http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 오상욱 ( Sang Wook Ok ) (검색결과 1 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
과학교과교육 : 과학과 교육과정의 교과서에서 사용된 그래프의 유형과 활용분석 - 7학년을 중심으로-
강지현 ( Ji Hyun Kang ),오상욱 ( Sang Wook Ok ) 전북대학교 과학교육연구소 2014 과학과 과학교육 논문지 Vol.39 No.1
Scientific graph is a very strong tool in analyzing and communicating scientific knowledge, and is another way of expressing and interpreting data. Having the ability of structuring and understanding graph becomes a crucial factor to be a globally talented professional since graph is not only used in science but also in many parts of our lives, However, students usually experience difficulties in composing and interpreting data. To resolve this problem, researches from different aspects, including learners` learning processes, teaching material, instructor`s capability, interactions with other academic fields, are needed. In this study focused on graph as teaching material, we have selected 17 kinds of middle school science text books, which were recently published by the 2007 update of the government certified education guidelines, and analyzed the level of interpretation activities, types, composition, and distribution of interpretation on graphs. The dominant type of graph used in middle school science I textbooks was the linear type, which were constituted 94% of the total graphs. Among the science sections covered, Matter and Energy sections were the ones that the most graphs were used with 43.5% and 36.7%, respectively. In patterns of graph activity, Composition activities were 22.4 % and interpretation activities took up 77.6%. When the graphs were categorized by the level of composition activity, the results showed that the instructions of the scales of the axis, the instruction of axis and variables, and no instruction were, respectively, composed of 41.6, 39.6, 12.3, and 6.5%. And when the graph were categorized by the different levels of interpretation activity, the interpretation of one single graph turned out 89.1 %, and the interpretation of more than two graphs were only 10.9%. Investigation of composition and interpretation activities from different textbooks showed that the composition activities were inconsistent among the textbooks and the level of interpretation activities was mostly interpreting one single graph only.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
