본 연구는 심화 보충형 수준별 교육과정에서 ‘심화 과정’의 유형이 어떻게 나누어지는지 알아보는
데 목적이 있다. 현재 수준별 교육과정에서 수준이 어떤 유형으로 구분되는지 알아보는 것은 앞으로
실효성 있고 균형적인 수준별 수업이 현장에서 적용되는 데 많은 시사점을 줄 것이다.
연구 대상은 초등 사회과 심화 보충형 수준별 교육과정으로, ‘사례의 추가’, ‘기본 학습 내용의 일
반화’, ‘개념의 추가’, 그리고 ‘개념 간의 통합’ 이라는 4가지 준거에 의해 분석되었다. 그 결과 초등
사회과 교육과정에서 보이는 심화 과정 유형의 특징은 첫째, ‘사례의 추가’ 유형에 대단히 치중되어
있었고, 둘째, 유형의 종류가 매우 제한적이라는 결론을 얻었다.The purposes of this study were to understand what types were suggested in
categorizing enrichment courses in a differentiated curriculum, identify the problems with
the types, and search for improvement measures. For those purposes, the following
research questions were asked: First, what are the types of enrichment course and the
characteristics of those types found in curriculum texts? Second, what are the problems
identified as the result of the analysis of the types and are the improvement measures?
The analysis results were as follows: First, based on those four criteria, which were
'addition of examples,' 'generalization,' 'addition of concepts' and 'integration of concepts,'
the efforts to analyze enrichment course types were directed to the curriculum of
elementary school social studies. The criteria were examined in terms of the distribution
among the enrichment course types, that of the types among the grades, and that of the
types among areas. As a result, the characteristics of enrichment course types were
summarized as follows; first, 'addition of examples' was very much dominating. Second,
the criteria used were extremely limited. Those two characteristics reflect the fact that
enrichment courses were centered around 'addition of examples,' which doesn't fit the
'enrichment of thinking functions' and 'mastery of functions,' the goals of enrichment
learning originally intended by the curriculum developers.
Those conclusions led to the following suggestions; First, a considerable amount of
time should be invested in follow-up study on detailed criteria of enrichment course types
for each subject. It will be necessary to support the subject developers in the way that
they can devise an enrichment course type appropriate for the characteristics of each
subject. Second, after researches are done on the general types and detailed types by
subjects of an enrichment course, the procedures should be taken to test if they are fit
for an enrichment course. The concerned researches can be conducted at an experiment
school during a certain period. Finally, case studies need to be done of the UK and U. S.
A. to understand how they have organized curriculums to provide differentiated education and to help conduct more effective studies on enrichment course types.
The results of the study will be of great use in developing a differentiated curriculum
and running a class more effectively as there are expected more efforts made to develop
a enrichment course type according to each subject, to apply newly developed enrichment
courses to the class, and to case study the differentiated curriculums of other countries.