11,163 research outputs found
BLENDED DELIVERY OF UNDERGRADUATE CHEMISTRY LABORATORIES DUE TO COVID-19
COVID-19 has had a profound impact on tertiary education, most notably the rapid transition from face-to-face classes to online methods of teaching. This has posed significant challenges for laboratory classes, where students normally acquire technical, data analysis and communication skills through direct hands-on experience. Achieving these learning outcomes amid a global pandemic requires fundamental re-design of laboratory activities and their assessment. This presentation will provide a case study of how a second-year analytical chemistry unit was adapted to provide a blended learning experience. Half of the laboratories were transitioned into take-home activities using video recordings, sample data and additional online resources in place of face-to-face sessions. A revised report format was introduced, enabling students to demonstrate their knowledge of the underpinning chemistry and laboratory safety without physical attendance. The remaining laboratories were held face-to-face and assessed through a competency criterion system, maximising the value of studentsβ on-campus experience. An analysis will be provided of lessons learned from the adaptation process and how this will be used for continuous unit improvement
Teaching-learning methodologies: use of blended learning in chemistry laboratory
For a proper teaching-learning environment in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) it is mandatory to follow an integral educational program that considers the presential and non-presential activities as a whole, in the understanding of the utmost importance of the out of class studentsβ time. From this point of view, it seems more than appropriate the use of a learning system that combines Internet and digital media with established classroom forms that require the physical co-presence of teacher and students, i.e. the blended learning. In this contribution the authors make a proposal of implementation of virtual technological tools in non-presential activities with the aim of building a blended learning pedagogical framework for the subject βChemistryβ, which is being taught in the first year of the mathematics degree at the University of Alicante (Spain). Two virtual tools were selected for the mentioned purpose: video-tutorials and virtual laboratories. Both were implanted in a complete teaching methodology that, properly integrated with presential lectures, pursues the two main objectives that follow: i) be a solid reinforcement of the concepts developed in class and ii) have enough scientific entity to launch new ideas on the less developed items in the presential lectures
Perspectives on blended learning through the on-line platform, LabLessons, for Chemistry
The effectiveness of blended learning was evaluated through the integration of an online chemistry platform, LabLessons. Two modules, Formation of Hydrogen and Titration, were designed by college mentors alongside classroom chemistry teachers to engage and allow high school students to better comprehend these scientific topics. The pre-lab modules introduced the students to experiments they were expected to perform in class the following day. The modules consisted of an introduction as well as either a visualization and/or simulation specific to each topic. Students and teachers who utilized LabLessons were surveyed to establish a preliminary research on the use of technology in classrooms. Student and teacher surveys demonstrated LabLessons to be an interactive and helpful tool to improve students' understanding of conceptual ideasPeer Reviewe
An Evaluation of eScience Lab Kits for Online Learning
Higher education online science courses generally lack the hands-on components essential in understanding theories, methods, and techniques in chemistry and biology. Companies like eScience Labs construct kits to facilitate online learning, which provide students with hands-on activities relevant to their science courses. In order to evaluate ease, efficacy, and comprehension of the forensic science kits by eScience Labs was completed while writing observations of the activities during and after completion; the lab manual learning objectives were compared to results of activities and two stopwatches took elapsed time of each activity to compare with the stated times in the kit manual. This method determined that the eScience manual does not provide enough information for a college freshman to fully understand the topic; however, combining these labs with professor provided online lectures would allow full comprehension of the forensic science applications or techniques. Recommendations to obtain maximum learning outcomes include requiring the completion of prerequisites like algebra and general chemistry. With these aspects combined, the eScience lab kit is a great addition to an introductory forensic science course as it provides safe and interactive hands-on activities
Lessons from University Instructors and Students Toward the Post-COVID-19 Laboratory Education
νμλ
Όλ¬Έ(λ°μ¬) -- μμΈλνκ΅λνμ : μ¬λ²λν κ³Όνκ΅μ‘κ³Ό(ννμ 곡), 2023. 2. ννκΈ°.2020λ
μ λ°μν μ½λ‘λ-19 μ¬νμ μ΄λ‘ μΈν μ¬νμ 거리λκΈ° λ°©μ μ μ±
μ λν μ€ν μμ
λ€μ΄ κ΄μ΅μ μΈ λλ©΄ λ°©μμμ μ΅μνμ§ μμ λΉλλ©΄ λ°©μμΌλ‘ κ°μμ€λ½κ² μ νλλ μν©μ μΌκΈ°νμλ€. μ½λ‘λ-19λ‘ μΈν μΈκ³μ μΈ κ΅μ‘ κ²°μμ΄ μμλλ μν©μμ, κ³Όνκ΅μ‘νμλ€μ λΉλλ©΄ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ΄ κ°μ Έμ¨ μ€ν κ΅μ‘μ λ³νμ μ£Όλͺ©νλ©° κ·Έ μ κ°μ κ²°κ³Όμ λν κ²½νμ μΈ μ°κ΅¬λ₯Ό μ΄κ΅¬νμλ€.
μ΄μ λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μλ λ€μκ³Ό κ°μ λ κ°μ§ λͺ©νλ₯Ό μ§λκ³ μ°κ΅¬λ₯Ό μννμλ€. 첫째, μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ΄λΌλ μ΄μ μ μν©μ μ§λ©΄νμ¬ μ κΈ°λ μ€ν κ΅μ‘μ λ³Έμ§(essence)μ κ΄ν κ·Όλ³Έμ μΈ μ§λ¬Έλ€μ λ΅νκ³ μ νλ€. κ·Έλ¬ν μ§λ¬Έλ€μ λ€μκ³Ό κ°μ΄ μμ½λ μ μμ κ²μ΄λ€. (λ¬Έ 1) λνμ λ¬Όλ‘ K-12 κ³Όνκ΅μ‘μ μ΄λ₯΄κΈ°κΉμ§ μ€ν μμ
κ²½νμ λ³Έμ§μ 무μμΈκ°? λ§μ‘±μ€λ¬μ΄ νμ΅ κ²°κ³Όκ° μ΄λ μ λ 보μ₯λλ€λ©΄ μ격 λ§μΈμ¦μ¨ μμ
μ΄ νΈμ¦μ¨ κ²½νμ λ체ν μ μλκ°? (λ¬Έ 2) κ΅μμμ νμμ μ곡κ°μ 곡λ-μ‘΄μ¬(co-presence)λ νμμ μΈκ°? (λ¬Έ 3) μ°λ¦¬λ μ΄λ»κ² νμλ€μ μμ° νμμ λν νκ΅¬λ‘ μ΄λνκ³ , κ·Έκ²μ μ€ν λ³΄κ³ μμμ κ³Όνμ κΈμ°κΈ°λ‘μ νννλλ‘ ν μ μλκ°? (λ¬Έ 4) μμ λν λ΅μ μΈκ³μ μ¬λ¬ λ¬Έν λ° κ·Έμ λ°λ₯Έ κ΅μμμ νμ κ°μ μνΈμμ©μ νΉμ±μ λ°λΌ λ¬λΌμ§λκ°? (λ¬Έ 5) μ°λ¦¬λ μ΄λ»κ² μΌλ°μ μΈ μν©λΏ μλλΌ κΈ΄κΈν μν©μμλ μ€νν μ μλ ν¨κ³Όμ μ΄κ³ μ μμ μΈ μ€ν μμ
μ μ€κ³ν μ μλκ°? μ΄μ λν μ μ μ μΈ λ΅μ μ°κ΅¬μ μ΄λ‘ μ νκ³Ό ν¨κ» μ΄ν΄λ³΄κ³ , λ³΄λ€ μ§μ μ μΈ λ΅μ μ°κ΅¬μ κ²°κ³Όμ λΉμΆ λ
Όμμμ μ μνκ³ μ νμλ€.
λμ§Έ, λ³Έ λ
Όλ¬Έμ 2020λ
μ μ½λ‘λ-19λ‘ μΈνμ¬ μ΄λ°λ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ κ΄νμ¬ λνμμμ μ΄κ³΅κ³μ΄ κ΅μ‘μ μ΄λ ν νμμ΄ λ°μνμλμ§λ₯Ό μ‘°μ¬νκ³ ν₯νμ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μν μ€μ μ μΈ ν¨μλ₯Ό μ 곡νλ μΌμ λͺ©νλ‘ νμλ€. λ³΄λ€ κ΅¬μ²΄μ μΌλ‘, λ³Έ λ
Όλ¬Έμ λν κ΅μμλ€μ΄ 2020λ
λ΄νκΈ°μ ν¬λ°λ―Ήμ μ§λ©΄νμ¬ μ΄λ»κ² μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μ€ν(implement)νμλμ§λ₯Ό ν©λ¦¬μ μΌλ‘ μ€λͺ
νκ³ (μ°κ΅¬ 1), νμλ€μ λ°μμ ν΅ν΄ κ·Έ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μ‘°μ¬νλ©°(μ°κ΅¬ 3), λ―Έλμ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ€κ³λ₯Ό μν μ€μ μ μΈ μ§μΉ¨(guideline)μ μ 곡νκ³ μ νμλ€. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μ νμ₯μΈ νκ΅λνκ΅(κ°λͺ
)μ μν©μ΄ μ΄λ¬ν μ λ°μ μΈ μ°κ΅¬μ μμκ³Ό μνμ κ°λ₯νκ² νμλ€.
μ΄λ‘ μ νλ‘μ, λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μ€ν μμ
κ³Ό μ΄λ¬λ(e-learning)μ κ° μμκ° κ΅μ°¨νλ μ§μ μΌλ‘ μ΄ν΄νλ κ΄μ μ μ μνμλ€. μ°μ , μ€ν μμ
λλ μ΄λ¬λ μμ
μ μ€ννλ μ΄μ λ μ€ν μμ
μ λͺ©μ λλ μ΄λ¬λμ κ°λ₯μ± λ° μꡬμ λμ¬ μλ€. κ΅μ νλ‘κ·Έλ¨μ μΌμ’
μΌλ‘μ, μ€ν μμ
κ³Ό μ΄λ¬λμ μ΄λ»κ² λ΄μ©μ μ λ¬νκ³ , νμ΅μ κ° μνΈμμ©μ μ΄μ§νκ³ , νκ°μ νΌλλ°±μ μ 곡νλμ§λ₯Ό κ³ λ €ν΄μΌλ§ νλ€. κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ λ νλ‘κ·Έλ¨λ€μμ μ΄λ¬ν μΈ μμλ€μ μλ‘ μμ°μ€λ½κ² λμνλ€. 2020λ
μ λ€μν λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
λ€μ μ½λ‘λ-19 μν©μμ μ΄λ¬ν λ κ΅μ‘μ μ ν΅μ΄ λ§λμ, κ΅νΈνλ©°, νΌν©λ(blended) μ§μ μ΄μλ€. λν 2020λ
μ λ€μν λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
λ€μ νΉμ±μ μ¬νλ¬Ένμ μΈ μμλ₯Ό ν¬ν¨νλ κ°κ°μ κ΅μνμ΅ λ§₯λ½μμ νμ±λμλ€. 2020λ
μ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
κ΅μμ λ° νμλ€λ‘λΆν° μ»μ κ΅νμ(μ°κ΅¬ 1 λ° 2) λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μκ° μ€ν κ΅μ‘μ μνμ¬ νμ₯λ λΈλ λλ(blended) λ¬λ μ΄ν΄μ λλ¬νκ² νμμΌλ©°(2.3.4 μ°Έμ‘°) λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μν κ΅μ μ€κ³(instructional design) λͺ¨νμ νμμ± μμ μ κΈ°νμλ€.
κ³Όνκ΅μ‘μμμ μ€ν μμ
μ κ΄νμ¬, μ€ν μμ
μ λͺ©μ κ³Ό, νΈμ¦μ¨(hands-on) λ° λ§μΈμ¦μ¨(minds-on) λ
Όμκ³Ό, μ€ν λ³΄κ³ μ μ°κΈ° λ° νΌλλ°± λ°©λ²μ κ³ μ°°νμλ€. μ΄λ¬λ λ° ν¨κ³Όμ μΈ κ΅μ μ λ΅μ κ΄νμ¬, μ΄λ¬λμ μ λ§ λ° μꡬμ, 맀체(media) μ μμ, μ¨λΌμΈ μνΈμμ©μ μμκ³Ό, μ΄λ¬λμμμ νκ° λ° νΌλλ°±μ μκ³ νμλ€. μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ (μ¬)μ°½λ°μ κ΄νμ¬λ μ½λ‘λ-19 μ΄μ κ³Ό μ΄νμ μ°κ΅¬λ€μ λμλ³΄κ³ , ν΄λΉ μ©μ΄μ μλ―Έλ₯Ό λμΆνμλ€. νΉλ³ν, μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ νμ₯λ λΈλ λλ λ¬λμΌλ‘ μ΄ν΄νλ κ΄μ μ μ μνμλλ°, μ΄λ μ²«μ§Έλ‘ νΈμ¦μ¨ λ° λ§μΈμ¦μ¨ μ€ν κ²½νμ νΌν©νκ³ λμ§Έλ‘ μ€ν κ²½νλ€κ³Ό νμ΅ κ³΅κ°λ€μ νΌν©νλ κ²μ΄μλ€.
λνμ¬, κ³Όνκ΅μ‘μμμ κ΅μμ νμ주체μ±(agency)μ νμ©νμ¬ λνμ μ΄κ³΅κ³μ΄ κ΅μμλ€μ΄ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μ€νν λμ μ μμ μΈ νλμ ν΄μνμλ€. μ°λ¦¬λλΌ κ³Όν κ΅μμλ€μ νμ주체μ±μ λν μ¬νλ¬Ένμ μκ°μ μ°κ΅¬μμ ν΄μμ μ§νμ κ±°μμ (macro-), μ€μμ (meso-), κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ λ―Έμμ (micro-) μμ€μ ꡬ쑰(structure)λ€λ‘ μ κ΅ννμλ€. λν, κ΅μ‘곡ν λΆμΌμμμ μ€κ³ λ° κ°λ° μ°κ΅¬ κ΄μ μ λ°λΌ μ μ°νκ³ (flexible) λ°λ³΅μ μΈ(iterative) κ΅μ μ€κ³ λͺ¨νμ μ μ©μ±μ μ μνμμΌλ©°, μ΄λ μΈμ νλΉνλ₯Ό μν μμ
λͺ¨λ λμΆ κ³Όμ μμμ λνΌλ νλ‘ν νμ΄ν(rapid prototyping)μ ν¬ν¨νλ κ²μ΄μλ€.
μ°κ΅¬ 1μμ, μ°κ΅¬μλ νκ΅λνκ΅μμ μ½λ‘λ-19 μ΄μ μ μλ‘ λΉμ·νμλ μΌλ° 물리ν, νν, μλ¬Όν, μ§κ΅¬κ³Όν μ€νλΏλ§ μλλΌ 2κ°μ μ 곡 κ΅κ³Ό μ€ν μμ
μ λΉκ΅νμλ€. μ°κ΅¬μλ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
νμμ μ°½λ°μ μ¬νλ¬Ένμ κ΄μ μμ ν΄μνμλλ°, μ΄ λ μ½λ‘λ-19 ν¬λ°λ―Ήκ³Ό κ΅μ‘ λΉκ΅μ μνμ¬ λΆκ³Όλ ꡬ쑰 λ° λν κ΅μμλ€μ νμ주체μ±μ μ£Όλͺ©νμλ€. κ±°μμ μμ€μ νκ΅ λ§₯λ½, μ€μμ μμ€μ νκ΅λνκ΅ λ§₯λ½, κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ λ―Έμμ μμ€μ κ°λ³ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
λ§₯λ½μ μλ‘ λΏλ§ μλλΌ λν κ΅μμμ νμ주체μ±κ³Όλ λ°μ νκ² μνΈμ°κ΄λμ΄ μμλ€. 2020λ
λ΄νκΈ°μ, κ΅μμμ νμ주체μ±μ μ΄λ¬ν λ€μΈ΅μ (multi-level) ꡬ쑰λ€μ μνμ¬ λͺ¨μμ§μ΄μ‘λ€(shaped). κ·Έλ¬λ, κ°λ³ κ΅κ³Ό(discipline)μ λ°λΌ μ€νλ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ κ΅μμκ° ν¬μ
ν λ
Έλ ₯μ λ°λΌ μλΉν λ€μνκ² λμλ€. λν κ΅μμλ€μ κ³ λ €μ¬νμ λμμ μλ£, μ€ν λ°μ΄ν°μ νΉμ±, μμ λ€κ³Ό νμλ€ κ°μ μ νλ μνΈμμ©, νκ°μ μ΄λ €μ, κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ νμλ€μ΄ νΈμ¦μ¨ κ²½νμ΄ μμ΄ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μμ 무μμ μ»μ(gain) μ μλκ° νλ μ μ΄μλ€. 2020λ
κ°μνκΈ°λΆν° λν κ΅μμλ€μ μν©μ μ μνμ¬ μμ λ€μ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ κ°μ νμμΌλ©°, λ λ§μ κ°μ μ λ€μ μ μνμλ€. μ°κ΅¬ 1μ κ²°κ³Όλ λν κ΅μμμ νμ주체μ±μ΄ μλ°ν κΈ΄κΈ μν©μμ λ€μν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ€νμ΄ μ°½λ°νλ κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό λ³μμμ 보μ¬μ€λ€.
μ°κ΅¬ 2λ μ°κ΅¬ 1κ³Ό λ°λ§μΆμ΄ νκ΅λνκ΅μμ μνλμλ€. μ°κ΅¬μλ λνμλ€μ΄ μλ‘ λ€λ₯Έ κ΅κ³Όμ λ€μν μ격 μ€ν μμ
κ²½νμ μ΄λ»κ² μΈμνμλμ§λ₯Ό μ‘°μ¬νμλ€. μ°κ΅¬ 2λ νΌν© μ°κ΅¬λ‘μ, 338λͺ
μ νμλ€λ‘λΆν° μ¨λΌμΈ μ€λ¬Έ μλ΅μ μ»μμΌλ©° 18λͺ
μ νμλ€κ³Ό μΈν°λ·°λ₯Ό μ€μνμλ€. λΆμ°λΆμ(ANOVA)κ³Ό Bonferroni μ¬ν κ²μ μ ν΅ν΄ μ격 μ€ν μμ
κ²½νμ λν νμλ€μ μΈμμ΄ κ΅κ³Ό(물리, νν, μλ¬Ό, μ§κ΅¬κ³Όν, λ€λ₯Έ μ 곡 κ³Όλͺ©)μ λ°λΌ ν΅κ³μ μΌλ‘ μ μλ―Ένκ² λ€λ₯΄λ€λ μ μ λ°κ²¬νμλ€(p < .05). λνμ¬, νμ μΈν°λ·°λ μ΄λ¬ν μ°¨μ΄λ€μ΄ κ°λ³ κ΅κ³Όλͺ©μμ μ°½λ°ν κ΅μ μ λ΅μ μνμ¬ λ°μνμμμ λλ¬λ΄μλ€. ν₯νμ ν¨κ³Όμ μΈ μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μν μ λ΅μΌλ‘μ, μμ
μ λͺ©μ μ λͺ
νν μ€μ νκΈ°, μ€ν λμμμ μΈμ¬νκ² μ€κ³νκΈ°, λμμ (synchronous) μ¨λΌμΈ νλ ₯ μΈμ
μ 곡νκΈ°, μ€ν λ³΄κ³ μ μμ±μ λν νΌλλ°±μ μ 곡νκ³ λ³΄μΆ©μ νκ°λ₯Ό μ€μνκΈ° λ±μ μ μνμλ€.
μ°κ΅¬ 3μμ μ°κ΅¬μλ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μν λΈλ λλ μ€ν λ° μ΄λ¬λ κ΅μ μ€κ³(Blended Laboratory and E-learning iNstructional Design, BLEND) λͺ¨νμ κ°λ°νκ³ νλΉννμλ€. ν¬λ°λ―Ήμ μνμ¬ μλνλ κ΅μ νκ²½μ λμνκΈ° μν΄, μ°κ΅¬μλ κ΅μ μ€κ³ λͺ¨νμ μ μνκ² κ΅¬μΆνμ¬ μ€μ μ νμ΅ λ§₯λ½μ μ μ©νκ³ , μ°Έμ¬μμ νΌλλ°±μ ν΅ν λ°λ³΅μ (iterative) λͺ¨ν μμ μ μλνμλ€. μ°κ΅¬ λ§₯λ½μ μλΉ νν κ΅μ¬λ€μ μν λΆμννμ€ν κ°μ’μλ€. μ΄κΈ° BLEND λͺ¨νμ λ¬Έν 리뷰 λ° 2020λ
μ μ°κ΅¬ 1κ³Ό μ°κ΅¬ 2μ κ΅νμ κΈ°λ°νμ¬ λμΆλμλ€. λ΄μ (internal) νλΉνλ₯Ό μν΄ 6λͺ
μ μ΄ν΄λΉμ¬μ(stakeholder)κ° μ¬μ©μ± νκ°(usability test)μ μ°Έμ¬νμμΌλ©°, λ€μν κ³Όν κ΅κ³Ό λ°°κ²½μ 10λͺ
μ λ΄μ© μ λ¬Έκ°μ 3λͺ
μ κ΅μ‘곡ν μ λ¬Έκ°κ° μ λ¬Έκ° λ¦¬λ·°λ₯Ό μ 곡νμλ€. μΈμ (external) νλΉνλ₯Ό μν΄ ν΄λΉ μκΈ°μ κ΅μ μ€κ³ λͺ¨νμ κΈ°λ°μΌλ‘ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
λͺ¨λμ΄ κ°λ° λ° μ€νλμκ³ , ν΄λΉ κ°μ’λ₯Ό μκ°νλ 7λͺ
μ λνμλ€μ΄ μ¨λΌμΈ μ€λ¬Έ λ° νμ μΈν°λ·°μ μ°Έμ¬νμλ€. 2νκΈ°μ νλΉν κ³Όμ μ κ±°μ³, BLEND λͺ¨νμ λ΄μ μΌλ‘ ν¨μ¨μ μ΄λ©°(efficient) μΈμ μΌλ‘ ν¨κ³Όμ (effective)μΈ κ²μΌλ‘ νλΉνλμλ€. μ΄ λ κ΅μμ λ° νμ κ°μ λμ μνΈμμ©μ΄ νΉλ³ν μ£Όλͺ©λμλ€. λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μν μ΅μ’
BLEND λͺ¨νμ μ§μμ μΈ νμ± νκ°μ νΌλλ°±μ μ€μνλ©°, μ£Όλ³ κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ κ°μ’λ³ μμ€μμμ μ격 μ€ν μμ
κ΅μ 체μ λ₯Ό ꡬ쑰ννκ³ μκ°ννμλ€. μ°κ΅¬ 3μ κ³Όνκ΅μ‘μμ μ€κ³ λ° κ°λ° μ°κ΅¬ λ°©λ²μ μ μ©ν λλ¬Έ μ¬λ‘μ΄λ€.
λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μμ λͺ¨λ ν΄κ²°λμ§ μκ³ μ¬μ ν νμ μ°κ΅¬λ₯Ό μꡬνλ μμ λ€μ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€: (1) μ격 μ€ν νμμ΄ μꡬνλ λ°μ κ°κ°μ κ³Όν κ³Όλͺ©(물리, νν, μλ¬Ό, μ§κ΅¬κ³Όν λ±)μ νΉμ± μ¬μ΄μ μνΈμμ©μ΄ λ μμΈν κ³ μ°°λμ΄μΌ νλ€. (2) μ€ν λμμμ μ΄λ»κ² μ€κ³νκ³ , 촬μνλ©°, νΈμ§ν΄μΌ νλμ§μ λ¬Έμ κ° μ¬μ ν μ€μνλ€. (3) κ°λ°©ν(open-ended) νꡬ μ€ν μμ
μ μν κ΅μ μ€κ³ λͺ¨νμ΄ ν₯νμ μ€μν μ°κ΅¬ μ£Όμ μ΄λ€. μ΄ κ²½μ°, κ°λ°©ν νꡬ μμ
νλ‘κ·Έλ¨μ μ΄λ»κ² νκ°ν κ²μΈμ§ μμ λ°λμ λ¨Όμ ν΄κ²°λμ΄μΌ ν μ°κ΅¬ μ£Όμ κ° λ κ²μ΄λ€.
λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μ κ°μ μ 2020λ
λ° 2021λ
μ νκ΅λνκ΅λΌλ μ°κ΅¬ νμ₯μ λ
νΉμ±μ κΈ°μΈνλ€. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ μ½λ‘λ-19 μ΄κΈ° μν©μμ μ°½λ°ν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ κ΄νμ¬ μλΉν λ§μ λ°μ΄ν°λ₯Ό μμ§ν μ°κ΅¬ μ¬λ‘λ‘ λ³΄μΈλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘, μ°κ΅¬ 1μμ μ°κ΅¬ 3μ μ΄λ₯΄λ μμ
μ μ½λ‘λ-19μ μ΄κΈ° λ¨κ³μμ λνλ μ격 μ€ν μμ
νμμ ν¬κ΄μ μΌλ‘ λ³΄κ³ νλ €λ μλλΌκ³ ν μ μλ€. νμ§λ§ μμ€μ μΌλ‘. λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μ κ°μ μ λ§λ€μλ μ½λ‘λ-19 μν©μ μκ°μ΄ μ§λκ³ μν©μ΄ λ³νν¨μ λ°λΌ μλ μ κ²μΌλ‘ μμ©ν μ μλ€. κ²°κ³Όμ μΌλ‘, ν¬μ€νΈ-μ½λ‘λ-19 μλμ μ격 μμ
, νΉν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μ§μκ° μ΄λ ν μ§λ₯Ό μμνκΈ°λ μ½μ§ μλ€.
λ§μ½ μ°λ¦¬κ° λκ΄μ μΈ μμ μ μ·¨νλ€λ©΄, λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ λν μ°λ¦¬μ κ²½νμ μ€ν κ΅μ‘μ λν μ°λ¦¬μ μμμ νμ₯μμΌ, μκ°κ³Ό 곡κ°μ λλλ€λ©° λ€μν νμ΅ μμμ ν΅ν©νλ λΈλ λλνμμ ν₯ν΄ μ μ§νκ² ν κ²μ΄λ€. μ€μ λ‘, μ€ν κ΅μ‘μ μν΄ νμ₯λ λΈλ λλ λ¬λ μ΄ν΄λ νΈμ¦μ¨ λ λ§μΈμ¦μ¨, λμμ λ λΉλμμ , νμ₯ λ μ격 λ±μ μ€λ μ΄λΆλ²μ λμ΄ λ λμ μ€ν κ΅μ‘μΌλ‘ λμκ°λ κΈΈμ λΉμΆ λ©΄μ΄ μλ€.
μ΄μλ λ°λλ‘, λ§μ½ μ°λ¦¬κ° λΉκ΄μ μΈ μμ μ μ·¨νλ€λ©΄, μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ λν μ°λ¦¬μ μ¬κ°ν κ³ μ°° μμ μΈμ κ° μ¬λΌμ§ μ μμΌλ©°, μ΄λ κ΅μ‘μ¬μμ λ§μ κ΅μ λ°©λ²λ€μ΄ κ·Έλ¬νλ κ²κ³Ό λ§μ°¬κ°μ§μ΄λ€. κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘, μκΈ°νμλ― μ½λ‘λ-19λ‘ μΈνμ¬ μ°λ¦¬κ° κ²½νν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ ν΅ν΄ μ¬λ°κ²¬λ μ€ν μμ
μ λ³Έμ§μ κ΄ν κ·Όλ³Έμ μΈ μ§λ¬Έλ€(λ¬Έ 1-5)μ λ΅νλ μΌμ΄ μμ²λλ€. μ¬κΈ°μ μ΄λ¬ν μ§λ¬Έλ€μ λ΅νλ κ°μ₯ νΈλ¦¬ν λ°©λ²μ κ° μ€ν μμ
μμ μ νλ νμ΅ λͺ©νμ νΉμμ±μ μμ‘΄νλ κ²μ΄κ² μ§λ§, μ΄λ¬ν λ¨μν ν΄κ²°μ±
μ ν¬μ€νΈ-μ½λ‘λ-19 μ€ν κ΅μ‘μ μν λ μ¬νλ κ³ μ°°λ‘ λμκ°λ κΈΈμ μ΄μ΄μ€ μ μλ€.
κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘, μμμ μ κΈ°λ 5κ°μ§μ μ§λ¬Έλ€μ λν΄ λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μ μ°Έμ¬μλ€μ λͺ©μ리λ‘λΆν° λ³΄λ€ κ΅¬μ²΄μ μΈ λ΅μ ν΄λ³΄λ μΌμ΄ μλ―Έ μμ κ²μ΄λ€: (λ΅ 1) νμλ€μ΄ μ€ν κΈ°λ₯(skill)μ ν¨μν λΏλ§ μλλΌ μμνμ§ λͺ»νλ νμκ³Ό ν¨κ» μ묡μ μ§μ(tacit knowledge) λ° κ³Όνμ λ³Έμ±(nature of science)μ μ§λ©΄ν κΈ°νλ₯Ό μ 곡νκΈ° μνμ¬, νμλ€μκ² μ΅μλΆκ°κ²°μ νΈμ¦μ¨ κ²½νμ μ 곡ν΄μΌ νλ€. λΈλ λλ λ¬λ νμμ νΈμ¦μ¨ κ²½νκ³Ό λ§μΈμ¦μ¨ κ²½νμ λͺ¨λ κ°κ² νλ λμμ΄ λ μ μλ€. (λ΅ 2) κ΅μμμ νμλ€μ μκ°μ μΈ μΈ‘λ©΄μμλ λ°λμ λμμ μνΈμμ©μ ν΄μΌλ§ νλ€. λ€λ§, κ·Έ λ€μ΄ 곡κ°μ μΌλ‘ ν¨κ» μλ μΌμ΄ νμμ μΈμ§λ λͺ
ννμ§ μλ€. (λ΅ 3) λ§μ½ κ°λ₯νλ€λ©΄, νκΈ° λ¨μμ κ°λ°©ν μ€ν μμ
μ μ§ννλ κ²μ΄ νμλ€μ κΉμ΄ μλ νꡬμ μ¬κ³ λ‘ μ΄λνλ κ°μ₯ μ’μ κΈ°νκ° λ κ²μ΄λ€. νμ§λ§, νμ€μ μΌλ‘ μ리μ±
(cookbook) νμμ μ€ν μμ
λ€μμλ μ΄λ‘ μ μμΈ‘κ³Ό μ€μ μ€ν λ°μ΄ν° μ¬μ΄μ κ°κ·Ήλ§μ΄ νκ΅¬κ° μΌμ΄λκ² λλ μ μΌν μ§μ μΌ μ μλ€. κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘, μλΉμ€ν(pre-lab) νλ, λ°μ΄ν° νΉμ±, λλ£ ν λ‘ (discussion)μ΄ μ£Όμ κΉκ² μ€κ³λμ΄μΌ νλ€. (λ΅ 4) λ§μ½ μ€ν μμ
νμ₯μ λλ¬μΌ λ¬Ένκ° μΈμ§μ κ²½λ‘λ‘μμ μ(hand) λλ λ§μ(mind)μ κ°μ‘°νκ±°λ, κ΅μμμ νμ κ°μ μνΈμμ©μ μμ§μ μΌλ‘ λλ μνμ μΌλ‘ λ§λ λ€λ©΄, κ·Έλ λ€κ³ ν μ μλ€. (λ΅ 5) κ΅μ 체μ μ λν νμ± νκ°λΌλ κ°λ
μ΄ μ€ν μμ
μ λ μ μμ μ΄κ³ (adaptive) μ μ°νκ² λ§λλ λ°©λ²μΌ μ μλλ°, μ΄κ²μ μ°κ΅¬ 3μμ κ°λ°λ BLEND λͺ¨νμμ μ λλ¬λλ€.
2020λ
νκ΅λνκ΅μ κ΅μμμ νμ΅μλ€μ λν μ격 μ€ν μμ
μ μ€ννκ³ μκ°νκΈ° μν΄ λ
Έλ ₯ν μ§μ ν νμμλ€(agents)μ΄μλ€. κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ κ·Έλ€μ΄ λ¨κΈ΄ κ΅νμ΄μΌλ§λ‘ ν¬μ€νΈ-μ½λ‘λ-19 μ€ν μμ
μ ν₯νλ BLEND λͺ¨νμ κ°λ° λ° μ€ν μμ
μ λ³Έμ§μ κ΄ν κ³ μ°°μ κ°λ₯νκ² νμλ€.The COVID-19 situation in 2020 and the so-called social distancing preventive policy necessitated the sudden shift of university laboratory courses from a conventional face-to-face format into an unfamiliar non-face-to-face one. Amidst the unexpected educational losses worldwide, science education scholars focused on the changes in laboratory education brought by remote laboratory course format and urged empirical studies on them.
The researcher had two research purposes throughout this study. First, it was to answer fundamental questions on the essence of laboratory education that were raised facing the unprecedented global implementation of remote laboratory courses. (Q1) What is the essence of the laboratory experience from the university to K-12 science education? If satisfactory learning outcomes are secured to some extent, can (remote) minds-on experience replace hands-on one? (Q2) Is spatio-temporal co-presence of instructors and students necessary? (Q3) How can we invite students to an inquiry about natural phenomena, which would be represented in their scientific writing in their lab report? (Q4) Do the answers differ according to the characteristics of interaction among instructors and students and in different cultures worldwide? (Q5) How can we design a laboratory course that is both effective and adaptive that can be implemented in both normal and emergency situations? The tentative answers were explored while reviewing theoretical backgrounds and more direct answers were given while discussing the specific results of this study.
Second, it was to investigate what happened in the university STEM education sites concerning remote labs necessitated by the COVID-19 in 2020 and provide implications for future University Remote Laboratories (URLs). More specifically, it was to rationalize how university instructors implemented their remote labs in the spring semester of 2020 facing the imminent pandemic (Study 1), investigate the consequence of those remote labs via university students response (Study 2), and prescribe practical guidelines for future remote lab design (Study 3). The research field of Hankuk University (pseudonym) initiated and enabled this overall research.
A framework to understand URL as the locus where the components of laboratory sessions and e-learning intersect was suggested. The reasons for implementing laboratory or e-learning courses lie in the purpose of laboratory or the promises and requirements of e-learning. As instructional programs, laboratory and e-learning should consider how the content is delivered, interactions between learners promoted, and assessment and feedback are provided. And those three factors in both programs naturally correspond to each other. The COVID-19 situation made the two strands of educational tradition meet, interplay, and blended in the various URL courses that emerged in 2020. The characteristics of the URL courses in 2020 were shaped according to each teaching and learning context, which includes sociocultural factors. And the lessons from URL instructors and students in 2020 (Study 1 and 2) led the researcher to an extended understanding of blended learning for laboratory education (see 2.3.4) and raised the need for an instructional design (ID) model for URLs (see 2.5 and Study 3).
For laboratory in science education, the purpose of laboratory, hands-on versus minds-on debate, interaction in laboratory, and lab report writing and feedback were contemplated. For e-learning and effective teaching strategies, the promises and requirements of e-learning, media presentation, aspects of online interaction, and assessment and feedback in e-learning were deliberated. For (re-)emergence of remote laboratory, studies before and after the COVID-19 were reviewed, and its meaning was revisited. Particularly, understanding remote laboratory as extended blended learning was suggested, which first blends the hands-on and minds-on laboratory experiences and second laboratory experiences and learning spaces.
Further, the instructor agency framework in science education was utilized to interpret the adaptive behavior of university STEM instructors while implementing their remote lab courses. The sociocultural perspective on Korean science instructors agency elaborated the researchers horizon of interpretation in macro-, meso- and micro- level structures. Also, the notion of design and development research in educational technology assured the utility of an ID model that is adaptive and flexible, which includes rapid prototyping (RP) when eliciting the course module for external validation.
In Study 1, the researcher compared four general remote labs, each for physics, chemistry, biology, and earth science, that were previously similar, and two major course labs at Hankuk University. The emergence of URL phenomena was interpreted from a sociocultural perspective, focusing on the structure posed by the COVID-19 pandemic and the educational authorities and the agency of university instructors. The macro-level context of Korea, the meso-level context of Hankuk University, and the micro-level context of each URL were closely interconnected with each other and the university instructors agency. In the spring semester of 2020, instructors agency was strongly shaped by the multi-level structures. However, the implemented URL in each discipline became quite various due to the endeavor instructors put in. The university instructors concerns were about video materials, data characteristics, limited interactions between them and students, difficulties in evaluation, and what students could gain from the URLs without hands-on experience. Since the fall semester of 2020, instructors have adapted to the situation, revised their URLs, and suggested further improvements. Study 1 reveals that university instructors agency led to the emergence of various remote laboratory course implementations in the context of an imminent emergency.
In Study 2, in step with Study 1, the researcher investigated how Hankuk University students perceived various remote laboratory course experiences in different content disciplines. Conducted as a mixed-methods study, online survey responses were collected from 338 students, and in-depth interviews were conducted with 18 students. ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc tests of survey responses found that students perceptions of their URL experiences were significantly different (p < .05) dependent on content discipline (physics, chemistry, biology, earth science, and other majors). In addition, student interviews revealed that these differences in perceptions resulted from the different emergent teaching strategies used in each course. Suggestions were made for clearly setting learning objectives, carefully designing videos of experiments, offering collaborative synchronous online sessions, providing guidance and feedback for lab report writing, and introducing supportive assessments as strategies for future implementation of remote labs.
In Study 3, the BLEND (Blended Laboratory and E-learning iNstructional Design) ID model for URL was developed and validated. To respond to the fluctuating instructional environment of the pandemic, an ID model was promptly constructed and applied in the authentic learning context, iteratively revising the model with participant feedback. The research context was an Analytical Chemistry Experiment (ACE) course for pre-service chemistry teachers. The initial BLEND model was based on a literature review and lessons from Study 1 and 2 in 2020. For internal validation, six stakeholders participated in the usability test, and 10 subject-matter experts from various science disciplines and three educational technology experts provided expert reviews. For external validation, the URL course module was developed and implemented from the ID model, and seven university students who took the course responded to online surveys and participated in follow-up interviews. After two rounds of validation, the BLEND model was confirmed to be internally efficient and externally effective. The interactions with the instructor and peers, in particular, were highly appreciated. The finalized BLEND model for URL emphasizes constant formative evaluation and feedback and structures and visualizes the URL instructional system at both the weekly and overall course levels. Study 3 is a rare case of applying a design and development research method to science education.
Some issues were not resolved in this study and need follow-up research: (1) The interplay between the requirements of remote lab format and the nature of each science discipline (i.e., physics, chemistry, biology, and earth science) should be scrutinized. (2) How the experiment video should be designed, shot, and edited remains crucial. (3) An ID model for open-ended inquiry laboratory is a plausible future research topic. Then, how to evaluate the open-ended inquiry module arises as an essential prerequisite, which is also an important research agenda.
The strength of this study lies in its unique research field - Hankuk University in 2020 and 2021. This study seems to have collected extensive data for various remote lab courses that emerged in the initial situation of the COVID-19. Therefore, Study 1 to Study 3 can be said the attempts that report the URL phenomena during the early stage of the COVID-19 comprehensively. However, ironically, the COVID-19 situation that shaped the strength of this study can also be a double-edged sword as time passes and the situation changes. Consequently, the status of remote teachings, especially of remote labs in the post-COVID-19 era, is hard to predict.
If we take an optimistic view, our experience of URLs will broaden our imagination to evolve our laboratory education towards a blended format incorporating various learning modes across time and space. Indeed, the extended understanding of the blended learning for laboratory courses could shed some light on the path that overcoming the old dichotomies such as hands-on versus minds-on, synchronous vs. asynchronous, physical versus virtual, and place-based versus remote, to proceed toward better laboratory education.
In contrast, if we take a pessimistic view, we can expect that even our serious contemplation on remote labs may disappear someday, as many teaching methods did in the history of education. Therefore, it is recommended to recall fundamental questions on the essence of laboratory sessions that are rediscovered while we experience remote labs due to the COVID-19 (Q1-Q5). The easiest way to answer those questions would be by relying on the peculiarity of the learning objectives in each laboratory course - however, it does not open the way to more profound contemplations toward the post-COVID-19 laboratory education.
Instead, more certain answers for the abovementioned questions (Q1-Q5) could be meaningfully derived from participants' voices throughout this study: (A1) The minimum firsthand experience should be secured to foster students experimentation skills and provide students chances to engage with unexpected phenomena relevant to tacit knowledge and the nature of science. Note that a blended learning format can be an alternative that provides students with both hands-on and minds-on experiences. (A2) Instructors and students must have synchronous interactions in a temporal aspect. However, whether the spatial co-presence is necessary is not so manifest. (A3) If possible, a semester-long open-ended laboratory class would be the best chance to invite students to in-depth inquiry thinking. However, the gap between the theoretical prediction and the real experimental data seems to be the plausible locus where an inquiry may arise for cookbook-style labs in a practical sense. Therefore, the pre-lab activity, the characteristics of data, and peer discussions should be designed carefully. (A4) If the culture surrounding the laboratory education site favors the hand or mind as a cognitive channel or shapes the interaction between instructors and students vertically or horizontally, the answer would be yes. (A5) The notion of formative assessment of the instructional system may help make the laboratory courses more adaptive and flexible in various instructional situations, as in the BLEND model developed in Study 3.
The instructors and students at Hankuk University in 2020 were genuine agents who struggled to implement and take URL courses. And their lessons enabled the development of the BLEND model and the contemplation of the essence of laboratory sessions toward the post-COVID-19 laboratory education.Chapter 1. Introduction 1
1.1 Study Background 1
1.2 Purpose of Research 5
1.3 Research field 7
1.3.1 The Republic of Korea in the COVID-19 situation 8
1.3.2 Hankuk University in the Republic of Korea 9
1.4 Study Design 10
1.4.1 Study 1 11
1.4.2 Study 2 11
1.4.3 Study 3 12
Chapter 2. Theoretical Framework 13
2.1 Laboratory in Science Education 15
2.1.1 The purpose of laboratory 15
2.1.2 Hands-on versus minds-on debate 17
2.1.3 Interaction in laboratory 20
2.1.4 Laboratory report writing and feedback 21
2.2 E-learning and Effective Teaching Strategies 22
2.2.1 The promises and requirements of e-learning 22
2.2.2 Media presentation 24
2.2.3 Aspects of online interaction 25
2.2.4 Assessment and feedback 26
2.3 (Re-)emergence of Remote Laboratory 27
2.3.1 Studies on remote laboratories before the COVID-19 27
2.3.2 Studies on remote laboratories after the COVID-19 29
2.3.3 The meaning of remote laboratory revisited 31
2.3.4 Remote laboratory as blended learning 34
2.4 Instructor Agency and Sociocultural Perspective 38
2.4.1 Instructor agency in science education 38
2.4.2 Sociocultural perspective on Korean science instructors' agency 39
2.5 Design and Development Research 42
2.5.1 Utility of instructional design model 42
2.5.2 The need for a flexible model 43
2.5.3 Model development and validation research 44
2.5.4 Rapid prototyping approach 45
Chapter 3. Study 1: University Instructors' Agency During the Implementation of Remote Laboratory 46
3.1 Research Questions 47
3.2 Method 48
3.2.1 Participants 48
3.2.2 Qualitative interviews 49
3.2.3 Data analysis 50
3.3 Results 51
3.3.1 Macro-level context: South Korea 52
3.3.2 Meso-level context: Hankuk University and previous practices in laboratory courses 54
3.3.3 Micro-level context: Remote laboratories according to science discipline 56
3.3.4 The remote laboratories implemented at Hankuk University in the spring semester of 2020 60
3.3.5 Issues raised during the implementation of remote laboratories 64
3.3.6 University instructors' perceptions of the learning outcomes of remote laboratories 67
3.3.7
Principles And Practices Fostering Inclusive Excellence: Lessons From The Howard Hughes Medical Instituteβs Capstone Institutions
Best-practices pedagogy in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) aims for inclusive excellence that fosters student persistence. This paper describes principles of inclusivity across 11 primarily undergraduate institutions designated as Capstone Awardees in Howard Hughes Medical Instituteβs (HHMI) 2012 competition. The Capstones represent a range of institutional missions, student profiles, and geographical locations. Each successfully directed activities toward persistence of STEM students, especially those from traditionally underrepresented groups, through a set of common elements: mentoring programs to build community; research experiences to strengthen scientific skill/identity; attention to quantitative skills; and outreach/bridge programs to broaden the student pool. This paper grounds these program elements in learning theory, emphasizing their essential principles with examples of how they were implemented within institutional contexts. We also describe common assessment approaches that in many cases informed programming and created traction for stakeholder buy-in. The lessons learned from our shared experiences in pursuit of inclusive excellence, including the resources housed on our companion website, can inform othersβ efforts to increase access to and persistence in STEM in higher education
- β¦