[논문]과학기술관련 사회쟁점 미디어 정보에 대한 중학생들의 평가 양상 탐색

조세린; 고연주; 이현주

doi:10.14697/jkase.2021.41.1.59

과학기술관련 사회쟁점 미디어 정보에 대한 중학생들의 평가 양상 탐색
Patterns of Student Evaluation on Media Information Regarding Socioscientific Issues 원문보기

한국과학교육학회지 = Journal of the Korean association for science education, v.41 no.1, 2021년, pp.59 - 70

조세린 (장위중학교) , 고연주 (이화여자대학교) , 이현주 (이화여자대학교)

초록
AI-Helper

대중매체를 통해 전달되는 과학기술관련 사회쟁점(SSI)에 관한 미디어 정보를 비판적으로 평가하여 합리적인 의사결정을 내릴 수 있는 능력은 시민으로서 지녀야 할 과학적 소양의 한 측면이다. 본 연구는 합리적인 의사결정을 위해 선행되어야 할 학생들의 정보 평가 양상에 관한 것으로, 일상에서 접하는 SSI 미디어 정보를 과학적 요소가 강조된 수치정보와 정서적 공감이 강조된 공감정보로 구분한 후, 이러한 정보의 특성에 따라 중학생들의 정보 평가 양상이 어떻게 다른지 탐색해보았다. 본 연구에는 중학생 96명이 참여하였으며, 신문기사 형식의 SSI 자료 내 정보의 신뢰도와 설득력 있는 정도를 묻는 질문지를 도입하였다. 질문지는 세 가지 SSI 주제에 대한 찬성 또는 반대 입장에 대해 과학적 요소가 강조된 수치정보와 정서적으로 호소하여 공감을 불러일으키는 공감정보 기사 2개로 구성되었으며, 정보가 얼마나 믿을만한가를 묻는 신뢰도 평가 문항과 정보가 얼마나 설득력 있는가를 묻는 설득력 있는 정도 평가 문항을 포함하였다. 연구 결과, 첫째 전반적으로 학생들은 SSI 맥락에서 공감정보보다 수치정보를 더 신뢰하는 것으로 나타났다. 신뢰하는 정보 요소로는 수치정보에서는 과학적 증거와 데이터를, 공감정보에서는 사례, 사회 문제, 표현, 그리고 가치를 주로 신뢰하는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 설득력 있는 정도에 대한 평가는 수치나 공감과 같은 정보의 유형보다는 SSI 맥락이나 내용적인 측면에 따라 상이한 것으로 나타났다. 즉, 학생들은 SSI 정보를 담은 기사의 설득력을 판단할 때 정보에 담긴 가치, 근거의 풍부함, 정보의 논리성을 바탕으로 판단하였다고 볼 수 있다.

Abstract ▼ AI-Helper

Ability to make informed decisions by critically evaluating media information on socioscientific issues (SSI) is one of the crucial elements of scientific literacy that citizens should obtain. This study aims to investigate how middle school students evaluated media information about socioscientific issues (SSI) when they faced two different types of information (i.e., numerical and empathic information). To achieve the aim, 96 middle school students responded to the questionnaires asking them to evaluate reliability and persuasiveness of SSI media information. The questionnaires consisted of two sets of newspaper articles on each SSI (pro-numerical/empathic, against-numerical/empathic). After reading the articles, the students evaluated reliability and persuasiveness of each article and wrote the reasons for their evaluation. The results were as follows: First, the students believed that news articles with numerical information were more reliable than the ones with empathic information in all SSI contexts. They tended to trust scientific evidence and data from numerical information, and real cases, societal problems, expressions, and values from empathic information. In addition, they evaluated their reliability based on the logic of information, accuracy of information, breadth and depth of data, and quantity and quality of sources both numerical and empathic information. Second, in case of evaluating persuasiveness of the articles, they focused more on the values that information contained, richness and logicality of the information, rather than the types of information, regardless of the type of information.

주제어

표/그림 (10)

표 Table 1. Contents of information given to the participants
표 Table 2. Comparison of reliability of numerical information and empathic information within SSI contexts
표 Table 3. Information that students rated as more reliable within SSI contexts (N=96)
그림 Figure 1. Scatter plots of students' response to reliable information within SSI contexts
표 Table 4. Reasons for evaluating as more reliable
표 Table 5. Frequencies of students' responses to more reliable elements of information(N(%))
표 Table 6. Comparison of persuasiveness of numerical information and empathic information within SSI contexts
표 Table 7. Information that students rated as more persuasive within SSI contexts (N=96)
표 Table 8. Reasons for evaluating as more persuasive
표 Table 9. Frequencies of students' responses to more persuasive types of information(N(%))

참고문헌 (38)

Capkinoglu, E., Cetin, P. S., & Peten, D. M. (2021). How do pre-service science teachers evaluate persuasiveness of a socioscientific argument? International Journal of Science Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2021.1876273

상세보기
Choe, I. (2005). A comparative study on modelling readability formulas: Focus on primary and secondary textbooks. Journal of the Korean Society for information Management, 22(4), 173-195.
Christenson, N., Rundgren, S. N., & Zeidler, D. L. (2014). The relationship of discipline background to upper secondary students' argumentation on socioscientific issues. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 581-601.

상세보기
Dani, D., Wan, G., & Henning, J. E. (2010). A case for media literacy in the context of socioscientific issues. New Horizons in Education, 58(3), 85-98.
Evagorou, M. (2011). Discussing a socioscientific issue in a primary school classroom: The case of using a technology-supported environment in formal and nonformal settings. In T. D. Sadler (Ed.), Socio-scientific issues in the classroom: Teaching, learning, and research (pp. 133-159). The Netherlands: Springer.
Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687.

상세보기
Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Puig, B. (2012). Argumentation, evidence evaluation and critical thinking. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (pp. 1001-1015). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Kim, Y., & Ahn, J. (2019). Factors influencing internet media credibility among college students. The Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 19(2), 438-449.
Ko, Y. (2017). Comparison of college students' dialogic argumentation in the context of socioscientific issues: Based on idiocentrism and allocentrism. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
Kolsto, S. D. (2001). 'To trust or not to trust,... '-pupils' ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 877-901.

상세보기
Kolsto, S. D. (2006). Patterns in students' argumentation confronted with a risk-focused socio-scientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 28(14), 1689-1716.

상세보기
Kolsto, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., Mestad, I., Quale, A., Tonning, A. S. V., & Ulvik, M. (2006). Science students' critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Science Education, 90(4), 632-655.
Kwon, H., & Choi, H. (2013). Effect of epistemological beliefs on dependency on the source authority in terms of evaluating persuasiveness of scientific explanation. The Korean Journal of Educational Psychology, 27(1), 181-200.
Lee, E. (2011). Perceived bias or biased perception? Effects of others' comments, perceived opinion climate, and issue involvement on perceived news slant. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 55(3), 179-198.
Lee, E., & Kang, N. (2014). Middle school students' evaluation of scientific information: From the perspective of hypothetico-deductive Reasoning. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(4), 375-383.
Leung, J. S. C., Wong, A. S. L., & Yung, B. H. W. (2015). Understandings of nature of science and multiple perspective evaluation of science news by non-science majors. Science & Education, 24(7-8), 887-912.
Leung, J. S. C., Wong, A. S. L., & Yung, B. H. W. (2017). Evaluation of science in the media by non-science majors. International Journal of Science Education(Part B), 7(3), 219-236.

상세보기
Lin, S. S. (2014). Science and non-science undergraduate students' critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(5), 1023-1046.

상세보기
McClune, B., & Jarman, R. (2012). Encouraging and equipping students to engage critically with science in the news: What can we learn from the literature? Studies in Science Education, 48(1), 1-49.

상세보기
Miller, J. D. (2006). Civic scientific literacy in Europe and the United States. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the World Association for Public Opinion Research, Montreal, Canada.
Mun, J., Kim, E., & Kim, S. (2017). College students' evaluation of scientific information: Focusing on the trustworthiness of information. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 17, 143-165.
Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 947-967.

상세보기
Oliveras, B., Marquez, C., & Sanmarti, N. (2014). Students' attitudes to information in the press: Critical reading of a newspaper article with scientific content. Research in Science Education, 44(4), 603-626.

상세보기
Phillips, L. M., & Norris, S. P. (1999). Interpreting popular reports of science: What happens when the reader's world meets the world on paper? International Journal of Science Education, 21(3), 317-327.

상세보기
Ratcliffe, M. (1997). Pupil decision-making about socio-scientific issues within the science curriculum. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 167-182.

상세보기
Raveendran, A., & Chunawala, S. (2015). Values in science: Making sense of biology doctoral students' critical examination of a deterministic claim in a media article. Science Education, 99(4), 669-695.
Rundgren, S. N. C., & Rundgren, C. J. (2010). SEE-SEP: From a separate to a holistic view of socioscientific issues. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching, 11(1), 1-24.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.

상세보기
Song, H., Kim W, W., & Cho, H. (2005). A study on audience's awareness about the media reports of science technology risk: Focused on the genetically modified organism(GMO) case. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 49(3), 105-128.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In Y. S. Lincoln & N. K. Denzin (Eds), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tseng, A. S. (2018). Students and evaluation of web-based misinformation about vaccination: Critical reading or passive acceptance of claims? International Journal of Science Education(Part B), 8(3), 250-265.

상세보기
Werner da Rosa, C., & Otero, J. (2018). Influence of source credibility on students' noticing and assessing comprehension obstacles in science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 40(13), 1653-1668.

상세보기
Witzig, S. B., Halverson, K. L., Siegel, M. A., & Freyermuth, S. K. (2013). The interface of opinion, understanding and evaluation while learning about a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science Education, 35(15), 2483-2507.

상세보기
Wu, Y. T., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). High school students' informal reasoning on a socio-scientific issue: Qualitative and quantitative analyses. International Journal of Science Education, 29(9), 1163-1187.

상세보기
Xiao, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2017). Associations between attitudes towards science and children's evaluation of information about socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 26(3-4), 247-269.
Yang, F. Y., Chen, Y. H., & Tsai, M. J. (2013). How university students evaluate online information about a socio-scientific issue and the relationship with their epistemic beliefs. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 385-399.
Zeidler, D. L., & Nichols, B. H. (2009). Socioscientific issues: Theory and practice. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 21(2), 49-58.

상세보기
Zimmerman, C., Bisanz, G. L., Bisanz, J., Klein, J. S., & Klein, P. (2001). Science at the supermarket: A comparison of what appears in the popular press, experts' advice to readers, and what students want to know. Public Understanding of Science, 10(1), 37-58.

상세보기

저자의 다른 논문 :

표제어: PCR

동의어: Packet Collision Rate

용어 설명 출처 목록 (6)

용어 설명: PCR은 세균 특이성이 있는 primer를 이용하여 적은 수의 세균이 있을지라도 쉽게 검출할 수 있는 유용한 방법이며, 이를 이용하여 구강 내 치면세균막이나 타액에서 직접 세균을 검출할 수 있게 되었다[8].

내보내기 구분	파일저장 인쇄 메일전송
구성항목	기본정보 상세정보 관리번호, 논문명, 저널/프로시딩명, 저자 , 발행년, 권, 호, 시작페이지, 끝페이지, 발행기관 관리번호, 논문명, 대등논문명, 저자 , 저널/프로시딩명, 발행기관, 발행년, 발행언어, 권, 호, 시작페이지, 끝페이지, ISBN, ISSN, 주제분야, 키워드, 초록(한글), 초록(영문), 저자(소속기관)
저장형식	Text(ASCII format) Excel format RefWorks Direct Export RIS format (for Reference Manager, ProCite, EndNote), Scholar's Aids, Mendeley
메일정보	받는사람 (필수) @ 보내는사람 (선택) @ 제목 내용 KISTI 검색결과 이메일 서비스
안내	총 건의 자료가 검색되었습니다. 다운받으실 자료의 인덱스를 입력하세요. (1-10,000) 검색결과의 순서대로 최대 10,000건 까지 다운로드가 가능합니다. 데이타가 많을 경우 속도가 느려질 수 있습니다.(최대 2~3분 소요) 다운로드 파일은 UTF-8 형태로 저장됩니다. 파일의 내용이 제대로 보이지 않을실 때는 웹브라우저 상단의 보기 -> 인코딩 -> 자동선택 여부를 확인하십시오. ~ Text(ASCII format) Excel format

연합인증