IEG 환경지질연구정보센터

전체 글

(1)Jour. Korean Earth Science Society, v. 25, no. 8, p. 708−718, December 2004. J

(2). Ò ¢>~ Ò·ö 8 æ\ *L jL ; > ã* ¦ÖL, 614-103 ¦Ö% ê\ $3ÿ Ö38-31. Analysis on the Earth Science Concepts of the Gifted Science Students and Non-gifted Students By the Types of Thinking Styles Soo-Kyong Park* %XVDQ 6FLHQFH +LJK 6FKRRO 'DQJJDP 'RQJ %XVDQMLQ*X %XVDQ .RUHD $EVWUDFW On the basis of Sternberg’s theory of mental self-government, this study examined the difference in thinking style between gifted science students and non-gifted students, and their earth science concepts by the different types of thinking styles. The subjects were consisted of 120 students from the Busan Science Academy and 122 students from two general high schools in Busan, Korea. All participants responded to the Thinking Styles Inventory which is a self-report test consisting of 65 items, and the essay questions for examining the students' earth science concepts. The results are as follows. First, the gifted science students prefer legislative, judicial, anarchic, global, and liberal styles, whereas non-gifted students prefer executive, oligarchic, and conservative styles. Second, Type I thinking style group proved to have more complex concepts in relation to the geological and astronomical areas than those of the Type II thinking style group in both of the gifted and non-gifted students. This indicates that Type I thinking style students use a deep learning approach whereas Type II thinking style students use a surface learning approach. ,FZXPSET theory of mental self-government, thinking styles, gifted science students, non-gifted students, earth science concepts º £ ~ Ï'f Sternberg~ ;¶~B Vö ~ 'Ò" ¢>~ Ò·~ N¢ Ò~, Ò· F;ö V¢ L ÷ &æ ®º æ" Bvj jv ªC~º © . ¢ *~ "'Òv 1 j 120«" ¢>ê v 2j 122«j &çbR + 65^~ ¶8 Ò· ¦Òf BF; æ" Bv ¦Ò¢ ~& . Ö", "'Òf «»', Ò»', Z;¦B, *Ú', ê' Ò· Ö^~ îRÚ "B¢ F^~ ¶8 ¶~ ObR ^B¢ Ö~º ßWj ¾æÚî . >ö ¢>f ¯;', "LB, >' Ò· Ö^~ ê ¾ æö V¢ ^B¢ Ö~º ßWj ¾æÚî . Ò· F;ö V æ " Bvj jv Ö", "'Ò ÷" ¢> ÷ ÎL Type I Ò·~ Type II Ò·~ . æî ª¢f Â^ ª¢ Û'bR ê ® ' Bvj ¾æÚî . ºÚ ;¶~B V, Ò·, "'Ò, ¢>, æ" Bv. \~ Vã 5 Ï "'Òj *~ NêzB vGj ¢ ~º&ö & jºWf B' G" Ò²' G öB Îv ºB . ß® B' GöB 'Òj. f ¢> "º æ', ;~', Ú', Ò. *E-mail: [email protected] Tel: 82-51-528-5747 Fax: 82-51-891-0004. ²' ßWj &æ ®bæ ö rº ßê vG Ú^¢ (Karnes and Bean, 2001; Renzulli, 2000). ÚöBº 2002j¦V Ï'b 'ÒvG» ¯_ 'Ï>B, ö V¢ "V F¦öBº vG'¶ö¦, ¦Ö7 vGÓ"~ 7£j Û~ ¦Ö"v¢ "'Òv æ;~ Ú'~ ® . "'Òvº "'Ò¢ Vö B~ Ê 'ÒvGj Âb æ V> Ò²¢ Fê > ®º c~' "'Ò G Wj JãÏ'b ~ ® . V¢B, 'Òj .

(3) Ò¢>~Ò·ö8æ\BLjL. &æ ®º ßê vG' º¢ òÊº ¢& > Úê' vG *Î jº~ ¢ * Bº "'Ò~ ßW ÖF 6¦>Ú¢ © . ö öBº Sternberg(1988, 1990, 1997, 1998)~ ;¶~B (the theory of mental self-government)j " "'Ò" ¢> ~ Ò·j jvÁÒ~¶ . ;¶~B ~ V &;f B Ò~º O *~º Û~; 5 Û~ç~ &æ Nö" FÒ~ º © . Ò²¢ æV~º · O ® ¢ç~ ¯ÿj æV~ &Ò~º. · · Ò~ ¢ Sternberg(1994a, 1994b) º ‘Ò·(thinking styles)’¢ ®& . ;¶ ~Bº VË(function), ;(form), >&(level), º* (scope), ãËW(leaning)~ 5&æ ~* Nöb W > Îv 13&æ Ò·

(4) B . ‘VË’f ; ¦& «»', ¯;', Ò»' ¦B¢ < VË~ *~ ;ê ?f VËj >¯ º ~ ^ &æ Ò·b ¾ . 7 «»' ·f cWj º~º ¢j F^~, ¯;' ·f « { æ& ®º ëZ~ >¯j ±j~, Ò»' ·f æ~ ÿö &~ ï&~º ©j F^. . ‘;’ö V¢Bº J &æ Ò· ®º ß® Z;¦' ·f ;" .N¢ Ú~ , º, ²*ö &~ ª~'b ^B¢ Ö~V ¢ F^ . ;¶~B~ ‘>&’f O, ", æ ê ~ >&öB VËj B>~º ;¦~ >&j *Ú' ; ¦f æ#' ;¦ ª~ ;¶~B~ VË B>öê ß; >& ®rj ~ . ‘º*’º ;¦& Ú _f ;^¢ Îv jº& ® *~ ; Ú' _f ' ^B¢ º º*¢ ~~, Ú¦' ·" ¦' · ® . îæïb ‘ãËW’f ;¦& Ö & ²~ ³ F çöB R*> ®º ©¾" ê' ·" > ' ·b &êB . ê' ·f î Î^ ßWj æò "B¢ F^~º > >' ·f V ~ " .N¢ >~Jº ãË ® . ' Ò ·~ ßû" ¦Òæ ^~ .º Table 1" ? . *f ?f Ò·" Û¶~ Û·~ ç&& êö & (Zhang and Sternberg, 2000; Zhang, 2000, 2002a, 2002b)~ 6 Vãb Biggs(1987)~ Û· (theory of learning. . approaches) ® . Û·f [' 7"(deep approach)" R' 7"(surface approach)b &ê > Biggs(1994)ö ~~ [' 7"f ÚÒ' ÿVf Û"B~ ÚÏö & , Û ¶ò~ ~ö & , îÚ j:Ú¢ *~ æ ¾ ¢~ ãþ" &Nùº êf jf . >ö R' 7"j ~º Û¶º Û"B¢ æN' º ö ~ ©b ~, Vê' Ûj Û Ï Ú¾ .N¢ ÎO~ ß; "B¢ "B¾. B " ªÒ~ º ãË ® . s" 7~ &j &çb Û·" Ò ·~ &NWj Ò F¯(Zhang and Sternberg, 2000)öB R' Û·f «»', Ò»', ê' Ò ê/B Ò·" ¦' ç&&ê¢ ¾æÚ î, [' Û·f ¯;', >', æ#' Ò "B Ò·" ¦' ç&&ê¢ ¾æÚî. . ~ &j &çb 6 (Zhang, 2000)ö ~~ ' Ò· «»', Ò»', ê', ê/B& [' Û·" ;' ç&j &, >ö ' ¯;', >' Ò· R' Û·" ;' ç&j & . f ?f Ö"¢ " Zhang(2002b) f Ò·" Û" Ò~ F;(Torrance, 1988)~ ç&j º ªC Ö" Ò·j Type I(«»', Ò»', *Ú', ê')" Type II(¯;', æ#', >') ¾*Ú B~& . *~ ö ~~ Type If ' Û' Ò(holistic mode of thinking)f &N ¸b c', V&ö ê* ' *þj 6>~º ãË ® . >ö Type IIº ' ªC' Ò(analytic mode of thinking)f &N ¸b, V &~ æj F^~ ²*¢ 7~º ãË ® . Þ, ~ 'Ò¢ &çb Ò·j Ò F¯ö ~~ 'Òº ¢>ö j « »' ê' Ò»' Ò·j &æ ® º ©b ¾æÒ (Grigorenko and Sternberg, 1995). 6 'Ò ~ Ò·" ëWf~ &êö & öB Ò»' Ò· ëWf &Ë ¸f ç&j & (Grinkorenko and Sternberg, 1997). " ÚöBê 'Òj &çb Ò·ö & (J²; , 2003; ¾ÿê , 2003; V BÁV¦, 2004)¾ "Æ' &6ö & (Ë «{ , 2002) Úæ ®b, ß® ".

(5) . ;>ã. Table 1. Thinking styles’ characterization and sample items of mental self-government Nö. VË (function). ; (forms). >& (levels). º* (scope). ãË (leaning). Ò·. ßû. ^~ .. «»' (legislative). ¶~ Ob î² c cn~º ãËW. ÚÊ ¢j r ¾º Ú j:Ú& ¢~º ©j ±j .. ¯;' (executive). ê \¾ æö V¢ ¢~º ©j ±j ~º ãËW. ¾º ;ê æ Òö V¢ ¢~º ©j ± j .. Ò»' (judicial). Ò² Òbö &~ 6, ï&, jL~º ã ËW. ¾º ªC¾ ï& _f jL~º ;

(6) B ¢j ±j .. `"B (monarchic). &æ Bö .6j v jWF r ræ *v~º ãËW. ¾º ®ö &æ ¢öò ÷7~º ©j ± j .. ê/B (hierarchical). ¢~ ÖFB*f 7ºWj J;~ ÿö &æ ¢j >¯~º ãËW.. ¾º ZÞ&¢ · r, ¢ ¢~ Ïj ò 7ºW~ BB¢ Vº ©j ±j. vB (oligarchic). ¢~ ÖFB*¢ væ p ÿö &æ ¢j >¯~º ãËW. ¾º &Bº ZÎ ¢j ¢ ~ºæº ræò «« ¢~ BB¢ ;~º º ÚJæj Ðº .. Z;¦B (anarchic). ;¾ º, \³j Ú~ ª~'b ^B¢ Ö~º ãËW. ¾º 'j ~¢~¾ & r, '¾º ©f Zí¾ Ï .. *Ú' (global). *Ú', ¢>', ºç' ©j F^~º ãËW. ¾º ¢~ ^¦' Ò *Ú' "B¢. º ¢ ± .. æ#' (local). ^¦', î', \Ú' ©j F^~º ãËW. ¾º B~ *Ú' Îf 7ºW º ¦ ª' Gö z "~¢ VÞ .. Ú¦' (internal). b¶ ¢~ Ú¦ö .6j vº ¶V Ï' ãËW. ¾º Ò² ~¢~æ p ¢~ Î Gj ¾ b¶ Ö~º ©j ±j .. ¦' (external). þ ¢~ ¦æË' ç^~' ã ËW. ¾º &~ \WöbB Ò² ç^· Ï ~º ÿj ±j .. ê' (liberal). î Î^ B¢ F^~ îÚ Ob ¢~Jº ãËW. ¾º ^Bö ç~, îÚ *Û¾ O» b Ö~J .. >' (conservative). .N¢ F^~ *Û' Ob ¢ ~Jº ãËW. ¾º ÚÊ ¢j ~j r, ö ÒÏ>î~ O» j:Ú j & VJ .. ª¢ 'Ò~ ßWö & · 7" º> ® . ö "'Ò~ Ò·~ ßW" "Bv "~ &NW ¦¢ C® ö & Ò6j d º & jº~ . V¢B öBº "'Ò f ¢>~ Ò·j jv~, j & çb Ò·~ F;ö V¢ æ" Bvj ª C~º ~ Ï'j z . ~ Ú' ^Bº r" ? . Ñ, "'Ò" ¢> *ö Ò·f ÚÊ N& ®º&? ~, Ò· F;ö V¢ "'Ò" ¢> ~ æî ª¢ Bvf Úá² &? q, Ò· F;ö V¢ "'Ò" ¢> ~ Â^ ª¢ Bvf Úá² &?. \ O» \ &ç ~ &çf "'Òv Î 103«, . 17«~ C 120«" ¢>ê v Î 82 «, 40«~ C 122« . ¢> ÷~ R÷j *~, ¦ÖÚ ²Ò~ ¢>ê v 7 öB vGÓ"& Kï& Ö"¢ V. "Wê & 7*²ö ³~º Î¶v 1Bvf ¶ v 1Bv¢ F;~& . F; v vöB 2j ¶ê Î 2/" 1/~ 122«j ª~ ºÂ~& . "'Òv 1j & >& 7v W' ç* , 'Òv « *; 1ê B~*;, 2ê c~' ^BÖK ï&, 3ê 3; 4¢*~ " Æ* 5 7~ ê *;j ö F BB . "'Òv « ê « ËK¦Òö ~~ ¾æÂ ~ æË, ÞÚ, > Ò, ºÒ, æ' ËK ¦Ò Ö" T6> ª

(7) º Table 2f ? . VB æË'f Öê .877, 'W' f Öê .922 >&j ¾æÞ . 'W~ V&f ï ~>& 39~, ï>& 40-60, ÚÂ >.

(8) Ò¢>~Ò·ö8æ\BLjL. . Table 2. Results of Intellectual Aptitude Test of the gifted science students V&. 'W. '. ï ï ~ >& ï >& ÚÂ >&. Ö ÚÂ >&. Ú>K. ºÒK. >ÒK. æ'K. 64.54 0« 41« 70« 28«. 67.57 0« 28« 48« 63«. 68.38 0« 5« 77« 57«. 66.02 2« 25« 82« 30«. & 61-70, Ö ÚÂ >& 71ç æË~ V&f ï~>& 89~, ï>& 90-119, ÚÂ >& 120-139, Ö ÚÂ >& 140 çö . Table 2öB &ç ~ T6>& 706 >j ãÖ * V& 5% Úö ~º ¸f 6 > " > ® . &ç ö² 'Ï>º " 'Òv~ vG"; ÞB¢ ÚÚ Ú, Ò², Ú, .ÚËj

(9) ~º Ûv"f >, ", ;"j

(10) ~º *v"& ® (²7S , 2003). VFf >, ", ;"öB ê" Ïb >Ú®, zF "Ïf >& ¸, * ^' ÚÏb W>Ú® . VF "Ï~ ~ ¾ ‘æ"’f ¢>ê v æ" I" æ " IIö ~º ÏRf º*¢ ® . V¢B öBº æ"~ 7º Bvö & Ò¢ ~V ~V * 'Òv 1j ; vG";öB æ" * º*¢ Û 'Ò" ¢>ê vöB æ" II¢ Û 2j j &çb ~& . ¶ò >÷ öBº &ç ö² Ò·" ~ Ï'ö &~ J« ê Ò· ¦Òê ¢ 30ª*ö ö ~ v ÷~ Ò· N ¢ ªC~& . Ò· F;ö V æ" B vj Ò~V *~ Type I F;ö ~º 4& æ Ò·~ C6 ¸f ÷" Type II F;ö ~º 3&æ Ò·~ C6 ¸f ÷j ª ~~& . ' C6ö V.~ '' ç* 7 öB ·ã F; Îvö ³ ãÖ¢ B '' 20 «j &çb ~& . æ" Bv ¦Òæ ^ö & *Ú ~ wj >'b ¦Æ~ ª~V&j ·W~& ö V¢ ¶ 1~ ª~ ¢~ê& 90%ö ê. æË 135.96 0« 8« 74« 57«. ê ¶& &ç ~ wj ª~~& . /;ê\ 5 ¶ò ¾Ò Sternbergf Wagner& 1992jö B· Ò· ¦Òê(Thinking Styles Inventory; TSI)¢ JF (1997) ÚöB æz ©b bþ¶& B B ^ j £ ' ^ö & ¶~ ï² WË j 16(*& jî ) ¦V 56( Ö - ) Òö >w~º C 65^~ ¶V ¦Òæ . º ;¶~B j " 13&æ Ò·j G; ~ ®b, Ò· ¦Ò~ 6>º ^~ 6>¢ 6> êÖB . Ò· ¦Ò~ ~* F;ö & C 65^~ ^ Wf Table 3" ? öB G; Ò· ¦Ò~ *Ú Ö ê(Cronbach )º 13B~ Ò·ö ö .56~.88 ¾æÒ . öB æ" Bvj Ò~V * ÒÏ BF; ^f æ" II v"Bö "~ ¶ vÒ 2 ÿ ÂB~& "vG *^ Table 3. Number of items in each subscales of Thinking Styles Inventory Nö. Ò·. ^®^. ^>. VË. «»' ¯;' Ò»'. 5, 10, 14. 32, 49 8, 11, 12, 31, 39 21, 23, 42, 51, 57. 5 5 5. ;. `"B ê/B vB Z;¦B. 4, 19, 33, 25, 56 2, 43, 50, 54, 60 27, 29, 30, 52, 59 16, 21, 35, 40, 47. 5 5 5 5. >&. *Ú' æ#'. 7, 18, 38, 48, 61 1, 6, 24, 44, 62. 5 5. º*. Ú¦' ¦'. 9, 15, 37, 55, 63 3, 17, 34, 41, 46. 5 5. ãË. ê' >'. 45, 53, 58, 64, 65 13, 22, 26, 28, 36. 5 5. Cê. 65.

(11) . ;>ã. & 2b¦V æê¢ ¦Ã A~ . ~ ¶ òº SPSS/Win 10.0j ÒÏ~ R&6>z Ò· ïÞNö &~ t¦Ãj ~& .. öB "'Ò ¢> F~~² ¸f 6>¢ & . Ö"º ~ &ç " 'Ò ¢> z Ò»', «»', *Ú ', Z;¦B, ê' ·j æîº ©j ¾æÞ . >ö ¯;' ·f 99.9% Öê >&öB "v B, >' ·f 99%Öê >&öB ¢> "'Ò F~~² ¸f 6>¢ & . "B, ê/B, æ#', Ú¦' ·öBº v ÷*ö F~ N& ¾æ¾æ p~ . Ö"¢ Ú~ F¯ Ö"f jv, 'Ò «»', ¯;', Ò»', *Ú', ¶F', >', ê/B, Ú¦' Ò·öB ¢> . F~~² ¸f 6>¢ (J²; , 2003) Ö"fº N& ® . 6, s~ &j &ç b ê~ ëWf Ò·~ ç&j C² ö ~~ ê/B, Ú¦', >' Ò·" 3. \Ö 5 ¢~ Ò ¢>~ Ò·~ N "'Ò" ¢>ö & ' ~* Ò· ê ï" R&ÞN, N¦Ã Ö"º Table 4f ?. . Table 4ö ~~ &¦ª~ Ò·öB "' Ò ~ ï 6>& z ¸~b¾ ¯;', ê/B, "vB, æ#', >' ·~ ãÖº ¢> . ~ 6>& z ¸² ¾æ¾º ©j r > ® . N ¦Ã Ö"¢ ÚÚ, Ò»' ·f 99.9% Ö ê >&öB, «»', *Ú' ·f 99% Öê > &öB, Z;¦Bf ê' ·f 95% Öê >&. Table 4. Means, standard deviations and t-values for the subscales of the thinking styles Ò·. ÷. ï. R&ÞN. t. «»'. 'Ò ¢>. 19.936 18.938. 2.343 2.811. 2.617**. ¯;'. 'Ò ¢>. 15.955 17.245. 3.987 2.797. -3.810***. Ò»'. 'Ò ¢>. 17.941 16.654. 2.736 2.830. 3.985***. `"B. 'Ò ¢>. 17.910 17.438. 3.652 3.150. 1.332. ê/B. 'Ò ¢>. 16.212 17.001. 3.120 2.857. -1.520. vB. 'Ò ¢>. 15.055 15.883. 2.878 2.548. -2.899**. Z;¦B. 'Ò ¢>. 17.223 16.587. 2.401 2.362. 2.135*. *Ú'. 'Ò ¢>. 16.486 15.612. 2.635 2.456. 3.264**. æ#'. 'Ò ¢>. 16.005 16.089. 2.809 2.458. -.283. Ú¦'. 'Ò ¢>. 17.386 16.872. 3.121 3.478. 1.330. ¦'. 'Ò ¢>. 18.083 17.291. 2.929 3.063. 1.397. ê'. 'Ò ¢>. 17.899 17.221. 2.860 2.916. 2.283*. >'. 'Ò ¢>. 13.311 14.289. 3.485 3.276. -2.699**. Total N = 242 (Ò: 120 ¢>: 122) *: p < .05 **: p < .01 ***: p < .001.

(12) Ò¢>~Ò·ö8æ\BLjL. . [^B 1] âf æ~ NöB æêj BB æê2~ *2 ç¢. þ Ö"¢ ¾æÞ © . êb¦V 11000 kmöB 16000 km >º öBº æê2& ê~æ p~. . f ?f j Zí¢ ~, ©f æÚ¦~ ÚÊ ¢ Ã«~º ©æ F¢ J. Fig. 1. Item for examining the students’ concept of seismic wave and internal structure of the Earth. Table 5. The number of students’ responses in ‘seismic wave and internal structure of the Earth’ item (%) º". 'Ò. Ò·. æ B º º Zw. ¢>. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. 4(20) 7(35) 9(45) 0(0). 6(30) 6(30) 8(40) 0(0). 10 12 15 3. 6(30) 5(25) 6(30) 3(15). 9(45) 4(20) 2(10) 5(25). 15 9 8 8. ;' ç&j ¾æÞ > «»', ¦', ê' Ò·"º ¦' ç&j ¾æÚÚ(Zhang, 2001) Ö"fº ç>B Ö"¢ & . Þ, ~ v 'Ò¢ &çb ºªCj F ¯ ö ~~ ¢> 'Ò z « »', Ò»', ê' Ò·j æîº ©b ¾ æÒ (Dai and Feldhusen, 1999). ç~ ^ &æ F¯f~ jv¢ « " r ~ &ç "'Ò~ Ò·f Ú~ Ú v Ò

(13) B 'Ò÷¾ s & ~ 'Ò÷~ Ò·" z× ¢~>º ©b ¾ æÒ . Ò ¢>~ Ò·ö 8 æî ª¢ *L jL Ò·" Û·~ ç&j Ò F¯ö V.~ Zhang(2002b)f Type I Ò·" Type II Ò·j Bn : ® . ö ~~ Type I ·(«»', Ò»', *Ú', ê')f c~' 'b ¢j >¯~º ãËj ¾æÚº > ö Type II ·(¯;', æ#', >')f V Oj F^~ B~² ¢j >¯~º ãËj ¾ æÞ . öBº v &æ Ò· F ;ö V¢ 'Ò ÷" j'Ò ÷~ æ" B v ² ¾æ¾ºæ Ò~& Ö"º r " ? .. æê B æ\Ú¦\` *L: æêVç" æÚ¦ ö & ^f Fig. 1" ? ö & v ÷ ~ wj ªC Ö"º Table 5f ? . [^B1]ö & w 7 B® ‘z'&’¢ò ~ Ú¦ö & Þ/ ìº ãÖ¾ B® ‘ ~ Ò’¢ò w ãÖº æ>&b ª~ ~& . ö j, æê2~ .*çö & J« f ì æÚ¦ ®³~ Òö &Bò B wf B ºb ª~~& . B ºö ~º w~ .º ‘æÚ¦ö &ê& b î Ò~V r^’, ‘f æ" Ò ÚV r^’, ‘æ j¾ö 6 ~¾~ [ ® º ©j r J& ’ . Ò æÚ¦~ ®³" æ ê2~ . *çj &NæÚ VF wf ºb ª~~& . .º ‘æ" bî ®V r^ö ãêöB . ¢Ú¾B æê 2& %æ pº z'&& â ’, ‘æ Ú¦ö Ú B [ ®Ú S2& *>æ p~ P2º .>Ú ê~æ p~ ’ ® . 'Ò" ¢>~ Ò· F;ö V¢ w jNj ÚÚ, æ >&f v ÷ Îv Type II ~ wN z ¸² ¾æÒ B º" º >&f v ÷ Îv Type I~ wN z ¸² ¾æÒ . ß® &Ë [' 7"j º~º º >&öB 'Ò ÷f Type I(9«)" Type II(8«)~ wN~ N& 'f > ¢> ÷.

(14) . ;>ã. [^B 2] & öÒF &^ rÖ& ^º ÿï·~ â" ?f Ë²ö B & 'bj º~ 'b Rb¦V G;8j áî . r "¶ &'böB G; 8f Zí ¢ Û C&Þ Ò. f Zíæ J«~J.. Fig. 2. Item for examining the students’ concept of seafloor spreading. Table 6. The number of students’ responses in ‘seafloor spreading’ item (%) º". 'Ò. Ò·. B æ B æ+¶ò C æ+¶ò C j' Bv. ¢>. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. 2(10) 12(60) 6(30) 0. 3(15) 11(55) 4(2) 2(10). 5 23 10 2. 6(30) 10(50) 2(10) 2(10). 12(60) 4(20) 1(5) 3(15). 18 14 3 5. f Type I(6«)" Type II(2«)~ wN~ N& ç&'b ² ¾æÒ . Zw~ ãÖº 'Ò÷ öBº ¾æ¾æ p~ ¢> ÷öBº Type I" Type IIöB Îv ¾æÒ . {Ë *L: 6" &N~ &{Ëö & ^f Fig. 2f ? ö & v ÷~ w j ªC Ö"º Table 6" ? . [^B 2]ö & w 7 "¶ ~ G;8j ‘z C~ ¾’ò B~¾ ‘_ö &rÞ> zC ~ ¾º 0 ’¢ B wf B æb ª~~& . ö j zC~ ¾¢ G;8b. &{Ë Bvj B wf B æ + ¶ò Cb ª~~& . ¯ ‘_ ·ãb .> æ '~ _ ¸j^ _öB îÚ æ' ¾fB ÿ º ©j r² >î ’, ‘_öB îÚ æ ' ê³ W> 66 ¢^¾* ’ ~ w . . ö z~ æ¶V G;8j .. , æ¶V *" &{Ëj &NæÚ J« ã Öº æ + ¶òCb ª~~& . .º ‘_ ²ÖöB ?f Òò¢ ÎÚê æ6öB ?f æ¶V OËj &ê zC ¾Jº ©b &{ Ëj r² >î ’& ® . 'Ò" ¢>~ Ò· F;ö V¢ w jNj ªC, æ >&öBº v ÷ Îv Type II~ wN z ¸² ¾æÒ, ¶òC >. &öBº v ÷ Îv Type I~ wN z ¸² ¾æÒ . 6 v &æ ¶òC >&öB 'Ò f Type I(18«)" Type II(15«)~ wN~ N& 'f > ¢> ÷f Type I(12«)" Type II (5«)~ wN~ N& ç&'b ² ¾æÒ . ^öB ¾æÂ j"' Bvf 'Ò÷" ¢ > ÷ Îv Type I Type IIöB nê& ¸ ² ¾æÒb ‘&ö &rÞ> 'ï Ã&. ’& . . *f ?f Ö"ö ~~ 'Ò" ¢> v ÷ Îv Type I Ò· F;~ Type II F;~ æ"~ æî ª¢ Bv ; Wö ®ÚB ;vz> ' º" ¶òCj ~º ©b CB . Ò ¢> ÷~ Ò · F;ê wN~ N& 'Ò ÷ z ² ¾æÒ . Ò ¢>~ Ò·ö 8 Â^ ª¢ *L jL ¯9~ >Òï *L: ·ê ¯W~ bÒï(·ö B ïÒ, *"V, ²"V, , 'ê>æ ª)j R Rf þ B ^f r" ? ö & v ÷~ wj ªC Ö"º Table 7 " ? . [^B 3] æ~ R7Kj 1¢ ~ ÆW~.

(15) Ò¢>~Ò·ö8æ\BLjL. . Table 7. The number of students’ responses in ‘surface gravity of Saturn’ item (%) º". 'Ò. Ò·. B 'Ï ;LzB 'Ï j' Bv. ¢>. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. 5(25) 13(65) 2(10). 6(30) 10(50) 4(20). 10 24 6. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. 9(45) 7(35) 4(20). 12(60) 2(10) 6(30). 21 9 10. Table 8. The number of students’ responses in ‘clusters’ H-R diagram’ item (%) º". 'Ò. Ò·. B C ;LzB C j' Bv Zw. ¢>. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. Type I (N=20). Type II (N=20). ²ê. 10(50) 8(40) 2(10) 0(9). 8(50) 7(35) 3(15) 2(10). 18 15 5 2. 9(45) 6(30) 2(10) 3(15). 8(40) 4(20) 5(25) 3(15). 17 10 7 6. R7Kf 1.06 . îï æ~ 100Vö &rÚ ÆW~ R 7K æf N& ¾æ pº Fº Zíæ J«~¢. [^B 3]ö & w 7 ‘ÆW~ >æªê V r^’ _f ‘ÆW~ 'ê>æª 11VV r^’ ¢ w ãÖº B 'Ïb ª~~& . R 7K ¯W~ îïö jf~ >æª~ Bö > jfj B~ ÆW~ >~¢ &«~ êÖ wf ;vzB 'Ïb ª~~& . 'Ò" ¢>~ Ò· F;ö V¢ ªC , B 'Ï" ;vzB 'ÏöB 'Ò" ¢> Îv Type I~ wN Type II ¸² ¾æÒ . 'Òf ;vzB 'Ïö ~º w (13«) &Ë ô~ ¢>f B 'Ï >& ö ~º w(12«) ô~ . 'Òf ' º "ê Type I" Type II wN~ N& 'îb¾ ¢ >f Type I" Type II wN~ N& ² ¾ æÒ . º ~ æîª¢ ^ö & Ö"f ¢ ~~º ©b v ÷~ Ò·ö V w ã Ë ÚÏ ßW"º Z& ©b . ¾ j"' BvöB 'Ò" ¢> ~ >wö N& ¾æÒ . 'Ò~ ãÖ ‘ÆWf. Ö Ò ¶*~V r^ö ÆW~ 'êöBº êÓ Â öK ·Ï~ 7Kj çêÎ ’, ‘· ~ &ê& · &V& ìV r^’¢º JBv ¾æÂ >, ¢>~ ãÖº ‘·"~ Ò& fV r^’¢º JBv > ¾æÒ . 9~ ß9 *L: ÖBW" çW~ H-Rê. f þ B ^f r" ? ö & w j ªC Ö"º Table 8" ? . [^B 4] â (&)º ÖBW, (¾)º çW~ H-Rê(ï-/ê) . H-Rê çöB v W~ ê ª

(16) ¢ "êöB ½Ú¾º *Ë6~ *~&. . ¢ Û r > ®º 6" F¢ J« ~¢. [^B 4]ö & w 7 ‘*Ë6~ *~& j¾ ¢> W~ ¾& ô ’ò J« ãÖº B Cb ª~~& . H-Rê çöB ê~ ª

(17) ¢ ê ~ êz";j

(18) ~ :² J« ãÖº ;v zB Cb ª~~& . ;vzB Cö ~ º .º ‘çWf J¾>ÚB &¦ª~ ê Wê >Ú:, ÖBWf 0ÚB îï êò ¢¦ Wê >î ’ w ãÖ . ^ö & w jNj Ò· F;ö V ¢ ªC , B C >&öBº 'Ò÷f Ò·ö V wN~ N& ìîæò ¢> ÷f Type I~ wN Type II ¸² ¾æÒ. . 6 ;vzB C >&f 'Ò÷" ¢> ÷ Îv Type I~ wN Type II ¸² ¾æ Ò . ^ö & w 7 j"' Bvf ‘îï > *Ë6 *ö ® ’~ .& > ¾æ¾ HRêç~ ê~ ª

(19) f ê~ êz Bvj &Êæ á ©b " > ® . JBvf v ÷ö B Û'b ¾æÒb ¢> ÷öB Zw ê > ¾æÒ ..

(20) . ;>ã. f ?f Ö"ö ~~ Type I Ò· F;~ Type II F;~ æ"~ Â ^ ª¢ Bv ;Wö ®ÚB ;vz> ' 'Ï" Cj ~º ©b ¾æÒb º 'Ò÷ " j'Ò ÷ö Û' Ö" " > ® . º Ûö ®ÚB [' 7"(deep approach)" R ' 7"(surface approach)~ N C > ®. (Biggs, 1994). [' 7"~ Û¶º îÚ j :Ú¢ *~ æ" &Nùº >, R' 7" ~ Û¶º ÏÚ¾ .N¢ ÎO~ Û"B¢. "B¾ " &Nùæ á~º ãË ® . " ÛöB [' 7"" R' 7"ö & Ò ¢ ê F¯(Chin and Brown, 2000)ö ~~ , ~ 7 f z þ>ëöB v &æ 7"Oö V¢ ;W' Ò, J«~ ßW, î^ ÿ, zææÿ, "Bö & Ö 5&æ º" öB N& ¾æÒ . öBê Ò· F; ö V¢ " Bvj jv Ö" Type I Ò· F;~ f Type II F;~ Ûö ®ÚB [' 7" &Ë ©b ¾æÒ .. ÖV 5 *Þ "'Ò Ò·" ¢>~ Ò·j ßWj jv~, Ò· F;ö V¢ v ÷ &æ ®º æ" Bvj jv~¶ >¯ öB áf Öf r" ? . Ñ, "'Òf ¢>ö j~ «»', Ò»', Z;¦B, *Ú' Ò ê' Ò·~ ßWj ¾æÚî . V¢B f ºç' î Ú "B¢ F^~ ¶V ¶~ Ob ^B¢ Ö~¶ ~ ;¾ ³j Ú~º ãËj &ê > ® . >ö ¢>f ¯;', " vB, >' ßW ¾æ¾ f ê ¾ æö V¢ ^B¢ Ö~º ãË ®º © b ¾æÒ . ~ Ö"f &N F¯~ Ö"¢ j v " r ~ &ç "'Ò ÷~ Ò ·f Ú~ ^ê 'Ò¾ s & v 'Ò÷~ Ò·" z FÒ ©b *"B . Renzulli(1986)º 'Ò~ F;j vöB þj ¾ ~º ‘v 'ÒW(schoolhouse giftedness)’ " îÚ j:Úf ÖÂbj ê³~ ò > ®º. ‘c~'-Ö' 'ÒW(creative-productive giftedness)’b ª~& . f &N~ ~ &ç " 'Òv f 7v v" W' &¦ª ç*~ v 'ÒW~ ßWj "º ÿ ö, Ò·~ GöB " rº îÚ "Bf ^BÖ Oj F^~º c~'-Ö' 'ÒWê ÿö &æ ®rj ö& . ~, "'Ò" ¢>~ Ò· F;ö V æî ª¢ Bvj jv Ö" Type I Ò ·~ Type II Ò·~ . >~ Bvj ç^ &NæÚ J«~ 'b Ò ~º ãË Â] ¸² ¾æÒ . Type II Ò ·~ f æÚ¦ f &{Ë "Bö ®Ú Bv*~ ç^&NWj ³~æ á Òf& ç&'b ô ¾æÒ . V¢B ~ Ö"º, Type I Ò·j c~' 'b ¢j >¯~º ãËb, Type II Ò·j V Oj F^~ B~² ¢j >¯~º ãËb ;~ F¯ (Zhang, 2000; Zhang and Sternberg, 2000)~ æW ¦Ã~ GöBê ~~& ® . 6 ¢>~ Ò· F;ê wN~ N& 'Ò ÷ ² ¾æ¾, ¢> 7öB ß ® ÒF; R' 7" F;ö ³ [' Ûö ÚJæj &æº ©b CB . q, "'Ò" ¢>~ Ò· F;ö V Â^ ª¢ Bvj jv Ö" Type I Ò ·~ Type II Ò·~ ¯ W~ bÒï" W~ ßW Bv ;Wö ®ÚB ; vz> ' 'Ï" Cj ~º ©b ¾æ Ò . º æî ª¢ ^ö & Ö"f ¢~~ º ©b v ÷~ Ò·ö V Bv >& æ"~ ' ÚÏ ßW"º Z& ©b . . ¯ Û~ ÚÏ ßW" Z&~² Type I Ò· F;~ f Type II Ò· F;~ . Ûö ®ÚB [' 7" &Ë ©b CB . ~ Ö"¢ Æ& Ëê ö & BÞ j ~ r" ? . Ñ, Ò·f 'Òj¢ 6 ê~V * Ï' º ~ 'ÒWj &z~V * O»j dº "& >º © . 'Ò¢ * v>-Û ÿf ~ ËK" F;ö ¦>º ~ãb B¢ ~ 6 ¦ ¦ª~ Ò· j j~V *~ · Û ~ãj B¢.

(21) Ò¢>~Ò·ö8æ\BLjL. (Dai and Feldhusen, 1999). . *;' 'ÒvG O» 7 ~¾ ³ê";(acceleration curriculum)f ¯;' Ò·~ ö², z" ;(enrichment curriculum)f «»' Ò·~ ö ² z '.~ rJ^® (Sternberg and Grigorenko, 1993). ~ Ö" "'Ò f Ò·ö B ¢>ö j~ «»', Ò»', *Ú' ßW j æò ©b C&rbæ Ûÿ¾ ï&; & ßWö ¦F r &Ë ¸f ëW¢ ¾æâ > ® . V¢B îÚ j:Ú¢ cn~º "Bf ^B Ö 7~ zvG";~ BB" ' Ï ºB . ~, *>' v>-Û O»GöB vÒ~ > ëO»" ~ Ò·"~ zö &j ~ j º& ® . ¯ ;~ >ëO»f ¯;' Ò·j æò ö²º F > ®b¾ «»' ö ²º '~ >ë O» jö > ® . f &N~ «»' ÷ö²º *CÞ >ëj, Ò»' ÷ ö²º ªCj * £V¢ ;~º >ë*Û ; > ® (Sternberg, 1994b). ö ">ëöB Ò· FÒ ²÷ >ëj ê r «»' ÷ö²º Ò 7~ î^»" "BÖ >ë j, Ò»' ÷ö²º "' ªCj * · ¶ò¢ B~º >ë jº~ . ß® Type II Ò· ÷~ ãÖ Û~ [' 7"b Fê jº& ®bæ ¢ * >ë O»j 'Ï~ Ûö ~º Î"¢ Ú'b C®º ºê & jº~ . q, öBº v ö ;~ Ò ·" æ" Bv~ ç&òj ~ . ºê öBº ¢ {&~ ' v /ê 5 vÒ ¢ &çb, vÒ~ æê Oö V 'Ò . ~ Ò ·ê Û W"ö ÚÊ 'Ëj ~ºæ ê Ò>Ú¢ © .. ^ ^ò ¾ÿê, BêÆ, *ê', 2003, 'Ò~ âöæËÁÒ · ëW*~ ê. LG\, 41 (4), 25-48. ²%S, B«~, C\, Ò^, 2003, 'ÒL L> ºÏ nÚB. 'ÒL, 185 p. JF, 1997, Ò· ëWö & \(Sternberg ~ æË¶~Ú j 7

(22) b). J&L CÒ* ¢^, 138 p.. . J²;, Jã, FBz, 2003, 'Ò ¢>~ Ò F; N 5 LÒ ßWê ÒF;. 'ÒLG\, 13 (3), 19-44. Ë«{, sç×, ;êÖ, 2002, 7L 2j 'Ò ~ æö & Æ' 6 ö & Æ 5 £8 ÿ~ Î. ]æ\²æ, 23 (5), 397-405. 8B, V¦, 2004, 'Òf ¢> *~ Ò· æË 5 c~W*~ ê jL. LG

(23) Ò\, 18 (2), 49-68. Biggs, J., 1987, Student approaches to learning and studying. Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research, 12-20 p. Biggs, J., 1994, Approaches to learning: Nature and measurement. In Husen, T., and Postlethwaite, T.N. (eds.), The international encyclopedia of education, Oxford, Pergamon, ENG, 319-322. Chin, C., and Brown, D.E., 2000, Learning in Science: A Comparison of Deep and Surface Approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37 (2), 109-138. Dai, D.Y., and Feldhusen, J.F., 1999, A validation study of thinking styles inventory implication for gifted education. Roeper Review, 21 (4), 302-307. Grigorenko, E.L., and Sernberg, R.J., 1995, Thinking styles. In Saklofske, H.D., and Zeidner, M. (eds.), International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence, Plenum Press, NY, USA, 205-229 Grigorenko, E.L., and Sternberg, R.J., 1997, Styles of thinking, abilities, and academic performance. Exceptional Children, 63, 295-312. Karnes, F.A., and Bean, S.M., 2001, Methods and materials for teaching the gifted. Waco, Prufrock Press, TX, USA, 725p. Renzulli, J.S., 1986, The three ring of conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In. Sternberg, R.J., and Davidson, J.E. (eds.), Conception of giftedness, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 53-92. Renzulli, J.S., 2000, The identification and development of giftedness as a paradigm for school Reform. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9 (2), 95-114. Sternberg, R.J., 1988, Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human development, 31, 197-224. Sternberg, R.J., 1990, Thinking styles : Keys to understanding student performance. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 366371. Sternberg, R.J., 1994a, Thinking styles: Theory and assessment at the interface between intelligence and personality. In Sternberg, R.J. and Ruzgis, P. (eds), Intelligence and personality, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 169-187. Sternberg, R.J., 1994b, Allowing for thinking styles. Educational leadership, 52, 36-40..

(24) . ;>ã. Sternberg, R.J., 1997, Thinking styles. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 185 p. Sternberg, R.J., 1998, Mental self-government: A theory of intellectual styles and their development. Human Development, 31, 197-224. Sternberg, R.J., and Grigorenko, E.L., 1993, Thinking styles and the gifted. Roeper Review, 16 (2), 122-131. Torrance, E.P., 1988, Style of Learning and Thinking: Administrator’s manual. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service, Inc. Zhang, L.F., 2000, Relationship between Thinking Styles Inventory and Study Process Questionnare. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 841-856.. Zhang, L.F., 2001, Do thinking styles contribute to academic achievement beyond self-related abilities? The Journal of Psychology, 135 (6), 621-637. Zhang, L.F., 2002a, Thinking styles and modes of thinking: Implications for education and research. The Journal of Psychology, 136 (2), 245-261. Zhang, L.F., 2002b, Thinking styles: their relationships with modes of thinking and academic performance. Educational Psychology, 22 (3), 331-348. Zhang, L.F., and Sternberg, R.J., 2000, Are learning approaches and thinking styles related? A study in two chinese population. The Journal of Psychology, 134 (5), 469-489. 2004j 9ú 6¢ ö 7> 2004j 11ú 3¢ >;ö 7> 2004j 11ú 13¢ ö j.

(25)