한국과학교육학회지 (Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education)

  • 제24권1호
  • /
  • Pages.76-89
  • /
  • 2004
  • /
  • 1226-5187(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8489(eISSN)
한국과학교육학회 (The Korean Association for Science Education)
권호 표지

Co-evolving with Material Artifacts: Learning Science through Technological Design

  • 발행 : 2004.02.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Recent studies of science and technology "in-the-making" revealed that the process of designing material artifacts is not a straightforward application of prior images or theories by one (or more) person(s) isolated from his or her (their) environment. Rather, designing is a process contingent on the social and material setting for both engineering designers and students. Over the past decade, designing technological artifacts has emerged as an important learning environment in science classrooms. Through the analyses of a large database concerning an innovative simple machines curriculum for sixth-and seventh-grade students, we accumulated valid evidence for the nature of the designing process and science learning through it. In this paper, we show that design actions intertwine with the transformation of the objectified raw materials and artifact, the designer collective, and the mediating tools enabling that transformation, which constitute the elements of an activity from the perspective of cultural-historical activity theory. We conceptualize the continuous change of relation between material artifacts, designers, and tools throughout the design activity as co-evolution. Two episodes were selected to exemplify synchronic and diachronic change of relations inherent in co-evolving activity system. Finally, we discuss the implications of co-evolution during design activity for science learning.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Bucciarelli, L. L. (1994). Designing engineers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  2. Cajas, F. (2000). Research in technology education: What are we researching? A response to Lewis. Journal of Technology Education, 11, 61-69
  3. Duhem, P. (1982). The aim and structure of physical theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
  4. Elman, J. L., Bates , E. A., Johnson, M. H., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett , K. (1996). Rethinking innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. cambridge, MA: MIT Press
  5. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta Konsultit
  6. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133-156 https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080020028747
  7. Engestrom, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engestr$\"{o}$m, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punam$\"{a}$ki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1-16). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
  8. Gooding, D. (1990). Experiment and the making of meaning: Human agency in scientific observation and experiment. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
  9. Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1995). Investigative work in the science curriculum. Milton- Keyes, England: Open University Press
  10. Hanson, N. R. (1965). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
  11. Hodson, D. (1996). Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion, Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28, 115-135 https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027980280201
  12. Il' enkov, E. (1977). Dialectical logic: Essays in its history and theory (Transl. by H. Campbell Creightin). Moscow: Progress
  13. Jenkins, E. (1998). The schooling of laboratory science. In J. Wellington (Ed.), Practical work in school science: Which way now? (pp. 35-51). New York: Routledge
  14. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39-103 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2
  15. Kafai, Y. B. (1994). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children's learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  16. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press
  17. Layton, D. (1993). Technology's challenge to science education: cathedral, quarry or company store? Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press
  18. Leont'ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
  19. Miettinen, R. (1998). Object construction and network in research work: the case of research on cellulose-degrading enzymes. Social Studies of Science, 28, 423-463 https://doi.org/10.1177/030631298028003003
  20. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
  21. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry laboratories. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing
  22. Roth, W.-M. (1996). Art and artifact of children's designing: A situated cognition perspective. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 129-166 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0502_2
  23. Roth, W.-M. (1998). Designing communities. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing
  24. Roth, W.-M. (2001). Modeling design as situated and distributed process, Learning and Instruction, 11, 211-239 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00029-3
  25. Roth, W.-M. (2004). Activity theory and education: An introduction. Mind, Culture and Activity, 11, 211-239
  26. Roth, W.-M., Tobin, K. G., & Ritchie, S. M. (2001). Re/constructing elementary science. New York: Peter Lang
  27. Roth, W.-M., & Welzel, M. (2001). From activity to gestures and scientific language. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 103-136 https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200101)38:1<103::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-G
  28. Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab (Ed.), The teaching of science (pp. 1-104). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
  29. Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: In pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 403-418 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1990.tb17229.x
  30. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., & Rosch, E. (1993). The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press