최소 단어 이상 선택하여야 합니다.
최대 10 단어까지만 선택 가능합니다.
다음과 같은 기능을 한번의 로그인으로 사용 할 수 있습니다.
NTIS 바로가기한국과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean association for science education, v.36 no.4, 2016년, pp.591 - 606
The purpose of this study is to develop the argumentation program to build scientific concepts on natural selection for science-gifted elementary students and to know how to implement this program. For this study, nine key concepts about natural selection such as the overproduction of offspring, lim...
핵심어 | 질문 | 논문에서 추출한 답변 |
---|---|---|
진화론은 무엇인가? | National Research Council(2011)는 생물학의 근간이 되는 개념 중 하나로 진화론을 선정했다. 진화론은 생명 현상을 포괄적으로 설명하는 이론으로서 생물학에서 가장 중심이 되는 이론이므로 과학교육에서 다루어야 할 내용이다(Ha, Cha & Ku, 2010; Dobzhansky, 1973; Rutledge & Warden, 2000). 생물의 진화를 이해하기 위해서는 변이, 변이의 유전, 경쟁, 과잉 생산, 제한된 환경, 차별적 생존과 번식, 자연 선택, 개체군 변이 등과 같은 개념들이 개인의 인지구조에 논리적으로 결합이 되어야 한다. | |
생물의 진화를 이해하기 위해서 어떤 개념들이 개인의 인지구조에 논리적으로 결합이 되어야하는가? | 진화론은 생명 현상을 포괄적으로 설명하는 이론으로서 생물학에서 가장 중심이 되는 이론이므로 과학교육에서 다루어야 할 내용이다(Ha, Cha & Ku, 2010; Dobzhansky, 1973; Rutledge & Warden, 2000). 생물의 진화를 이해하기 위해서는 변이, 변이의 유전, 경쟁, 과잉 생산, 제한된 환경, 차별적 생존과 번식, 자연 선택, 개체군 변이 등과 같은 개념들이 개인의 인지구조에 논리적으로 결합이 되어야 한다. 그래야 학습자들의 인지구조에 선개념으로 형성되어 있는 목적론, 용불용설, 의인화, 개체 내 적응과 같은 비과학적인 진화 개념들을 효과적으로 제거할 수 있다(Nehm & Ha, 2011). | |
구성주의 교수가 지식의 전달이 아니라 관련된 경험을 대화할 기회를 제공하는 것이 목적인 이유는? | 구성주의 교수의 목적은 지식의 전달이 아니라 관련된 경험과 대화할 기회를 제공하는 것이다(Driver, Newton & Osborne, 2000). 논변활동이 과학지식의 습득을 위한 효과적인 교수학습 전략이 될 수 있는 이유는 자신의 생각을 드러내는 과정을 거쳐 개념을 학습할 수 있으며(Driver, Newton & Osborne, 2000), 설명을 구성하는 과정에서 지식을 통합하고 연결시켜 내용에 대한 이해를 향상시킬 수 있기 때문이다(Chi et al., 1994). |
Anderson, D. L., Fisher, K. M., & Norman, G. J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 952-978.
Bishop, B. A., & Anderson, C. W. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 415-427.
Board on Science Education. (2012). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
Boulter, C. J., & Buckley, B. C. (2000). Constructing a typology of models for science education. In Developing models in science education (pp. 41-57). Springer Netherlands.
Buckley, B. C. (2000). Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 895-935.
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chi, M. T. H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., & Lavancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
Cho, H., Yang, I., Lee, H., & Song, Y. (2008). An Analysis on the Level of Evidence used in Gifted Elementary Students' Debate. Journal of the Korean Association for science education, 28(5), 495-505.
Cho, H. (2013). Epistemic level in middle school students' small-group argumentation using first-hand or second-hand data. Master's Thesis. The Graduate School Seoul National University.
Cho, H. (2014). Development and effect of argument-based modeling strategy as teaching method in middle school students. Dissertation. Graduate School Pusan National University.
Dobzhansky, T. (1973). Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution. The American Biology Teacher, 35(3), 125-129.
Evans, E. M. (2000). The emergence of beliefs about the origins of species in school-age children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46, 221-254.
Ferrari, M., & Chi, M. T. H.(1998). The nature of naive explanations of natural selection. International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 1231-1256.
Furtak (2012). Linking Progression for Natural Selection to Teachers' Enactment of Formative Assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 1181-1220
Gutheil, G., Vera, A., & Keil, F. C. (1998). Do houseflies think? Patterns of induction and biological beliefs in development. Cognition, 66, 33-49.
Ha, M., & Cha, H. (2006). Analysis of Mis-conceptualizations regarding Evolution Originating from TV Animation and Science Books for Children. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 25(4), 352-362.
Ha, M., Lee, J., & Cha, H. (2006). A Cross-Sectional Study of Students' Conceptions on Evolution and Characteristics of Concept Formation about It in Terms of the Subjects: Human, Animals and Plants. Journal of the Korean Association for science education, 26(7), 813-825.
Ha, M. (2007). Development of The instructional strategies of evolution based on The cross-sectional analysis of evolution conception. Master's Thesis. Graduate School of Korea National University of Education.
Ha, M., Cha, H., & Ku, S. (2010). A Study of Conceptions, Interest and Acceptance of Evolution, and Religiosity between Biology Majors and Non-majors in Colleges, The Korean Journal of Biology Education, 38(3), 467-475.
Hand, B., & Choi, A. (2010). Examining the impact of student use of multiple modal representations in constructing arguments in organic chemistry laboratory classes. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 29-44.
Hubber, P., Tytler, R., & Haslam, F. (2010). Teaching and learning about force with a representational focus: pedagogy and teacher change. Research in Science Education, 40, 5-28.
Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2002). Young children's naive thinking about the biological world. Psychology Press : New York.
Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2006). Young children's conception of the biological world. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(4), 177-181.
Jang, W. (2014). Research on the preconceptual type and the cause of conceptual formation of biological adaptation in 5th grade elementary school student. Master's Thesis. Graduate School of Korea National University of Education.
Jeffery, K. R. (1994) A study of the presence of evolutionary protoconcepts in pre-high school textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(5), 507-518.
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erduran & M. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education : perspectives from classroom-based research(pp.3-28). Dordrecht London: Springer.
Jo, J. (2014). Pre-service biology teachers' perspectives about biological meanings of competition and adaptation. Master's Thesis. Graduate School of Korea National University of Education.
Kuhn, L., & Reiser, B. (2006). Structuring activities to foster argumentative discourse. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Lee. G., Kwon. Y., Kim. Y., Baek. S., Shin. D., Yun. Y., Jang. Y., & Cho. M (2013). Life ScienceI. Seoul: Sangsangacademy Co.
Lee. J., Lee. B., Ku. H., Oh. H., Ryu. H., & Kang. H. (2012). Life Science II. Seoul: Chunjae Education Co.
Mayer, R. E., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapango, L. (1996). When is less more: meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 64-73.
Mayr, E. (1997). This is biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
Medin, D. L., & Atran, S. (2004). The native mind: Biological categorization and reasoning in development and across cultures. Psychological Review, 111, 960-983.
Nehm, R. H., Ha, M., Rector, M., Opfer, J., Perrin, L., Ridgway, J., & Mollohan, K. (2010). Scoring guide for the open response instrument (ORI) and evolutionary gain and loss test (EGALT). Technical Report of National Science Foundation REESE Project 0909999. Accessed online 10 Jan 2011 at: http://evolutionassessment.org.
Nehm, R. H., & Ha, M. (2011). Item feature effects in evolution assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(3), 237-256.
NRC(National Research Council) (2011). A framework for K-12 science education; Practice, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
Poling, D. A., & Evans, E. M. (2002). Why do birds of a feather flock together? Developmental change in the use of multiple explanations: Intention, teleology, essentialism. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 89-112.
Reece, J. B., Urry, L. A., Cain, M. L., Wasserman, S. A., Minorsky, P. V., & Jackson, R. B. (2012). Campbell Biology, 9th Eds. Pearson Education, Inc.
Sampson, V. & Clark, D. (2008). The Impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The effect of collaboration on the outcomes of argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.
Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2011). A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41, 63-97.
Sampson, V., & Grooms, J. (2010). Generate an argument: an instructional Model. Science Teacher, 77(5), 32-37.
Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217-257.
Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Schwarz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632-654.
Smith, M. U. (2010). Current status of research in teaching and learning evolution: II. padagogical issues. Science & Education, 19(6-8), 539-571.
Walton, D. M. (1990). What is reasoning? what is an argument?. The Journal of Philosophy, 87, 399-419.
Yang. I., Kim. H., Park. K., Lim. S., Kim. J., Shin. H., Eum. A., & Baek. S. (2013). Elementary science teachers' guide book 6-1. Seoul: MiraeN.
*원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다.
Free Access. 출판사/학술단체 등이 허락한 무료 공개 사이트를 통해 자유로운 이용이 가능한 논문
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.