The purpose of this study was to inquire the possibility of Pedagogical content knowledge(PCK), originally a representative index for raising professionalism in teachers, as a index for raising professionalism in Korean language teachers.
In this d...
The purpose of this study was to inquire the possibility of Pedagogical content knowledge(PCK), originally a representative index for raising professionalism in teachers, as a index for raising professionalism in Korean language teachers.
In this dissertation, I examined Shulman(1986, 1987) and other PCK researches to provide reasonable evidence, for providing PCK's definition, its components and standard of analysis for Korean teachers. ‘PCK Model for Korean teachers’ was set based on ‘PCK Model by Crossman(1990)’.
This study examined how the three components of PCK which are subject matter, pedagogical, and situational knowledge affect PCK's modality of two native teachers and two non-native teachers. This study inquired whether PCK affects learner's learning achievement or not. Also, this study sought a method to raise Korean teacher's PCK, and practical PCK for Korean educational environment.
Two methods were used. One of them was Qualitative Analysis for Korean teacher's PCK. For this, I collected and analyzed wide range of materials; audio-recordings of course, teacher's questionnaire, Core(Content Representation) questionnaire, syllabi, learning materials, interview, phone call, and e-mail. The other one was Quantitative Analysis for learners’ achievements. A questionnaire was used for examining the difference between learners’ achievements, and learners' Pre and Post tests results were analyzed using SPSS 18.0 statistics.
The result of study about Korean teacher's pedagogical knowledge(CH 3) indicated that the contents that were taught by the native teachers and the non-native teachers were quite different; native teachers put focus on ‘using target grammar in communicative situations’, which is related to pragmatic knowledge including vocabulary knowledge and grammar knowledge. The non-native teachers, on the other hand, put focus on ‘making sentences using target grammar' using vocabulary knowledge and grammar knowledge. The native teachers carried and pursued their class in Korean language only. In intermediate level class, the use of learners’ mother tongue did not affected the quality of the class at all. The use of Korean of the non-native teachers in classroom setting had some connection with teachers' target language ability. There was a difference how Han teacher C and Ethnic Korean teacher D recognized Korean.
The result of study about Korean teacher's pedagogical knowledge(CH 4) was the following: The native teachers and the non-native teachers carried their class in PPP, but there were many differences between them when they conducted activities. All the teachers checked leaner's advance learning, and corrected their misconception and difficult concept using teacher's know-how and repertory. However they made some mistakes sometimes. When the teachers evaluated the learners, there was a difference between the native teachers and the non-native teachers. The native teachers let chinese learners, who had been studying focusing on tests, to solve different kinds of problems were effective, and they found it was effective for them.
As for the result of the study about Korean teachers' situational knowledge(CH 5), the native teachers and the non-native teachers both said Chinese learners were passive and feel comfortable with studying focused on taking tests. There was a difference between the two classes. The result of the study indicated that PCK of the Korean teachers affected the achievement of the learners(CH 6). The conclusion was the following: Adopting PCK for raising professionalism in Korean teachers was meaningful and the possibility of increasing professionalism in teachers using PCK was confirmed.
The native teachers PCK were good at using PCK in pedagogical knowledge and fairly good in subject matter knowledge. Though some of the non-native teachers made some errors, they were good at using PCK in subject matter knowledge. However there was a need for improvement in pedagogical knowledge. Also, situational knowledge did affect greatly on the classes of the native teachers and non-native teachers.
There was a fundamental difference of the factors which influence on non-native teachers’ PCK and native teachers’ PCK. The factor of influence on native teachers’ PCK came out Korean linguistic knowledge, career and conviction. And the factor of influence on non-native teachers’ PCK was linguistic knowledge, career(including using textbook), learning experience of Korean language, their mother tongue. This result matches the study of Medgyes(1992), and suggests to recognize of a fundamental difference as checking PCK of non-native teachers and native teachers, and have to search for the way of becoming professional teacher at their positions.
There is a need for studying for teaching Korean and pedagogical knowledge in the future. And new teacher’s PCK study, career teacher’s PCK study, comparative study between new and career teachers’, and longitudinal Study based on various action research should be done. Also the results of such results should be used for training and reeducation program for Korean teachers.
，韩语论文，韩语毕业论文 |
