References
- Anderson, D. L., Fisher, K. M., & Norman, G. J. (2002). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 952-978. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10053
- Berland, L., & Crucet, K. (2016). Epistemological Trade-Offs: Accounting for Context When Evaluating Epistemological Sophistication of Student Engagement in Scientific Practices. Science Education, 100(1), 5-29. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21196
- Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68-94. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20446
- Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082-1112. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21257
- Bishop, B. A., & Anderson, C. W. (1990). Student conceptions of natural selection and its role in evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 415-427. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660270503
- Board on Science Education. (2012). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
- Chinn, C. A., Buckland, L. A., & Samarapungavan, A. L. A. (2011). Expanding the dimensions of epistemic cognition: Arguments from philosophy and psychology. Educational Psychologist, 46(3), 141-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.587722
- Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 293-321. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20216
- Corcoran, T. B., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform.
- Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
- Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of research in education, 32(1), 268-291. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X07309371
- Ford, M. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404-423. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20263
- Furtak (2012). Linking Progression for Natural Selection to Teachers' Enactment of Formative Assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 1181-1220.
- Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 169-190). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53-90. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_3
- Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Osborne, J., & Wild, A. (2015). Beyond construction: Five arguments for the role and value of critique in learning science. International Journal of Science Education,
- Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of educational research, 67(1), 88-140. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001088
- Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2006). Young children's conception of the biological world. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(4), 177-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00431.x
- Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science education, 77(3), 319-337. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730770306
- Kwon, J., & Kim, H. (2016). Exploring small Group Argumentation Shown in Designing an Experiment : Focusing on Students' Epistemic Goals and Epistemic Consideration for Activities. Journal of Korean Association for science education, 36(1), 45-61. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.1.0045
- Louca, L., Elby, A., Hammer, D.,&Kagey, T. (2004). Epistemological resources: Applying a new epistemological framework to science instruction. Educational Psychologist, 39, 57-68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3901_6
- Maeng, S., Park, Y., & Kim, C. (2013). Methodological Review of the Research on Argumentative Discourse Focused on Analyzing Collaborative Construction and Epistemic Enactments of Argumentation. Journal of the Korean Association for science education, 33(4), 840-862. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.4.840
- Mayr, E. (1997). This is biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behavioral and brain sciences, 34(02), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000968
- Ohlsson, S. & Bee, N. V. (1992) The effect of expository text on children's explanations of biological evolution. OERI Report. Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
- Osborne, J. F., Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S. Y. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
- Park, C., & Cha, H. (2016). Analyzing the effectiveness of argumentation program to conceptualize natural selection concept for the elementary science gifted students. Journal of Korean Association for science education, 36(4), 591-606. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.4.0591
- Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science education, 66(2), 211-227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207
- Sampson, V., & Grooms, J. (2010). Generate an argument: an instructional Model. Science Teacher, 77(5), 32-37.
- Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634-656. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20065
- Toulmin, S. (1958). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cited by
- 불확실함에서 벗어나기까지: "왜 강낭콩이 싹트지 않았을까?" 논변 활동에서 초등학생들의 정서-인지적 반박 vol.40, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2020.40.1.1