참고문헌
- 강순민 (2004). 과학적 맥락의 논의 과제 해결 과정에서 나타나는 논의과정 요소의 특성. 한국교원대학교 박사학위 논문
- 강현모 (2007). 찰스 아이브스의 <114 노래집> (1922) : 미국의 정체성을 찾기 위한 장르에 대한 탐색. 서울대학교 박사학위 논문
- 곽경화, 남정희 (2009). 과학적 논의과정 활동을 통한 학생들의 논의 과정 변화 및 논의 상황에 따른 논의과정 특성. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(4), 400-413
- 김재봉(2002). 창조적 국어사용과 논증 문화. 한국초등국어교육 제 20집. 한국초등국어교육학회
- 김희경, 송진웅 (2004). 학생의 논변활동을 강조한 개방적 과학탐구 모형의 탐색. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(6), 1216-1234
- 남정희, 곽경과, 장경화, Hand, B. (2008). 논의를 강조한 탐구적 과학글쓰기의 중학교 과학수업에의 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 28(8), 922-936
- 민병곤 (2000). 신문 사설의 논증 구조 분석. 국어국문학, 127, 133-154
- 박영신 (2006). 교실에서의 실질적 과학 탐구를 위한 과학적 논증기회에 대한 이론적 고찰. 한국지구과학회지, 27(4), 410-415
- 양일호, 이효정, 이효녕, 조현준. (2009). 과학적논증과정 평가를 위한 루브릭 개발. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(2), 203-220
- 이선경 (2006). 소집단 토론에서 발생하는 학생들의 상호작용적 논증 유형 및 특징. 대한화학회지, 50(1), 79-88 https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2006.50.1.079
- 이선영 (2002). 토론의 논증 구성과 사회적 상호작용에 관한 연구, 서울대학교 석사학위 논문
- American Association for the Advancement of Science[AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press
- Barrs, M. (2004) Writing and Thingking. Retrieved from the World Wide web: http://www.teachingthinking.com
- Becker, J., Knight, E.Q., & Varelas. M. (1993). Meaning, love, and self in the classroom. Teaching and Learning: Journal of Natural Inquiry, 8, 11-15
- Brinker, K. (1994) Linguistische Textanalyse / 이성만 역 (2004). 텍스트언어학의 이해: 언어학적 텍스트분석의 기본 개념과 방법, 한국문화사
- Clark, D., & Sampson, V. (2006). Personally seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentaion. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253-277 https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600560944
- Dijk, T. A. v. (1997). The study of discourse. In Dijk, T. A. v. (Ed.), Discourse studies: a multidisciplinary introduction-Discourse as structure and process (Vol. 1). SAGE Publication Ltd. (London): 1-34
- Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osbome, J., (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classroom. Science Education, 84, 287-312 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
- Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72 https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260208560187
- Eemeren, F. H. v & Grootendorst, R. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary development, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
- Eemeren, F. H. v., Grootendorst, R., Blaire, J. A., & Willard C. A. (1992). Argumentation Illuminated. International Centre for the Study of Argumentation, SICSAT
- Fellows, N. J. (1994). A window into thinking: Using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 985-1001 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310911
- Freely, A. J. (1996). Argumentation and Debate: Critical thinking for reasoned decision making (9th ed.), Belmont, C. A.: Wadsworth Publishing Company
- Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. The Falmer Press: London
- Hand, B., Prain, V., Lawrence, C., & Yore, L. D. (1999). A writing in science framework designed to enhance science literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 21(10), 1021-1035 https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290165
- Hand, B., Hohenshell, L., & Prain, V. (2004). Exploring students'responses to conceptual questions when engaged with planned writing experiences: A study with year 10 science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(2), 186-210 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10128
- Hodson, D. (1993). In science of a rationale for multi cultural science education. Science Education, 77(6), 685-711 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770611
- Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodr uez, A. B., & Duschl, R. (2000). Doing the lesson or doing science: argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792 https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200011)84:6<757::AID-SCE5>3.0.CO;2-F
- Johns, A. M. (2002). Genre in the classroom: multiple perspectives. Mㅁ모: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Kallberg, J. (1987). The rhetoric of genre: chopin's nocturne in C minor, Nineteenth Century Music, 9(1987-8), p.239
- Kelly, G. J., Regev, J., & Prothero, W. (2008). Analysis of lines of reasoning in written argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 137 - 157). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
- Keys, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115-130 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199903)83:2<115::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-Q
- Kuhn, D., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. San Diego: Academic Press, INC.
- Kuhn, D. (1993). Science argument: Implication for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770306
- Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. New York: Academic Press, Inc
- Lemke, A. L. (1990). Talking science:language, learning, and values. New Jersey: Alex Publishing Corporation
- Macken-Horarik, M. (2002). Something to shoot for: a systemic functional approach to teaching genre in secondary school science. In A.M. Jones (ED.), Genre in the classroom: multiple perspectives (pp.17-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
- Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in science:Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. K. Halliday & Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp.166-202). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
- Martin, J. R., Christie, F., & Rothery, J. (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson. In L. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 58-82). Centre for Studies in literary education. Geelong: Deakin University
- Newell, G. E., & Winograd, P. (1989). The effects of writing on learning from expository text. Written Communication, 6(2), 196-217 https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088389006002004
- Newton, P., Driver, R., & Obsborne, J., (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576 https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290570
- Norris, S., & Phillips, L. (2003). How literacy in its functional sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224-240 https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10066
- National Research Council[NRC]. (1996). National Science Education Standards.National Academy Press, Washington, DC: National Academy Press
- National Research Council[NRC]. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: a guide for teaching and learning. National Academy Press, Washington, DC: National Academy Press
- Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
- Osborne, J. F. (2002). Science without literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 203-215 https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640220147559
- Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1999). Students Perceptions of Writing for Learning in Secondary School Science. Science Education, 83(2), 151-162 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199903)83:2<151::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-S
- Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260 https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336957
- Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press
- van Eemeren, F. H. & Grootendorst, R. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary development, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, INC
- Veel, R. (1997). Learning how to meanscientifically speaking: apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In F. Christie & J.R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and Institutions (pp.170-193). London: Continuum
- von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: Case Studies of Ho Students'Argumentation Relates to Their Scientific Knowledge. Journal of Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20213
- Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and Literacy in Science Education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press
- Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725 https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690305018
- Zohar, A. & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35-62 https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008