메타인지와 하이퍼텍스트 구조가 저작체제 학습에 미치는 효과

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국교육학회
· 수록지 정보 : 교육학연구 / 32권 / 5호
· 저자명 : 金會洙

목차

요 약
Ⅰ. 연구문제
Ⅱ. 선행연구
Ⅲ. 연구방법
Ⅳ. 결과 및 해석
Ⅴ. 논의 및 결론
〈참고문헌〉
Abstract

초록

본 연구의 목적은 메타인지와 하이퍼텍스트 구조가 저작체제의 학습에서 학업성취에 미치는 효과를 검토하였다. 메타인지는 메타인지 적 지식과 메타인지적 규제로 나누어 개념화하였고, 하이퍼텍스트의 구조 중에서 연상적 하이퍼텍스트와 위계적 하이퍼텍스트를 고려하였다. 저작체제에 대한 사전지식이 없는 46명의 대학생이 무선표집되었고, 두 가지 하이퍼텍스트구조에 무선배치되었다. 실험은 개인별로 실시되었고, 하이퍼텍스트에 의한 학습의 전과정 동안에 피험자는 생각을 소리내어 말하도록 요구되었으며, 그 과정은 비디오테잎에 녹화되었다 연구결과는 메타인지적 지식이 하이퍼텍스트 학습조건에 상관없이 성취에 영향을 주지 못한 반면, 메타인지적 규제는 성취에 의미있는 효과를 보였다는 점을 지적한다. 그러나 하이퍼텍스트의 구조는 하위메타인지적 규제집단을 제외하고는 성취에 대한 의미있는 효과를 갖지 못했다.

영어초록

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of both metacognition and hypertext structure on performance in a hypertext learning environment. Basic questions of this study were : Does learners' metacognition have significant effects on learner's performance in a hypertext-mediated instruction? Which of two types of hypertext structure, hierarchical and associative structure, is more effective for teaching novices an authoring language system? Are there any effects of interaction between metacognition and hypertext structure on performance?
Subjects were 45 college students in Korea. They had no experience in HyperCard and Macintosh computers. The hypertext program used in this study was designed to teach both basic components and skills of HyperCard. This study defined metacognition as the combination of metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive regulation. Metacognitive knowledge was assessed with Metamemory in Adulthood(MIA). All experimental sessions were conducted on individual basis. Each subject was asked to think aloud while each hypertext instruction was implemented Videotaped trunk-aloud protocols were coded by two coders and numbers of verbalization about metacognitive regulation were counted.
There were no significant effects of metacognitive knowledge on the recall test scores as well as the skill test scores, because some sub-components of metacognitive knowledge had negative effects on performance while the others had positive effects. In contrast, metacognitive regulation had significant relationships with two types of performance in a hypertext. The high metacognitive regulation group achieved the higher scores on the two types of performance tests regardless of the hypertext structure. The low metacognitive regulation group achieved the lower scores regardless of the hypertext structure. However, the low metacognitive regulation group attained higher scores on the skill test under the hierarchical hypertext than under the associative hypertext.
The results of the regression analysis of the recall test scores indicated that about 40.6% of the variance was explained significantly by the set of sub-components of metacognitive knowledge, sub-components of metacognitive regulation, and hypertext structure. The effective predictors of the recall test scores were two sub-components of metacognitive knowledge (use of memory strategies and knowledge of memory tasks and processes) and two sub-components of metacognitive regulation (evaluation of cognition and remediation of cognition). The component of use of memory strategies, however, had negative effects on the recall test scores. The results of analysis showed that about 47.6% of the variance of the skill test scores were explained by the set of sub-components of metacognitive knowledge, sub-components of metacognitive regulation, and hypertext. The best predictors of the variance were perception of own memory capabilities, knowledge of memory tasks and processes, and monitoring of cognition. However, the sub-component of perception of memory capabilities had negative effects on the skill test scores.

참고자료

· 없음