Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2012.32.5.841

How Do Elementary School Teachers Teach Prediction, Inference, and Hypothesis?  

Yang, Ilho (Korea National University of Education)
Kim, Yeomyung (Myeongdeok Elementary School)
Lim, Sungman (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.32, no.5, 2012 , pp. 841-854 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to investigate the teaching methods of prediction, inference, and hypothesis. The major data source was gathered by in-depth interview of science teachers (about 50-80 minutes for each interview). The interviews were conducted using semi-structured interview protocol, which consisted of three major parts: (1) Teacher's definition of prediction, inferences, hypothesis, (2) Teaching methods of prediction, inferences, and hypothesis and (3)Reasons of teacher's inaccurate perceptions of prediction, inference, and hypothesis. All the interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Topics in the questions were categorized. The results were as follows: Teachers recognized the importance of prediction, inferences, and hypothesis. But they didn't have an accurate conception and they have great difficulty in classifying and explaining the prediction, inferences, and hypothesis. To find out the teaching methods, researcher investigated the inquiry activities, teaching times, usage of terms, teachers' questions, and teaching difficulties. Reasons for having difficulty were lack of teaching competency, difficulties from the students, and problems in the present curriculum. Finally, we discovered that the reasons for teacher's inaccurate perceptions of prediction, inference, and hypothesis were two factors. One is internal factors, which include the lack of scientific inquiry process skills, burdens of science subject and lack of science education knowledge. The other is external factors, which include education system for evaluations and lack of teacher education. In conclusion, this study suggested establishing more elementary teacher education programs that include strengthened concepts of inquiry process skills and teaching methods.
Keywords
science process skills; prediction; inference; hypothesis; elementary teacher;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Stephen P. T., & Sue D. T., (2001). Looking for ideas: observation, interpretation and hypothesis-making by 12-year-old pupils undertaking science investigations. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 791-813.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 김지영, 강순희(2006). 중등학교 과학 교사들의 탐구 과정의 활용 정도와 가설에 대한 인식. 한국과학교육학회지, 26(2), 258-267.
3 김희경, 박보화, 이봉우(2007). 우리나라 과학교과서에 나타난 기초 탐구 과정 분석: 분류, 예상 및 추리 탐구 요소를 중심으로. 초등과학교육, 26(5), 499-508.
4 문병찬, 이경학, 김해경(2009). 지층에 대한 탐구활동에서 초등영재 학생들의 관찰 및 추리 특성. 초등과학교육, 28(4), 476-486.
5 구수정, 박승재(1995). 자연보호답사대회 보고서에 진술된 국민학생의 가설능력의 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 15(1), 116-125.
6 권재술, 김범기(1994). 초.중학생들의 과학탐구 능력 측정도구의 개발. 한국과학교육학회지, 14(3), 251-264.
7 배영부(2009). 초등과학교육에서 탐구과정기능의 활용. 한국초등교육, 19(2), 89-102.
8 백성혜, 김동욱(2000). 가설 설정 능력이 추리 능력과 구분되어야 하는 이유. 화학교육, 27(4), 42-48.
9 양일호, 채금란, 조현준 (2005). 과학적 증거 평가 활동에서 일어나는 사고과정 분석. 교원교육, 21(3), 276-308.
10 오창호, 양일호(2009). 양초 연소 탐구 과제 상황에서 초등 예비교사가 생성한 관찰 및 가설의 오류 특성. 초등과학교육, 28(2), 93-104.
11 이영애(2004). 인과추리가 유추에 의한 과학 개념의 학습에 미치는 영향. 한국심리학회지 : 실험, 16(3), 285-297.
12 이혜원, 양일호, 조현준(2005). 초.중학생의 관찰, 예상, 가설의 이해. 초등과학교육, 24(3), 236-241.
13 이혜정, 정진수, 박국태, 권용주(2004). 초등학생들과 초등예비교사들이 관찰활동에서 생성한 과학적 의문의 유형. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(5), 1018-1027.
14 임희준, 김재윤(2007). 과학 탐구 수업에 관한 초등학교 교사들의 인식. 과학교육논총, 20(1), 73-81.
15 조현준, 한인경, 김효남, 양일호(2008). 초등학교 과학 탐구 수업 실행의 저해 요인에 대한 교사들의 인식 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 28(8), 901-921.
16 조희영, 박승재(2001). 과학론과 과학교육. 서울: 교육과학사.
17 조희영(2007). 과학교육론; 요약과 적용. 서울: 교육과학사.
18 홍승호(2008). 예상과 추리의 탐구기능에 대한 기초 연구. 초등교육연구, 13, 51-66.
19 Adams, P. E., & Krockover, G. H. (1997). Concerns and perceptions of beginning secondary science and mathematics teacher. Science Education, 81(1), 29-50.   DOI
20 Bass, J. E., Contant, T. L., & Carin, A. A. (2009). Teaching science as inquiry. 11th ed. Prentice Hall:Boston.
21 Costenson, K., & Lawson, A. E. (1986). Why isn't inquiry used in more classrooms? The American Biology Teacher, 48(3), 150-158.   DOI
22 Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches(2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23 Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
24 Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York: Teachers College Press.
25 Martin, D. J. (1999). Elementary science methods: A constructivist approach. (임청환, 권성기, 송명섭, 송남희 공역, 2004). Delmar Publishers.
26 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
27 National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.