View : 17 Download: 0

사회극놀이 수준이 다른 유아간 상호작용이 표상능력과 협상능력에 미치는 영향

Title
사회극놀이 수준이 다른 유아간 상호작용이 표상능력과 협상능력에 미치는 영향
Authors
허진경
Issue Date
2001
Department/Major
대학원 유아교육학과
Publisher
이화여자대학교 대학원
Degree
Master
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to find out the effect of interaction with children of different levels of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability and negotiation ability. To meet the above purpose, these study questions have been set up as follows. I. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a higher level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability and negotiation ability with lower level? I-1. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a higher level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability with lower level? I-2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a higher level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with lower level? II. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability and negotiation ability with higher level? II-1. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability with higher level? II-2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with higher level? The subjects of this study were five-year old, 32 children from S kindergarten in Suwon who were divided by the sociodramatic play rating scale of Smilansky & Shefatya(1990) into 16 novices and 16 experts. Children were randomly chosen for the experimental or control group. They were participated for 20 minutes 17 times. The data was gathered by post-observation 3 times. The Symbolic Skill scale developed by Black(1989) was used to measure the children s representation ability. The Negotiation Act scale selected in The Intersubjectivity Scale developed by Goncu(1933a) was used to measure the children s negotiation ability. The data was analyzed by t-test. The results of the study were as follows First, The children with lower levels within the playing experience in the control and the experimental group were generally different in representation ability and negotiation ability. The children with lower play levels with playing experience in the experimental group showed enacting pretense, choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props, acting without props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in planning pretense, choosing every day topic, acting with directly elicited props meaning a lower representation ability. This result means that the representation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher level children had an positive effect on the representation ability of the lower level children. The children with lower play level within the playing experience in the experimental group showed introduction, extension, building-on, acceptance acts meaning a higher negotiation ability, and they had a low tendency in emphasis, irrelevant act meaning the lower negotiation ability. However, the children with lower levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to rejection, revision, conciliation act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher play levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher play level children had a positive effect on the negotiation ability of the lower level children. Second, children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control and the experimental group were partially different and were generally similar in representation ability and negotiation. Children with higher play levels within the playing experience of the experimental group showed choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in choosing every topic meaning a lower representation ability. However, the children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to planning pretense, enacting pretense, acting with directly elicited props, acting without props. This result means that the representation ability of the children with higher levels was improved. At least their representation ability was not low. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had a partially positive effect on the representation ability of the higher level children. The children with higher levels within playing experience of the experimental group showed building-on act meaning a higher negotiation ability. However, the children with higher levels within playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar in introduction, extension, acceptance, rejection, revision, conciliation, emphasis, irrelevant act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with higher levels was maintained. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had little effect on the negotiation ability of the higher level children. higher level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with lower level? 2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability and negotiation ability with higher level? 2-1. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability with higher level? 2-2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with higher level? The subjects of this study were five-year old, 32 children from S kindergarten in Suwon who were divided by the sociodramatic play rating scale of Smilansky & Shefatya(1990) into 16 novices and 16 experts. Children were randomly chosen for the experimental or control group. They were participated for 20 minutes 17 times. The data was gathered by post-observation 3 times. The Symbolic Skill scale developed by Black(1989) was used to measure the children s representation ability. The Negotiation Act scale selected in The Intersubjectivity Scale developed by Goncu(1933a) was used to measure the children s negotiation ability. The data was analyzed by t-test. The results of the study were as follows First, The children with lower levels within the playing experience in the control and the experimental group were generally different in representation ability and negotiation ability. The children with lower play levels with playing experience in the experimental group showed enacting pretense, choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props, acting without props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in planning pretense, choosing every day topic, acting with directly elicited props meaning a lower representation ability. This result means that the representation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher level children had an positive effect on the representation ability of the lower level children. The children with lower play level within the playing experience in the experimental group showed introduction, extension, building-on, acceptance acts meaning a higher negotiation ability, and they had a low tendency in emphasis, irrelevant act meaning the lower negotiation ability. However, the children with lower levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to rejection, revision, conciliation act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher play levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher play level children had a positive effect on the negotiation ability of the lower level children. Second, children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control and the experimental group were partially different and were generally similar in representation ability and negotiation. Children with higher play levels within the playing experience of the experimental group showed choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in choosing every topic meaning a lower representation ability. However, the children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to planning pretense, enacting pretense, acting with directly elicited props, acting without props. This result means that the representation ability of the children with higher levels was improved. At least their representation ability was not low. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had a partially positive effect on the representation ability of the higher level children. The children with higher levels within playing experience of the experimental group showed building-on act meaning a higher negotiation ability. However, the children with higher levels within playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar in introduction, extension, acceptance, rejection, revision, conciliation, emphasis, irrelevant act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with higher levels was maintained. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had little effect on the negotiation ability of the higher level children. higher level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with lower level? 2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability and negotiation ability with higher level? 2-1. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability with higher level? 2-2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with higher level? The subjects of this study were five-year old, 32 children from S kindergarten in Suwon who were divided by the sociodramatic play rating scale of Smilansky & Shefatya(1990) into 16 novices and 16 experts. Children were randomly chosen for the experimental or control group. They were participated for 20 minutes 17 times. The data was gathered by post-observation 3 times. The Symbolic Skill scale developed by Black(1989) was used to measure the children s representation ability. The Negotiation Act scale selected in The Intersubjectivity Scale developed by Goncu(1933a) was used to measure the children s negotiation ability. The data was analyzed by t-test. The results of the study were as follows First, The children with lower levels within the playing experience in the control and the experimental group were generally different in representation ability and negotiation ability. The children with lower play levels with playing experience in the experimental group showed enacting pretense, choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props, acting without props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in planning pretense, choosing every day topic, acting with directly elicited props meaning a lower representation ability. This result means that the representation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher level children had an positive effect on the representation ability of the lower level children. The children with lower play level within the playing experience in the experimental group showed introduction, extension, building-on, acceptance acts meaning a higher negotiation ability, and they had a low tendency in emphasis, irrelevant act meaning the lower negotiation ability. However, the children with lower levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to rejection, revision, conciliation act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher play levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher play level children had a positive effect on the negotiation ability of the lower level children. Second, children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control and the experimental group were partially different and were generally similar in representation ability and negotiation. Children with higher play levels within the playing experience of the experimental group showed choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in choosing every topic meaning a lower representation ability. However, the children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to planning pretense, enacting pretense, acting with directly elicited props, acting without props. This result means that the representation ability of the children with higher levels was improved. At least their representation ability was not low. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had a partially positive effect on the representation ability of the higher level children. The children with higher levels within playing experience of the experimental group showed building-on act meaning a higher negotiation ability. However, the children with higher levels within playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar in introduction, extension, acceptance, rejection, revision, conciliation, emphasis, irrelevant act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with higher levels was maintained. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had little effect on the negotiation ability of the higher level children. higher level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with lower level? 2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representatio nability and negotiation ability with higher level? 2-1. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s representation ability with higher level? 2-2. What is the effect of the interaction with children of a lower level of sociodramatic play on children s negotiation ability with higher level? The subjects of this study were five-year old, 32 children from S kindergarten in Suwon who were divided by the sociodramatic play rating scale of Smilansky & Shefatya(1990) into 16 novices and 16 experts. Children were randomly chosen for the experimental or control group. They were participated for 20 minutes 17 times. The data was gathered by post-observation 3 times. The Symbolic Skill scale developed by Black(1989) was used to measure the children s representation ability. The Negotiation Act scale selected in The Intersubjectivity Scale developed by Goncu(1933a) was used to measure the children s negotiation ability. The data was analyzed by t-test. The results of the study were as follows First, The children with lower levels within the playing experience in the control and the experimental group were generally different in representation ability and negotiation ability. The children with lower play levels with playing experience in the experimental group showed enacting pretense, choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props, acting without props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in planning pretense, choosing every day topic, acting with directly elicited props meaning a lower representation ability. This result means that the representation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher level children had an positive effect on the representation ability of the lower level children. The children with lower play level within the playing experience in the experimental group showed introduction, extension, building-on, acceptance acts meaning a higher negotiation ability, and they had a low tendency in emphasis, irrelevant act meaning the lower negotiation ability. However, the children with lower levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to rejection, revision, conciliation act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with lower levels was improved by the children with higher play levels. Therefore the interaction with the higher play level children had a positive effect on the negotiation ability of the lower level children. Second, children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control and the experimental group were partially different and were generally similar in representation ability and negotiation. Children with higher play levels within the playing experience of the experimental group showed choosing fanciful topic, acting with indirectly elicited props meaning a higher representation ability, and they had a low tendency in choosing every topic meaning a lower representation ability. However, the children with higher levels within the playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar to planning pretense, enacting pretense, acting with directly elicited props, acting without props. This result means that the representation ability of the children with higher levels was improved. At least their representation ability was not low. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had a partially positive effect on the representation ability of the higher level children. The children with higher levels within playing experience of the experimental group showed building-on act meaning a higher negotiation ability. However, the children with higher levels within playing experience of the control group and the experimental group were similar in introduction, extension, acceptance, rejection, revision, conciliation, emphasis, irrelevant act. This result means that the negotiation ability of the children with higher levels was maintained. Therefore the interaction with the lower level children had little effect on the negotiation ability of the higher level children. ; 본 연구에서는 사회극놀이에서 극놀이 수준이 다른 유아간의 상호작용이 유아의 표상능력과 협상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 알아보는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이와 같은 목적에 따라 설정된 연구문제는 다음과 같다. I. 극놀이 수준이 높은 유아와의 상호작용이 극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아의 표상능력과 협상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가? I-1. 극놀이 수준이 높은 유아와의 상호작용이 극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아의 표상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가? I-2. 극놀이 수준이 높은 유아와의 상호작용이 극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아의 협상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가? II. 극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아와의 상호작용이 극놀이 수준이 높은 유아의 표상능력과 협상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가? II-1. 극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아와의 상호작용이 극놀이 수준이 높은 유아의 표상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가? II-2. 극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아와의 상호작용이 극놀이 수준이 높은 유아의 협상능력에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가? 본 연구의 대상은 수원시에 위치한 S유치원에서 Smilansky와 Shefatya(1990)의 사회극놀이 수준 평정척도에 의거하여 선정된 만 5세 유아 32명으로서, 사회극놀이 수준이 낮은 유아 16명과 사회극놀이 수준이 높은 유아 16명이었다. 통제집단이나 실험집단으로 무선할당된 유아들은 놀이수준별로 4명씩 한 조를 이루어 1회당 20분씩 총 17회에 걸쳐 극놀이(처치)에 참여하였다. 자료는 3회 동안의 극놀이 관찰(사후검사)을 통해 수집하였다. 표상능력을 측정하기 위해 Black(1989)의 상징기술 도구를 사용하였으며, 협상능력을 측정하기 위해 Goncu(1993a)의 상호주관성 도구 중 협상행동 부분만 발췌하여 사용하였다. 수집된 자료는 t 검증을 통해 분석하였다. 본 연구의 분석결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 낮은 극놀이 수준 유아들과 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 낮은 수준 유아들의 상징기술과 협상행동에서 전반적으로 차이가 나타났다. 하위 연구문제 별로 나타난 결과는 다음과 같다. 먼저 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 낮은 수준 유아들보다 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 낮은 수준 유아들이 높은 표상능력을 보여주는 극놀이 실행, 상상적 주제 선택, 간접적 도구의존·도구 독립적 행동을 많이 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 비교적 낮은 표상능력을 보여주는 극놀이 계획, 일상적 주제 선택, 직접적 도구의존 행동은 적게 하는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 높은 수준 유아와 극놀이를 했던 낮은 수준 유아의 표상능력이 높아졌음을 의미한다. 따라서 높은 수준 유아와의 상호작용이 낮은 수준 유아의 표상능력에 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다고 할 수 있다. 또한 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 낮은 수준 유아들보다 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 낮은 수준 유아들이 높은 협상능력을 보여주는 도입·확장·구축·수용행동을 많이 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 낮은 협상능력을 보여주는 강조·관계없는 행동은 적게 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 했던 낮은 수준 유아들과 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 했던 낮은 수준 유아들은 거부·수정·조정행동을 비슷하게 하는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 높은 수준 유아와 극놀이를 했던 낮은 수준 유아의 협상능력이 전반적으로 높아졌음을 의미한다. 따라서 높은 수준 유아와의 상호작용이 낮은 수준 유아의 협상능력에 전반적으로 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다고 할 수 있다. 둘째, 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 높은 수준 유아들과 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 높은 수준 유아들의 상징기술과 협상행동에서는 부분적으로 차이가 나타나거나 전반적으로 차이가 나타나지 않았다. 하위 연구문제별로 나타난 결과는 다음과 같다. 먼저 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 높은 수준 유아들보다 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 높은 수준 유아들이 높은 표상능력을 보여주는 상상적 주제 선택, 간접적 도구의존 행동을 많이 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그리고 비교적 낮은 표상능력을 보여주는 일상적 주제 선택은 적게 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 했던 높은 수준 유아들과 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 했던 높은 수준 유아들은 극놀이 계획·실행, 직접적 도구 의존·도구 독립적 행동을 비슷하게 하는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 낮은 수준 유아와 극놀이를 했던 높은 수준 유아의 표상능력이 부분적으로 높아졌음을 의미한다. 표상능력이 적어도 낮아지지는 않았음을 내포하는 것이다. 따라서 낮은 수준 유아와의 상호작용이 높은 수준 유아의 표상능력에 부분적으로 긍정적인 영향을 미쳤다고 할 수 있다. 또한 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 높은 수준 유아들보다 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 경험해온 높은 수준 유아들이 높은 협상능력을 보여주는 구축행동을 많이 하는 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 통제집단 속에서 극놀이를 했던 높은 수준 유아들과 실험집단 속에서 극놀이를 했던 높은 수준 유아들은 도입·확장·수용·거부·수정·조정·강조·관계없는 행동을 비슷하게 하는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 낮은 수준 유아와 극놀이를 했던 높은 수준 유아의 협상능력이 유지되었음을 의미한다. 따라서 낮은 수준 유아와의 상호작용이 높은 수준 유아의 협상능력에 거의 영향을 미치지 않았다고 할 수 있다.
Fulltext
Show the fulltext
Appears in Collections:
일반대학원 > 유아교육학과 > Theses_Master
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE