• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.757-768
• /
• 2016

This study developed an SSI (Socio-Scientific Issue) discussion program that applies a creative technique called six thinking hats, and then investigated the differences in argumentation patterns and effects on the decision-making abilities of each character feature of students between SNS debate and existing face to face debate. There were three SSI themes - Designer Babies, embryonic stem cell study, and legitimacy of abortion. Students were divided into two groups, the debate group using SNS and face to face debate group. The character patterns of students were divided to 'extraversion,' 'agreeableness,' and 'conscientiousness' through test sheets for character features for each student. Both groups were educated for creative discussion methods using six thinking hats and then, the class progressed. As a result of analyzing argumentation patterns used in SNS debate and face to face debate, the most used argumentation pattern was the "cause pattern." But comparing to face to face debate, other patterns (mark, inference, authority, motive) were also used in SNS debate. The study analyzed three factors of decision-making ability for each character feature of students such as complexity, perspectives, and inquiry. As a result, for 'complexity' factor, there was a significant difference between SNS debate group and face to face debate group only in the student group of Agreeableness. For 'perspectives' factor, there were significant differences between SNS debate group and face to face debate group in all three characters. Finally, for inquiry, there were no significant differences between SNS debate group and face to face debate group in all three characters. Accordingly it would be necessary to apply SNS debate using the six thinking hats in SSI education to enhance perspectives.

• 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.

• Korean Management Science Review
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.81-93
• /
• 2003

These days we come across many wicked problems whose solutions are beyond individuals intellectual ability. These problems can be resolved through collaborative group interaction. We developed an internet-based asynchronous group interaction support system, after looking into the collaborative problem solving process and the IBIS (Issue-Based Information System) argumentation model. It has the following characteristics ; 1) it is developed based on the modified IBIS model which is a model for group interaction to resolve wicked problems ; 2) it supports both processes of seeking and comparing solutions, while most similar systems do not have a feature to support the latter process ; 3) different structures can be defined dynamically according to the purpose of group interaction, so that it could be used for collaborative problem solving in a specific domain. To show the usability of the system, we carried out an experiment, whose result is shown at the end.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.212-221
• /
• 2006

The purposes of this study were to examine the characteristics of teacher help in small group Thinking Science(TS) activities and analyze the way students respond to teacher help. For this study, twenty-four 5th grade and twenty-four 7th grade students were selected, to undertake TS activities. Out of the 8 activities students participated in, the verbal interactions in activity 4 and 6, by students in four small groups, which incorporated relatively active argumentation was analyzed. Students' cognitive level was identified through a science reasoning task and the students were grouped heterogeneously according to their cognitive level. This study showed that teachers predominately used simple confirmation questions in preference to metacognitive question. Also, teacher help varied according to one's personal traits, work experience and degree of activity recognition. It was discovered that when the teacher provided student appropriate metacognitive questions and sufficient feedback, students actively engaged in argumentation. On the other hand, when the teacher asked simple confirmation questions and interfered in the activity, students did not participate in argumentation actively.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.135-145
• /
• 2018

In this study, we investigated the argumentations of group and classroom discussions in socioscientific issues (SSI) discussion classes. Twenty-seven high school students participated in the SSI discussion classes on nuclear power generation. We observed and recorded the classes and also conducted semi-structured interviews. For the analyses, we revised a previous framework that was developed to analyze dialogic argumentations in the context of SSI. The analyses of the results indicated that there were more discourse schemes in the classroom discussions than the group discussions which are related to awareness and openness to multiple perspectives, evidence based reasoning, and on-going inquiry and skepticism. And there were few discourse schemes related to moral and ethical sensitivity in the group and classroom discussions. Various grounds, data, and information were presented in the classroom discussions. Students concentrated on carrying their claims and were not able to sympathize with and accept other opinions. Therefore, there were few discourse schemes to reach consensus. In addition, they perceived classroom discussions as competitive and actively rebutted other claims or grounds. The levels of argumentation were also high in the classroom discussions. The group discussions were held in relaxed atmosphere, and they asked the opponents more for clarification or additional information and evidences. However, classroom discussions were held in serious atmosphere, and they actively queried the validity of the claims or grounds. Based on the results, some suggestions to implement SSI discussion classes were discussed.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• v.2
• /
• pp.195-198
• /
• 2006

One of the major sources of error in precise GPS positioning since the turn-off the Selective Availability(SA) is the ionospheric propagation delay. For the last decades, a lot of the ionospheric researches based on a GPS network have been implemented throughout the world. Especially researches of the ionospheric modeling for Wide Area Argumentation System(WAAS) have been undertaken and published. In mid-latitude regions, typical spatial and temporal variations in ionospheric models delay tend to minimal. The developed ionospheric model calls for a 1.25 degree grid at latitudes and a 2.5 degree grid at longitudes. The precise grid TEC estimated by the inversion technique is also compared with global ionosphere maps(GIMs) which have been provided by several analysis centers(ACs). The results of initial investigations into the suitability of the proposed ionospheric modeling scheme in north-east Asia are presented.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• v.2
• /
• pp.199-202
• /
• 2006

One of the major sources of error in precise GPS positioning since the turn-off the Selective Availability(SA) is the ionospheric propagation delay. For the last decades, a lot of the ionospheric researches based on a GPS network have been implemented throughout the world. Especially researches of the ionospheric modeling for Wide Area Argumentation System(WAAS) have been undertaken and published. In mid-latitude regions, typical spatial and temporal variations in ionospheric models delay tend to minimal. The developed ionospheric model calls for a 1.25 degree grid at latitudes and a 2.5 degree grid at longitudes. The precise grid TEC estimated by the inversion technique is also compared with global ionosphere maps(GIMs) which have been provided by several analysis centers(ACs). The results of initial investigations into the suitability of the proposed ionospheric modeling scheme in north-east Asia are presented.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.238-252
• /
• 2020

In this study, we analyzed the types of rebuttals in the argument structure of learning contents in lesson plans constructed by Earth science preservice teachers, and then we explored examples of how they responded to resolving the rebuttal. As a result of analyzing preservice teachers' assignments, discussions, and interviews collected during a total of 20 hours of classes and group discussions for 5 weeks, all 5 types of rebuttals suggested by Verheij (2005) were identified. Through the data analysis, a total of 18 rebuttal cases derived, and these cases were classified into 3 types according to how preservice teachers solve the rebuttals in class. The conclusions and implications based on the results are as follows: First, this study provided empirical data that the thinking process of validating core elements of argumentation and processes of argumentation is actively taking place in preservice teachers' lesson planning using the argument structure, and expanded the scope of application of argumentation in science education research. Second, the argument structure of learning contents should be used to help teachers to come up with strategies to induce students' curiosity and devotion to learn science contents. Third, preservice teachers should have the opportunity to think about the nature of science, including the variability and uncertainty of scientific knowledge when they discover rebuttals and develop solutions to them. Based on these conclusions, implications and suggestions for science education and further research were suggested.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.160-175
• /
• 2004

This study examined the knowledge and practices of scientific inquiry displayed by three student teachers and two beginning teachers at secondary levels. Observations using the instrument of OTOP designed by the research team of OCEPT (Oregon Collaborative for Excellent in the Preparation of Teachers) generalized similar teaching strategies of scientific inquiry between student and beginning teachers, such as using group work for students' first hand experience, using concrete materials for experimentation or visual tools for demonstration, using questions for factual knowledge mainly without opportunities to understand how scientific knowledge is constructed. Those scientific inquiry activities were very confirmative ones to follow the steps without opportunities of understanding nature of science or nature of scientific inquiry. However, all participants in this study hold knowledge of scientific inquiry envisioned by the National Science Education Standards [NSES] (NRC, 1996), where students identify their hypothesis, use critical and logical thinking, and consider alternative explanations through argumentation as well as experimentation. An inconsistent relationship between participating teachers knowledge and practices about scientific inquiry resulted from their lack of pedagogy skills of implementing it in the classroom. Providing opportunities for these teachers to reflect on their beliefs and practices about scientific inquiry was recommended for the future study. Furthermore, increasing college faculty interest in new teaching approaches for upgrading the content knowledge of student teachers and beginning teachers was recommended as a solution, since those teachers showed evidence of influence by college faculties at universities in their pedagogy skills.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.4
• /
• pp.585-598
• /
• 2015

This study aims to investigate the components of group writing through three steps of group writing course consist of collecting information, organizing information, and revision. A total of 19 pre-service teachers who took the science argumentation course participated in the group writing activity. They made up a group of four or five and chose one subject from among socioscientific issues for group writing. The discussion contents and writing were analyzed inductively to find the group writing components at every step. The results of the study are as follows: First, components in the step of collecting information were (1) sharing information (2) understanding information. and (3)judging information. Second, components in the step of organizing information were (1) categorizing information, (2) decentralization, (3) balancing information, and (4) reflection. The last, process components in the step of revision were (1) unification of form, (2) global review, and (3) improving readability.