, L. J. (1979). Principles of Instructional design(2nd ed.). New York : HoIt Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Glaser, R. (1977). Adaptive education : Individual diversity and learning. New York: HoIt Rinehart and Winston.
Greenwood, C. R,, Delquardi, J. C., Stanley,S.O., Terry, B., & Hall, R. V. (1985). Assessment of eco-behavioral interaction in school settings. Behavior Assessment, 7, 331-347.
Jonassen, D. H. (1982). Aptitude-versus content-treatment interactions . Implications for instructional design. Journal of Instructional Developments 5(4),15-24.
Leshin, C. B, Pollock, J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional design strategies and tactics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Educational Technology Publications.
Merrill M. D. (1983). Component Display Theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models : An overview of their current statue Hillsdale, New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Merrill, M. D. (1980). Learner control in computer based learning. Computer and Education, 4, 77-95.
Miles, M. B & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Analyzing Qualitative Data A source book for new methods. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage Publications.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design : What is it and why is it? In Reigeluth, C. M.(Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models . An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1979). TICCIT to the fututure : Advances in instructional theory for CAI. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,6(2),40-46.
Roma, C. M. (1990). Formative evaluation research on an instructional theory for understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Indiana.
Simmons, J. L. (1991). Formative evaluation research on an instructional theory for teaching causal principles. Unpublished doctoral dissertaion, Indiana University, Indiana.
Skinner, B. F (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review,24(2),86-97.
Sohn, J., Bloom, L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1990).A model of instruction for understanding : Developing student`s mental models. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Indiana.
Steinberg, E. R. (1977). Review of student control in computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,3(3),84-90.
Tennyson, R. D. (1980). Instructional control strategies and content structure as design variables in concept acquisition using computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology,72(4),525-532.
Welch, R. E. & Frick, T. W. (1993). Computerized adaptive testing in instructional settings. Educational Technology Research and Developments 41,47-62.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research : Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage Publications.
Ausubel. D. P. ()1967.A cognitive structure theory of school learning. In L. Siegel(Ed.), Instruction : Some contemporary viewpoint San Francisco . Chandler Publishing.
Chung, J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional prescriptions for learner control. Educational Technology, October,14-20.
Cronbach, L. J. & Snow, R.E. (1977). Aptitude and instructional methods : A handbook for research on teaching. New York : Irving Press.
Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1985). The systematic design of instruction(2nd ed.). Glenview, IL : Scott Foreman.
Gasne, R. M. & Briggs, L. J. (1979). Principles of Instructional design(2nd ed.). New York : HoIt Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Glaser, R. (1977). Adaptive education : Individual diversity and learning. New York: HoIt Rinehart and Winston.
Greenwood, C. R,, Delquardi, J. C., Stanley,S.O., Terry, B., & Hall, R. V. (1985). Assessment of eco-behavioral interaction in school settings. Behavior Assessment, 7, 331-347.
Jonassen, D. H. (1982). Aptitude-versus content-treatment interactions . Implications for instructional design. Journal of Instructional Developments 5(4),15-24.
Leshin, C. B, Pollock, J., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1992). Instructional design strategies and tactics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Educational Technology Publications.
Merrill M. D. (1983). Component Display Theory. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models : An overview of their current statue Hillsdale, New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Merrill, M. D. (1980). Learner control in computer based learning. Computer and Education, 4, 77-95.
Miles, M. B & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Analyzing Qualitative Data A source book for new methods. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage Publications.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1983). Instructional design : What is it and why is it? In Reigeluth, C. M.(Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models . An overview of their current status. Hillsdale, New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Reigeluth, C. M. (1979). TICCIT to the fututure : Advances in instructional theory for CAI. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,6(2),40-46.
Roma, C. M. (1990). Formative evaluation research on an instructional theory for understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Indiana.
Simmons, J. L. (1991). Formative evaluation research on an instructional theory for teaching causal principles. Unpublished doctoral dissertaion, Indiana University, Indiana.
Skinner, B. F (1954). The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review,24(2),86-97.
Sohn, J., Bloom, L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1990).A model of instruction for understanding : Developing student`s mental models. Unpublished manuscript, Indiana University, Indiana.
Steinberg, E. R. (1977). Review of student control in computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction,3(3),84-90.
Tennyson, R. D. (1980). Instructional control strategies and content structure as design variables in concept acquisition using computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology,72(4),525-532.
Welch, R. E. & Frick, T. W. (1993). Computerized adaptive testing in instructional settings. Educational Technology Research and Developments 41,47-62.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research : Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage Publications.
| 📝 Regist Info |
|
I D : msgs***** Date : 2013-12-04 FileNo : 16057731 |
Cart  | |
| |