연구동향 분석
박사

과학영재 고등학생의 과학분야 문제발견과정 분석: 근거이론을 중심으로 = An Analysis of How Science Gifted High School Students Process Problem-Finding in Science?based on Grounded Theory

조대기 2015년

논문상세정보
    • 저자 조대기
    • 형태사항 26 cm
    • 일반주기 지도교수: 한기순
    • 학위논문사항 교육학과, 학위논문(박사)-, 인천대학교, 2015. 8
    • 발행지 인천
    • 언어 kor
    • 출판년 2015
    • 발행사항 인천대학교
    유사주제 논문( 0)
인용/피인용

' 과학영재 고등학생의 과학분야 문제발견과정 분석: 근거이론을 중심으로 = An Analysis of How Science Gifted High School Students Process Problem-Finding in Science?based on Grounded Theory' 의 참고문헌

  • 한국교육심리학회 교육심리학 용어사전 (제1판)
    서울: 학지사 [2001]
  • 한국과 미국의 비교를 통해 본 한국적 창의성 구인 연구
    류형선 성은현 이정규 하주현 한순미 한윤영 아동학회지, 29(3), 319-338 [2008]
  • 통찰문제의 재구조화를 활용한 문제발견 검사로서의 K-RAT 개발 및 타당화, 박사학위 논문
    한윤영 숙명여자대학교 대학원 [2012]
  • 초등학교 아동의 과학적 문제발견 능력에. 영향을 미치는 관련변수 분석, 박사학위 논문
    이혜주 이화여자대학교 대학원 [2005]
  • 초등 과학영재와 일반학생의 과학 탐구 문제 발견 과정 분석
    김효남 정주혜 교육과학연구, 44(1), 123-145 [2013]
  • 창의적 사고의 발달경향 연구
    하주현 대한사고개발학회 학술대회 발표논문집 [2001]
  • 창의적 사고와 문제발견 사고의 연령에 따른 차이
    하주현 교육심리연구, 17(1), 311-327 [2003]
  • 창의적 문제발견/문제해결 순환 수업이 고등학생의 문제발견 능력에 미치는 효과
    김성연 조대기 한기순 창의력교육연구, 12(2), 65-85 [2012]
  • 창의성-문제해결, 과학, 발명, 예술에서의 혁신(김미선역.). 서울: 시그마프레스
    Weisberg, R. W. (원저는 2006년에 출판) [2009]
  • 창의성 교육의 새로운 접근: 문제 찾기
    김정섭 윤경미 전윤식 교육학연구, 41(3). 215-238 [2003]
  • 질적연구방법론(조흥식 외 3인 공역)
    Creswell, J. W. 서울: 학지사 [2004]
  • 질적연구 근거이론의 단계 [Basic ofqualitative research]. (신경림 역). 서울: 현문사
    Corbin, J. Strauss, A. (원전은 1998년에 출판) [2001]
  • 지구자원으로서의 물 ; 과학영재의 문제발견능력.한국지구과학회지
    신명경 정현철 허남영 추계학술발표회 단일본, 244-244 [2005]
  • 중학생의 과학적 탐구문제 설정과정에 대한 사례분석, 박사학위논문
    김재우 서울대학교 대학원 [2000]
  • 잘 알려진 창의적 과학자들의 과학적 문제 발견패턴 분석
    김영민 박종석 서혜애 한국과학교육학회지, 33(7), 1285-1299 [2013]
  • 이혼가족 자녀의 적응과정에 관한 연구: 근거이론 접근, 박사학위논문
    박한샘 연세대학교 대학원 [2004]
  • 연구와교육(R&E)프로그램을 통한 과학영재의 창의성 신장 방안에 관한 연구
    강호남 박경희 박일영 박지현 서혜애 이진희 이혁우 최호성 한국과학재단 정책연구보고서 2002-5092 [2003]
  • 아동의 집단과제 수행에서 나타나는 창의성과 플로우의 관계분석,박사학위 논문
    이수미 성균관대학교 대학원 [2011]
  • 상담일반: 창의적 인성검사의 타당화 연구
    김택호 양재혁 임승환 상담학연구, 10(1), 175-186 [2009]
  • 비구 조화된 문제 상황에서 이공계 대학생들의 문제발견 과정 및 문제발견에 영향을 미치는 요인
    강유진 ( Eu Gene Kang ) 김지나 ( Ji Na Kim ) 한국과학교육학회지, 32(4),570-585 [2012]
  • 문제발견의 탐색
    하주현 교육심리연구, 19(4), 917-932 [2005]
  • 문제발견능력 검사 도구의 구안 및 타당화
    이윤아 석사학위 논문. 한국교원대학교 대학원 [2008]
  • 라카토스의 연구프로그램 방법론과 과학의 합리성
    김정숙 哲學論究, 20,151-181 [1992]
  • 대학교수의 문제발견 과정 연구, 석사학위 논문
    이상훈 서울대학교 대학원 [2014]
  • 남학생은 여학생보다 창의적인가 ?
    신지은 정현철 최승언 한기순 한국지구과학회지, 231(4), 324-333 [2002]
  • 긍정 심리학 : 행복의 과학적 탐구
    권석만 서울: 학지사 [2008]
  • 근거이론 연구방법의 이론과 실제(GroundedTheory)
    김소선 간호학탐구, 12(1), 69-81 [2003]
  • 관절통환자의 통증정도와 통증연관 행위에 관한 연구
  • 과학영재의 문제발견력과 과학적 특성 변인간의관례 및 성차분석
    윤초희 정현철 허남영 교육학 연구, 45(3), 199-231 [2007]
  • 과학영재의 과학문제발견력 관련변인에 대한 구조방정식모형 분석
    김명숙 한기순 영재교육연구, 18(1), 23-52 [2008]
  • 과학영재와 일반학생의 문제발견의 차이 및 문제발견에 영향을미치는 제변인 분석, 박사학위논문
    윤경미 부산대학교 대학원 [2004]
  • 과학영재를 위한 사사교육 준비와 유형에 대한 논의
    박종원 과학영재교육, 1(3), 1-19 [2009]
  • 과학영재들의 문제발견 활동 분석 및 문제발견과 문제해결과의관계. 박사학위 논문
    류시경 경북대학교 대학원 [2009]
  • 과학영재 고등학생의 학교적응과정분석: 근거이론 접근. 박사학위 논문
    곽미용 경성대학교 대학원 [2012]
  • 과학고 및 영재고 Research and Education(R&E) 운영실태 분석 및 활성화방안 제안: R&E 운영담당자 면담사례를 중심으로
    류춘렬 정현철 채유정 영재교육연구, 22(2), 243-264 [2012]
  • 과학 영재 학생들의 과학적 문제발견 능력을 측정하기 위한 도구 개발
    류시경 박종석 한국과학교육학회지, 28(2), 139-149 [2008]
  • 고등학생들의 독창적인 문제발견 능력과 학업 성취도, 과학 탐구능력, 창의적 성격과의 관계
    류시경 ( Si Kyung Ryu ) 박종석 ( Jong Seok Park ) 한국과학교육학회지, 27(3), 263-271 [2007]
  • 고등학생들의 과학적 문제발견과 가설설정 능력 측정도구 개발및 적용, 박사학위 논문
    김영화 부산대학교 대학원 [2009]
  • 『질적연구방법론』
    신경림 이화여자대학교 출판부 [2004]
  • Weisberg, R. W. (2003). Case studies of innovation. In L. Shavinina (Ed.),International handbook of innovation (pp 204-247). Boston: Pergamon.
  • Weiping Hu, Quan Zhen Shi, Qin Han, Xingqi Wang, and Philip Adey(2010). Creative Scientific Problem Finding and ItsDevelopmental Trend. Creativity Research Journal, 22(1), 1?7.
  • Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thouht. London: Cape.
  • Wallach, M. A. (1985). Creativity testing and giftedness. F. D. Horowiz &M. O’Brien(Eds) The gifted and talented: Developmental persperties,99-123. Washington, DC: American Psychology Association.
  • Walberg, H. J., Rasher, S. P. & Parkerson, J. (1980). Childhood andeminence, Journal of Creative Behavior, 13(4), 225-231.
  • Wakefield, J. F. (1985). Toward creativity: problem-finding in aDivergent-thinking exercise. Child Study Journal, 15, 265-270.
  • Vos, J. F. & Post, T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Far (Eds.), The nature of expertise(pp. 261?285). Hilsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Torrence, E. P. (1970). Torrence Tests of creative thinking. PersonalPress, Inc.
  • The Methodology of Scientific ResearchProgrammes. Cambridge University Pres. eds. Worral, J. & Curie, G. C. 신중섭 옮김(2002), 과학적 연구프로그램의 방법론
    Lakatos, I. 서울: 아카넷 [1978]
  • Subotnik, R. F. (1988). Factors from the structure of intellect modelassociated with gifted adolescents' problem finding in science: Reaserchwith Westinghouse Sience Talent Search Winners. Journal ofCreative Behavior, 22(1), 42-54.
  • Strauss, A., (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge:Cambridge University Pres.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basic of qualitative research: Techniqueand procedures for developing grounded theory. New York: SagePublications.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: Anoverview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln(Eds.), Hand book ofqualitative research, 273-285. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basic of qualitative research. NewburyPark, CA: Sage.
  • Sternberg,R.J.,& Lubart,T.I.(1995).Defying the crowd.New York:FreePress.
  • Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Implict theories of intelligence, creativity andwisdom. Journal of Personality and social Psychogy, 49, 607-627.
  • Stern, P. (1980). Grounded theory methodology: Its uses and processes. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 12, 20-23.
  • Simonton, D. K. (2003). Scientific creativity as constrained stochasticbehavior: The integration of product, person, and process perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 475-494.
  • Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, creativity and leadership: Historiometricinquiries. Cambrige, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Simonton, D. K. (1976). Biographical determinants of achieved eminence:A multi-variate approach to the Cox data. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 33(2), 218-226.
  • Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill-structured problems. ArtificialIntelligence, 4, 181-202.
  • Similansky, J., & Halberstadt, N. (1986). Inventors versus problemsolvers: An empirical investigation. Journal of Creative Behavior,20(3), 183-201.
  • Schreiber, R. S. & Stern, P. N. (2001). Using grounded theory innursing. New York: Springer Publishing Co.
  • Sandelowski, R. S. (1995). Sample size in qualitative research. Researchin Nursing and Health, 18(2), 179-183.
  • Runco, M. A. (Ed.). (1994). Problem finding, problem solving and creativity. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • Runco, M. A. & Okuda, S. M. (1988). Problem discovery, divergent thinking,the creative process. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17(3), 211-220.
  • Runco, M. A. & Nemiro, J. (1994). Problem finding, creativity, andgiftedness. Roeper Review, 16(4), 235-240.
  • Roe, A. (1983). Early background of eminence: The social psychology ofcreativity and exceptional achievement(pp.46-51). Oxford: PergamonPress.
  • Reitman, W. R. (1964). Heuristic Decision Procedures, Open Constraints, andthe Structure of Il-Defined Problems. In M. W. Shely & G. L. Bryan(Eds.), Human Judgements and Optimality. N.Y.: John Wiley and Sons.
  • Reiter-Palmon, R., Mumford, M. D., Boes, J. O., & Runco, M. A. (1997). Problem construction and creativity: The role of ability, cueconsistency, and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 9-23.
  • R&E 프로그램에 대한 과학영재고등학생들의 인식 연구
  • Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post- Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago.
  • Poincare , H. (1913). The foundations of science. Lancaster, PA: SciencePress.
  • Perkins, D. N. (1981). The mind’s best work. Cambridge, MA: HaverdUniversity Press.
  • Parnes, S. J. (1967). Creative behavior guidebook. New York: Scribner.
  • Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination. NY: Charles Scribner's Sons.
  • Olton, R. M. (1979). Experimental studies of incubation: Searching for theelusive. Journal of Creative Behavior, 13, 9-22.
  • Okuda, S. M., Runco, M. A. & Berger, D. E. (1991). Creativity and theFinding and Solving of Real-world Problems. Journal ofPsychoeducational Assesment, 9, 45-53.
  • Ohlsson, S. (1992). Imfomation-processing explanations of insight and relatedphenomena, In M. T. Keane & K. T. Gilhooly (Eds), Advances in thepsychology of thinking (Vol 1), 1-44. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
  • Newell, A., Shaw, C. & Simon, H. A. (1962). The processes of creaivethinking. In H. E. Gruber, G. Terrell, & M. Wertheimer (Eds.). Contemporary approaches to creative thinking (pp. 153-189). New York:Pergamon.
  • Munhall, P. L. (2001). Nursing Research: A qualitative perspective (3rded.). Sudbury. MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
  • Mumford, M. D., Reiter-Palmon, R. & Reedmond, M. R. (1994). Problemfinding revisited. In M. A. Runco(Ed.), Problem finding, Problemsolving, and creativity(pp.3-39). Norwood, NJ: Ablex PublishingCorporation.
  • Moore, M . T. (1985). The Relationship between the Originality of Essays and Variables in the Problem-Discovery Proces: A Study ofCreative and Noncreative Middle School Students. Paper presented atthe Annual Meeting of the Eastern Educational Research Association. Virginia Beach, VA.
  • Min B. & Garry A. G. (2006). The Role of Knowledge Management in theInnovation Process. Journal compilation. 15(1), 45-62.
  • Miller, A. I. (1998). The gift of creativity. Roeper Review, 21(5). 51-54.
  • Milgram, S. (1967). The small world problem. Psychology Today, 2, 60-67.
  • Metcalfe, J. (1987). Premonitions of insight predict impending error. Journalof Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12,623-634.
  • Merton, R. S. (1945). Sociology of knowledge. In G. Gervitch, & W. E. Moore(Eds). Twentieth century Sociology. NY: Philosophical Library.
  • Merrifield, P. R., Guilford, J. P., Christensen, P. R. & Frick, J. W. (1962). The role of intellectual factors in problem solving. PsychologicalMonographs, 76, 1-21.
  • Meldin, D. L., Ross, B. H., & Markman, A. B. (2005). Cognitivepsychology(4th ed.). NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self & society. Chicago: The University ofChicago Press.
  • Mayer, R. E. (1999). Problem solving. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker(Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (vol 2, pp. 295-300). SanDiego: Academic Press.
  • Mansfield, N. H. & Busse. T. V. (1981). The psychlogy of creativity anddiscovery: Scientists and their work. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
  • Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbery Park. CA: Sage Publications.
  • Koestler, A. (1964). The Act of Creation. New York: Penguin Books.
  • Ko hler, W. (1925). The mentality of apes. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
  • Kaplan, C. A. & Simon, H. A. (1990). In search of insight. CognitivePsychology, 22, 374-419.
  • Jensen, K. B. & Jankowski, N. W. (eds). (1991). A Handbook of QualitativeMethodologies for Mass Communication Research, Routledge, New York.
  • Jay, E. S. (1996). The nature of problem finding in students' scientificinquiry. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. Harvard University.
  • Jay, E. S. & Perkins, D. N. (1997). Problem finding: The Search formechanism. In M. A. Runco(Ed). The creativity research handbookvolume one(pp.257-293). Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press.
  • Jansson, D. G. & Smith, S. M. (1991). Design fixation. Design Studies, 12,3-11.
  • Hoover, S. M. (1994). Scientific problem finding in gifted fifth-gradestudents. Roeper Review, 16(3), 156-159.
  • Hoover, S. M. & Feldhusen, J. F. (1994). Scientific problem solving andproblem finding: A theoretical model. In M.A. Runco(Ed) Problemfinding, problem solving and creativity. Norwood, NJ: AblexPublishing Corporation.
  • Harlow, H. F. (1949). The formation of learning sets. Psyhological Review,56, 51-65.
  • Hadamard, J. (1954). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. New York: Dover.
  • Guilford, J, P. (1975). Creativity: Aquarter century of progress. In I. A. Taylor & J. W. Getzels(Eds.), Perspectives in Creativity. 37-59. Chicago:Aldine. In R. J. Sternberg(Ed.). Handbook of Creativity, 251-272. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving theusefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalisticapproach. San Francisco, CA: Josscy-Bass.
  • Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory. Mill Valey, CA: SociologyPress.
  • Glaser, B. G. & Straus, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory:Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine Publishing.
  • Getzels, J. W. (1982). The Problem of the Problem. In R. M. Hogarth(Ed.), Question Forming and Response Consistency, (pp. 37-44). SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Getzels, J. W. (1975). Problem finding and the invetiveness of solution. Journal of Creative Behavior 9(1), 12-18.
  • Getzels, J. W. & Similansky, J. (1983). Individual differences in pupilperceptions of school problems. British Journal of educationalPsychology, 53, 307-316.
  • Getzels, J. W. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: Alongitudinal study of problem finding in art. NY: John Willey & Sons.
  • Frensch, P. A. & Sternberg, R. J. (1989). Expertise and intelligent thinking:When is it worse to know better? In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances inthe psychology of human intelligence 5, 157-188. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Fredericksen, N. (1984). Implications of Cognitive Theory for Instruction inProblem Solving. Review of Educational Research, 54(3), 363-407.
  • Flow: the psychology of optimal experience.최인수 옮김 (2010). 몰입
    Csikszentmihalyi, M. 서울: 한울림 [1991]
  • Fleck, J. I. & Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Are all insight problem createdequall? The seach for the prototypical insight problem. Unpublishedmanuscript, Temple University.
  • Einstein, A. & Infeld, L. (1938). The evolution of physics. NYC: Simon &Schuster.
  • Edwin C. Selby., Emily J. Shaw. & John C. Houtz. (2005). The CreativePersonality. The Gifted Child Quarterly 29(4), 300.
  • Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological Monogragh, 68(5,whole no. 270).
  • Dudek, S. Z. & Cote, R. (1994). Problem finding revisited. In M.A. Runco(Ed). Problem finding, problem solving and creativity. Norwood,NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • Dominowski, R. L. & Dallob, P. (1995). Insight and problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), The Nature of insight(pp.33-62). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Dijksterhuis, A. (2004). Think different: The merits of unconsious thougt inpreference development and decision making. Journal of personality andSocial Psychology, 87, 586-598.
  • Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Health.
  • Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field ofqualitative reasearch. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln(Eds), Handbookof qualitative reasearch. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • David, P. D. (1978). An analysis and evaluation of the internal validity ifthe remote associate test: What does it measure? Educational andPsychological Measurement, 38, 1031-1040.
  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Sawyer, K. (1995). Creative insight: The socialdimension of a solitary moment. In R. J. Steinberg & J. E. Davidson(Eds.), The nature of insight (pp 329-361). Cambridge, MA: MITPress.
  • Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Getzels, J. W. (1971). Discovery-oriented behaviorand originality of creative products: a study with artists. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 19(1), 47-52.
  • Creativity in young children : Implications ofproblem-finding and the Real-World Divergent Thinking Test
    한기순 한국교육, 28(1), 121-142 [2001]
  • Cox, C. M. (1983). The early mental traits of 300 geniuses. In R.S.Albert(Ed.), Genius and eminence: The social psychology of creativityand exceptional achievement(pp.46-51). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • Communitybuilding intheClassroom.공동체를 세우는 협동학습(박영주 역,2007)
    Shaw,V. 서울: 디모데 [1998]
  • Brooks, L. R. (1990). Concept formation and particularizing learning. In P. Hanson & S. Davis (Eds.), Vancouver studies in cognitive science (Vol.1, pp. 141-167). Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.
  • Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Birch, H. (1945). The relation of previous experience to insightful problemsolving, Journal of Comparative Psychology, 38, 367-383.
  • Begley, P. T. (1996). Using triangulation in nursing research. Journal ofAdvanced Nursing, 1996, 24(1), 122-128.
  • Artley, N. L., Horn, R. V. Friedrich, D. D. & Carroll, J. L. (1980). Therelationship between problem finding, creativity and cognitive style. Thecreative Child and Adult Quarterly, 1, 20-26.
  • Amabile, T. M. (1990). Social influence on creativity: Evaluation,coaction, and surveillance. Creativity Reseach Journal, 3, 6-21.
  • Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. NY:Springer-Verlag. In Jay, E. S. (1996). The nature of problem findingin students’ scientific inquiry. Unpublished doctorial dissertation.Harvard University.