• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.37 no.4
• /
• pp.565-575
• /
• 2017

This study analyzes the epistemic considerations and the argumentation level revealed in the discourse of the key concept of natural selection for science-gifted elementary students. The paper analyzes and discusses the results of a three-student focus group, drawn from a cohort of twenty gifted sixth-grade elementary students. Nature, generality, justification, and audience were used to analyze epistemic consideration. Learning progression in scientific argumentation including argument construction and critique was used to analyze students' scientific argumentation level. The findings are as follows: First, Epistemic considerations in discourse varied between key concepts of natural selection discussed. The nature aspect of epistemic considerations is highly expressed in the discourse for all natural selection key concepts. But the level of generality, justification and audience was high or low, and the level was not revealed in the discourse. In the heredity of variation, which is highly expressed in terms of generality of knowledge, the linkage with various phenomena against the acquired character generated a variety of ideas. These ideas were used to facilitate engagement in argumentation, so that all three students showed the level of argumentation of suggestions of counter-critique. Second, students tried to explain the process of speciation by using concepts that were high in practical epistemic considerations level when explaining the concept of speciation, which is the final natural selection key concept. Conversely, the concept of low level of epistemic considerations was not included as an explanation factor. The results of this study suggest that students need to analyze specific factors to understand why epistemological decisions are made by students and how epistemological resources are used according to context through various epistemological resources. Analysis of various factors influencing epistemological decisions can be a mediator of the instructor who can improve the quality and level of the argumentation.

• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.123-145
• /
• 2013

This study was expected to yield the meaningful conclusions from the experimental group who took lessons based on inductive activities using GeoGebra at the beginning of proof learning and the comparison one who took traditional expository lessons based on deductive activities. The purpose of this study is to give some helpful suggestions for teaching proof to mathematically gifted elementary students. To attain the purpose, two research questions are established as follows. 1. Is there a significant difference in proof abilities between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? 2. Is there a significant difference in proof attitudes between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? To solve the above two research questions, they were divided into two groups, an experimental group of 10 students and a comparison group of 10 students, considering the results of gift and aptitude test, and the computer literacy among 20 elementary students that took lessons at some education institute for the gifted students located in K province after being selected in the mathematics. Special lesson based on the researcher's own lesson plan was treated to the experimental group while explanation-centered class based on the usual 8th grader's textbook was put into the comparison one. Four kinds of tests were used such as previous proof ability test, previous proof attitude test, subsequent proof ability test, and subsequent proof attitude test. One questionnaire survey was used only for experimental group. In the case of attitude toward proof test, the score of questions was calculated by 5-point Likert scale, and in the case of proof ability test was calculated by proper rating standard. The analysis of materials were performed with t-test using the SPSS V.18 statistical program. The following results have been drawn. First, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in proof ability than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Second, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in the belief and attitude toward proof than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Third, the survey about 'the effect of inductive activities using GeoGebra on the proof' shows that 100% of the students said that the activities were helpful for proof learning and that 60% of the reasons were 'because GeoGebra can help verify processes visually'. That means it gives positive effects on proof learning that students research constant character and make proposition by themselves justifying assumption and conclusion by changing figures through the function of estimation and drag in investigative software GeoGebra. In conclusion, this study may provide helpful suggestions in improving geometry education, through leading students to learn positive and active proof, connecting the learning processes such as induction based on activity using GeoGebra, simple deduction from induction(i.e. creating a proposition to distinguish between assumptions and conclusions), and formal deduction(i.e. proving).