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.8 no.1, 2015년, pp.66 - 75
양일호 (한국교원대학교) , 김기영 (신암초등학교) , 임성만 (한국교원대학교) , 김은애 (한국교원대학교) , 김성운 (한국교원대학교)
This study is to investigate an argumentation level for elementary school students after analysing an argumentation structure about a socio scientific issue(SSI), and inquire a change of the decision-making according to the refutation materials and empathic situation. This data was collected from th...
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
논증은 학생들에게 어떤 기회가 될 수 있는가? | , 2000). 논증은 학생들이 과학문제 상황에서 동료와의 논의를 통해 현상을 해석하고 문제를 해결해나가는 실질적인 탐구능력을 키워주는 기회가 될 수 있다(Kim & Song, 2004; Park, 2006). 또한 논증은 과학의 본성 이해와(Osborne & Simon, 2004), 비판적 사고와 합리적 의사결정 능력의 함양에도 중요한 역할을 한다(Quinn, 1997). | |
과학자들은 논중을 통해 무엇을 하는가? | 과학에서의 논증은 연구과정에 있어서 핵심적인 활동이다. 과학자들은 논증을 통해 새로운 이론에 대해 지지하는 이론을 뒷받침하는 증거를 제시하거나, 다른 사람과 의견을 나누는 논증 과정을 통하여 과학적 지식을 생성한다(Zohar & Nemet, 2002). 과학교육에서도 과학적 개념의 변화와 비판적 사고능력의 배양을 위해 논증활용의 중요성이 강조되고 있다 (Driver et al. | |
과학에서 논증은 크게 두 가지의 상황으로 구분되는데 무엇인가? | 과학에서 논증은 크게 두 가지의 상황으로 구분된다. 첫째는 과학적 질문의 상황으로만 구성된 과학적 상황이며, 둘째는 과학적 이론이 배경이 되어 현실의 문제에 대한 사회적, 윤리적 측면이 강조된 사회과학적(Socio-scientific) 상황이다(Osborne et, al., 2001). |
Bae, J. I., & Cha, H. Y. (2014). Analysis of the types of claims and argumentations in science debate classes of fifth graders. Science education proceedings, 20(1), 63-83.
Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision-making on science and technology based issues. Science Education, 87(3), 352-377.
Erduran, S. (2008). Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleizandre, M. P. (Eds.) Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. 47-69.
Fleming, R. (1986). Adolescent reasoning in socioscientific issues. Part I : Social cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 677-687.
Jang, H. R., & Chung, Y. L. (2009). An analysis of informal reasoning in the context of Socio-Scientific decision-making. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 29(2), 253-266.
Jeong, E. Y., & Kim, Y. S. (2001). The application of biology instructional models for value inquiry education. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 21(1), 160-173.
Jho, H. K. (2014). A literature review of studies on socioscientific issues with a focus on decision making. Research of pedagogical education, 18(1), 191-213.
Kim, H. B., & Lee, S. K. (1996). Secondary students' attitudes toward science-technology related issues in korea. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 16(4), 461-469.
Kim, H. K., & Song, J. W. (2004). The exploration of open scientific inquiry model emphasizing students' argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 24(6), 1216-1234.
Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310.
Kwak, K. H., & Nam, J. H. (2009). Enhancing the quality of students' argumentation and characteristics of students' argumentation in different contexts. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 29(4), 400-413.
Lee, H. J. (2008). Decision-making patterns of pre-service science teachers on socioscientific issues. Research of pedagogical education, 12(2), 377-395.
Lee, J. Y. & Kim, H. B. (2011). Small group argumentation pattern of middle school students constructed in the conflict context. biology education, 39(2), 235-247.
Lim, M. Y., & Jung, S. A. (2013). An analysis of changes in gifted, middle school students' decision-making on socioscientific issues in biotechnology. Research of pedagogical education, 17(4), 1501-1522.
Osborne, J. E., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
Park, Y. B., Kim, Y. S., & Chung, W. h. (2002). The effects of decision-making activities about bioethical issues on students' rational decision-making ability in high school biology. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 22(1), 54-63.
Park, Y. S. (2006). Theoretical study on the opportunity of scientific argumentation for implementing authentic scientific inquiry. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 27(4), 401-415.
Quinn, V. (1997). Critical thinking in young minds. London: David Fulton.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Moral and ethical dimensions of socioscientific decision-making as integral components of scientific literacy. The Science Educator, 13, 39-48.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 4-27.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
Sadler, T. D., Amirshokoohi, A.,Kazempour, M., & Allspaw, K. M. (2006). Socioscience and ethics in science classrooms: teacher perspecctives and strategies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 353-376.
Sadler, T. D., & Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463-1488.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yun, M. H., Jeong, M. S., & Park, W. H. (2007). The analysis of decision-making process based on the nature of science : Focused on socio-scientific issues. Journal of science education, 34, 85-98.
Zeidler, D. L., Walker, K. A., Ackett, W. A., & Simmons, M. L. (2002). Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 86(3), 343-367.
Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89(3), 357-377.
Zohar, A. & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering student's knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.