View : 31 Download: 0

메타기억적 책략훈련이 교육가능급 정신지체아의 기억수행에 끼치는 효과에 관한 연구

Title
메타기억적 책략훈련이 교육가능급 정신지체아의 기억수행에 끼치는 효과에 관한 연구
Authors
김경란
Issue Date
1987
Department/Major
대학원 특수교육학과
Keywords
정신지체아기억수행교육가능급메타기억
Publisher
이화여자대학교 대학원
Degree
Master
Advisors
송준만
Abstract
본 연구에서는 정신지체아의 기억수행증진을 위한 지도에서 메타기억적 정보를 활용한 기억책략훈련방법이 정신지체아의 기억책략의 일반화능력에 미치는 영향을 밝히고자 하였다. 연구대상은 MA 8세이상이면서 IQ 50에서 75사이의 교육가능급 정신지체아동들이었다. 피험자들은 훈련 전에 실시한 자유회상과제의 결과에 따라 2실험집단과 1통제집단에 균등배치되었다. 한 실험집단에는 단순히 기억책략만 훈련시켰고, 또 다른 실험집단에는 같은 기억책략을 훈련시키면서, 동시에 책략이용과 관련된 메타기억적 정보를 인식시켰으며, 통제집단에는 어떠한 책략의 지시도 없이 자기나름의 기억책략을 사용케하였다. 본 연구에서 훈련시킨 기억책략은 덩이화시연법(the Chunking and rehearsal)이었고, 덩이화시연법은 자유회상과제의 맥락에서 훈련되었다. 본 연구에서는 메타기억인식을 과제요구 특성, 책략유형, 책략의 가치 및 효율성에 관한 정보를 제공해줌으로써 조작했다. 훈련완료후 즉시 기억책략훈련의 효과를 측정했으며, 훈련 2일후에 훈련효과의 유지 및 일반화검사를 실시했다. 훈련은 각 아동들에게 개별적으로 실시되었고, 종속척도로는 회상된 항목수와 한 항목당 평균노출기간을 측정했다. 실험결과는 다음과 같다. 1. 훈련후 즉시 실시한 자유회상검사에서 기억책략을 훈련시킨 2실험집단은 통제집단에 비해 회상점수와 평균노출기간이 훈련전보다 유의하게 증가됐다. 그러나 메타기억적 정보를 활용한 기억책략훈련집단과 단순히 기억책략만 훈련시킨 집단간에는 회상점수와 평균노출기간면에서 유의한 차가 없었다. 2. 유지검사에서 2훈련집단은 통제집단에 비해 유의하게 더 큰 회상점수와 평균노출기간을 산출해냄으로써 책략훈련효과가 유지됐음을 나타냈다. 그러나 2훈련집단간에는 회상점수와 평균노출기간면에서 유의한 차가 없었다. 3. 일반화검사에서의 재인점수에 있어서는 3집단간에 유의한 차가 없었다. 그러나 평균노출기간에서는 메타기억적 정보를 활용한 기억책략훈련집단이 다른 2집단보다 유의하게 더 긴 노출기간을 보였을 뿐만 아니라 또한 계열위치상의 3번째 위치에서마다 현저하게 더 긴 노출기간을 보임으로써 자발적으로 덩이화시연책략을 일반화시켰다는 증거를 제시했다. 본 연구결과들을 종합해볼 때, 부분적인 증거이긴 했으나 메타기억적 정보는 유지와 같은 익숙한 과제상황에서보다는 새로운 과제상황인 일반화조건에서 더 중요한 역할을 한다고 주장한 Borkowski와 Cavanaugh(1980)등의 선행연구들을 뒷받침했으며, 또한 훈련의 일반화효과를 증진시키기 위해서는 기억책략훈련시 메타기억인식이 필요조건일것임을 시사했다.;The purpose of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of two components (Specific strategy training and strategy awareness) of an instructional package designed to train mnemonic strategy the educable retarded and to test the generalization of trained mnemonic strategy. The research questions of the study were: 1. Is there any difference in the effectiveness of the only strategy training and the strategy training combined in strategy awareness on the memory performance of the retarded? 2. Is the any difference in the effectiveness of the only strategy training and the strategy training combined in strategy awareness on the maintenance of the trained mnemonic strategy? 3. Is there any difference in the effectiveness of the only strategy training and the strategy training combined in strategy awareness on the generalization of the trained mnemonic strategy? Thirty educably retarded children within the IQ range of 50 to 75 and above the MA 8 were selected and then assigned to three groups. One groups was trained the chunking and rehearsal, another group was trained the chunking and rehearsal combined in strategic awareness and the other group was trained nothing. The results were follows: 1. There was a significant difference among the three groups in the difference of the recalled scores between pre-free recall test and the post free recall test; Compared with control group, both the strategy training methods had a positive effect on re-call scores of the post free recall test. But there was not a significant difference between the only strategy training group and the strategy training group combined in strategy awareness. 2. There was significant difference among the three groups in mean exposure duration per one item of the free recall task held immediately after training. Both the training groups had exposure durations significantly longer than the control groups. But, there was not a significant difference in mean exposure durations per one item of both the training groups. 3. There was a significant difference among the three groups in the difference of the recalled scores of the pre-free recall test and the maintenance test. Compared with control group, both the strategy training groups maintenance a positive training effect on recall scores of the free recall test. But there was not a significant difference in the maintenance of the strategy between the only strategy training group and the strategy training group combined in strategy awareness. 4. There was a significant difference among the three groups in mean exposure duration per one item of the maintenance test. Both the strategy training group had exposure durations significantly longer than the control group. But there was not a significant difference in the mean exposure durations per one item of both the training group. 5. There was not a significant difference among the three groups in number correct of the recognition test to investigate the generatization effect. 6. There was a significant difference among the three groups in mean exposure duration per one item of recognition test. The combination of strategy training and strategy awareness did increase exposure duration more longer than the other training method. And there was not significant difference in mean exposure duration between the control group and the only strategy training group. In conclusion, there was evidence that the combination of strategy training and strategy awareness did increase the likelihood of strategy transfer on the generalization task (recognition). However, this likelihood of strategy transfer were not consistently translated into improved performance. Disussion centered on the implication of these results and on the need for increased research on the metamnemonic skills involved in strategy generalization.
Fulltext
Show the fulltext
Appears in Collections:
일반대학원 > 특수교육학과 > 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