Acknowledgement
이 논문은 2020년도 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2020S1A5B5A16083113).
References
- Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
- Baze, C., Gonzalez-Howard, M., Sampson, V., Fenech, M., Crawford, R., Hutner, T., Chu, L., & Hamilton, X. (2023). Understanding student use of epistemic criteria in engineering design contexts. Science Education. http://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21795
- Buckley, B. C. (2000). Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 895-935. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900416848
- Chen, Y. C., & Techawitthayachinda, R. (2021). Developing deep learning in science classrooms: Tactics to manage epistemic uncertainty during whole-class discussion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(8), 1083-1116. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21693
- Cherbow, K., & McNeill, K. L. (2022). Planning for student-driven discussions: A revelatory case of curricular sensemaking for epistemic agency. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 31(3), 408-457. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.2024433
- Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90017-5
- Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521-549.
- de Jong, T., Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 105-113. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3102_2
- Duncan, R. G., Chinn, C. A., & Barzilai, S. (2018). Grasp of evidence: Problematizing and expanding the next generation science standards' conceptualization of evidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 907-937.
- Duncan, R. G., Tate, C., & Chinn, C. A. (2014). Students' use of evidence and epistemic criteria in model generation and model evaluation. ICLS 2014 Proceedings (pp. 615-622).
- Emden, M. (2021). Reintroducing "the" scientific method to introduce scientific inquiry in schools?: A cautioning plea not to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Science & Education, 30, 1037-1073. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00235-w
- Erduran, S., Ioannidou, O., & Baird, J. -A. (2021). The impact of epistemic framing of teaching videos and summative assessments on students' learning of scientific methods. International Journal of Science Education, 43(18), 2885-2910.
- Ford, E. D. (2004). Scientific method for ecological research. Cambridge University Press.
- Garcia-Carmona, A. (2020). From inquiry-based science education to the approach based on scientific practices: A critical anaysis and suggestions for science teaching. Science & Education, 29, 443-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00108-8
- Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
- Ha, H., & Choi, Y. (2022). Exploring the enactment of epistemic and conceptual resources for productive engagement in the modeling activity including empirical investigations of ecosystems. Biology Education, 50(2), 155-171.
- Hogan, K., & Maglienti, M. (2001). Comparing the epistemological underpinnings of students' and scientists' reasoning about conclusions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 663-687. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1025
- Jeong, E., Lee, Y., Ha, H., Cho, H., & Kim, H. -B. (2017). Exploring the possibilities of students' conception construction through inquiry activities in middle school science textbooks. Biology Education, 45(3), 371-389. https://doi.org/10.15717/BIOEDU.2017.45.3.371
- Manz, E. (2012). Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological knowledge. Science Education, 96(6), 1071-1105. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21030
- Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
- Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data anlysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage.
- Ministry of Education (2022). 2022 Revised Curriculum. Ministry of Education Notice No. 2022-33 [Annex 9]. Ministry of Education.
- National Research Council [NRC] (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
- Nersessian, N. J. (2012). Engineering concepts: The interplay between concept formation and modeling practices in bioengineering sciences. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(3), 222-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2012.688232
- Odden, T. O. B., & Russ, R. (2019). Defining sensemaking: Bringing clarity to a fragmented theoretical construct. Science Education, 103, 187-205. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21452
- Oh, P. S., Ha, H., & Yoo, J. Y. (2022). Epistemological messages in a modeling-based elementary science classroom compared with a traditional classroom. Science Education, 106, 797-829.
- Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching scientific practices: Meeting the challenge of change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-014-9384-1
- Phillips, A. M., Watkins, J., & Hammer, D. (2018). Beyond "asking questions": Problematizing as a disciplinary activity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 982-998. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21477
- Pluta, W. J., Chinn, C. A., & Duncan, R. G. (2011). Learners' epistemic criteria for good scientific models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(5), 486-511.
- Reiser, B. J., Novak, M., McGill, T. A. W., & Penuel, W. R. (2021). Storyline units: An instructional model to support coherence from the students' perspective. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 32(7), 805-829. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2021.1884784
- Rheinberger, H. -J. (1997). Toward a history of epistemic things: Synthesizing proteins in the test tube. Stanford University Press.
- Rittle-Johnson, B., & Koedinger, K. R. (2005). Designing knowledge scaffolds to support mathematical problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 313-349. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2303_1
- Russ, R. S., & Berland, L. K. (2019). Invented science: A framework for discussing a persistent problem of practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(3), 279-301.
- Saenz, C. (2009). The role of contextual, conceptual and procedural knowledge inactivating mathematical competencies (PISA). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71, 123-143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9167-8
- Samarapungavan, A., Westby, E. L., & Bodner, G. M. (2006). Contextual epistemic development in science: A comparison of chemistry students and research chemists. Science Education, 90(3), 468-495. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20111
- Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2010). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217-257. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421
- Santini, J., Bloor, T., & Sensevy, G. (2018). Modeling conceptualization and investigating teaching effectiveness. Science & Education, 27, 921-961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-0016-6
- Schwarz, C. V., Passmore, C., & Reiser, B. J. (2017). Helping students make sense of the world using next generation science and engineering practices. NSTA.
- Sikorski, T. R., & Hammer, D. (2017). Looking for coherence in science curriculum. Science Education, 101(6), 929-943. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21299
- Star, J. R. (2013, April). On the relationship between knowing and doing in procedural learning. In Fourth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 80-86).
- Vaughn, A. R., Brown, R. D., & Johnson, M. L. (2020). Understanding conceptual change and science learning through educational neuroscience. Mind, Brain, and Education, 14(2), 82-93. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12237