• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.85-107
• /
• 2012

This essay criticizes Van Fraassen's argument for empirical equivalence among competing theories, which is based on his interpretation of Newtonian space-time. I argue that his misleading interpretation of the ontology of absolute space-time results in his ineffective attacks against a residual structure of space-time, absolute velocity. Van Fraassen's argument basically misleads us into empirical equivalence in that his literal reading of Newtonian space-time disregards a variety of aspects of its model.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.337-348
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to examine epistemic thinking in middle school students in an argument-based inquiry science class. Participants of the study were 93 9th grade students from four classes of a middle school in a metropolitan city. Observations were made over one semester during which argument-based inquiry lessons on five subjects were conducted. Data was collected from argument-based inquiry activity worksheets and student questionnaires. After analysis of epistemic thinking in the written reflections, students were found to have the highest frequency of epistemic metacognitive skills, followed by epistemic cognition, epistemic metacognitive experience, and epistemic metacognitive knowledge. While investigating the effects of an argument-based inquiry science class on student epistemic thinking and after analysis of the reflections written for the first ABI activity and the fifth ABI activity, we found that all of the sub-elements of epistemic thinking have increased. The rate of growth for epistemic cognition is greatest, followed by epistemic metacognitive knowledge and epistemic metacognitive skills. Assessed for epistemic thinking, the level of epistemic thinking improved over the course of the argument-based inquiry science class. The results of the survey show that students actively participating and being recognized for their active participation in the argument-based inquiry science class are helpful in understanding scientific knowledge. Therefore, an argument-based inquiry science class is a teaching and learning program that allows students to understand and experience the epistemic nature of scientific knowledge and its construction through collaboration and agreement.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.41 no.4
• /
• pp.405-414
• /
• 2020

In this study, we analyzed the development of high school students' argumentation through their writings on socio-scientific Issues (SSI) related to the Climate Change Unit in the Earth Science I curriculum. Pre- and post-writing assignments on the two main causes of global warming were analyzed and compared. In addition, an in-depth interview of the focus group was conducted with 7 students who showed a distinct change in the level of argumentation. According to the results, 16 of 52 students remained at the same argumentation level in pre- and post-writing assignments, and students remaining at Level 2 among five levels had difficulty in understanding the Toulmin's argument pattern (TAP) structure. Using the TAP structure, 29 of 52 students demonstrated increased argumentation levels in the post-writing assignments. The conclusions include that writing lessons on SSI using the TAP in Earth science classes can improve the level of high school students' argumentative writing, and that the level of students' argumentation can develop with the elaboration of their level of falsification. Also, it is suggested that the science curriculum should increase students' science writing competencies by specifying science writing as one of the goals.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.64 no.1
• /
• pp.38-48
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study was to analysis characteristics and changes of epistemic thinking in middle school students on class-argument activities in an argument-based inquiry(ABI) science class. Data was collected from class recording video and activity worksheets of five subjects argument-based inquiry. Results of the analysis of student epistemic cognition characteristics show that experimental data was presented the most as evidence, and depending on the ABI activity, personal experience-based evidence and evidence based on scientific principles were used. As a result of analyzing the changes between claims made before and after class argumentations on five ABI activities in an argument-based inquiry science class, student claim modifications could be classified, according to reasons for the modification, into three types: correcting incorrect claims, clarifying unclear content, and expanding the concept.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.219-234
• /
• 2018

In this study, we explored the possibility of automating the process of analyzing elements of scientific argument in the context of a Korean classroom. To gather training data, we collected 990 sentences from science education journals that illustrate the results of coding elements of argumentation according to Toulmin's argumentation structure framework. We extracted 483 sentences as a test data set from the transcription of students' discourse in scientific argumentation activities. The words and morphemes of each argument were analyzed using the Python 'KoNLPy' package and the 'Kkma' module for Korean Natural Language Processing. After constructing the 'argument-morpheme:class' matrix for 1,473 sentences, five machine learning techniques were applied to generate predictive models relating each sentences to the element of argument with which it corresponded. The accuracy of the predictive models was investigated by comparing them with the results of pre-coding by researchers and confirming the degree of agreement. The predictive model generated by the k-nearest neighbor algorithm (KNN) demonstrated the highest degree of agreement [54.04% (${\kappa}=0.22$)] when machine learning was performed with the consideration of morpheme of each sentence. The predictive model generated by the KNN exhibited higher agreement [55.07% (${\kappa}=0.24$)] when the coding results of the previous sentence were added to the prediction process. In addition, the results indicated importance of considering context of discourse by reflecting the codes of previous sentences to the analysis. The results have significance in that, it showed the possibility of automating the analysis of students' argumentation activities in Korean language by applying machine learning.

• Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education
• /
• v.29 no.4
• /
• pp.441-450
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of elementary gifted students' argumentation and examine the special features of argumentation founded in scientific inquiry. 28 students were selected in the special education center for the gifted in K National University. They were organized 8 groups of 3~4 students and engaged in scientific inquiry activity. The researcher wasn't involved in students' inquiry activity and argumentation except for the guiding and introducing their activity. In the first session, each group carried out the experiment 'Putting a heated can in the water' and then, the students discussed to probe their experimental results and build their explanation. In the second session, each group presented their experiment results and evidence from their experiment justifying their claims, and had questions from other groups. The protocol data during 8 groups' argumentations were analyzed using 'Rubric for Scientific Argumentation Assessment' (Yang et al., 2009) in three domains- the form, content and attitude. As a result, in form domain, almost groups were rated 2 points due to their argument without rebuttal on the subcategory of 'composition', but they got a good grade above 3 points in subcategory such as 'claim', 'ground', and 'conclusion'. In content domain, almost groups got points above 3 points. In attitude domain, there were some striking contrast between each groups. Six groups got good score more than 4 points on the subcategory of openness, but two groups, they alleged and got score below 3 point. While the 6 groups of all got 4 points in the aspect of participation, 3 groups got 3 points lower than because they only just asserted and not interact with other groups. Throughout the argumentation, two features were found that; as time goes by, arguments were refined; Students tended to use their prior to knowledge rather than evidence such as experimental data in making claims and conclusions.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.43 no.6
• /
• pp.509-520
• /
• 2023

Scientific explanation is the main goal of scientists' scientific practice, and the science curriculum also includes developing students' abilities to construct scientific explanations as a major goal. Thus, clarifying its meaning is an important issue in the science education community. In this paper, the researchers identified three perspectives on 'scientific explanation' based on the scoping review method (Deductive-Nomological, Probabilistic, and Pragmatic explanation models). We argued that it is important to clarify and distinguish the meanings of 'scientific explanation' from other concepts used in science education, such as 'description', 'prediction', 'hypothesis', and 'argument' based on a review of the literature. It is also pointed out that there is a difference between 'scientific explanation' as a product and 'explaining scientifically' as communication, and several ways to revise achievement standard statements in the science curriculum are suggested, to guide students to construct scientific explanations and to help students to explain scientifically. By adopting the three scientific explanation models, the important factors to be considered were classified and organized, and examples of science learning activities for scientific explanation considering such factors were suggested. It is hoped that the discussion in this study will help establish clearer learning goals in science learning related to scientific explanation and aid the design of more appropriate learning activities accordingly.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.11-23
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to analyze the degree of argumentation structure development and factors of development of preservice teachers through SSI related argumentative writings. The study was conducted with 16 preservice teachers that students taking elementary science education theory class in K university located in Chungbuk. The testees wrote six SSI related argumentative writings (once a week), and we examined the degree of argumentation structure development and the change in the recognition of SSI of the preservice teachers by comparing the writings before and after the experiments. The experimental results showed that argumentation structure of the preservice teachers'writings improved and argument level (argument capability) of them also increased as the number of writing was increased. Factors that affect the argumentation structure improvement are mainly argumentation structure education, a number of writings, feedbacks, and subjects related to SSI. In this aspect, the argumentative writing on SSI has the effect of developing scientific sophistication and enhancing the decision-making power of students, and it has positive impacts in science education.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.161-172
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to characterize students' conceptions on causes of the phases of the moon. For this purpose, students were given a worksheet for argumentative writing activity where in they need to choose the right answer between five statements and provide reasonable evidences about causes of the phases of the moon. Written arguments collected were used as analysis data and TAP(Toulmin's argument pattern) including conceptual analysis of TAP elements were utilized to figure out logical structures and subordinate conceptions. The result showed that students had various alternative concepts about causes of the phases of the moon and associated with celestial. Also 70.5% of subjects had incomplete argument structures, and error types of concepts had difference according to types of alternative concepts as well as TAP. These results mean that importance of checking students' preconceptions, need of scientific argumentation, and appropriate instructional strategies considering alternative conception types and fallacy types that students had.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.34 no.5
• /
• pp.479-490
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to develop an argument-based modeling strategy, utilizing writing and argumentation for communication in science education. We need to support students and teachers who have difficulty in modeling in science education, this strategy focuses on development of four kinds of factors as follows: First, awareness of problems, recognizing in association with problems by observing several problematic situations. Second is science concept structuralization suggesting enough science concepts by organization for scientific explanation. The third is claim-evidence appropriateness that suggests appropriate representation as evidence for assertions. Last, the use of various representations and multimodal representations that converts and integrates these representations in evidence suggestion. For the development of these four factors, this study organized three stages. 'Recognition process' for understanding of multimodal representations, and 'Interpretation process' for understanding of activity according to multimodal representations, 'Application process' for understanding of modeling through argumentation. This application process has been done with eight stages of 'Asking questions or problems - Planning experiment - Investigation through observation on experiment - Analyzing and interpreting data - Constructing pre-model - Presenting model - Expressing model using multimodal representations - Evaluating model - Revising model'. After this application process, students could have opportunity to form scientific knowledge by making their own model as scientific explanation system for the phenomenon of the natural world they observed during a series of courses of modeling.