• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.198-209
• /
• 2011

In this study, pre-service science teachers' reflective thinking in their journal writing was investigated. To do this, the authors used pre-service science teachers' journal writing abilities, wherein they not only reported data and result formally, but also wrote their feelings and reflections about an inquiry-based physics experiment they performed. Pre-service science teachers' writings were decomposed into sentences and each sentence was analyzed into a framework with 4 dimensions: knowledge, procedure, orientation and attitude. Reflective thinking in knowledge dimension included reflection on what they know before the experiment, what they still do not know and what they learned from the experiment. Reflective thinking in procedure dimension included recalls of experiences about general experimental procedures and specific experimental skill. Reflective thinking in orientation dimension included their views about the nature of science and science teaching and learning, and reflective thinking in attitude dimension consisted of interests, motives and values about the experiment they performed. While there were some variations in frequency distribution of reflective thinking by the topic of experiments, pre-service science teachers' reflective thinking in journal writings revealed their metacognition on their knowledge and learning, epistemological belief about science and science learning, and affective domain related to experiment. This study can infer that such kind of writing with 'their own language' in an informal way followed by formal 'scientific' reports in a scientific experiment has a significance not only as a mediator representing reflective thinking but also as an instructional activity to facilitate reflective thinking in science learning and teaching.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.119-128
• /
• 2023

This study was conducted to present an alternative instructional model through natural experience activities by developing a natural experience activity program that can learn and feel how to recognize and act on nature based on flow learning. In order to achieve the purpose of the study, a nature experience program, which consists of four stages of meeting nature, exploring nature, playing with nature and sharing emotions, was developed based on the main procedures of each stage of the ADDlE instructional design model. Through the research process, activities and precautions for each stage of the nature experience activity program were presented, and major educational implications were discussed based on the developed program. The nature experience program developed through the study can provide teachers with a basic direction for nature experience activities along with changing their perception of how to do nature experience activities, and infants are expected to become learners who freely feel, experience nature and make up their own knowledge through the nature experience program.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.5
• /
• pp.847-857
• /
• 2017

This study examined the effect of the Collaborative Problem-Solving for Character Competence (CoProC) instruction model within the context of secondary science education. The participants of this study were comprised of 143 Korean students, each of whom was in the 10th grade spread across four class cohorts. These cohorts were further divided into an experimental group (comprised of 73 students from two different classes), which received the CoProC program; and a control group (70 students from two other classes), which did not. In order to assess the effect of CoProC instruction model upon participants' character competence, we designed and administered a Character Competence Test for participants. The CoProC instruction model consists of 3 fundamental steps: Preparation, Problem-solving, and Evaluation. Key character competence targeted in the CoProC program include caring, collaboration, communication, responsibility, respect, honesty, self-regulation, and the development of positive self-image. Thus, these same qualities were targeted and analyzed in the Character Competence Test, which was administered before and after the CoProC activities. The results show a significant increase in the experimental group's competency for caring, collaboration, responsibility, respect, and self-regulation when compared to the control group. Based on these results, we have found that CoProC instruction model to be an effective teaching intervention toward cultivating character competence in a secondary science education setting.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.45-61
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study is to explore students' epistemic goals and considerations in designing an experiment task and to investigate how a shift in the students' epistemology affected their argumentation. Four 7th grade students were selected as a focus group. According to the results, when they designed their own experiment, their epistemic goal was 'scientific sense-making' and their epistemic considerations - the perception of the nature of the knowledge product was 'this experiment should explain how something happened', the perception of the justification was 'we need to use our interpretation of the data' and the perception of the audience was 'constructor' - contributed to designing their experiment actively. When students tried to select one argument, their epistemic goal shifted to 'winning a debate', showing 'my experiment is better than the others' with the perception of the audience, 'competitor'. Consequently, students only deprecated the limits of different experiment so that they did not explore the meaning of each experiment design deeply. Eventually, student A's experiment design was selected due to time restrictions. When they elaborated upon their result, their epistemic goal shifted to 'scientific sensemaking', reviewing 'how this experiment design is scientifically valid' through scientific justification - we need justification to make members accept it - acting as 'cooperator'. Consequently, all members engaged in a productive argumentation that led to the development of the group result. This study lays the foundation for future work on understanding students' epistemic goals and considerations to prompt productive argumentation in science classrooms.