연구동향 분석
박사

공과대학 프로젝트 기반 수업에서 학습성과에 영향을 미치는 변인들 간의 구조적 관계 분석

이소영 2015년

논문상세정보
    • 저자 이소영
    • 기타서명 Analysis of the structural relationship among variables affecting learning outcome in project-based learning for engineering education
    • 형태사항 삽화: ix, 163 p.
    • 일반주기 지도교수: 주영주, 참고문헌: p. 120-148
    • 학위논문사항 교육공학과,, 이화여자대학교 대학원:, 2015. 8. 졸업, 학위논문(박사)-
    • DDC 300
    • 발행지 서울 :
    • 언어 kor
    • 출판년 2015
    • 발행사항 이화여자대학교 대학원,
    유사주제 논문( 0)
인용/피인용

' 공과대학 프로젝트 기반 수업에서 학습성과에 영향을 미치는 변인들 간의 구조적 관계 분석' 의 참고문헌

  • 한국공학교육인증의 "프로그램 교육목표" 달성을 위한 평가 모형 개발
    김명랑 김복기 윤우영 공학교육, 11(2), 42-49 [2008]
  • 한국공학교육인증원 인증현황
    http://www.abeek.or.kr/htmls_kr 에서검색 [2015]
  • 한국공학교육인증원 KEC2005 공학인증기준 설명서
    http://www.abeek.or.kr/htmls_kr/contents.jsp?menu_l=2&menu_m=16에서 검색 [2006]
  • 한국경영자총협회 대졸 신입사원 채용 및 재교육 현황조사 결과
    http://www.kefplaza.com/labor/pm/insamanage04_view.jsp?nodeId=139&idx=5834에서 검색 [2008]
  • 학습과제의 실제성 인식수준에 따른 학습동기와 성취도 변화
    강명희 김나리 교육공학연구, 15(1), 25-42 [1999]
  • 팀웍 역량의 구성요인 탐색 및 진단도구 개발: 남녀 대학생을 중심으로
    김명소 한영석 한국심리학회지: 여성, 15(1), 129-153 [2010]
  • 토목공학분야의 개선된 종합설계과목의 필요성 및 적용
    김장호 박준홍 최성욱 한경희 허준행 한국공학교육학회, 13(6), 152-163 [2010]
  • 캡스톤디자인을 활용한 학습성과 평가
    김성동 김정엽 이희원 기계저널, 52(9), 35-39 [2012]
  • 캡스톤 디자인의 디자인 교육 응용 사례연구-인터랙션디자인 교과를 중심으로
    권오성 신창범 디지털디자인학연구, 14(1), 34-42 [2013]
  • 캡스톤 디자인 교과목 기반의 프로그램학습성과 평가 연구
    김성환 김정엽 박근 이희원 한국공학교육학회, 13(6), 143-151 [2010]
  • 집단탐구 협동학습에서 학업적 자기효능감, 협력적 자기효능감,학업성과의 관계
    임규연 교육의 이론과 실천, 16(2), 19-36 [2011]
  • 중학교 국어 교과에서 성별에 따른 외재적 학습동기, 독서태도, 학습전략, 지각된 교수전략이 성취도에 미치는 영향력 차이 분석
    서혁 이소영 주영주 국어교육학연구, 45, 549-584 [2012]
  • 종합설계교과목의 교수-학습 결과 분석
    김동철 김인숙 공학교육연구,16(2), 31-36 [2013]
  • 전문대학 공학계열 신입생들의 메타인지, 문제해결력 및 학습몰입이 성취도에 미치는 영향
    김능연 맹민재 이상희(Sang-Hoi Yi) 정애경 전자공학회 논문지, 47(2), 133-140 [2010]
  • 전문대 학생의 강좌에 대한 자기효능감,유용, 용이성, 몰입 및 만족도 간의 구조적 관계 규명
    김가연 임연욱 정애경 주영주 교육의 이론과실천, 15(3), 217-238 [2010]
  • 전문대 공학계열생에 있어 학업적 자기효능감, 학교의 지원의 학습성과 -만족도, 성취도 및 학습지속의향- 에 관한 연구
  • 이러닝 학습성과의 영향변수 탐색과 인과분석의 교육정책적 함의
    김종숙 열린교육연구, 15(3), 101-125 [2007]
  • 이러닝 수강생 교육 효과에 관한 연구
    남상조(Sang-Zo Nam) 문숙경(SookKyung Moon) 한국콘텐츠학회논문지, 7(1), 161-168 [2007]
  • 이공계 인력이 우리의 미래다-이공계 르네상스 희망전략
    장진규 TheHRD Review, 64(7), 126-137 [2012]
  • 웹기반 프로젝트 학습에서 학습실제성, 학습동기, 성취도 간의 관계 규명
    강명희 김지심 김혜선 윤희정 교육공학연구, 24(3), 23-51 [2008]
  • 원격교원연수에서 지각된 과제가치,ICT 활용능력, 학습 성과 간의 관계 규명
    강명희 김보경 조미현 한정선 교원교육, 27(2), 59-81 [2011]
  • 외국 대학의 캡스톤 디자인 교육
    임동진 전기의 세계, 55(9), 58-61 [2006]
  • 서울시 지방자지단체 학습동아리 참여공무원의 집단효능감이 학습만족도에 미치는 영향
    기영화 이영은 평생교육 HRD 연구, 6(4), 23-42 [2010]
  • 사이버대학생의 학업적 자기효능감, 자기조절학습능력및 온라인과제가치와 만족도 및 성취도간의 관계 분석
  • 사이버대학생의 자기조절학습능력, 지각된 유용성, 지각된 용이성, 만족도, 성취도, 학습지속의향 간의 구조적 관계 규명
    이소영 주영주 홍유나 한국교육, 38(2), 56-79 [2011]
  • 사이버교육에서 학습동기, 프로그램, 조직의 지원과 상호작용, 몰입 및 학습성과의 구조적 관계 규명
    김나영 주영주 교육공학연구, 26(2),53-82 [2010]
  • 문제중심학습 성과에 대한 팀효능감, 메타인지의 예측력 규명
    류혜선 윤성혜 이정민 아시아교육연구, 13(1), 105-123 [2012]
  • 대학생 프로젝트 팀의 구성, 프로세스, 성과 간의 관계에 대한 형태적 연구
    문연희 심덕섭 양동민 최지호 상업교육연구, 22, 69-87 [2008]
  • 대학생 팀웍역량 검사의 개발 및 타당화 연구
    최윤미 직업교육연구,30(2), 173-196 [2011]
  • 대학 학습동아리 활동에서 자기주도학습능력, 집단효능감, 지식공유 및 만족도와의 관계
    송윤희 교육과학연구, 42(3), 179-209 [2011]
  • 대학 프로젝트 수업 환경에서 분업화, 상호작용, 공유정신모형이 팀 수행성과와 개인 학습에 미치는 영향
    조일현 교육공학연구, 26(3), 1-20 [2010]
  • 기업 이러닝에서 온라인 과제가치, 직무몰입,만족도와 전이동기 간의 구조적 관계
    주영주 최혜리 하영자 기업교육연구, 13(1), 31-50 [2011]
  • 기업 사이버교육에서 학습자의 만족도, 학업 성취도 및 학습전이 간의 관계 규명
  • 구조방정식모델링의 이해와 적용
    문수백 서울: 학지사 [2010]
  • 과제기반 협력학습에서 소집단 구성원의 자기조절학습 수준이 집단자기조절, 소집단 성과 및 활동 만족도에 미치는 영향
    이현우 교육방법연구, 24(1), 171-183 [2012]
  • 공학소양을 위한 팀워크 교육
    Choe, Yu-Hyeon 최유현 공학교육, 15(3), 63-66 [2008]
  • 공학설계교육에서 학습과 학습전이간의 관계성 연구
    윤관식 이병철 한국공학교육학회, 12(3), 3-12 [2009]
  • 공학교육인증제도의 학습성과와 교양교육
    김희동 지인영 교양교육연구, 3(1), 89-103 [2009]
  • 공학교육의 문제점과 개선 방향에 대하여
    송동주 공학교육과 기술,10(2), 85-92 [2003]
  • 공무원 사이버 강좌 만족도 평가를 위한 척도 개발 및 타당화 연구
    김나영 박성희 주영주 하영자 교육과학연구, 38(3), 75-91 [2007]
  • 건축학부 종합설계 사례: 정보기술 및 건설관리 기법 적용을 중심으로
    김영민 정영수 하지원 건축, 55(6), 45-49 [2011]
  • 건축공학 프로그램의 종합설계관련 교과목 운영현황분석
    김영석 한승우 건축, 55(6), 39-44 [2011]
  • 『구조방정식모형으로 논문쓰기』
    김주환 서울: 커뮤니케이션 [2009]
  • “공학대학 캡스톤디자인(창의적 공학 설계) 교육과정 운영실태 및 학습 만족도 조사”
    이동욱 이태식 장병철 전영준 한국공학교육학회,12(2), 36-50 [2009]
  • “[이공계 르네상스] 글로벌 공학인재 양성 시급”
    홍기범 전자신문. http://www.etnews.com/201211300601에서 2013년 1월 30일 검색 [2012]
  • “2013년 대학생 최대 관심사 2위는 ‘취업’, 1위는.”
    조용철 파이낸셜뉴스. http://www.fnnews.com/news/201301040915387032에서2015년 2월 19일 검색 [2013]
  • e-비즈니스 기술: 모바일 클라우드 사용에 영향을 미치는 요인과 모바일 신뢰의 조절효과에 관한 실증연구
    김근아 김상현 e-비즈니스연구,12(1), 281-310 [2011]
  • Young, M. F. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. EducationalTechnology Research and Development, 41(1), 43-58.
  • Yadav, A., Vinh, M., Shaver, G. M., Meckle, P., & Firebaugh, S. (2014).Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(5), 659-677.
  • Yadav, A., Luderberg, M. A., DeSchryver, M., Dirkin, K. H., Schiller, N.,Maier, K. S., & Herrid, C. F.(2007). Teaching science with casestudies: A national survey of faculty perception of the benefits andchallenges of using cases. Journal of College Science Teaching,37(1), 34-38.
  • Wilson, J. E. (2005). Self-appraisal of problem-solving ability as apredictor of academic outcomes in allied health programs.Unpublished doctorial dissertation, University of Oklahoma HealthSciences Center, Oklahoma City.
  • Williams, E. A., & Castro, S. L. (2008). The effects of teamwork onindividual learning and perceptions of team performance: Acomparison of face-to-face and online project settings. TeamPerformance Management, 16(3/4), 124-147.
  • Wigfield, A., & Cambria, J. (2010). Students’ achievement values, goalorientations, and interest: Definitions, development, and relations toachievement outcomes. Developmental Review, 30(1), 1-35.
  • Wigfied, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-Value Theory of AchievementMotivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
  • Whatley, J. (2012). Evaluation of a team project based learning module fordeveloping employability skills. Issues in Informing Science andInformation Technology, 9, 75-92.
  • Weingart, L. R. (1992). Impact of group goals, task component complexity,effort, and planning on group performance. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 77, 682-693.
  • Wang, C. H., Shannon, D. M., & Ross, M. E. (2013). Students’characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, andcourse outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3),302-323.
  • Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Source of self-efficacy in school:Critical Review of the literature and future directions. Review ofEducational Research, 78(4), 751-796.
  • Tseng, K. H., Chang, C. C., Lou, S. J., & Chen, W. P. (2013). Attitudestowards science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) ina project-based learning (PjPL) environment. International Journal ofTechnology and Design Education, 23, 87-102.
  • Tseng, H., & Ku, H. (2011). The relationships between trust, performance,satisfaction, and development progressions among virtual teams.Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 12(2), 81-94.
  • Tsai, Y. M., Kunter, M., Ludtke, O., Trautwein, U., & Ryan, R. (2008).What makes lessons interesting? The role of situation and personafactors in three school subjects. Journal of Educational Psychology,100, 460-472.
  • Trautwein, U., Marsh, H. W., Nagengast, B., Ludtke, O., Nagy, G., &Jonkmann, K. (2012). Probing for the multiplicative term in modernexpectancy?value theory: A latent interaction modeling study.Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 763-777.
  • Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning.The autodesk Foundation. Retrieved fromhttp://www.bie.org/index.php/site/RE/pbl_research/29146
  • Strobel, J., Wang, J., Weber, N.R., & Dyehouse, M. (2013). The role ofauthenticity in design-based learning environments: the case ofengineering education. Computers & Education, 64, 143-152.
  • Stevens, M. J., & Campion, M. A. (1994). The knowledge, skill, and abilityrequirements for teamwork: implications for human resourcemanagement. Journal of Management, 20(2), 503-530.
  • Stepien, W. & Gallagher, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: As authenticas it gets. Educational Leadership, 51, 25-28.
  • Stefanou, C. Stolk, J. D., Prince, M. , Chen, J. C., & Lord, S. M. (2013).Self-regulation and autonomy in problem and project-based learningenvironments. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(2), 109-122.
  • Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structuralequation models. In S. Leinhart(Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp.290-312), San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • So, H. J. , & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning,social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment:Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51, 318-336.
  • Smith, K. A. (2004). Teamwork and project management. Boston: McGrawHill-Higher Education.
  • Shoaf, M. M. (2000). Classroom Note: A capstone course for pre-servicesecondary Mathematics teachers. International Journal ofMathematical Education in Science and Technology, 31(1), 151-160.
  • Sass, D. A., Smith, P. L. (2006). The effects of parceling unidimensional scales on structural parameter estimates in structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 13(4), 566-586.
  • Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., Rosen, M. A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, andteam performance: discoveries and developments. Human Factors,50(3), 540-547.
  • Ryan, R. M., Connell, J. P., & Deci, E. L. (1985). A motivational analysisof self-determination and self-regulation in education. In C. Ames &R. E. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Theclassroom milieu (pp.289-305). New York: Academic Press.
  • Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Promoting self-determined schoolengagement: Motivation, learning, and well-being. In K. R. Wentzel& A. Wigfield (Eds.), Handbook on motivation at school (pp.171-196). New York: Routledge.
  • Rundle-Thiele, S., & Kuhn, K-A. (2007, July). Do perception mirrorreality? Student perceptions of learning versus grade outcomes.Paper presented at the Academy of Marketing Conference. London,UK: Kingston University.
  • Rugarcia, A., Felder, R., Woods, D., & Stice, J. (2000). The future ofengineering education I. A vision for a new century. ChemicalEngineering Education, 34(1), 16?25
  • Roh, Y. S., Lee, S. Jeong Lee, & Mennenga, H. (2014). Factors influencinglearner satisfaction with team-based learning among nursingstudents. Nursing & Health Sciences, 16(4), 490?497.
  • Roelofs, E., & Terwel, J. (1999). Constructivism and authentic pedagogy:state of the art and recent developments in the Dutch nationalcurriculum in secondary education. J. Curriculum Studies, 31(2),201-227.
  • Roberts, G., Klieber, D., & Duda, J. (1981). An analysis of motivation inchildren’s sport: The role of perceived competence in participation.Journal of Sport Psychology, 3 , 206-216.
  • Robbins, E. J., Kinney, J. M., & Kart, C. S. (2008). Promoting activeengagement in health research: lessons from an undergraduategerontology capstone course. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 29,105-123.
  • Reid, W. J., Bailey-Dempsey, C., & Viggiani, P. (1996). Evaluation ofstudent fieldwork: An empirical study. Journal of Social WorkEducation, 32(1), 45-52.
  • Reeves, T. C. , Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2002). Authentic activities andonline learning. In A. Goody, J. Herrington, & M. Northcote(Eds.),Quality conversations: Research and development in highereducation, Volume 25 (pp. 562-567). Jamison, ACT: HERDSA.
  • Radinsky, J., Bouillion, L., Lento, E. M., & Gomez, L. M. (2001). Mutualbenefit partnership: a curricular design for authenticity. Journal ofCurriculum Studies, 33(4), 405-430.
  • Purzer, S. (2011). The relationship between team discourse, self-efficacy,and individual achievement: a sequential mixed-methods study.Journal of Engineering Education, 100(4), 655-679.
  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior research methods, instruments, and computers, 36(4), 717-731.
  • Plante, I., O’ Keefe, P., & Theoet, M. (2013). The relation betweenachievement goal and expectancy-value theories in predictingachievement-related outcomes: A test of four theoretical conceptions.Motivation and Emotion, 37(1), 65-78.
  • Pintrich P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T. , & McKeachie, W. J. (1993). Amanual for the use of the motivated strategies for learningquestionnaire(MSLQ). National Center for Research to ImprovePostsecondary Teaching and Learning, AnnArbor, MI.
  • Pintrich P. R., & De Groot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulatedlearning components of classroom academic performance. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
  • Pike, G. R. (1993). The relationship between perceived learning andsatisfaction with college: An alternative view. Research in HigherEducation, 34(1), 23-40.
  • Petraglia, J. (1998). Reality by design: The rhetoric and technology ofauthenticity in education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erbaum Associates.
  • Perkun, R. (1993). Facets of adolescents’ academic motivation: a longitudinalexpectancy-value approach. In P. Pintrich & M. L. Maehr (Eds.).Advances in motivation and achievement (pp. 139-189). Greenwich,CT: JAI.
  • Perkins, D. N., Hancock, C., Hobbs, R., Martin, F., & Simmons, R. (1986).Conditions of learning in novice programmers. Journal of EducationalComputing Research, 2(1), 37-56.
  • Pembridge, J. J. & Paretti, M. C. (2010, June). The current state ofcapstone design pedagogy. Paper presented at the American Societyin Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exhibition,Louisville, KY.
  • Pascual, R., & Uribe, R. (2006, June). Experiential learning strategies in amechanical engineering senior course. Paper presented at the SixthInternational Workshop on Active Learning in Engineering Education.Monterrey, Mexico.
  • Park, S. H., Kim, M., & Yu, D. (2011). The effects of learning authenticityon the learning achievements in the online corporate trainingprogramme. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 37-41.
  • Paretti, M., Layton, R., Laguette, S., & Speegle, G. (2011). Managing andmentoring capstone design teams: considerations and practices forfaculty. International Journal of Engineering Education, 27(6), 1-14.
  • Pajares, F. (1999). Current directions in self- efficacy research. In M.Maehr, & P.R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation andachievement (pp. 1-49). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  • Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy belief in academic settings. Review ofEducational Research, 66(4), 543-578.
  • Paechter, M., Maier, B., & Macher, D. (2010). Students’ expectation of, andexperiences in e-learning: Their relation to learning achievements andcourse satisfaction. Computers & Education, 54, 222-229.
  • O’Neill, T. A., Goffin, R. D., & Gellatly, I. R. (2012). The knowledge, skill,and ability requirements for teamwork: revisiting the teamwork-KSAtest’s validity. International Journal of Selection and Assessment,20(1), 36-52.
  • Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents andconsequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of MarketingResearch, 17(4), 460.
  • Nicaise, M., Gibney, T., & Crane, M. (2000). Toward an understanding ofauthentic learning: student perceptions of an authentic classroom.Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9, 79-94.
  • Neo, M., & Neo, T. K. (2009). Engaging students in multimedia-mediatedconstructivist learning-students’ perceptions. Educational Technology& Society, 12(2), 254-266.
  • National Survey of Student Engagement Report (2007). Experience thatmatter: Enhancing student learning and success. Indiana UniversityCenter for Postsecondary Research. Retrieved fromhttp://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2007_Annual_Report/docs/withhold/NSSE_2007_Annual_Report.pdf
  • Nassersharif, B., & Rousseau, C. E. (2010, June). Best practice inassessing capstone design projects. Paper presented at the CapstoneDesign Conference. Boulder, CO.
  • Napier, N. P., & Johnson, R. D. (2007). Technical projects: Understandingteamwork satisfaction in an introductory IS course. Journal ofInformation Systems Education, 18(1), 39-48.
  • Multon, K. D., Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1991). Relations ofself-efficacy beliefs to academic outcomes: a meta-analyticinvestigation. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 38(1), 30-38.
  • Moursund, D. (1999). Project-based learning using information technology.Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
  • Mohrman, S. A. , Cohen, S. G., & Mohrman, A. M. (1995). Designingteam-based organizations: New forms knowledge work. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Mills, J. E., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Engineering education ? isproblem-based or project-based learning the answer? AustralianJournal of Engineering Education. Online publication 2003-04. Retrieved fromhttp://www.aaee.com.au/journal/2003/mills_treagust03.pdf.
  • Miller, R. B., & Brickman, S. A. (2004). A model of future orientedmotivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 16,9-33.
  • Miller, D. L. (2001). Reexamining teamwork KSAs and team performance.Small Group Research, 32(6), 745-765.
  • Mento, A. J., Steel, R. P., & Karren, R. J. (1987). A meta-analytic study ofthe effects of goal setting on task performance: 1966-1984.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 50-77.
  • Meece, J. L., Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1990). Predictors of mathanxiety and its consequences for young adolescents’ courseenrollment intentions and performances in mathematics. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 82, 60-70.
  • McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social psychology: A brief introduction. NewYork: Holt.Rinehart and Winston.
  • Mayo, J. A. (2004). Using case-based instruction to bridge the gapbetween theory and practice in psychology of adjustment. Journal ofConstructivist Psychology, 17, 137-146.
  • Mayer (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects ofproblem solving. Instructional Science, 26, 49-63.
  • Martinez-Caro, E., & Campuzano-Bolarin, F. (2011). Factors affectingstudents’ satisfaction in engineering disciplines: traditional vs. blendedapproaches. European Journal of Engineering Education, 36(5), 473-483.
  • Marks, M. A., Marthieu, J. E., & Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally basedframework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy ofManagement Review, 26(3), 356-376.
  • Malka, A., & Covington, M. V. (2005). Perceiving school performance asinstrumental to future goal attainment: Effects on gradedperformance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 60-80.
  • Lynch, K., Goold, A., & Blain, J. (2004). Students’ pedagogical preferencesin the delivery of IT capstone courses. Issues in Informing Scienceand Information Technology, 1, 431-442.
  • Loehlin, J. C. (1998). Latent variable models. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Ling-yee, E. L. (2011). Course-specific motivated learning and outcomes:the role of the perceived task value of course-specific assignments.Journal of Teaching in International Business, 22, 107-125.
  • Liaw, S. S. (2008). Investigating students’ perceived satisfaction, behavioralintention, and effectiveness of e-learning: a case study of theblackboard system. Computers & Education, 51, 864-873.
  • Lepper,M.R.,Corpus,J.H.,& Iyengar,S.S.(2005).Intrinsic and extrinsicmotivationalorientations in the classroom:Age differences and academiccorrelates.JournalofEducationalPsychology,97(2),184-196.
  • Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacyexpectations to academic achievement and persistence. Journal ofCounseling Psychology, 31(3), 356-362.
  • Leggat, S. G. (2007). Effective healthcare teams require effective teammembers: defining teamwork competencies. BMC Health ServiceResearch, 7, 1-10.
  • Lee, H. W. (2012). User-design approach in problem development and itseffects on authenticity, performance, and satisfaction in problem-basedlearning. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 21(3), 526-534.
  • Lebow, D., & Wager, W. W. (1994). Authentic activity as a model forappropriate learning activity: Implications for emerging instructionaltechnologies. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 23(3),231-244.
  • Leach, D. J. , Wall, T. D., Rogelberg, S. G., & Jackson, P. R. (2005). Teamautonomy, performance, and member job strain: uncovering theteamwork KSA link. Applied Psychology: An International Review,54(1), 1-24.
  • Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. B.Resnick, J. M. Levine and S. D. Teasley (Eds), Perspectives onsocially shared cognition (pp. 63-82.) Washington DC: AmericanPsychological Association.
  • Kuhn, K. A., & Rundle-Thiele, S. R. (2009). Curriculum alignment:exploring student perception of learning achievement measures.International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education,21(3), 351-361.
  • Kridel, C. (2010). Encyclopedia of curriculum studies 1. Thousands Oaks:Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Koh, J. H. L., Herring, S. C., & Hew, K. F. (2010). Project-based learningand student knowledge construction during asynchronous onlinediscussion. Internet and Higher Education, 13, 284-291.
  • Kline, R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling(3rd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
  • Kishton, J. M. , & Widamn, K. F. (1994). Unidimensional versus domainrepresentative parceling of questionnaire items: An empiricalexample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 757-765.
  • Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The project method: The use of the purposeful actin the educative process. Teacher’s college, Columbia University. Retrieved from http://www.archive.org/details/projectmethodus00kilpgoog
  • Keller, J. M. (2009). Motivational design for learning and performance:The ARCS model approach. New York, NY: Springer.
  • Katz, L. G., & Chard, S. D (1992). The project approach. In J. E. Johnson,& J. Roopnarine (Eds.), Approaches to early childhood education(pp.209-222) New York: Macmillan.
  • Julien, B. L., Lexis, L., Schuijers, J. , Samiric, T., & McDonald, S. (2012).Using capstones to develop research skills and graduate capabilities:A case study from physiology. Journal of University Teaching &Learning Practice, 9, 1-15.
  • Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, J. (2013). Locus of control, self-efficacy,and task value as predictors of learning outcome in an onlineuniversity context. Computers & Education, 62, 149-158.
  • Joo, Y. J., Bong, M., & Choi, H. J. (2000). Self-efficacy for self-regulatedlearning, academic self-efficacy, and Internet self-efficacy inWeb-based instruction. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 48, 5-17.
  • Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., & Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Real-life problemsolving: A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning.Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving.Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning. EducationalTechnology, 31(9), 28-33.
  • Jex, S. M., & Britt, T. W. (2008). Organizational psychology: Ascientist-practitioner approach. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley &Sons, Inc.
  • Jeng, Y. C., & Shih, H. H. (2008). A longitudinal design study onself-efficacy, attribution, goal setting, and mechanics achievement indepartment of mechanical engineering students on Taiwan. TheInternational Journal of Learning, 15, 161-169.
  • Jeffries, P. R., Rew, S., & Cramer, J. M. (2002). A comparison ofstudent-centered versus traditional methods of teaching basic nursingskills in a learning laboratory. Nursing Education Perspectives, 23(1),14-19.
  • Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams inorganizations: From in put-process-output models to IMOI models.Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517-543.
  • Idowu, P. (2004, June). A strategy for innovative capstone design projects.Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering EducationAnnual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT.
  • Husman, J., Derryberry, W. P., Crowson, H. M. & Lomax, R. (2004).Instrumentality, task value, and intrinsic motivation: making sense oftheir independent interdependence. Contemporary EducationalPsychologist, 29, 63-76.
  • Hung, W. (2013). Team-based complex problem solving: a collectivecognition perspective. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 61, 365-384.
  • Hung, D. & Chen, D. (2007). Context-process authenticity in learning:implications for identity enculturation and boundary crossing.Education Technology & Research Development, 55(2), 147-167.
  • Hughes, R. L., & Jones, S. K. (2011). Developing and assessing college studentteamwork skills. New Directions for Institutional Research, 149, 53-64.
  • Huang, H. M. (2002). Towards constructivism for adult learners in onlinelearning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33,27-37.
  • Hotaling, N., Fasse, B. B., Bost, L. F., Hermann, C. D., & Forest, C. R.(2012). A quantitative analysis of the effects of a multidisciplinaryengineering capstone design course. Journal of EngineeringEducation, 101(4), 630-656.
  • Hoffman, B., & Spatariu, A. (2008). The influence of self-efficacy andmetacognitive prompting on math problem-solving efficiency.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 875-893.
  • Hoegl, M., & Gemuenden, H. G. (2001). Team quality and the success ofinnovative projects: A theoretical concept and empirical evidence.Organization Science, 12(4), 435-449.
  • Hirschfeld, R. R., Jordan, M. H., Feild, H. S., Giles, W. F., & Armenakis,A. A. (2006). Becoming team players: team members’ mastery ofteamwork knowledge as a predictor of team task proficiency andobserved teamwork effectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology,91(2), 467-474.
  • Herrington, J., Reeves, T.C., Oliver, R., & Woo, Y. (2004). Designingauthentic activities in web-based courses. Journal of Computing inHigher Educational, 16(1), 3-29.
  • Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology, Research and development, 48(3), 23-48.
  • Herrington, J. (2005). Authentic tasks in e-learning designs, Studies in Learning. Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 2(2), 1-8.
  • Heppner, P. P., & Peterson, C. H. (1982). The development and implicationsof a personal problem-solving inventory. Journal of CounselingPsychology, 29(1), 66-75.
  • Heppner, P. P. , & Baker, C. E. (1997). Applications of the problem solvinginventory. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling &Development, 29(4), 229-241.
  • Helle, L., Tynjala, P., & Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based learning inpost-secondary education-theory, practice and rubber sling shots.Higher Education, 51, 287-314.
  • Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Pintrich, P. R., Elliot, A. J., & Thrash,T. M. (2002). Revision of achievement goal theory: Necessary andilluminating. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 638-645.
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariatedata analysis(7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Hackman, J. R. (1987) The design of work teams. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.),Handbook of Organizational Behavior (pp. 315-342). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
  • Gum, L. F., Walters L., & Nobes, C. (2012). Novice to expertinterprofessional teamwork: Self-assessment team competency tool.Flinders University Rural Clinical School for Country Heath, SouthAustralia.
  • Gulikers, J. T. M. , Bastiaens, T. J., & Martens, R. L. (2005). The surplusvalue of an authentic learning environment. Computers in HumanBehavior, 21, 509-521.
  • Guinan, P. J., Cooprider, J. G. , & Faraj, S. (1998). Enabling softwaredevelopment team performance during requirements definition: abehavioral versus technical approach. Information Systems Research,9(2), 101-125.
  • Greeno, J. G. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptualdomain. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22,170-218.
  • Gosen, J., & Washbush, J. (2004). A review of scholarship on assessingexperiential learning effectiveness. Simulation & Gaming, 35(2),270-293
  • Gladstein, D. L. (1984). Groups in context: a model of task groupeffectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29, 499-517.
  • Gemuenden. H. G., & Lechler, T. (1997, July). Success factor of projectmanagement: The critical few. Paper presented at the Innovation inTechnology Management - The Key to Global Leadership. PICMET'97: Portland International Conference on Management andTechnology. Portland, Oregon.
  • GBS 설계 모델을 적용한 기업 e-learning 학습 환경에서 학습 성과에영향을 미치는 요인
    임규연 조일현 교육공학연구, 18(4), 79-110 [2002]
  • Fraser, B. J. (1994) Research on classroom and school climate, In D. GABEL (Ed.) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning(pp. 493?541). New York: Macmillan.
  • Fransen, J., Weinberger, A., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Team effectivenessand team development in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 9-24.
  • Fortune, A. E., Cavazos, A., & Lee, M. (2005). Achievement motivation andoutcome in social work field education. Journal of Social WorkEducation, 41(1), 115-129.
  • Fornell, C., & D. F. Larcker. (1981). Evaluating structural equation modelswith unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal ofMarketing Research, 18, 39-50.
  • FitzPatrick, K. A. (2004). An investigative laboratory course in humanphysiology using technology and collaborative writing. Advances inPhysiology Education, 28, 112-119.
  • Feather, N. T. (1982). Expectancy-value approaches: Present status andfuture directions. In Feather, N. T. (Ed.), Expectations and actions:Expectancy-value models in psychology(pp. 395-420). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
  • English, M. C., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). Supporting student self-regulatedlearning in problem and project-based learning. InterdisciplinaryJournal of Problem-based Learning, 7(2), 128-150.
  • Elliott, T. R., Godshall, F., Shrout, J. R., & Witty, T. E. (1990).Problem-solving appraisal, self-reported study habits, andperformance of academically at-risk college students. Journal ofCounseling Psychology, 37, 203-207.
  • Elliott, K. M., & Shin, D. (2002). Student satisfaction: An alternativeapproach to assessing this important concept. Journal of HigherEducation Policy and Management, 24(2), 197-209.
  • Elliott, K. M., & Healy, M. A. (2001). Key factors influencing studentsatisfaction related to recruitment and retention. Journal of Marketingfor Higher Education, 10(4), 1-11.
  • Eccles, J. S., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece,J. L., & Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values, and academicbehaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievementmotivation (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.
  • Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (1995). In the mind of the actor: The structureof adolescents’ achievement task value and expectancy related beliefs.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(3), 215-225.
  • Eccles, J. S. (1984). Sex differences in achievement patterns. In T.Sonderegger (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 32, pp.97-132). Lincoln, NE: Univ. of Nebraska Press.
  • Easley, R. F. , Devaraj, S., & Crant, M. (2003). Relating collaborativetechnology use to teamwork quality and performance: An empirical130analysis. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4),247-265.
  • Diehl, W., Grobe, T., Lopez, H., & Cabral, C. (1999). Project-based learning: A strategy for teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Center for Youth Development and Education, Corporation for Business, Work, and Learning.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsicmotivational processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances inexperimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39-80). New York:Academic Press.
  • Collis, B. (1997). Supporting project-based collaborative learning via WWWenvironment. In B. Khan (Ed.), Web-based instruction (pp.213-219).Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
  • Cole, J. S. , Bergin, D. A. , & Whittaker, T. A. (2008). Predicting studentachievement for low stakes testing with effort and task value.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 609-624.
  • Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1990). Technology and thedesign of generative learning environments. Educational Technology,31(5), 34-40.
  • Chowdhury, S. , Endres, M., & Lanis, T. W. (2002). Preparing students forsuccess in team work environments: the importance of buildingconfidence. Journal of Management Issues, 14(3), 346-359.
  • Chou, H. W., Lin, Y. H., & Chou, S. B. (2012). Team cognition, collectiveefficacy, and performance in strategic decision-making teams. SocialBehavior and Personality, 40(3), 381-394
  • Cheung, G. W., & Lau, R. S. (2008). Testing mediation and suppression effects of latent variables: Bootstrapping with structural equation models. Organizational Research Methods, 11(2), 296-325.
  • Chen, G., Donahue, L. M., & Klimoski, R. J. (2004). Trainingundergraduates to work in organizational teams. Academy ofManagement Learning & Education, 3(1), 27?40.
  • Chaparro-Pelaez, J., Iglesias-Pradas, S., Pascual-Miguel, F. J., &Hernandez-Garcia, A. (2013). Factors affecting perceived learning ofengineering students in problem based learning supported bybusiness simulation. Interactive Learning Environments, 21(3),244-262.
  • Centra, J. A. , & Gaubatz, N. B. (2005). Student perceptions of learningand instructional effectiveness in college courses. ETS SIR IIResearch. Retrieved from https://www.ets.org/sir_ii/about/research.
  • Cannon-Bowers, J. A, Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C. E. (1995).Defining competencies and establishing team training requirements. InR. A. Guzzo, E. Salas, & Associations(Eds.), Team effectiveness anddecision making in organizations (pp. 333-380). San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
  • Cannon-Bowers, J. A & Salas, E. (1998). Team performance and trainingin complex environment: recent finding from applied research.Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(3), 83-87.
  • Campion, M. A., Medsker, G. J., & Higgs, A. C. (1993). Relations between workgroup characteristics and effectiveness: Implications for designingeffective work groups. Personnel Psychology, 46, 823-850.
  • Buzzetto-More, N. A. (2013), Models to inform capstone programdevelopment. Issues in Informing Science and InformationTechnology, 10, 81-93.
  • Buck Institute for Education (2003). Project based learning: A guide tostandards-focused project based learning for middle and high schoolteachers (2nd ed.). Oakland, CA: Wilsted & Taylor.
  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R.(1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid P. (1989). Situated cognition and theculture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-34.
  • Bottge, B. A. , & Hasselbring, T. S. (1993). Taking word problems off thepage. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 36-36.
  • Bong, M. (2001). Role of Self-Efficacy and Task-Value in Predicting CollegeStudents' Course Performance and Future Enrollment Intentions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(4), 553-570.
  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
  • Bogo, M., Regehr, C., Hughes, J., Power, R., & Globerman, J. (2002).Evaluating a measure of student field performance in direct service:Testing reliability and validity of explicit criteria. Journal of SocialWork Education, 38, 385-401.
  • Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationshipbetween reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research inMathematics Education, 33(4), 239?258.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Dochy, F. J. R. C. (1996). Alternatives in assessment ofachievements, learning process, and prior knowledge. Boston, MA:Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Bilica, K. (2004). Lessons from experts: Improving college scienceinstruction through case teaching. School Science and MathematicsEducation, 29(1), 41-62.
  • Bereiter, C., & Scardiamalia, M. (1996). Rethinking learning. In D. R. Olson& N. Torrance, N (Eds.), The handbook of human development: Newmodels of learning, teaching, and schooling(pp. 485-513). London:Blackwell.
  • Bentler,P.M.,& Bonett,D.G.(1980).Significancetestsandgoodnessof fitin theanalysisofcovariancestructures.PsychologicalBulletin, 88,588-606.
  • Beaubien, J. M., & Baker, D. P. (2004). The use of simulation for trainingteamwork skills in health care: how low can you go? Quality &Safety in Health Care, 13(1), 151-156.
  • Batista, I. V. C., & Cornachione, E. B. (2005). Learning styles influences onsatisfaction and perceived learning: Analysis of an online businessgame. Development in Business Simulation and ExperientialLearning, 32, 22-30.
  • Bastiaens, T., & Martens, R. (2000). Conditions for web-based learningwith real events. In B. Abbey(Ed.), Instructional and cognitiveimpacts of web-based education (pp.1-32). Hershley/London: IdeaGroup Publishing.
  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). Applications of structural equationmodeling in marketing and consumer research: a review.International Journal of Research in Marketing, 13, 139-161.
  • Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York:FreemanBarab, S. A. , Squire, K. D., & Deuber, W. (2000). A coevolutionary modelfor supporting the emergence of authenticity. EducationalTechnology Research & Development, 48(2), 37-62.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of the thoughts and action: A socialcognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking behavior.Psychological Review, 64, 359-372.
  • Artino, A. R. (2008). Motivational beliefs and perceptions of instructionalquality: predicting satisfaction with online training. Journal ofComputer Assisted Learning, 24, 260-270.
  • Artino, A. R. (2007). Online military training: Using a social cognitive viewof motivation and self-regulation to understand students’satisfaction, perceived learning, and choice. The Quarterly Reviewof Distance Education, 8(3), 191-201.
  • Anderson,J.C.,& Gerbing,D.W.(1988).Structuralequationmodelingin practice:A review andrecommendedtwo-stepapproach,Psychological Bulletin,103,411-423.
  • Anderson, J. R. (1983). Cognitive psychology and its implications. NewYork: Freeman.
  • Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell. D. F. (1992). Demography and design: predictorsof new product team performance. Organization Science, 3, 321-341.
  • Amos 19 구조방정식 모델링 원리와 실제
    배병렬 서울: 청람 [2011]
  • Alavi, S. B., & McCormick, J. M. (2008). The roles of perceived taskinterdependence and group members' interdependence in thedevelopment of collective efficacy in university student groupcontexts. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(3), 375-393.
  • Adderley, K., Ashwin, C., Bradbury, P., Freeman, D., Goodlad, S., Greene,J., Jenkins, D., Rae, J., & Uren, O. (1975). Project methods in highereducation. London: Society for Research into Higher Education.
  • ABET(2015). Find an Accredited Program. Retrieved fromhttp://www.abet.org.