Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Characteristics of Student Inquiry Found in Project-based Science Practices: Focusing on Theory-Evidence-Method Coordinations and Skills in Using Tools

프로젝트 기반 과학 활동 과정에서 나타나는 학생 탐구의 특징: 증거-이론-방법의 조정과 도구 사용의 솜씨를 중심으로

  • Received : 2015.06.30
  • Accepted : 2015.07.28
  • Published : 2015.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to explore the characteristics of student inquiry found in project-based science practices. The participants were four high school students in a science research club and worked their own project for one semester. During the project, they made their research questions, planned and executed their research procedures, and made their own conclusion. Their activities during the project were videotaped and recorded. They were also interviewed. Group worksheets and written reports were all collected for analyses. The whole processes of the inquiry were analyzed and interpreted qualitatively. The characteristics of student inquiry were presented in the view of the theory-evidence-method coordination. Three different modes of the coordinations that were found recursively in their inquiry were the theory-evidence coordination, the evidence-method coordination, and the theory-evidence-method coordination. It was also revealed that students' tacit knowledge using various tools were exhibited and these skills improved during their group works. The implications for school science inquiry education and research based on this study are discussed.

이 연구에서는 프로젝트 기반으로 자유롭게 주제를 정하고 과학활동을 수행하는 과정에서 나타나는 학생 탐구의 특징을 탐색하였다. 연구 참여자는 고등학교에서 한 학기 동안 과학 동아리 활동에 참여한 4명의 학생들이었다. 학생들은 한 조가 되어 스스로 탐구 주제를 정하고 활동 과정을 계획하고 실행하였다. 학생들의 탐구 활동을 관찰하고 녹화 및 녹음하였으며 자발적으로 면담의사를 표현한 학생과 면대면 반구조화된 면담을 실시하고, 조별 활동지와 보고서를 수집하는 등 다양한 자료를 수집하였다. 탐구의 전 과정은 질적으로 분석하였으며, 학생들의 과학 활동에 대해 해석적으로 분석하였다. 학생 탐구 특징에 관한 연구의 결과는 두 부분으로 제시되었다. 첫째, 과학 활동에서 이론-증거-방법 간의 조정은 다양한 양상으로 나타났다. 구체적으로, 활동의 맥락에 따라 이론-증거의 조정, 증거-방법의 조정, 이론-증거-방법의 조정 양상이 드러났다. 둘째, 학생들은 활동 수행 과정에서 다양한 도구를 선택하고 조합하였으며, 도구 사용에 있어서 체화된 암묵적 지식인 솜씨를 발휘하였다. 연구 결과를 토대로 학교 과학 탐구를 위한 과학 교육 및 연구에의 시사점을 논의하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abd-El-Khalick, F., Boujaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H.-L. (2004). Inquiry in science education: International perspectives. Science Education, 88(3), 397-419. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10118
  2. Chinn, C. A., & Melhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10001
  3. Cho, H. (1992). An analysis of the nature of scientific inquiry and a study on the instructional method for promoting inquiry competence. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 12(1), 61-74.
  4. Cho, Y. (1999). Qualitative descriptions, analyses, interpretations. Journal of the Korean Society for the Study of Anthropology of Education, 2(2), 27-63.
  5. Duschl, R. A. (2005). The HS lab experience: Reconsidering the role of evidence, explanation and the language of science. Commissioned paper by the National Research Council for the Committee on the role of the laboratory in high school science.
  6. Garcia-Mila, M., & Anderson, C. (2008). Cognitive foundations of learning argumentation. In S. Erduran, & M. P. Jimenz-Alexandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 29-45). UK: Springer.
  7. Grandy, R., & Duschl, R. A. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. Science & Education, 16(2), 141-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-005-2865-z
  8. Hodson, D. (2009). Teaching and learning about science: Language, theories, methods, history, traditions and values. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sence Publishers.
  9. Jang, H. (2014). Science meets philosophy. Seoul: EBS Media Co.
  10. Jeon, Y., & Jeon, M. (2009). The difficulties that occur when teaching scientific open-inquiry. Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 20(1), 105-115. https://doi.org/10.20972/kjee.20.1.200907.105
  11. Jeong, S.-H., Choi, H.-D., & Yang, I.-H. (2011). Analysis on the complexity of scientific reasoning during pre-service elementary school teachers' open-inquiry activities. Journal of the Korean Society of Elementary Science Education, 30(3), 379-393.
  12. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre, & S. Erduran (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 3-27). Dordrecht: Springer.
  13. Jung, W., Lee, J., & Oh, S. (2011). Investigation on the difficulties during middle school students' finding inquiry topics on open-inquiry activities. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(8), 1199-1213.
  14. Kim, H., & Song, J. (2004). The exploration of open scientific inquiry model emphasizing students' argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 24(6), 1216-1234.
  15. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1992). The couch, the cathedral, and the laboratory: On the relationship between experiment and laboratory in science. In A. Pickering (Ed.), Science as practice and culture (pp. 113-137). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  16. Kuhn, D., & Franklin, S. (2006). The second decade: What develops (and how)? In W. Damon, & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2, Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 953-993). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  17. Lee, J. (2013). Multi-layered construction of technoscientific knowledge in a neuroscience research lab: A research on the actor-networks of Neuroscience Research Institute (NRI); Unpublished doctoral dissertation: Seoul National University. Seoul.
  18. Lee, S. H., Shin, M.-K., Lee, G., Lee, S.-K., Kwon, N.-J. (2010). Analyzing coherence of evidences and claims presented in elementary students' science writing for inquiry activities. Journal of the Korean Society of Elementary Science Education, 29(4), 505-514.
  19. Lee, S.-K., Son, J., Kim, J.-H., Park, J., Seo, H.-A., Shim, K.-C., Lee, K.-Y., Lee, B., Choi, J. (2013). Characteristics of school science inquiry based on the case analyses of high school science classes. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(2), 284-309. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.2.284
  20. Lynch, M. (1985). Art and artifacts in laboratory science: A study of shop work and shop talk in a research laboratory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  21. Ministry of Education (1987). Science education curriculum. Ministry of Education and Culture.
  22. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2007). Science education curriculum. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology.
  23. Moshman, D. (1998). Cognitive development beyond childhood. In D. Kuhn, & R. Siegler (Eds), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2, Cognition, perception, and language (5th ed., pp. 947-978). New York: Wiley.
  24. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  25. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Gloucester, Massachusetts, MA: Peter Smith.
  26. Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
  27. Rudolph, J. L. (2005). Inquiry, instrumentalism, and the public understanding of science. Science Education, 89, 803-821. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20071
  28. 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421
  29. Shin, H., & Kim, H. (2010). The analysis of the teachers' and students' views about the difficulties on open inquiry activities in elementary school science. Journal of the Korean Society of Elementary Science Education, 29(3), 262-276.
  30. Song, J. (2014). Restructuring Korean science curriculum: With a focus on the new integrated curriculum for all students. Paper presented at 2014 KASE International Symposium.
  31. Thagard, P. (2012). The cognitive science of science: Explanation, discovery, and conceptual change. The MIT Press.
  32. Yoo, J., & Kim, J. (2012). Middle school students' construction of physics inquiry problems and variables isolation and clarification during small group open-inquiry activities. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(5), 903-927. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.5.903
  33. Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20, 99-149. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1999.0497

Cited by

  1. 고등학생의 학교 과학 탐구 활동에서 나타나는 도구발생의 특징 vol.37, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.6.971
  2. 학생 중심의 과학 학습 공동체 이해를 위한 행위주체성에 대한 이론적 고찰 vol.39, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2019.39.1.101