Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2006.26.3.342

The Development of Laboratory Instruction Classification Scheme  

Yang, Il-Ho (Korea National University of Education)
Jeong, Jin-Woo (Korea National University of Education)
Hur, Myung (Ewha Womans University)
Kim, Seog-Min (Koyang Hanne Elementary School)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.26, no.3, 2006 , pp. 342-355 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to develop a classification scheme for laboratory instruction, which could occupy a central and distinctive role in science education. For this study, literature on laboratory instruction types were analyzed. Utilizing several of these theoretical frameworks, a Classification Scheme for Laboratory Instruction (CSLI), which clearly represents various features of laboratory instruction, was created. The developed CSLI consisted of two descriptors: one is the procedure for laboratory instruction, and the other is a way of approach. The procedure is either designed by the students or provided for them from an external source. A dichotomy also exists for the approach taken toward the activity: deductive or inductive. Validity was established for the CSLI. In addition, laboratory instruction according to CSLI was divided into four types: verification, discovery, exploratory, and investigation. Although this study demonstrated only limited features of laboratory instruction due to the absence of a field test, it serves as a model for more comprehensive studies.
Keywords
descriptors; laboratory instruction; procedure; approach;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 이상원 (2002). 실험의 두 역할 - 사실 획득과 이론 시험. 철학, 72, 273-294
2 APU (1984). Science report for teachers: 2 The assessment framework age 13 & 15. Department of Education and Science: Welsh Office and Department of Education for Northern Ireland
3 Chin, C. (2003). Success with investigations. The Science Teacher, 70(2), 34-40
4 Gunstone, R. F. (1991). Reconstructing theory from practical experience. In B. E. Woolnough (Ed.). Practical science, (pp. 67-77). Miton Keynes: Open University Press
5 Hegarty, E. H. (Ed.) (1990). The student laboratory and the science curriculum. London: Routledge
6 Herron, M. D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. School Review, 79(2), 171-212   ScienceOn
7 Hodson, D. (1996). Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(2), 115-135
8 Hofstein, A, & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54   ScienceOn
9 National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, EC: National Academy Press
10 Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. J. Schwab & P. F. Brandwein (Ed.). The Teaching of Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
11 Tobin, K. (1986). Secondary science laboratory activities. European Journal of Science Education, 8, 199-211   ScienceOn
12 Wallace, C. S. (2004). An illumination of the roles of hands-on activities, discussion, text reading, and writing in constructing biology knowledge in seventh grade. School Science and Mathematics, 104(2), 70-78   ScienceOn
13 Wellington, J. J. (2000). Teaching and learning secondary science: Contemporary issues and practical approaches. London and New York: Routelge
14 Woolnough, B. E. (1994). Effective science teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press
15 Morrow, C. A. (2003). Misconceptions scientists often have about the K-12 national science education standards. The Astronomy Education Review, 1(2), 85-94
16 Friedler, Y., & Tamir, P. (1986). Teaching basic concepts of scientific research to high school students. Journal of Biological Education, 20, 263-270
17 Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201-217   ScienceOn
18 Hegarty, E. H. (1978). Levels of scientific enquiry in university science laboratory classes: Implications for curriculum deliberations. Research in Science Education, 8(1), 45-57
19 Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA Wadsworth Publishing Company
20 German, P. J., Haskins, S., & Auls, S. (1996). Analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals: Promoting science inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(5), 475-499
21 Hart, C, Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J., & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655-675   ScienceOn
22 Collette, A. T., & Chiappetta, E. L. (1984). Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools. St. Louis : Times Mrror/Mosby College Pub
23 Stannard, P. (1982). Evaluating laboratory performance. The Queensland Science Teacher, November
24 Pella, M. O. (1961). The laboratory and science teaching. The Science Teaching, 28(5), 29-31
25 Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1995). Investigative work in the science curriculum. Buckingham: Open University
26 Hacking, I. (1992). The self-vindication of laboratory science. In A. Pickering (Ed.). Science and Culture, (pp. 29-64). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press
27 Welzel, M., Haller, K., Bandiera, M, Hammelev, D., Koumaras, P., Niedderer, H., Paulsen, A. C, Becu-Robinault, K., & Aufschnaiter, S. (1998). Teachers' objectives for labwork: Research tool and cross country results. Working paper 6. European project: Labwork in science education (Targeted Socio-Economic Research Programme Project PL 95-2005). The European Commission
28 Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 70(256), 33-40
29 Domin, D S. (1999). A review of laboratory instruction styles. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 543-547   ScienceOn
30 Kapenda, H. M, Kandjeo-marenga, H. U, Kasanda, C. D., & Lubben, F. (2002). Characteristics of practical work in science classrooms in Namibia. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(1), 53-65   ScienceOn
31 Kirschener, P. A, & Meester, M. A. M. (1988). The laboratory in higher education: Problems, premises and objectives. Higher Education, 17(1), 81-89
32 Polman, J. L. (1999). Designing project-based science: Connecting learners through guided inquiry. New York: Teachers College Press
33 Lunetta, V. N. (1998). The school science laboratory: historical perspectives and context for contemporary teaching. In K. Tobin., & B. Fraser (Ed.). International Handbook of Science Education (volume 1), (pp. 249-262). Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic
34 Lazarowitz, R., & Tamir, R. (1994). Research on using laboratory instruction in science. In D. Gabel (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning, (pp. 94-128). New York: Macmillan
35 McComas, W. F. (2005). Enhancing the education of scientifically gifted students with inquiry instruction. Available at [www.usc.edu/dept/education/science-edu/Inquiry_Science_Instr2.pdf]
36 Quaker, A., Strang, J., Swatton, P., & Taylor, R. (1990). Exploration. A way of learning science. Oxford: Blackwell Education
37 Tamir, P. (1976). The role of the laboratory in science teaching. (Tech. Rep. 10). Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa, Science Education Center
38 Bybee, R. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrel., & E. H. Van Zee (Eds.). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 20-46). Wasington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science
39 Brown, C. R. (1995). The effective teaching of biology. New York, USA: Longman Publishing Company
40 Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
41 Millar, R., Tiberghien, A, & Le Mare chal, J. F. (2002). Varieties of labwork: A way of profiling labwork tasks. In D. Psillos., & H. Niedderer (Ed.). Teaching and learning in the science laboratory, (pp. 9-20). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
42 Woolnough, B. E., & Allsop, T. (1985). Practical work in science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
43 Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: in pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science & Mathematics, 90(5), 403-418
44 교육인적자원부 (2001). 과학과 교육과정. 서울: 대한교과서주식회사
45 Dana, L. (2001). The effects of the level of inquiry of situated secondary science laboratory activities on students' understanding of concepts and the nature of science, ability to use process skills and attitudes toward problem solving. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Lowell
46 Ivins, J. E. (1983). What are your labs really teaching'? The Science Teacher, 49, 56-59
47 Leach, J., & Scott, P. (1995). The demands of learning science concepts-issues of theory and practice. School Science Review, 76(277), 47-51
48 Millar, R, Le Mare chal, J. F., & Buty, C. (1998). A map of the variety of labwork. Working paper 1. European Project: Labwork in science education (Contract No. ERB-SOE2-CT-95-2001). The European Commission
49 Simpson, P. D., & Anderson, N. D. (1981). Science, students and schools. New York: Wiley