Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

An Analysis of the Patterns of Scientific Questions Generation among Elementary Science-Gifted and General Students

초등과학영재와 일반학생의 과학적 의문 생성 패턴 분석

  • Received : 2015.04.23
  • Accepted : 2015.08.21
  • Published : 2015.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to identify and compare the patterns of scientific questions generation among elementary science-gifted and general students when conducting observational tasks. The pattern in generating scientific questions, which is distinguished from other types of scientific questions, is the manner that students generate a variety of types of questions in an inquiry process. To analyze the patterns in generating scientific questions, the task of observing dry grapes in soda pop, candlelight, and dyed celery were selected as suitable tasks. The subjects were 26 science-gifted students participating in a gifted education program and 27 general students in an elementary school in the same city. They were all sixth graders. The results of this study are as follows: First, the patterns of scientific questions generation among gifted students and general students during observational tasks were classified into five patterns: [Pattern 1] single, [Pattern 2] sequential, [Pattern 3] repetitive, [Pattern 4] circulative, [Pattern 5] repetitive, and circulative. Second, gifted students and general students presented all of the five patterns, but the frequency of the patterns indicated differences between the two groups. The gifted students primarily presented [Pattern 3] and [Pattern 5]. On the other hand, the general students mainly presented [Pattern 1], [Pattern 2], and [Pattern 3]. These results suggest that the ways of generating scientific questions are very much as important as the types of questions. Teachers can establish teaching-learning strategies for generating scientific questions appropriate to learner's characteristics.

이 연구의 목적은 초등과학영재와 일반학생이 관찰 상황에서 나타내는 과학적 의문 생성 패턴을 분석하는 것이다. 이 연구에서 과학적 의문 생성 패턴(pattern in generating scientific questions)이란 과학적 의문의 유형(Type of scientific questions)과는 구분되는 것으로, 학생들이 탐구 과정 중 여러 유형의 의문들을 생성해가는 방식을 의미한다. 연구에 적합한 관찰 과제로 사이다 속 건포도, 촛불, 염색된 샐러리 과제를 선정하였다. 그리고 연구의 대상은 전라남도 S시 영재교육원 6학년 과학영재 26명과 같은 지역 시내에 위치한 초등학교 6학년 일반학생 27명으로 하였다. 연구 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 초등과학영재와 일반학생이 관찰 상황에서 나타낸 과학적 의문 생성 패턴은 '[패턴 1] 한 가지 유형의 의문 생성', '[패턴 2] 서로 다른 유형의 의문을 차례로 생성', '[패턴 3] 서로 다른 유형의 의문을 반복하여 생성', '[패턴 4] 서로 다른 유형의 의문을 순환하여 생성', '[패턴 5] 서로 다른 유형의 의문을 반복 순환하여 생성'의 다섯 가지로 분류할 수 있었다. 둘째, 초등과학영재와 일반학생은 각각 다섯 가지 패턴을 모두 나타냈으나 그 빈도에는 차이가 있었다. 영재학생들은 [패턴 3]과 [패턴 5]를 주로 나타냈으나, 일반학생들은 [패턴 1], [패턴 2], [패턴 3]을 가장 많이 나타냈다. 이러한 연구 결과는 학생들이 탐구 과정 중 생성한 개별 의문의 유형과 더불어 각 유형의 의문들을 생성해나가는 방식 또한 매우 중요함을 시사한다. 이를 통해 교사들은 학습자의 특성에 알맞은 과학적 의문 교수 학습 전략을 수립할 수 있을 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Barnes, C. P. (1979). Questioning strategies to develop critical thinking skills. Paper presented at the 46th annual meeting of the Claremont Reading Conference, Clarmont, CA, 13 pp. [ED 169 486]
  2. Chin, C. (2002). Student-generated questions: encouraging inquisitive minds in learning science. Teaching and Learning, 23(1), 59-67.
  3. Chin, C., & Kayalvizhi, G. (2002). Posing problems for open investigations: what questions do pupils ask?. Research in science & technological education, 20(2), 269-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514022000030499
  4. Choi, S. M., & Yeo, S. I. (2011). Analysis of elementary students' question types in their science class. Collection of Writings for Science Education, 24(1), 137-146.
  5. Chung, Y. L., & Bae, J. H. (2002). The effects of science question enhancement instruction on the science question level and achievement of middle school students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 22(4), 872-881.
  6. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593
  7. Elstgeest, J. (1985). The right question at the right time. In Wynne Harlen. Primary Science: Taking the Plunge. Oxford, England: Heinemann Educational, 36-46.
  8. Furtak, E. M., & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (2005). Questioning cycle: making students' thinking explicit during scientific inquiry. Science Scope, 28(4), 311-327.
  9. Hakkarainen, K., & Sintonen, M. (2002). The interrogative model of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. Science & Education, 11, 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013076706416
  10. Jang, J. E., Chung, Y. S., Choi, Y. H., & Kim, S. W. (2013). Exploring the characteristics of science gifted students' task commitment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.1.001
  11. Keys, C. W. (1998). A study of grade six students generating questions and plans for open-ended science investigations. Research in Science Education, 28(3), 301-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461565
  12. Kim, E. J. (2007). Science gifted and the assessment of creative problem solving ability. Korean Studies Information.
  13. Kim, Y. C. (2012). Qualitative research methodology I. Academy Press.
  14. King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Association, 31(2), 338-368. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312031002338
  15. Korean Ministry of Education. (2008). 2007 revised elementary school curriculum explanation IV : mathematics, science, practical course. Korean Ministry of Education.
  16. Kwon, H. Y., Byeon, J. H., Lee, I. S., & Kwon, Y. J. (2013). Analysis of characteristics of question generated in learning science by presenting method of question phenomena. Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 513-524. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2013.37.3.513
  17. Kwon, Y. J., Jeong, J. S., Kang, M. J., & Kim, Y. S. (2003a). A grounded theory on the process of generating hypothesis knowledge about scientific episodes. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(5), 458-469.
  18. Kwon, Y. J., Jeong, J. S., Lee, J. K., & Yang, I. H. (2007). The biologists' brain activation patterns during the generation of scientific questions on biological phenomena. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(1), 84-92.
  19. Kwon, Y. J., Jeong, J. S., Park, Y. B., & Kang, M. J. (2003b). A philosophical study on the generating process of declarative scientific knowledge - focused on inductive, abductive, and deductive processes. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(3), 215-228.
  20. Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Wadsworth Publishing Company.
  21. Lee, H. J., Jeong, J. S., Park, K. T., & Kwon, Y. J. (2004a). Types of scientific questions generated in observational activity by elementary students and preservice teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 24(5), 1018-1027.
  22. Lee, H. J., Park, K. T., & Kwon, Y. J. (2005). Type of thinking and generating processes of causal questions appeared in preservice elementary teachers' observation activity. Elementary science education, 24(3), 249-258.
  23. Lee, M. S., Jo, K. H., & Song, J. W. (2004b). Types and frequencies of questions - answers by middle school students in a small group activities during school experiments. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 24(2), 277-286.
  24. Lim, J. K. (2010). Effect that prior knowledge about research subject gets primary grade science brilliant intellect's observation method and question. Journal of Science Education, 34(1), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2010.34.1.105
  25. National Research Council NRC. (1996). National science education standards, Washington, DE: National Academy Press.
  26. Oh, C. H., Kim, M. K., & Yang, I. H. (2010). A microgenetic study on scientific question generating ability. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 30(6), 752-769.
  27. Park, E. M., & Kang, S. H. (2006). The effects of offering similar experiences for hypothesis-generation based on abduction. Secondary Education Research, 26(3), 356-366.
  28. Pedrosa de Jesus, H. T., Patricia, A. A., Teixeira-Dias, J. J., & Watts, M. (2006). Students' questions: building a bridge between Kolb's learning styles and approaches to learning. Education + Training, 48(2), 97-111. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400910610651746
  29. Reis, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2010). Is there still a need for gifted education?. An examination of current research. Leaning and Individual Differences, 20, 308-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.10.012
  30. Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1991). Science for All Americans. AAAS Press.
  31. Ryu, J. H., Joe, H. J., & Yoon, S. J. (2007). Exploratory analysis of learner generating questions. Journal of Educational Research, 30, 109-129.
  32. Ryu, S. G., & Park, J. S. (2009). Analysis of the scientific problem-finding activity of the scientifically-gifted. Secondary Education Research, 57(2), 59-83. https://doi.org/10.25152/ser.2009.57.2.59
  33. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Explaining creativity: the science of human innovation. Oxford University Press.
  34. Shin, D. H. (2007). The relationships between the patterns of elementary school teachers' explanations and the patters of elementary school students' questions on scientific phenomena. Elementary science education, 26(2), 149-160.
  35. Shin, H. H., & Kim, H. N. (2010). Analysis of elementary teachers' and students' views about difficulties on open science inquiry activities. Elementary science education, 29(3), 262-276.
  36. Thagard, P. (1998). Ulcers and bacteria I: Discovery and acceptance. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 29(1), 107-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8486(98)00006-5
  37. VanTassel-Baska, J. (2014). Curriculum issues: artful inquiry: the use of questions in working with the gifted. Gifted Child Today, 37(1), 48-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217513509621
  38. Vogler, K. E. (2005). Improve your verbal questioning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79(2), 98-103. https://doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.79.2.98-104
  39. Yang, I. H., Jeong, J. S., Kwon, Y. J., Jeong, J. W., Hur, M., & Oh, C. H. (2006). An intensive interview study on the process of scientists' science knowledge generation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 26(1), 88-98.
  40. Yang, I. H., Kim, E. A., & Oh, C. H. (2008). A case study of science high school students' hypothesizing and designing process. Secondary Education Research, 56(3), 283-331.
  41. Yang, I. H., Oh, C. H., & Cho, H. J. (2007). Development of the scientific inquiry process model based on scientists' practical work. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.1.001
  42. Yang, M. K. (2002). Exploring the characteristics of students' questioning in class and their educational implications. korean Journal of Educational Research, 40(1), 99-128.
  43. Yoon, C. H., & Kim, H. W. (2004). The study on formal reasoning, metacognition, and creativity of the intellectually gifted. Journal of Educational Psychology, 18(1), 241-260.
  44. Zion, M., & Sadeh, I. (2007). Curiosity and open inquiry learning. Journal of Biological Education, 41(4), 162-169. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2007.9656092
  45. Zoller, U. (1987). The fostering of question-asking capability: a meaningful aspect of problem-solving in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 510-512. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed064p510

Cited by

  1. '과학 교실 탐구공동체' 관점 기반 과학 수업 인식 조사 도구 개발 및 적용 vol.37, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.2.0273
  2. 초등 과학영재와 일반학생의 과학적 의문생성의 비교 vol.45, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2017.45.4.528
  3. Analysis on the Relationship between Meta-cognition and Scientific Reasoning Skill for the Scientifically Gifted Students and the General Students in Elementary School vol.46, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2018.46.4.524