Journal of Science Education (과학교육연구지)

Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Effect of Role Assignment on the Types and Patterns of Verbal Interactions in Middle School Students' Science Inquiry Activities

중학생의 과학 탐구 활동에서 역할 부여가 언어적 상호작용의 유형 변화와 양상에 미치는 영향

  • Received : 2020.06.18
  • Accepted : 2020.08.18
  • Published : 2020.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The active participation and active interaction of learners in small group science inquiry activities are the main factors that determine the effectiveness of science learning. Roles can be assigned to members of a small group to facilitate interaction between members within the small group. The purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of role assignment on the types and patterns of verbal interactions in middle school students' small group science inquiry activities. For this, 172 students from middle schools located in metropolitan cities were surveyed. We analyzed 18 small groups with assigned roles and 15 small groups without assigned roles. The change in verbal interaction type in small group science inquiry activity according to role assignment was largely divided into alienation and participation. In the case of small groups with assigned roles, the participation type occupied a higher proportion than the alienation type. The change in verbal interaction patterns did not show much significant differences when the role was assigned in terms of cognitive and affective. Based on this, further research is needed on how role assignment affects verbal interactions depending on the type of scientific inquiry and the stage of inquiry. In addition, further research on the composition of small groups and role assignment is required.

소집단 과학 탐구 활동에서의 학습자들의 적극적인 참여와 활발한 상호작용은 과학 학습의 효과를 결정하는 주요한 요인이라 할 수 있다. 소집단 내 구성원들 간의 상호작용을 촉진시키기 위하여 소집단 구성원들에게 역할을 부여할 수 있다. 본 연구에서는 중학생들의 과학 탐구 활동에서 역할 부여가 언어적 상호작용의 유형 변화와 양상의 변화에 미치는 영향을 분석하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 광역시 소재 2개 중학교 학생 172명을 대상으로 하였다. 역할을 부여한 소집단 18개, 역할을 부여하지 않은 소집단 15개를 분석하였다. 역할 부여에 따라 탐구 활동에서의 언어적 상호작용 유형의 변화는 크게 소외형과 참여형으로 구분하였다. 역할을 부여한 경우에 참여형이 소외형에 비해 더 높은 비중을 차지하였다. 언어적 상호작용의 양상은 인지적, 정의적 측면에서 역할을 부여하였을 때 차이가 크게 나타나지 않았다. 이를 바탕으로 역할 부여가 과학 탐구의 유형과 탐구 단계에 따라 언어적 상호작용에 어떠한 영향을 미치는가에 대한 추가적인 연구가 필요하다. 또한 소집단 구성과 역할 부여 방식에 대한 추가적인 연구도 요구된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Belbin, M. (1981). Management teams. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
  2. Chang, H. P., & Lederman, N. G. (1994). The effects of levels of cooperation within physical science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(2), 167-181. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660310207
  3. Cho, H., Seo., M, Nam, J., Kwon, J., Son, J., & Park, J. (2017). Analysis of character competency change in high school students by role assignment in argument-based inquiry(ABI) science class. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 37(4), 763-773. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2017.37.4.763
  4. Choi, Y., & Choi, O. (2010). Analysis of the operational activities within the social enterprises network. Korean Comparative Government Review, 14(1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.18397/kcgr.2010.14.1.63
  5. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classroom. 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
  6. Fox, W. M. (1995). Sociotechnical system principles and guidelines: Past and present. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 31(1), 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886395311009
  7. Han, D. (2014). Student's role and role composition according to the level of interaction during small group scientific inquiry activity(Master thesis). Graduate School of Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  8. Heller, P., & Hollabaugh, M. (1992). Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 2: Designing problems and structuring groups. American journal of Physics, 60(7), 637-644. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17118
  9. Hogan, K. (1999). Sociocognitive roles in science group discourse. International Journal of Science Education, 21(8), 855-882. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290336
  10. Howe, C., Rodgers, C., & Tolmie, A. (1990). Physics in the primary school: Peer interaction and the understanding of floating and sinking. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 5(4), 459-475. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03173132
  11. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1994). Learning together and alone cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  12. Kang, S., Lim, J., Kong, Y., Nam, J., & Choi, B. (2004). The development of students argumentation in science context. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 48(1), 85-93. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2004.48.1.085
  13. Kim, S. (2011). Teaching method using job assignment as a solution on the adverse effects of peer evaluation in team-based learning. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society, 12(6), 2543-2547. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2011.12.6.2543
  14. Kim, H., & Choi, B. (2009). Development of the instructional model emphasizing discussion and the characteristics of verbal interactions during its implementation in a science high school. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 29(4), 359-372.
  15. Kim, M., & Kim, Y. (2015). An analysis of the verbal interaction patterns of sciencegifted students in science inquiry activity. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(2), 333-342. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.2.0333
  16. Kim, Y. (2018). Analysis of verbal interaction types and stability in science inquiry activities in 7th grade students. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(6), 563-584.
  17. Kim, Y. (2019). Verbal interaction types and stability by science process skills in science gifted students. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(16), 335-353. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2019.19.16.335
  18. Kim, Y., Kim, M., Ha, M., & Lim, S. (2017). Analysis of changes in verbal interaction types of science-gifted students. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, science & Technology Education, 13(6), 2441-2457.
  19. Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J.-W., Kreijns, K., & Beers, P. J. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(3), 47-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504675
  20. Ku, Y., Park, K., Shin, A., Choi, B., & Lee, K. (2006). Characteristics of verbal interactions according to the leader style in MBL experiment class in which discussion was emphasized. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 50(6), 494-505. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2006.50.6.494
  21. Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245-1260. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00605
  22. Kwak, Y. (2001). Theoretical background of constructivist epistemology. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 22(5), 427-447.
  23. Lim, E. (2013). Student's role composition and co-construction of argumentation during small inquiry activity(Master thesis). Graduate School of Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  24. Lim, S., Park, K., Ha, M., Lee, H., & Kim, Y. (2019). Verbal interaction types in science inquiry activities by group size. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, science & Technology Education, 15(7), em1720.
  25. Lin, E. (2006). Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science Teacher, 73(5), 34-39.
  26. Lumpe, A. T., & Staver, J. R. (1995). Peer collaboration and concept development: Learning about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 71-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660320108
  27. Maloney, J. (2007). Children's roles and use of evidence in science: an analysis of decision-making in small groups. British Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 371-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701243636
  28. Noh, T., Kang, S., Han, S., Han, J., Jeon, K., & Seong, E. (2002). The effects of assigning cognitive roles in small-group discussion for science concept learning. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 46(1), 76-82. https://doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2002.46.1.076
  29. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
  30. Park, S. (2005). Students' perception of teaching activities and verbal interaction in science classes at the gifted science high school. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 26(1), 30-40.
  31. Pella, M. O. (1961). The laboratory and science thinking. The Science Teacher, 28, 20-31.
  32. Resnick, L. (Ed.). (1989). Knowing, Learning, and instruction. New York, NY: Routledge. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315044408
  33. Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classrooms: Social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839-858. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199610)33:8<839::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-X
  34. Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socio scientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20009
  35. Seong, S. (2005). Change and characteristics of verbal interaction in science inquiry experiments emphasizing social interactions. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Korea National University of Education, Chungju, Korea.
  36. Shin, A. (2006). Characteristics of students' verbal interaction in small group activities of MBL classes(Master thesis). Graduate School of Gongju National University, Gongju, Korea.
  37. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modelling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 35(2), 195-229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496403260843
  38. Tobin, K., McRobbie, C., & Anderson, D. (1998). Dialectical constraints to the discursive practices of a high school physics community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(5), 491-507. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199705)34:5<491::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-L
  39. Vye, N. J., Goldman, S. R., Voss, J. F., Hmelo, C., & Williams, S. (1997). Complex mathematical problem solving by individuals and dyads. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 435-484. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1504_1
  40. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  41. Watson. J., Swain, J., & McRobbie, C. (2004). Students' discussion in practical scientific inquiries. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1),24-45.
  42. Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008