지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Students' argumentation during science inquiry should be regarded important as it could help students to make meaningful connections between theories and experiments and to make scientific claims based on evidences. In this study, elementary science-gifted students' argumentation during small group inquiry was analyzed according to inquiry process. There were three stages of argumentation during students' inquiry. The first argumentation was to predict what would happen(Prediction stage). In this stage, the scientific problem was presented by concept cartoon as a way to start and to facilitate students' argumentation. The second argumentation was to design an experiment to solve the problem(Planning stage) and the third was to interpret the result of experiment(Interpretation stage). The discourse move, level of grounds and their relationship were analyzed to find the characteristics of argumentation during science inquiry. In terms of discourse move, ‘Asking for opinion’ was the most frequent whereas ‘Claim’ or ‘Rebuttal’ were rare. Students tended to listen to or ask others' opinion rather than provide their own claims or critics on others' opinion. ‘Rebuttal’ was shown a few times only during prediction and planning stage. There was no single ‘Rebuttal’ during interpretation stage. Students tended to easily accept or agree other student's interpretation of data instead of arguing their own ideas. In terms of level of grounds, students mostly provided their ideas without any attempt to justify their position. Especially during planning stage, students tended to suggest or decide ways of measuring or controlling variables without any grounds. They used evidences only a few times during prediction stage. In terms of relation between discourse move and level of grounds, students provided grounds most frequently when they dispute others' claims. The level of grounds were higher when they advocate or clarify their own or others’ ideas than when they claim their ideas. The result of this study showed that the quality of elementary science-gifted students' argumentation during science inquiry was undesirable in many ways. Implications for scaffolding and facilitating argumentation during science inquiry were discussed.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (24)
참고문헌 신청
Chin, C / 2009 / Using concept cartoons in formative assessment : Scaffolding students’ argumentation / International Journal of Science Education 31 (10) : 1307 ~ 1332
Choi, G. Y. / 2014 / An analysis of elementary sciencegifted students' argumentation during small group science inquiry / 석사 / Chuncheon National University of Education
Clark, D. B. / 2008 / Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality / Journal of Research in Science Teaching 4
Driver, R. / 2000 / Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms / Science Education 84 (3) : 287 ~ 312
Duschl, R. A. / 2002 / Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education / Studies in Science Education 38 : 39 ~ 72
Choi, G. Y. / 2014 / An analysis of elementary sciencegifted students' argumentation during small group science inquiry / 석사 / Chuncheon National University of Education
Clark, D. B. / 2008 / Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality / Journal of Research in Science Teaching 4
Driver, R. / 2000 / Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms / Science Education 84 (3) : 287 ~ 312
Duschl, R. A. / 2002 / Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education / Studies in Science Education 38 : 39 ~ 72
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0