• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.2
• /
• pp.301-311
• /
• 2017

In this study, we observed the characteristics of students' small group discussions concerning the four friction problems. Participants in this study were 22 students of upper-level mechanics course and their small group discussions have been transcribed. As a result, we found that the phenomenon in this study is well defined by 'common context.' The process of formation of the common context was explicitly observed when students discussed about the identification of the problem situation (especially the movement of A in the second problem), the nature of friction and various forces, inertial frame, and noninertial reference frame. Meanwhile, the formation of common context was tacit when students thought they already had a common context. For example, students did not discuss about the friction rule itself because they had confidence about the knowledge. We also found that the presence of the questioner, receiver, and the other opinion were important for positive group discussions. The result of this study would be meaningful because it analyzed how the theme affects the group discussion beyond the limit of previous studies of just analyzing the form or pattern of discourse.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.203-217
• /
• 2018

The research objective of this study is to analyze the aspects of small group decision-making process based on reading news reports in the context of the socio-scientific issues (SSI) activity related to climate change. Twenty-two high school students from Gyeonggi Province, South Korea, were asked to read two news reports on the UN climate change conferences and take a stance on joining the Paris Agreement both as an individual and as a small group. The news reports were analyzed in terms of genre, discourse, and style adapting the critical discourse analysis (CDA) and the decision-making processes of the small groups were examined on recognizing a problem and evaluating alternatives and decisions. The results from analyzing the news reports denoted that the Paris agreement is not only related to finding ideal solutions to climate change, but rather, connected to political or economic interests and power relationship. In the stage of recognizing a problem, meanwhile, different frames which students recognize the Paris agreement and discourses in the foreground of the news reports were the critical causes in terms of identifying the problem. In the stage of evaluating alternatives and decisions, the equity and fairness were the criteria for the small group discussions. This study implies the necessity of the scientific literacy instruction to develop the ability to critical reading in the context of the SSI.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.471-483
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study is to explore how students' epistemological framing and positional framing affect the role of wonderment questions related to the activation of conceptual resources and to investigate what contexts affect students' framings during scientific model construction. Four students were selected as focus group and they participated in collaborative scientific model construction of mechanisms relating to urination. According to the results, one student whose framings were "understanding phenomena" and "facilitator" asked wonderment questions, but the others whose framings were "classroom game" and "non-respondent" were not able to activate their conceptual resources. However, they were able to activate their conceptual resources when they shared the epistemological framing of "understanding phenomena" and shifted between the positional framings of "facilitator" and "respondent." Although they were able to activate their conceptual resources, these activated resources were not able to contribute to their model when they shifted to the framings of "classroom game" and "receiver." In contrast, when students constantly shared an "understanding phenomena" framing and dynamically shifted between the framings of "facilitator" and "respondent," they were able to activate various conceptual resources and develop their group model. The students' framings were affected by the contexts. These included: when students were confronted with cognitive difficulties and were not provided proper scaffolding; when the teacher played the role of answer provider and guided the activity with correctness; when there were several possible explanatory models that students could choose from; and when the teacher played the role of thought facilitator. This study contributes to supporting teaching and learning environments for productive scientific model construction.