• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.181-193
• /
• 2016

We examined the inquiry activities in the material domain of the elementary science textbooks and experimental workbooks based on 2009 revised curriculum. The analysis framework was SEP (Science and Engineering Practices) - 'Asking questions and defining problems', 'developing and using models', 'planning and carrying out investigations', 'analyzing and interpreting data', 'using mathematics and computational thinking', 'constructing explanations and designing solutions', 'engaging in argument from evidence', and 'obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information'. Sub-SEP of each grade band were also used. The results showed that the $3^{rd}{\sim}5^{th}$ grade science textbooks and workbooks mainly emphasized 'make observations and/or measurements', 'represent data in tables and/or various graphical displays', or 'use evidence to construct or support an explanation or design a solution to a problem' among around 40 sub-SEP. In the case of the inquiry activities for $6^{th}$ grade, majority of sub-SEP included were also only 'collect data to produce data to serve as the basis for evidence to answer scientific questions or test design solutions', 'analyze and interpret data to provide evidence for phenomena' or 'construct a scientific explanation based on valid and reliable evidence obtained from sources'. The type of 'asking questions and defining problems', 'using mathematics and computational thinking' or 'obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information' were little found out of 8 SEP. Educational implications were discussed.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.486-500
• /
• 2013

This study is conducted to examine how epistemic reasoning and argument structures of students vary according to data sources used in the process of argumentation implemented in the context of inquiry. To this end, three argument tasks using first-hand data and three argument tasks using second-hand data were developed and applied to the unit on 'Nutrition of Plants' for first year middle school students. According to the results of this study, epistemic reasoning of students manifested during the process of argumentation and varied according to data sources. While most students composed explanations with phenomenon-based or relation-based reasoning in argumentation using first-hand data, all the small groups composed explanations that included model-based reasoning in argumentation using second-hand data. In the case of arguments including phenomenon-based or relation-based reasoning, students described only observable characteristics, with warrants omitted from arguments in many cases. On the other hand, in the case of arguments that included model-based reasoning, explanations were composed by combining the results of observations with theoretical knowledge, with warrants more apparent in their arguments.

• Research in Mathematical Education
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.175-199
• /
• 2021

The Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach is described as an immersive argument-based science inquiry focusing particularly on learning through epistemic practices. In the literature, several previous studies indicate how academic achievement is positively influenced by the SWH. In addition to these previous studies, several meta-syntheses of qualitative data have been conducted on this particular topic. With these literatures in mind, a quantitative meta-analysis was conducted with ten studies (N = 724) to examine the effectiveness of the SWH on student achievement in Turkey. To present a thoroughly detailed report, this study also examined the following moderators: grade level, subject area, school location, intervention length, and report source. Overall, this study found that in Turkey, the SWH classrooms performed better in academic achievement tests than traditional lecture-based classrooms. Additionally, the SWH is more likely to be effective regardless of grade levels, subject areas, and school locations.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.189-203
• /
• 2008

Microcomputer Based Laboratory (MBL), by offering accurate and effective data collection and real-time graphs, enables students to reduce experiment time and, thereby, have deeper discussions concerning experimental results. This helps to emphasis the essential aspect of scientific inquiry; the process communication. Therefore, this study examined secondary school earth science MBL lessons with regards to the five basic aspects of scientific inquiry: "Asking", "Evidencing", "Explaining", "Evaluating" and "Communicating". It then investigated the level of argumentative communication between the students and teachers and also among the students themselves. For this study, three classroom activities were observed and videotaped, and teaching materials, textbooks and students' notes were collected. The transcribed data were analyzed from the perspective of scientific inquiry level and argument frames. The results showed that the scientific inquiry levels of the three classes were similar, except for the "Communicating" aspect, which appeared in only one episode. "Asking" was carried out by the teacher and then students were directed to collect certain data in the "Evidencing" stage. Furthermore, students were given possible ways to use evidence to formulate explanations and connections through the "Explaining" and "Evaluating" stages. In the argumentation analysis, most argumentative communication was identified as being associated with a given procedure, rather than with any scientific phenomena. In only one episode, did "Communicating" relate directly to any scientific phenomena. It can be concluded, that although MEL places emphasis on communication for authentic scientific inquiry, the environment required for such inquiry and argumentative communication can not be easily created in the classroom. Therefore, in order for authentic inquiry to take place in the MBL classroom, teachers should provide students with the opportunity to develop meaningful argumentation and scaffolding abilities.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.56-71
• /
• 2023

The purpose of this study is to explore the role and effectiveness of argumentation structure and the developmental characteristics of science PCK with Earth science preservice teachers who used argumentation structure as a pedagogical reasoning tool. Since teachers demonstrate PCK in a series of pedagogical reasoning processes using argumentation structures, we explored the characteristics of future-oriented family resemblance-PCK shown by preservice science teachers using argumentation structures. At the end of the semester, we conducted in-depth interviews with 15 earth science preservice teachers who had experienced lesson design and teaching practice using the argumentation structure. Qualitative analysis including a semantic network analysis was conducted based on the in-depth interview to analyze the characteristics of preservice teachers' family resemblance-PCK. Results include that preservice teachers organized their classes systematically by applying the argumentation structure, and structured classes by differentiating argumentation elements from facts to conclusions. Regarding the characteristics of each component of the argumentation structure, preservice teachers had difficulty finding warrant, rebuttal, and qualifier. The area of PCK most affected by the argumentation structure is the science teaching practice, and preservice teachers emphasized the selection of a instructional model suitable for lesson content, the use of various teaching methods and inquiry activities to persuade lesson content, and developing of data literacy and digital competency. Discussed in the conclusion are the potential and usability of argument structure as a pedagogical reasoning tool, the possibility of developing science inquiry and reasoning competency of secondary school students who experience science classes using argumentation structure, and the need for developing a teacher education protocol using argumentation structure as a pedagogical reasoning tool.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.146-159
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to examine the relation between students' reflective thinking and providing the reading framework in implementation of argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Participants of this study were 60 $8^{th}$ grade students (two classes). One class (31 students) was assigned to an experimental group and the other class (29 students) was assigned to a comparative group. For the experimental group, five activities using the reading framework with SWH writing template were implemented, while three activities using the reading framework with the SWH writing template and two SWH activities without the reading framework were implemented for the comparative group. The result of this study showed that there was no significant difference in students' reflective thinking between both groups. However, results indicated that providing the reading framework with SWH approach facilitated students' reflective thinking. Therefore, the findings show that providing the reading framework consistently in the SWH approach was effective when it came to facilitating students' reflective thinking.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.509-521
• /
• 2015

Argumentation is a social and collaborative dialogic process. A large number of researchers have focused on analyzing the structure of students' argumentation occurring in the scientific inquiry context, using the Toulmin's model of argument. Since SSI dialogic argumentation often presents distinctive features (e.g. interdisciplinary, controversial, value-laden, etc.), Toulmin's model would not fit into the context. Therefore, we attempted to develop an analytical framework for SSI dialogic argumentation by addressing the concepts of 'discourse clusters' and 'discourse schemes.' Discourse clusters indicated a series of utterances created for a similar dialogical purpose in the SSI contexts. Discourse schemes denoted meaningful discourse units that well represented the features of SSI reasoning. In this study, we presented six types of discourse clusters and 19 discourse schemes. We applied the framework to the data of students' group discourse on SSIs (e.g. euthanasia, nuclear energy, etc.) in order to verify its validity and applicability. The results indicate that the framework well explained the overall flow, dynamics, and features of students' discourse on SSI.

• Archives of design research
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.169-176
• /
• 2004

It is incontestable that the essence of the current fever of well-being is pseudo-ideology, which is the commercialized well-being. Nevertheless, the potential value as the cultural contests of Korean Design, reaching the philosophy of well-being, must not be overlooked. Being more than its dictionary meaning of 'happiness' and 'welfare', well-being aims peace of mind and richness in mentality, thus supports the life style of 'Body-Mind Monism'. As a trend that has taken a ride on the consumerism, it is inevitable to excavate the benign cultural value that an ordinary sign of well-being lacks in order to create a peculiar model of Korea's design contents by sublimating the commodity aesthetic of well-being into an alternative argument possessing the cultural identity of Korea. Well-being, not much different form an attitude of following the 'ways of nature', is a typical model of non-dualistic thinking of East Asia. By tracing back to the indication of well-being that already existed in the non-dualistic thought and design of East Asia, the genealogy connecting the current phenomena of well-being to the Body-Mind Monism can be found in the cultural traditions of as close as Korea and as far as East Asia. In the case of adopting the monistic way of East Asian thinking that sees body and mind as one not two as the theoretical background of well-being imported fro the West, it is expected to provide a solution for the design discourse of Korea to be out of colonialism. Well-being contributes to the monistic awareness in the period of self-reflected modernization, which needs to search new values based on the reconsideration of dualistic paradigm centered on the Western culture, thus it is worth putting anticipation on the potential significance well-being would have in the field of national as well as international design world.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.123
• /
• pp.409-440
• /
• 2012

It is well known that Deleuze began his philosophical work from researching the biographies of many predecessors' such as D. Hume, Lucretius, I. Kant, B. Spinoza, F. W. Nietzsche, H. Bergson, and etc. Among them, especially Spinoza, Nietzsche, and Bergson constitute a foundation supporting the whole idea of Deleuze. He declared that the goal of his early biographical work is a theme converging the identity of two philosophers, Spinoza and Nietzsche, and it shows that these two philosophers had such a huge significance to Deleuze, at least by then. However, we may point out two issues here. The first is why Deleuze, who is recognized as a philosopher of 'difference', deals the identity. The other issue is, what kind of identity exists between the two philosophers, Spinoza and Nietzche. In a common sense, their ideas contradict to each other. Spinoza puts God at the center of his philosophical system, whereas Nietzsche declared 'God is dead'. Though Nietzsche expressed a concurrent opinion with Spinoza at first, it is well known that he turned his side against him soon after and criticized him sharply. There is a conflict at the core of this criticism concerning the existence or non-existence of God. Many think that Spinoza, however, cannot be free from the argument that his philosophy allows a possibility of atheism. Deleuze, who also called Spinoza an atheist, suggested a new viewpoint of the philosophy of Spinoza based on his attribution to the concept of 'power'. On the other hand, Deleuze reinterpreted Nietzsche, where he analyzed 'the will to power' in a totally inventive way. Likewise, the reciprocal communication of ideas connected by the concept of 'power' gives a foundation of identifying the two philosophers to Deleuze. In this paper, considering this reciprocal communication, I intent to reveal the foundation of identity of the two philosophers, Spinoza and Nietzsche, and as a result, investigate what the concept of identity means to Deleuze, the philosopher of difference. Furthermore, we will also take a look at how Deleuze presents a new perspective on the conflict on the existence of God of the two philosophers in the process of validating the identity.