Figure 1. Procedure of developing science writing activity
Figure 2. Level 5 of inductive reasoning(Lim & Kim, 2018)
Figure 3. Level 5 of deductive reasoning(Lim & Kim, 2018)
Figure 4. Level 5 of abductive reasoning(Lim & Kim, 2018)
Figure 5. Scientific reasoning levels by scientific reasoning types
Figure 6. Differences of Inductive reasoning levels by grades
Figure 7. Differences of deductive reasoning levels by grades
Figure 8. Differences of abductive reasoning levels by grades
Table 1. Information of participants
Table 2. Operational definition of scientific reasoning types
Table 3. Operational definition of subcategories by scientific reasoning types
Table 4. Performance levels by scientific reasoning types
Table 5. Ratio of elementary school students' scientific reasoning
Table 6. Differences by grades of scientific reasoning ratio
Table 7. Scientific reasoning types by grades
Table 8. Scientific reasoning levels by grades
Table 9. Inductive reasoning level differences by grades
Table 10. Deductive reasoning level differences by grades
Table 11. Abductive reasoning level differences by grades
References
- Bereiter, C. (1980). Development in writing. in cognitive processes in writing, L. W. Gregg and E. R. Steinberg, editors, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 73-93.
- Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Choi, B., Han, H., Shin, A., Kim, S., & Park, J. (2003). Effects of a cognitive acceleration program on primary school students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 22(1), 1-14.
- Chun, J. & Son, J. (2004). A type analysis of creative thinking abilities in science writing - with focus on middle school science textbooks. The Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 7(2), 285-304. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2004.7.2.285
- Cooper, J. D. & Kiger, N. D. (2008). Literacy assessment: Helping teachers plan instruction. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
- Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria. Zeitschrift fur Soziologie, 19(6), 418-427.
- Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. (translated by Y. Kang, S. Ko, O. Kwon, H. Ryu, M. Park, J. Bang, J. Lee. I. Jeong, & W. Hwang, Seoul: Kyowusa, 2005.)
- Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications, Inc. (translated by H. Cho, S. Jeong, J. Kim, & J. Kwon, Seoul: Hakjisa, 2010).
- Eames, K. & Loewenthal, K. (1990). Effects of handwriting and examiner's expertise on assessment of essays. The Journal of Social Psychology, 130(6), 831-833. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1990.9924637
- Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28(2), 122-128. https://doi.org/10.2307/356095
- Fairclough, N. (2004). Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, 6, 121-138.
- Fehring, R. J. (1987). Methods to validate nursing diagnoses. Nursing Faculty Research and Publications, 27, 1-9.
- Fischer, H. R. (2001). Abductive reasoning as a way of worldmaking. Foundations of Science, 6(4), 361-383. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011671106610
- Graham, S. & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445-476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445
- Greenstein, G. (2013). Writing is thinking: Using writing to teach science. Astronomy Education Review, 12(1).
- Gunel, M., Hand, B., & McDermott, M. A. (2009). Writing for different audiences: Effects on high-school students' conceptual understanding of biology. Learning and Instruction, 19(4), 354-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.07.001
- Han, S. (2004). Vygotsky and education: Cultural-historical approach. Seoul: Kyoyukkoahaksa.
- Hand, B., Norton-Meier, L., Staker, J., & Bintz, J. (2006). When science and literacy meet in the secondary learning space: Implementing the science writing heuristic (SWH). University of Iowa.
- Jang, J. Y. & Hand, B. (2016). Examining the value of a scaffolded critique framework to promote argumentative and explanatory writings within an argument-based inquiry approach. Research in Science Education, 1-19.
- Jang, S. (2015). The critical discourse analysis(CDA) study of the Korean education contents. Journal of Research on Korean Education, 59, 213-244.
- Joung, Y. & Song, J. (2006a). Exploring the implications of Peirce's abduction in science education by theoretical investigation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 26(6), 703-722.
- Joung, Y. & Song, J. (2006b). The Features of the hypotheses generated by pre-service elementary teachers using the form of Peirce's abduction. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 25(2), 126-140.
- Ka, E. (2011). A study on the aspects and characteristics of writing development. Ph. D. dissertation. Korea National University of Education.
- Kang, S., Jo, J., & Noh, T. (2013). A study on writing process components and writing strategies in argumentative writing. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(7), 1418-1430. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.7.1418
- Keys, C. W. (1999a). Language as an indicator of meaning generation: An analysis of middle school students' written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 1044-1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199911)36:9<1044::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-J
- Keys, C. W. (1999b). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83(2), 115-130. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199903)83:2<115::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-Q
- Keys, C. W. (2000). Investigating the thinking processes of eighth grade writers during the composition of a scientific laboratory report. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 676-690. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200009)37:7<676::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-6
- Kim, N. (2015). Reading strategies and text analysis using critical discourse analysis(CDA). Journal of Reading Research, 35, 319-342. https://doi.org/10.17095/JRR.2015.35.11
- Ku, K. (1993). A study on Vygotsky's theory of the development of verbal thinking: Implications for literacy and writing. Journal of Research of Dae Shin College, 13, 21-42.
- Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., O'Loughlin, M., Schauble, L., Leadbeater, B., & Yotive, W. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. Academic Press.
- Kwon, Y., Choi, S., Park, Y., & Jeong, J. (2003). Scientific thinking types and processes generated in inductive inquiry by college students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(3), 286-298.
- Kwon, Y., Yang, I,, & Chung, W. (2000). An explorative analysis of hypothesis - generation by pre-service science teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 20(1), 29-42.
- Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
- Lee, J. & Jeong, E. (2013a). Development of an evaluation tool for assessing scientific thinking ability using science writing. Teacher Education Research, 52(3), 575-588. https://doi.org/10.15812/ter.52.3.201312.575
- Lee, J. & Jeong, E. (2013b). The effect of science writing activities on high school students' scientific thinking ability in Life Science 1 class. Journal of Science Education, 37(3), 476-491. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2013.37.3.476
- Lee, J., Maeng, S., & Kim, C. (2008). A new way of reading the science classroom discourse: Pedagogical discourse analysis. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 832-847.
- Lee, J., Maeng, S., Kim, H., & Kim, C. (2007). The systemic functional linguistics analysis of texts in elementary science textbooks by curriculum revision. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(3), 242-252.
- Lee, J. & Park, Y. (2016). Analyzing the transcription mode effects on the beta-gamma activity in a writing assessment. Journal of Research on Korean Education, 51(1), 252-284.
- Lee, S. (2000). A study on development stages of writing ability. The Korean Language and Literature, 126, 27-50.
- Lee, S. (2016). The application of critical discourse analysis for the analysis of texts in the field of social studies education: Focusing on systemic functional linguistics-based analysis. Theory and Research in Citizenship Education, 48(4), 173-224.
- Lee, S., Choi, C., Lee, G., Shin, M., & Song, H. (2013). Exploring scientific reasoning in elementary science classroom discourses. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 181-192. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.1.181
- Lee, S. & Ju, Y. (2005). A study on the aspects of writing ability development. The Education of Korean Language, 118, 127-148.
- Lim, O., & Kim, H. (2017). An analysis of perception on science writing of elementary school teachers and students. Cheongram Journal of Research on Science Education, 23(1), 37-52.
- Lim, O. & Kim, H. (2018). Scientific reasoning types and levels in science writings of elementary school students. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 37(4), 372-390. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2018.37.4.372
- McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2007). Middle school students' use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations. In M. Lovett, & P. Shah (Eds.), Thinking with data (pp. 233-265). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
- Ministry of Education (2015). Science curriculum, No. 2015-74 [issue 9]. Seoul: Ministry of Education.
- Ministry of Education and Human Resources (2007). Science curriculum. No. 2007-79. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Human Development.
- Minto, B. (1996). The pyramid principle: logic in writing and thinking. Pearson Education. (Lee, J., translator (2017). Seoul: The-Nan Publishing.
- Nam, J., Kwak, K., Jang, K., & Hand, B. (2008). The implementation of argumentation using science writing heuristics (SWH) in middle school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 922-936.
- Nam, J., Park, J., & Lee, D. (2012). The impact of the science writing heuristic approach on students' use of multiplr representations in science writing and students' recognition about multiple representations. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society. 56(6), 759-767. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2012.56.6.759
- Norris, S. & Phillips, L. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224-240. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10066
- Park, E., Jhun, Y., & Lee, I. (2007). Analysis of the elementary school participants' readiness to write on scientific subjects in science writing contest. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 26(4), 385-394.
- Park, J. (2000). Analysis of students' processes of generating scientific explanatory hypothesis - Focused on the definition and the characteristics of scientific hypothesis. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 20(4). 667-679.
- Park, J. & Shin, Y. (2007). Analysis of the types of science writing based on the scientific thinking abilities in science worksheet attached to elementary science textbook. The Bulletin of Science Education, 20(1), 99-112.
- Park, Y. (2014). A study of eye movement while Korean teachers assess handwriting and word processor writing samples. Korean Language Education Research, 49(2), 193-224. https://doi.org/10.20880/kler.2014.49.2.193
- Prain, V. (2006). Learning from writing in secondary science: Some theoretical and practical implications. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500336643
- Rivard, L. O. P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 969-983. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310910
- Salmon, W. C. (1984). Logic (3rd ed). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. (translated by K. Kauk, Seoul: Parkyoungsa, 2015).
- Sandoval, W. A. & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2
- Sharma, A. & Buxton, C. A. (2015). Human-nature relationship in school science: A Critical discourse analysis of a middle-grade science textbook. Science Education, 99(2), 260-281. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21147
- Son, J. (2006). A science writing teaching method based on scientific thinking for improving scientific essay writing ability. The Journal of Curriculum & Evaluation, 9(2), 333-355. https://doi.org/10.29221/jce.2006.9.2.333
- Son, J. (2009). The study of scientifically gifted students' scientific thinking and creative problem solving ability through science writing. Journal of Science Gifted Education, 1(3), 21-32.
- Song, Y., Yang, I., Kim, J., & Choi, H. (2011). A study of the elementary school teachers' perception of science writing. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(5), 788-800. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2011.31.5.788
- Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New York: Falmer.
- Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
- Wallace, R., Pearman, C., Hail, C., & Hurst, B. (2007). Writing for comprehension. Reading Horizons, 48(1), 41-56.
- Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99-149. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1999.0497
- Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2006.12.001
Cited by
- 문제의 구성을 강조한 프로그램에서 나타난 탐구 문제와 과학적 추론의 관련성 탐색 -삼투 현상 탐구 활동을 중심으로- vol.40, pp.1, 2018, https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2020.40.1.77
- 논의기반 탐구활동이 초등학생의 과학 글쓰기에 나타나는 주장과 증거에 미치는 영향 vol.64, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2020.64.6.389