Å×Å©³î·ÎÁö¸¦ Ȱ¿ëÇÑ ¸ðµ¨ÀÇ ¼³°è¿Í °³¹ß °úÁ¤¿¡¼ ³ªÅ¸³ ¿¹ºñÈÇб³»çÀÇ ¸ðµ¨ÀÇ º»¼º¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÀÎ½Ä ºÐ¼®: º¸ÀÏ ¹ýÄ¢À» Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î
Analysis of the Pre-service Chemistry Teachers¡¯ Cognition of the Nature of Model in the Design and Development Process of Models Using Technology
Á¤³ªÁø, ¹é¼ºÇý,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
Á¤³ªÁø ( Jeong Na-Jin )
¹é¼ºÇý ( Paik Seoung-Hey )
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the pre-service chemistry teachers¡¯ cognition of the nature of model in process of designing and developing models using technology. For this purpose, 19 pre-service chemistry teachers¡¯ in the 3rd grade
of a education college located in the central region observe experimental phenomena related to Boyle¡¯s law presented in the 7th grade science textbook and researchers required the design and development of a model related to the observed experimental results using technology. Based on previous studies, the nature of model were classified into two aspect: ¡®Representational aspect¡¯ and ¡®Explanatory aspect¡¯. The ¡®Representational aspect¡¯ was classified into ¡®Representation¡¯, ¡®Abstraction¡¯, and ¡®Simplification¡¯, and the ¡®Explanatory aspect¡¯ was classified into ¡®Analysis¡¯, ¡®Interpretation¡¯, ¡®Reasoning¡¯, ¡®Explanation¡¯, and ¡®Quantification¡¯. The pre-service chemistry teachers¡¯ cognition were analyzed by the classification. As a result of the study, the ¡®Representation¡¯ of the ¡¯expressive aspect¡¯ was uniformized in the form of space that changes in volume, and the pressure was expressed as the Brightness inside the cylinder or frequency of color change of particles for ¡®Abstraction¡¯. In the case of ¡®Simplification¡¯, the particle collision was expressed as a perfectly elastic collision, but there was a group that could not simply indicate the type of particle. In the ¡®Explanatory aspect¡¯, in the case of ¡®Analysis¡¯, volume was classified as a manipulated variable, and in the case of ¡®Interpretation¡¯, most groups analyzed the change in pressure through the collision of gas particles. However, the cognition involved in ¡®Reasoning¡¯ was not observed much. In the case of ¡®Explanation¡¯, there were groups that did not succeed in explanation because the area where the particles collided was not set or incorrectly set, and in the case of ¡®Quantification¡¯, there was a group that formulated the number of collisions per unit time, and on the contrary, there was a group that could not quantify the number of collisions because they could not be expressed in numbers.
Ű¿öµå
¿¹ºñÈÇб³»ç; ¸ðµ¨ÀÇ º»¼º; ¸ðµ¨ÀÇ ¼³°è¿Í °³¹ß; Å×Å©³î·ÎÁö
Pre-service chemistry teachers; Nature of the model; Model design and development; Technology
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸