The Analysis on the Connectivity of 'Invention Education' Area of Practical Arts(Technology and Home Economics) in the 2009 Revised Curriculum

Abstract

이 연구의 목적은 2009 개정 교육과정 실과(기술 가정) ‘발명교육’ 영역의 내용분석을 통해 교과과정의 수직적 연계성을 분석하는 것이다. 분석 대상은 국가교육과정 실과(기술 가정) 교육과정 문서와 초등학교 실과 교과서, 중학교 기술 가정 교과서, 고등학교 기술 가정 교과서를 선택하였다. 연계성 분석은 선행 연구를 바탕으로 연구자가 도출한 준거 틀에 의해 교육 과정 내 학습 내용이 학교급간 동일한 수준이면 ‘반복’, 학습 내용이 누락되었거나 상위학습이 불가능하면 ‘격차’, 심화 확대가 이루어졌으면 ‘발전’으로 보고 분석하였다. 이에 따른 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 발명의 이해, 발명의 실제 영역의 연계 정도는 ‘반복’이 각각 57.1%, 63.6%로 가장 많았으나 ‘발전’된 내용도 28.6%, 36.4%로 나타났다. 발명의 활용은 ‘발전’된 내용은 없었으나 ‘격차’가 62.6%로 가장 많이 나타났다. 발명과 진로 영역은 발전된 내용이 100%로 나타났다. 초등학교 실과와 중학교 기술 가정, 고등학교 기술 가정 교과 내 ‘발명교육’ 영역의 전반적 연계정도는 ‘반복’이 51.9%로 가장 많았고, ‘발전’과 ‘격차’ 된 내용이 각각 25.9%, 22.2%로 나타나 교과과정이 전반적으로 연계성이 미흡한 것으로 나타났다. 따라서 ‘발명교육’ 영역에 대한 연계성 분석 연구가 꾸준히 이루어져 학습자들의 교과 학습 질을 높이고 학교급별 연속성을 마련하기 위한 교과과정의 방향 제시가 요구된다.The objective of this study was to analyze the vertical connectivity of ’invention education’ area of practical arts(technology and home economics) in the 2009 revised curriculum. As subjects of analysis, the practical arts(technology and home economics) curriculum documents, three practical arts textbooks for elementary school, three technology and home economics textbooks for middle school, and three technology and home economics textbooks for high school were selected. In the results of analyzing contents, the ‘invention education’ area was classified into four areas and 27 sub-contents. When the equal level of contents was shown in the level of school, it was considered as ‘repetition’. In case when learning contents were omitted or upper-class learning was impossible, it was considered as ‘gap’. In case of intensification/expansion, it was considered as ‘development’. The results of this study were like below. Regarding the connectivity of understanding of invention and actual area of invention, the ‘repetition’ was the most as 57.1% and 63.6% respectively while also showing the contents of ’development’ as ‘28.6% and 36.4% respectively. The use of invention had no contents of ’development’ while showing the most ’gap’ as 62.6%. The invention and career area showed the contents of development as 100%. Regarding the overall connectivity of ’invention education’ area within textbooks of practical arts for elementary school, and technology and home economics for middle/high school, the ‘repetition’ was the most(51.9%) while the contents of ‘development’ and ‘gap’ were 25.9% and 22.2% respectively. Overall, it shows the insufficient connectivity of the curriculum. Therefore, it would be necessary to suggest the direction of curriculum to increase the quality of learning and also to establish the connectivity for the level of each school through continuous researches on the connectivity of ’invention education’ area.