Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education (한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육)

The Korean Elementary Science Education Society (한국초등과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis of Representation Patterns Used by Elementary Teachers and Meaning-Making Processes in Electromagnetic Experiment Activities

전자기 관련 실험 활동에서 초등 교사가 사용한 표상 패턴과 의미 형성 과정 분석

  • Received : 2020.03.19
  • Accepted : 2020.04.06
  • Published : 2020.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the representation patterns used by elementary teachers and their meaning-making process in electromagnetic experiments. In particular, we analyzed the representations depending on three levels of their abstractness: enactive representation (action based), iconic representation (image based) and symbolic representation (language based). For this, four experiment activities of two teachers were analyzed and the results are as follows. First, as an overall pattern of representation, an experiment subject is presented as the form of symbolic representation and the related concepts, experimental materials and methods are embodied through iconic representation. Then, through enactive representation, the actual experiments are implemented. The experimental results are primarily recorded through iconic representations and abstracted into symbolic representations to draw conclusions. The different levels of representations complement each other to expand their meanings, however, sometimes they also make inconsistent meanings among different levels. Based on these results, educational implications were discussed in terms of supporting and improving electromagnetic experiment activities.

Keywords

References

  1. Albe, V., Venturini, P. & Lascours, J. (2001). Electromagnetic concepts in mathematical representation of physics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(2), 197-203. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009429400105
  2. Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2017). Social semiotics in university physics education. In Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 95-122). Cham: Springer.
  3. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction (Vol. 59). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  4. Chang, J. & Song, J. (2015). A case study on the features of classroom norms formed in inquiry activities of elementary science classes. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(2), 303-312. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.2.0303
  5. Jho, H., Jo, K. & Yoon, H.-G. (2017). Analysis of middle school students' visual representation competences for electric current. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 67(6), 714-724. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.67.714
  6. Jo, K., Jho, H. & Yoon, H.-G. (2015) Analysis of visual representations related to electromagnetism in primary and secondary science textbooks. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 65(4), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.65.343
  7. Jo, K., Jho, H. & Yoon, H-G., (2017). Middle school students' interpretation, construction, and application of visual representations for magnetic field due to a current. Journal of Science Education, 41(1), 152-165. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2017.41.1.152
  8. Kang, H-S., Yoon, J. H. & Lee, D. H. (2008). Analysis on the uses of the external representations in the 3-6th grade science textbooks developed under the 7th national curriculum. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 27(2), 158-169.
  9. Kim, N., Chang, J. & Song, J. (2018). A comparison of the features of external representations presented in paper textbooks and digital textbooks: Focused on the 'Force' related units of middle school in the 2009 and 2015 national science curricula. School Science Journal, 12(3), 309-330. https://doi.org/10.15737/SSJ.12.3.201810.309
  10. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L. E. O. N. A. & Petrosino, A. J. (2001). Reconsidering the role of experiment in science education. Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings, 251-278.
  11. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  12. Noh, T., Yoon, M., Kang, H-S. & Han, J. (2007). Semiotic analysis of the inscriptions representing concept of atom and molecule in the 9th grade science textbooks. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 51(5), 423-432. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2007.51.5.423
  13. Park, J., Chang, J. & Song, J. (2016). Why did I cope with so?: A teacher's strategy to cope with anomalous situations in primary practical science lessons. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 35(3), 277-287. https://doi.org/10.15267/keses.2016.35.3.277
  14. Park, J., Chang, J., Tang, K. S., Treagust, D. F. & Won, M. (2020). Sequential patterns of students' drawing in constructing scientific explanations: Focusing on the interplay among three levels of pictorial representation. International Journal of Science Education, 1-26.
  15. Scott, P., Mortimer, E. & Ametller, J. (2011). Pedagogical link-making: A fundamental aspect of teaching and learning scientific conceptual knowledge. Studies in Science Education, 47(1), 3-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2011.549619
  16. Tang, K. S. (2016). The interplay of representations and patterns of classroom discourse in science teaching sequences. International Journal of Science Education, 38(13), 2069-2095. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1218568
  17. Tang, K. S., Delgado, C. & Moje, E. B. (2014). An integrative framework for the analysis of multiple and multimodal representations for meaning-making in science education. Science Education, 98(2), 305-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21099
  18. Treagust, D. F., Duit, R. & Fischer, H. E. (Eds.). (2017). Multiple representations in physics education (Vol. 10). New York: Springer.
  19. Tytler, R., Prain, V., Hubber, P. & Waldrip, B. (2013). Constructing representations to learn in science. Rotterdam: Sense.
  20. Wong, C. L. & Chu, H. E. (2017). The conceptual elements of multiple representations: A study of textbooks' representations of electric current. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit & H. E. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 183-206). Cham: Springer.
  21. Yeo, J. & Gilbert, J. K. (2017). The role of representations in students' explanations of four phenomena in physics: Dynamics, thermal physics, electromagnetic induction and superposition. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit & H. E. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 255-287). Cham: Springer.
  22. Yoon, H-G. (2018). Development and validation of visual representation competence taxonomy. Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education, 38(2), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2018.38.2.161
  23. Yoon, H-G. (2019). Analysis of elementary school students' visual representation competence for shadow phenomenon. Journal of The Korean Association for Science Education, 39(2), 295-305. https://doi.org/10.14697/JKASE.2019.39.2.295
  24. Yoon, H.-G. Jo, K. & Jho, H. (2016). Middle school students' interpretation, construction, and application of visual representations for electrostatic induction. New Physics: Sae Mulli, 66(5), 580-589. https://doi.org/10.3938/NPSM.66.580
  25. Yoon, H-G., Jo, K. & Jho, H. (2017). Secondary science teachers' perception about and actual use of visual representations in the teaching of electromagnetism. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(2), 253-262. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.2.0253
  26. Yoon, H-G. & Park, J. (2018). Elementary school teachers' use of visual representations and their perceptions of the functions of visual representations. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 37(2), 219-231. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2018.37.2.219