• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.501-510
• /
• 1997

Science teachers' beliefs about science and school science and their perceptions of the science laboratory learning environment were investigated with an assumption that science laboratory teaching would be affected by science teachers' beliefs. Likert-scale questionnaires of BASSSQ and SLEI were used in this study. The major findings were as follows: 1. Science teachers showed inconsistent beliefs about science and school science. Their responses reflected a patch-like view of postmodern epistemology and objectivism They also showed somewhat different views about science and school science. It was found that science teachers had strong objectivist views about science in some parts. but they had moderate constructivist views about school science in other parts; 2. The mean scores of student cohesiveness, integration. and rule clarity on the actual version in SLEl were relatively high, but those of open-endedness and physical environment were very low; 3. There was no association between teachers' beliefs about science and their perceptions of the science laboratory learning environment. But some associations were found between teachers' beliefs about school science and their perception on student cohesiveness, integration, and rule clarity of the actual science laboratory learning environment. Teachers' beliefs about school science had some statistically significant correlations with their perceptions on all scales of the preferred version of SLEI. We could not show a causal relationship between teachers' beliefs and their science laboratory learning environment through these results. But it can be suggested that teachers' beliefs about school science do have a role in constructing a desirable science laboratory learning environment, as we found that there were statistically significant correlations between them.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• no.36
• /
• pp.227-252
• /
• 2008

This study investigated the relation between social worker's beliefs on the nature of scientific knowledge which has been classified objectivism and constructivism and social work practice. As an epistemological position, constructivism is based on a view of knowledge that differs from that of objectivism, which holds that knowledge exists "out there" as objective truth. The focus of this paper is a examination on epistemological beliefs of social worker and social work practice. This paper proves that social work's epistemological beliefs have an effect on the practice modes. This research indicates that social works have a higher constructivist veiws than objectivist veiws on the nature of scientific knowledge. And social worker who have a high level of objectivism show a positive determinative mode. It has suggested that the constructive theory offers useful epistemology to the social worker who should deal with the clients in uncertain situations. In conclusion, a social worker with a high level of constructivism use an approach that creats a more equitable relationship between social worker and client. This perspective will allows cliens to participate in the formulation of theories in practice.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.221-233
• /
• 2002

This study investigated preservice science teachers' understandings of philosophical foundations(i.e., ontological and epistemological beliefs) underlying constructivist notions of learning. The teacher education program these subjects participated in explicitly addressed philosophical notions consistent with different views of constructivism. For these preservice science teachers, the program provided them with the opportunity to reflect upon the implications that their ontological and epistemological commitments had for their role as a science teacher. Data from four in-depth interviews were used to explore changes in each preservice science teacher's ontological beliefs, epistemological commitments, and pedagogical preferences. Results indicated that ontological beliefs and epistemological commitments were not necessarily consistent with conceptions of science teaching and learning for these preservice teachers. While some students internalized idealist and relativist perspectives, they did not integrate these relativist epistemological views into their preferred instructional practices. Also, regarding the fallible and tentative nature of knowledge, data in this study indicated that participants' epistemological beliefs about scientific Knowledge did influence how they were thinking about their roles as science teachers. Implications for teacher education programs and research on preservice science teacher's philosophical beliefs are discussed.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.309-323
• /
• 2002

This qualitative study investigated preservice teachers' understandings of the ontology and epistemology underlying constructivist notions of learning through four in-depth interviews. Of the sixteen participants in a larger study, five significantly changed ontological and epistemological beliefs and eleven did not. This study focused on these eleven teachers who have hardly changed their philosophical beliefs throughout the teacher education program. Ten teachers who consistently maintained the scientific realist beliefs were presented as a composite case (Young's case). Among the eleven teachers, there was one outlier who had consistently maintained an idealist and relativist epistemological position from the beginning of the study and was subjected to another case analysis (Ben's case). These cases corroborated the assertion that each individual's deeply entrenched ontological and epistemological beliefs are very hard to change. For researchers, this study offers insights into the reasons that preservice teachers give for non-changes in their thinking about learning to teach. The study also examines preservice teachers' perceived constraints in implementing their ideal pedagogies and the influence of the teacher education program on their pedagogical beliefs changes. The benefits and influences of the M.Ed. program's theoretical coursework and the field experiences on these teachers' learning-to-teach experiences are addressed with rich data. The implications for teacher educators as well as for the instructional practices of preservice teacher education programs are discussed. This research emphasize necessity of the field-based teacher education program and the need of empowering experienced school teachers as teacher educators in teacher preparation and professional development.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.22 no.5
• /
• pp.360-376
• /
• 2001

This qualitative research investigated in-service science teachers' perceptions about cooperative learning and their perceived barriers in implementing cooperative learning in their classrooms. The underlying premise for cooperative learning is founded in constructivist epistemology. Cooperative learning (CL) is presented as an alternative frame to the current educational system which emphasizes content memorization and individual student performance through competition. An in-depth interview was conducted with 18 in-service science teachers who enrolled in the first-class teacher certification program during 2001 summer vacation. These secondary school teachers's interview data were analyzed and categorized into three areas: teachers' definition of cooperative learning, issues with implementing cooperative learning in classrooms, and teachers' and students' responses towards cooperative learning. Each of these areas are further subdivided into 10 themes: teachers' perceived meaning of cooperative learning, the importance of talk in learning, when to use cooperative learning, how to end a cooperative class, how to group students for cooperative learning, obstacles to implementing cooperative learning, students' reactions to cooperative learning, teachers' reasons for choosing (not choosing) student-centered approaches to learning/teaching, characteristics of teachers who use cooperative learning methods, and teachers' reasons for resisting cooperative learning. Detailed descriptions of the teachers' responses and discussion on each category are provided. For the development and implementation of CL in more classrooms, there should be changes and supports in the following five areas: (1) teachers have to examine their pedagogical beliefs toward constructivist perspectives, (2) teacher (re)education programs have to provide teachers with cooperative learning opportunities in methods courses, (3) students' understanding of their changed roles (4) supports in light of curriculum materials and instructional resources, (5) supports in terms of facilities and administrators. It's important to remember that cooperative learning is not a panacea for all instructional problems. It's only one way of teaching and learning, useful for specific kinds of teaching goals and especially relevant for classrooms with a wide mix of student academic skills. Suggestions for further research are also provided.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.137
• /
• pp.151-191
• /
• 2016

Kant and Lacan strongly criticized the epistemological premise of formal logic. However, Lacan was opposed to Kant in terms of subject, object, knowledge and truth. From the viewpoint of Kant's transcendental logic, formal logic does not have the ability to represent the nature of truth. On the other hand, from the viewpoint of Lacan's psychoanalytic logic, Kant's transcendental logic misunderstands or only partially represents the state of things. But I would like to try to criticize the epistemological premise of the two forms of logic. Transcendental logic takes the evident and new function in that it has studied the necessary condition of content rather than the form of thinking which formal logic considers as his object of study. Transcendental logic evidently studies the categories which dominate our way of thinking. Can we say that the 12 categories which Kant provided are sufficient in explaining the necessity of thinking? Lacan's psychoanalytic logics tells us that Kant's categories are only a kind of metaphor related with hypothesis that tries to explain the possibility of synthetical judge a priori. Is Lacan's psychoanalytic logic sufficient in explaining the possibility of science? It is not sufficient in explaining the objectivity and strictness of science, for it depends on metaphor and metonymy which are useful to literature and unconsciousness. I would like to try to synthesize Kant's transcendental and Lacan's psychoanalytic logic in terms of structure-constructivism which combines both formal and dialectical logic, which is consistent with the ideal of human science, and not blinkered science. My conclusion is that Kant's ethical and esthetical theory should be modified though Lacan's psychoanalytic logic, and Lacan's theory of the unconsciousness revised by Kant's transcendental logic.