Analysis of the Development and Application Case of Technology Teachers Reflection Program Based on Design Thinking

이 연구의 목적은‘디자인 씽킹에 기반한 기술교사 성찰 프로그램(Technology teachers reflection program based on design thinking)’을 개발하고 적용해 기술교사의 전문성을 향상하기 위함이다. 이를 위해 프로그램을 개발하고 타당화했으며 워크숍을 통해 프로그램을 적용한 후 그 과정에 대해 분석했다. 이 연구는 Yin(2016)의 사례연구(case study) 방법을 활용했다. 연구 참여자는 전국의 기술교사 중 8명을 눈덩이 표집(snowball sampling) 방법으로 선정했다. 워크숍 전에 실시한 면담을 통해 기술교사들은 변화에 쫓김, 서툰 공감, 실패에 대한 두려움, 배움에 대한 갈증, 자신감 부족의 다섯 가지 어려움을 겪고 있음을 발견했다. 디자인 씽킹 워크숍과 선행연구들을 참고해 다섯 가지 어려움에 대한 해결방안을 제안하였고, 연구 참여자들도 해결방안에 공감했다. 디자인 씽킹 워크숍을 통해 기술교사들은 ‘10가지 마음가짐(mindset)’을 갖게되었다. 10가지 마음가짐은 수집된 자료의 분석과 선행연구(d.school, 2018; Dweck, 2017; Schweitzer, Groeger, & Sobel, 2016)를 통해 도출하였다. 10가지 마음가짐을 갖는 것으로 기술교사들이 겪는 다섯 가지 어려움은 해결될 수 있다는 것을 확인하였다. 10가지 마음가짐은 기술교사가 창조적 자신감(creative confidence)을 갖도록 하는데도 도움을 주었다. 연구에 참여한 기술교사들은 빠른 시제품 만들기(rapid prototype)의 과정에서 실패에 대한 두려움을 극복하며 창조적 자신감을 회복해 나가고 있었다. 연구에 참여한 기술교사들은 창조적 자신감을 바탕으로 Sch&#246;n(1983)이 말하는 ‘성찰적 실천가(reflective practitioner)’로 성장해 나가고 있었다. 요컨대, 디자인 씽킹은 기술교사들이 ‘기술교사의 어려움’을 해결하고, 그 과정을 통해 ‘마음가짐(mindset)’을 변화시키고, 다시 ‘창조적 자신감’을 회복시키며, 궁극적으로 ‘성찰적 실천가’로의 성장을 돕는다. 이는 선행 연구의 결과 (d.school, 2018; Dweck, 2017; Johansson&#8208;Sk&#246;ldberg, Woodilla, & &#199;etinkaya, 2013; Schweitzer et al., 2016; Straker & Wrigley, 2014; Wrigley & Straker, 2017)에서도 동일하게 확인된다.The purpose of this study was to improve the expertise of technology teachers by developing and applying ‘technology teachers reflection program based on design thinking.’ For this, the programs were developed and verified, of which the processes he analyzed after applying them at the workshops. This study utilized Yin’s(2016) methods of case study. Eight of the national technology teachers were selected as research participants through snowball sampling method. The technology teachers who participated in the workshop wrote out class reflection records before and after the workshop. Research participants were also interviewed before and after the workshop, and the interviews were recorded. The collected data were analyzed according to the general process of qualitative data analysis of Kim Young &#8211; chun. (2014, pp. 528～543) Through the interviews conducted before the workshop, the technology teachers found that they had five difficulties as follows; being chased by change, fear of failure, thirst for learning, poor empathy, and lack of confidence. Reference to the design thinking workshop and the previous researches suggested the solution to the five difficulties, and the research participants also sympathized with the solution. The design thinking workshop enabled the technology teachers to have ten mindsets. Ten mindsets were derived from the analysis of the collected data and the precedent study (d. school 2018a; Dweck, 2017; Schweitzer et al., 2016). It has been confirmed that the technology teachers’ five difficulties can be solved by having ten mindsets. The ten mindsets helped the technology teachers to have creative confidence. The technology teachers participating in the research were recovering their creative confidence by getting over the fear of failure in the process of making rapid prototypes. The technology teachers participating in the research were growing up into reflective practitioners of Sch&#246;n (1983) based on their creative confidence. In brief, design thinking helps technology teachers to solve ‘their difficulties , change ‘mindsets through the process, restore ‘creative confidence again, and ultimately grow as r ‘eflective practitioners . This is also confirmed in the outputs of the precedent research (d.school, 2018a; Dweck, 2017; Johansson&#8208;Sk&#246;ldberg et al., 2013; Schweitzer et al., 2016; Straker & Wrigley, 2014; Wrigley & Straker, 2017).