Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2010.30.6.739

Analysis of Argumentation in the Inquiry Discourse among Pre-service Science Teachers  

Lee, Bong-Woo (Dankook University)
Lim, Myung-Sun (Dankook University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.30, no.6, 2010 , pp. 739-751 More about this Journal
Abstract
The research reported in this study focused on an analysis of argumentation in the inquiry discourse among pre-service science teachers. For about 3 months, 7 groups of 24 pre-service science teachers participated in an open-ended inquiry and performed 10 inquiry discourses. All discourses were collected by video-recording and transcribed. To analyze features of argumentation discourse, analytic tools derived from Toulmin's argument pattern and cognitive argumentation scheme were applied to discussion transcripts. The results were as follows: First, the order of frequency in the analysis of 'meaning unit' was 'claim-warrant-data-rebuttal-backing.' Second, the order of frequency in the analysis of 'dialogue unit' was 'CW-CD-CDW-CWR-CR'. Third, more rebuttals were found than other discussions. Fourth, the second argumentative discussion showed a higher level than the first.
Keywords
argumentative discussion; argumentation; Toulmin's argument pattern;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 6  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Project 2061. (1994). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2 Boulter, C. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (1995). Argument and science education. In P. J. M. Costello & S. Mitchell (Eds.), Competing and consensual voices: The theory and practice of argument(pp. 84-98). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
3 최재혁, 서정희 (2007). 과학 영재의 국제경진대회 활동에서 창의성의 사회적 측면 분석 - 국제 청소년 물리 토너먼트 사례를 중심으로 -. 초등과학교육, 25(5), 582-590.
4 이봉우, 이성묵 (2004a). 온라인 물리탐구토론에 나타난 학생들의 상호작용 유형 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(3), 638-645.   과학기술학회마을
5 이효녕, 조현준, 손정주 (2009). 학교과학교육에서의 논증활동 활용에 대한 교사들의 인식. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(6), 666-479.   과학기술학회마을
6 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
7 조현준, 양일호, 이효녕, 송윤미 (2008). 초등과학 영재의 논증활동에서 사용된 증거의 수준 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 28(5), 495-505.   과학기술학회마을
8 이봉우, 이성묵 (2004b). 중학생들의 온라인 물리 탐구토론 내용 분석. 새물리, 48(3), 216-222.
9 Welch, W. W. (1981). Inquiry in school science. In N. Harms, & R. Yager, Project synthesis, What research says, Vol 3 NSTA.
10 양일호, 이효정, 이효녕, 조현준 (2009). 과학적 논증과정 평가를 위한 루브릭 개발. 한국과학교육학회지, 29(2), 203-220.   과학기술학회마을
11 김희경 (2003). 중학생의 동료간 논변활동을 강조한 개방적 물리 탐구: 조건, 특징, 역할을 중심으로. 서울대학교 박사학위 논문.
12 Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classroom: Social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839-858.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 van Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Auguing to learn and learning to augue: case studies of how sutdents'augumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Walton, D. N. (1996). Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning, Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15 Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J. (2006). Learning to teach argumentation: research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 2006, 235-260.   DOI   ScienceOn
16 교육인적자원부(2007). 과학과 교육과정. 교육인적자원부 고시 제 2007-79호.
17 Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
18 National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
19 National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
20 Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Meyer, K., & Woodruff, E. (1997). Consensually driven explanation in science teaching. Science Education, 81(2), 173-192.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, Learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
23 Martins, I., Mortimer, E., Osborne, J., Tsatsarelis, C., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2001). Rhetoric and science education. In H. Behrendt, H. Dahncke, R. Duit, W. Graber, & M. Komorek (Eds.), Research in science education-past, present, and future (pp. 189-198). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
24 Mason, L. (1996). An analysis of children's construction of new knowledge through their use of reasoning and arguing in classroom discussions. Qualitative Studies in Education, 9, 411-433.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Heigenberg, W. (1969). Der Teil und das Ganze. Gesprache im Umkreis der Atomphysik. Piper. 김용준 역(1982). 부분과 전체. 서울: 지식산업사.
26 Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1171-1190.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
28 Leach, J. (1999). Students' understanding of the co-ordination of theory and evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 789-806.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Lee, B. W., Son, J. W., & Lee, S. M. (2005). Science-gifted students' scientific inquiry change in online argumentative discussion. J. Korea Assoc. Res. Sci. Edu., 25(6), 642-649.
30 Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915-933.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 한국물리교육연구센터 (1994). 과학 공동탐구 토론대회 보고서. 서울: 관악사.
32 Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Duschl, R. A., Ellenbogen, K., & Erduran, S. (1999). Promoting argumentation in middle school science classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching(NARST), Boston, MA.
34 Duschl, R., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72.   DOI   ScienceOn