DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Developing and Applying a Checklist for Science Gifted Students' Construction of Scientific Inquiry Posters

과학 영재학생들의 과학탐구 포스터 작성을 위한 점검표의 개발과 적용

  • Received : 2019.08.16
  • Accepted : 2019.08.25
  • Published : 2019.08.31

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to help science gifted students construct posters after conducting scientific open inquiry. To this end, we analyzed 25 posters written by elementary science gifted students and extracted deficient aspects from the posters. Based on this, a checklist consisting of 17 items in 5 categories was developed to help students construct posters. By applying the developed checklist to the evaluation of 14 posters constructed by science gifted students in middle school, the correlations between evaluators and Cohen's kappa values showed high reliability. In addition, by comparing the evaluation results of the seven 7 posters constructed using the checklist with the evaluation results of control group, a significant difference at the level of p<.01 was obtained, therefore, the usefulness of the checklist was confirmed. Students who used checklists responded positively, including that the checklist helped them to recognize deficiencies in their inquiry and to construct posters systematically without omitting key items of the posters. Finally, additional considerations were discussed for the preparation and presentation of the students' posters.

Keywords

References

  1. Beal, J. A., Lynch, M. M. & Moore, P. S. (1989). Communicating nursing research: Another look at the use of poster sessions in undergraduate programs. Nurse Educator, 14(1), 8-10. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006223-198901000-00010
  2. Bracher, L., Cantrell, J. & Wilkie, K. (1998). The process of poster presentation: A valuable learning experience. Medical Teacher, 20(6), 552-557. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421599880274
  3. Chabeli, M. M. (2002). A poster presentation as an evaluation method to facilitate reflective thinking skills in nursing education. Curationis, 25(3), 10-18.
  4. Deonandan, R., Gomes, J., Lavigne, E., Dinh, T. & Blanchard, R. (2013). A pilot study: Research poster presentations as an educational tool for undergraduate epidemiology students. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 4, 183-188. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S52037
  5. Foryth, D. M., Wright, T. L., Scherb, C. A. & Gasper, P. M. (2010). Disseminating evidence-based practice projects: Poster design and evaluation. Clinical Scholars Review, 3(1), 14-21. https://doi.org/10.1891/1939-2095.3.1.14
  6. Gundogan, G., Koshy, K., Kurar, L. & Whitehurst, K. (2016). How to make an academic poster. Annals of Medicine and Surgery, 11, 69-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.09.001
  7. Hess, G. & Brooks, E. (1998). The class poster conference as a teaching tool. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education, 27, 155-158. https://doi.org/10.2134/jnrlse.1998.0155
  8. Johnson, G. & Green, R. (2007). Undergraduate researchers and the poster session. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34(2), 117-119.
  9. Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programmes (edited by Worrall, J. & Currie, G.). NY: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Lynch, M. W. (2018). Using conference poster presentations as a tool for student learning and development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 55(6), 633-639.
  11. Mills, P. A., Sweeney, W. V., DeMeo, S., Marino, R. & Clarkson, S. (2000). Using poster sessions as an alternative to written examinations - The poster exam. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(9), 1158-1161. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed077p1158
  12. Newbery, M. G. & Baltezore, J. M. (2006). Poster presentations: Conceptualizing, constructing & critiquing. The American Biology Teacher, 68(9), 550-554. https://doi.org/10.2307/4452063
  13. Nicholas, R. (2017). Academic & scientific poster presentation: A modern comprehensive guide. Springer.
  14. Novak, J. D., Bob Gowin, D. & Johansen, G. T. (1983). The use of concept mapping and knowledge vee mapping with junior high school science students. Science Education, 67(5), 625-645. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730670511
  15. Park, J. (1998). The role of deductive reasoning in scientific activities. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 18(1), 1-17.
  16. Park. J. (2002). An analysis of the processes of conceptual change through the successive refinement and articulation of student’s conceptual framework. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 22(2), 357-377. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.2018.22.3.357
  17. Park, J. (2003). An analysis of the experimental design suggested by students for testing scientific hypotheses. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(2), 200-213.
  18. Park, J. (2006). Modelling analysis of students’ processes of generating scientific explanatory hypotheses. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 469-489. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500404540
  19. Park, J. & Jang, K. A. (2005). Analysis of the actual scientific inquiries of physicists I-Focused on research motivation. Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 47(3), 401-408.
  20. Park, J. & Kim, Y. (2018). New generation introduction of physics education I (p. 145). Seoul: Books Hill.
  21. Shelledy, D. C. (2004). How to make an effective poster. Respiratory Care, 49(10), 1213-1216.
  22. Smith, P. E., Fuller, G. & Dunstan, F. (2004). Scoring posters at scientific meetings: First impressions count. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 97(7), 340-341. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680409700714
  23. Yoo, J. & Kim, J. (2012). Middle school students’ construction of physics inquiry problems and variables isolation and clarification during small group openinquiry activities. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(5), 903-927. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.5.903
  24. You, J. & Shim, K. (2007). An analysis on the scientific inquiry ability of middle school students through a scientific experiment-based inquiry competition. Journal of Society for the International Gifted in Science, 1(2), 109-116.