최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기대한지구과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean society of earth science education, v.7 no.1, 2014년, pp.11 - 23
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 i...
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
SSI는 과학적 논증활동 주제로 많이 사용되는 이유는? | , 2005). SSI는 과학 전문가뿐만 아니라 사회 전체의 관심이 요구되고 있는 문제로(Flower et al., 2009), 기존의 STS 교육에서 놓치고 있던 과학의 윤리적 측면에 대한 고려를 강조하고 있다(Zeidler et al., 2005). | |
SSI란? | , 2005). SSI는 사회와 과학의 상호 의존적 관계를 포함하고 있는 문제를 말한다(Zeidler et al., 2005). | |
현행 과학 교과의 목표는? | 현행 과학 교과의 목표는 학생들로 하여금 과학의 기본 개념을 이해하고, 탐구능력을 배양하고, 과학적인 태도를 함양함과 동시에 과학, 기술, 사회의관계를 인식하도록 만드는 것이다(MEST, 2009). 이중에서 학생들이 과학과 사회와의 관계를 인식하는것은 과학적 소양 중 하나인 과학의 본성을 이해한다는 측면에서 매우 중요한 부분이다(National Re-search Council, 1996). |
Abi-El-Mona, I., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Argumentative discourse in a high school chemistry classroom. School Science and Mathematics, 106(8), 349-361.
Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning for the Web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.
Colaizzi, P. E. (1978), Psychological research as the phenomenologist view it existential phenomenology: Oxford University press.
Flower, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279-296.
Holliday, W. G., Yore, L. D., & Alvermann, D. E. (1994). The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promise. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 877-893.
Gragson, D. E., & Hagen, J. P. (2010). Developing technical writing skills in the physical chemistry laboratory: A progressive approach employing peer review. Journal of Chemical Education, 87(1), 62-55.
Lee Hyun-ju, & Chang Hyun-sook(2007). The Comparison of State-level U.S. Science Curricula with Science Teachers' Perception Regarding Teaching Socioscientiifc Issues(SSI). The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 10(1), 189-209.
Maloney, J., & Simon, S. (2006). Mapping children's discussions of evidence in science to assess collaboration and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1817-1841.
Ministry of Education and Science Technology(2009). Korean 2009 Revision Science Curriculum. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
National Research Council[NRC], (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Newton, p., Driver, R., & Osborn, J. (1999). The plaace of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.
Ochsner, R., & Fowler, J. (2004). Playing devil's advocate: Evaluating the literature of the WAC/WID movement. Review of Educational Research, 7492), 117-140.
O'Donnell, A. M. & King, A. (Eds.) (1998). Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
Sadler, T.D., & Zeidler, D.L. (2005a). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 112-138.
Song Yun-mi, Yang Il-ho, Kim Ju-yeon, & Choi, Hyun-dong(2011). A Study of the Elementary School Teachers' Perception of Science Writing. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 31(5), 788-800.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L. & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for sosioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.