Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2009.29.8.824

An Analysis of Science Writing by High School Students through the Argumentation Structure Instruction: Focus on Writing tasks Based on Genres of Science Writing  

Park, Jeong-Eun (Seoul National University)
Yu, Eun-Jeong (Seoul National University)
Lee, Sun-Kyung (Seoul National University)
Kim, Chan-Jong (Seoul National University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.29, no.8, 2009 , pp. 824-827 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the changes in structure and contents of different functional genre of science writing during high school using the argumentation structure. For this thesis, seven students of a girls' high school in the national capital region took the argumentation structure instruction for 40 hours for a month. As a result, considerable changes had occurred amid the Explanation genre, the Experiment-recount genre and the Exposition genre. In the Explanation genre and the Experiment-recount genre, noticeable progress had been made in the usage of the argumentation elements and scientific concepts and knowledge evolved in a more rarified and detailed manner. In the Exposition genre, argumentation structure had changed from the simple argumentation structure to the subordination or the multiplex argumentation structure. Simultaneously, it was affirmed that the types and number of the argumentation elements increased significantly along with enlargement of respective scientific concepts and knowledge. Hence, this implies students can determine their understanding of scientific facts and contents during the progress of developing the argumentation structure. It is necessary that students take the well-organized argumentation structure instruction.
Keywords
scientific writing; science writing genre; argumentation structure;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 6  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 곽경화, 남정희 (2009). 과학적 논의과정 활동을 통한 학생들의 논의 과정 변화 및 논의 상황에 따른 논의과정 특성. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(4), 400-413   과학기술학회마을
2 Veel, R. (1997). Learning how to meanscientifically speaking: apprenticeship into scientific discourse in the secondary school. In F. Christie & J.R. Martin (Eds.), Genre and Institutions (pp.170-193). London: Continuum
3 Zohar, A. & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35-62   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Brinker, K. (1994) Linguistische Textanalyse / 이성만 역 (2004). 텍스트언어학의 이해: 언어학적 텍스트분석의 기본 개념과 방법, 한국문화사
5 Hodson, D. (1993). In science of a rationale for multi cultural science education. Science Education, 77(6), 685-711   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Kelly, G. J., Regev, J., & Prothero, W. (2008). Analysis of lines of reasoning in written argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 137 - 157). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer
7 Kuhn, D. (1993). Science argument: Implication for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. New York: Academic Press, Inc
9 Martin, J. R., Christie, F., & Rothery, J. (1987). Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson. In L. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 58-82). Centre for Studies in literary education. Geelong: Deakin University
10 Norris, S., & Phillips, L. (2003). How literacy in its functional sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224-240   DOI   ScienceOn
11 National Research Council[NRC]. (1996). National Science Education Standards.National Academy Press, Washington, DC: National Academy Press
12 Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press
13 van Eemeren, F. H. & Grootendorst, R. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary development, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, INC
14 강순민 (2004). 과학적 맥락의 논의 과제 해결 과정에서 나타나는 논의과정 요소의 특성. 한국교원대학교 박사학위 논문
15 Becker, J., Knight, E.Q., & Varelas. M. (1993). Meaning, love, and self in the classroom. Teaching and Learning: Journal of Natural Inquiry, 8, 11-15
16 Eemeren, F. H. v & Grootendorst, R. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary development, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
17 Fellows, N. J. (1994). A window into thinking: Using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 985-1001   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Barrs, M. (2004) Writing and Thingking. Retrieved from the World Wide web: http://www.teachingthinking.com
19 Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1999). Students Perceptions of Writing for Learning in Secondary School Science. Science Education, 83(2), 151-162   DOI   ScienceOn
20 김재봉(2002). 창조적 국어사용과 논증 문화. 한국초등국어교육 제 20집. 한국초등국어교육학회
21 Johns, A. M. (2002). Genre in the classroom: multiple perspectives. Mㅁ모: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
22 Newton, P., Driver, R., & Obsborne, J., (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Clark, D., & Sampson, V. (2006). Personally seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentaion. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253-277   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodr uez, A. B., & Duschl, R. (2000). Doing the lesson or doing science: argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Keys, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115-130   DOI   ScienceOn
26 National Research Council[NRC]. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: a guide for teaching and learning. National Academy Press, Washington, DC: National Academy Press
27 Lemke, A. L. (1990). Talking science:language, learning, and values. New Jersey: Alex Publishing Corporation
28 이선경 (2006). 소집단 토론에서 발생하는 학생들의 상호작용적 논증 유형 및 특징. 대한화학회지, 50(1), 79-88   과학기술학회마을   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Freely, A. J. (1996). Argumentation and Debate: Critical thinking for reasoned decision making (9th ed.), Belmont, C. A.: Wadsworth Publishing Company
30 Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. The Falmer Press: London
31 Macken-Horarik, M. (2002). Something to shoot for: a systemic functional approach to teaching genre in secondary school science. In A.M. Jones (ED.), Genre in the classroom: multiple perspectives (pp.17-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
32 강현모 (2007). 찰스 아이브스의 <114 노래집> (1922) : 미국의 정체성을 찾기 위한 장르에 대한 탐색. 서울대학교 박사학위 논문
33 Dijk, T. A. v. (1997). The study of discourse. In Dijk, T. A. v. (Ed.), Discourse studies: a multidisciplinary introduction-Discourse as structure and process (Vol. 1). SAGE Publication Ltd. (London): 1-34
34 Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260   DOI   ScienceOn
35 이선영 (2002). 토론의 논증 구성과 사회적 상호작용에 관한 연구, 서울대학교 석사학위 논문
36 Hand, B., Hohenshell, L., & Prain, V. (2004). Exploring students'responses to conceptual questions when engaged with planned writing experiences: A study with year 10 science students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(2), 186-210   DOI   ScienceOn
37 Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020   DOI   ScienceOn
38 American Association for the Advancement of Science[AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press
39 양일호, 이효정, 이효녕, 조현준. (2009). 과학적논증과정 평가를 위한 루브릭 개발. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(2), 203-220   과학기술학회마을
40 von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to Learn and Learning to Argue: Case Studies of Ho Students'Argumentation Relates to Their Scientific Knowledge. Journal of Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131   DOI   ScienceOn
41 Kuhn, D., & O’Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. San Diego: Academic Press, INC.
42 Newell, G. E., & Winograd, P. (1989). The effects of writing on learning from expository text. Written Communication, 6(2), 196-217   DOI
43 Yore, L. D., Bisanz, G. L., & Hand, B. M. (2003). Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725   DOI   ScienceOn
44 Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in science:Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. K. Halliday & Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp.166-202). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
45 박영신 (2006). 교실에서의 실질적 과학 탐구를 위한 과학적 논증기회에 대한 이론적 고찰. 한국지구과학회지, 27(4), 410-415   과학기술학회마을
46 Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72   DOI   ScienceOn
47 Osborne, J. F. (2002). Science without literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 203-215   DOI
48 민병곤 (2000). 신문 사설의 논증 구조 분석. 국어국문학, 127, 133-154
49 Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osbome, J., (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classroom. Science Education, 84, 287-312   DOI   ScienceOn
50 Eemeren, F. H. v., Grootendorst, R., Blaire, J. A., & Willard C. A. (1992). Argumentation Illuminated. International Centre for the Study of Argumentation, SICSAT
51 Kallberg, J. (1987). The rhetoric of genre: chopin's nocturne in C minor, Nineteenth Century Music, 9(1987-8), p.239
52 Hand, B., Prain, V., Lawrence, C., & Yore, L. D. (1999). A writing in science framework designed to enhance science literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 21(10), 1021-1035   DOI   ScienceOn
53 Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and Literacy in Science Education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press
54 김희경, 송진웅 (2004). 학생의 논변활동을 강조한 개방적 과학탐구 모형의 탐색. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(6), 1216-1234   과학기술학회마을
55 남정희, 곽경과, 장경화, Hand, B. (2008). 논의를 강조한 탐구적 과학글쓰기의 중학교 과학수업에의 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 28(8), 922-936   과학기술학회마을