질의응답

참고문헌 (43)

1. Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333(6046), 1096-1097. 

   상세보기

2. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airiasian, W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J. & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives: Abridged edition. New York: Longman. 

3. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Company. Inc. 

4. Bucat, B., & Mocerino, M. (2009). Learning at the sub-micro level: Structural representations. In Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 11-29). Springer, Dordrecht. 

5. Bungum, B. (2008). Images of physics: an explorative study of the changing character of visual images in Norwegian physics textbooks. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 4(2), 132-141. 

6. Burton, L. (2004). Helping students become media literate. In Workshop's paper. Australian School Library Association (NSW) Inc. 5th State Conference. 

7. Chittleborough, G., & Treagust, D. F. (2007). Correct interpretation of chemical diagrams requires transforming from one level of representation to another. Research in Science Education, 38(4), 463-482. 

8. Churches, A. (2009). Bloom's digital taxonomy. Educational Origami, 4. 

9. Colin, P., Chauvet, F., & Viennot, L. (2002). Reading images in optics: Students' difficulties and teachers' views. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3), 313-332. 

   상세보기

10. Dimopoulos, K., Koulaidis, V., & Sklaveniti, S. (2003). Towards an analysis of visual images in school science textbooks and press articles about science and technology. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 189-216. 

    상세보기

11. diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 385-398. 

    상세보기

12. Dori, Y. J., Tal, R.T., & Tsaushu, M. (2003). Teaching biotechnology through case studies: can we improve higher order thinking skills of nonscience majors? Science Education, 87(6), 767.793. 

    상세보기

13. Evagorou, M., Erduran, S., & Mantyla, T. (2015). The role of visual representations in scientific practices: from conceptual understanding and knowledge generation to 'seeing' how science works. International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1), 11. 

    상세보기

14. Gilbert, J. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Towards a coherent model for macro, submicro and symbolic representations in chemical education. In Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 333-350). Springer, Dordrecht. 

15. Gooding, D. (2006). From phenomenology to field theory: Faraday’s visual reasoning. Perspectives on Science, 14(1), 40-65. 

    상세보기

16. Hauenstein, A. D. (1998). A conceptual framework for educational objectives. University Press of America, Inc. 

17. Jho, H., Jo, K., & Yoon, H.-G. (2017). Analysis of middle school students’ visual representation competences for electric current. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 67(6), 714-724. 

    상세보기

18. Jo, K., Jho, H., & Yoon, H.-G. (2015) Analysis of visual representations related to electromagnetism in primary and secondary science textbooks. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 65(4), 343-357. 

    상세보기

19. Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701. 

    상세보기

20. Kim, O.-N. (2006). The comparative analysis of educational taxonomies in cognitive domain. The Korea Educational Review, 12(2), 165-189. 

21. Kim, T.-S., & Kim, B.-K. (2002). The comparison of graphing abilities of pupils in grades 7 to 12 based on TOGS (The test of graphing in science). Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 22(4), 768-778. 

22. Klopfer, L. E. (1971). Evaluation of learning in science. In B. S. Bloom, J. T. Hastings & G. F. Madaus (Eds.), Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: MaGraw-Hill. 

23. Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualizations in Science Education (pp. 121-146). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. 

24. Lee, J. (2011). Revisiting graphicacy: The roles of graphicacy in the digital era and tasks of geographic education. The Journal of the Korean Association of Geographic and Environmental Education, 19(1), 1-15. 

25. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). Developing model-based reasoning in mathematics and science. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21(1), 39-48. 

    상세보기

26. Lynch, M. (2006). The production of scientific images: vision and re-vision in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science. In L Pauwels (Ed.), Visual cultures of science: rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication (pp. 26-40). Lebanon, NH: Darthmouth College Press. 

27. Marzano, R. J. (2001). Designing a new taxonomy of educational objectives. Corwin Press, Inc. 

28. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and instruction, 13(2), 125-139. 

    상세보기

29. McKenzie, D. L., & Padilla, M. J. (1986). The construction and validation of the test of graphing in science (TOGS). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(7), 571-579. 

    상세보기

30. Mnguni, L. E. (2014). The theoretical cognitive process of visualization for science education. SpringerPlus, 3(1), 184. 

    상세보기

31. Moline, S. (1995). I see what you mean: Children at work with visual information. Teachers Pub Group Inc. 

32. Nitz, S., Ainsworth, S., Nerdel, C., & Prechtl, H. (2014). Do student perceptions of teaching predict the development of representational competence and biological knowledge? Learning & Instruction, 31, 13-22. 

    상세보기

33. Ozcelik, A. T., & McDonald, S. P. (2013). Preservice science teachers’ uses of inscriptions in science teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1103-1132. 

    상세보기

34. Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian journal of psychology, 45(3), 255-287. 

    상세보기

35. Park, S., Kim, H., & Lee E.-H. (2014). An Analysis of students’ graphicacy in Korea based on the national assessment of educational achievement, from 2005 to 2007. Journal of the Korean Geographical Society, 44(3), 410-427. 

36. Postigo, Y., & Pozo, J. I. (2004). On the road to graphicacy: The learning of graphical representation systems. Educational Psychology, 24(5), 623-644. 

    상세보기

37. Schwarz, CV, Reiser, BJ, Davis, EA, Kenyon, L, Acher, A, Fortus, D, et al. (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. doi:10.1002/tea.20311. 

    상세보기

38. Talanquer, V. (2011). Macro, submicro, and symbolic: the many faces of the chemistry "triplet". International Journal of Science Education, 33(2), 179-195. 

    상세보기

39. Tippett, C. D. (2016) What recent research on diagrams suggests about learning with rather than learning from visual representations in science, International Journal of Science Education, 38(5), 725-746. 

    상세보기

40. Topsakal, U. U., & Oversby, J. (2013). What do scientist and non-scientist teachers notice about biology diagrams? Journal of Biological Education, 47(1), 21-28. 

    상세보기

41. Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Carolan, J. (2010). Using multi-modal representations to improve learning in junior secondary science. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 65-80. 

    상세보기

42. Yoon, H.-G. Jo, K., & Jho, H. (2016). Middle school students’ interpretation, construction, and application of visual representations for electrostatic induction. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 66(5), 580-589. 

    상세보기

43. Yoon, H.-G., Jo, K., & Jho, H. (2017). Secondary teachers’ perception about and actual use of visual representations in the teaching of electromagnetism. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(2), 253-262. 

저자의 다른 논문 :

윤혜경 (55)