Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.2.249

The Impact of Reading Framework as a Reading Strategy on Writing for Reflection of Middle School Students  

Sung, Hwamok (Pusan National University)
Nam, Jeonghee (Pusan National University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.33, no.2, 2013 , pp. 249-265 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the influence of reading framework on writing for reflection when applied to inquiry-based Science Writing Heuristic approach. This study was conducted with 67 3rd grade middle school students. Thirty-two out of 67 students were assigned to R-SWH (Reading framework-Science Writing Heuristic) group while the other 35 students were assigned to SWH (Science Writing Heuristic) group. The R-SWH group has consistently used reading framework which the SWH group has not used when the inquiry-based science writing heuristic approach were carried out. The result of this study indicated that the R-SWH group showed a higher proportion of students who made writing for reflection by learning from reading materials than the SWH group. The R-SWH group used reading materials in order to understand the idea comprehensively and concept related to the topic the most, while the SWH group also used them for the same purpose as the R-SWH group but the ratio was less than the R-SWH group. In addition, as the learning activity has progressed, the R-SWH group showed that the proportion of students who transferred the science concept from reading materials into writing for reflection and the number of transferred concepts were higher than those of the SWH group. Therefore, the reading framework applied to inquiry-based science writing heuristic approach can facilitate a meaningful activity on reading and writing as a scaffolding to develop conceptual understanding.
Keywords
reading; writing; reading framework; conceptual understanding; inquiry-based science writing heuristic; writing for reflection;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 김미정(2011). 전략적 읽기틀을 이용한 탐구적 과학글쓰기가 중학생들의 학업성취도와 비판적 사고력 및 요약 글쓰기에 미치는 영향. 이화여자대학교 석사학위 논문.
2 남정희, 곽경화, 장경화, Brian Hand(2008). 논의를강조한 탐구적 과학글쓰기의 중학교 과학 수업에의 적용.한국과학교육학회지, 28(8), 922-936.
3 성화목, 황소영, 남정희(2012). 탐구적 과학 글쓰기 활동에서 학생들의 반성적 사고와 읽기틀의 관계에 대한 고찰. 한국과학교육학회지, 32(1), 146-159.
4 Bangert-Drowns, R., Hurley, M. M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effect of school-based writing-to-learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74, 29-58.   DOI
5 Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612-637.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Bereiter, C., & Scardamala, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7 Butler, G. (1991). Science and thinking: The write connection. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2, 106-110   DOI
8 Choi, A. (2010). Argument structure in the science writing heuristic(SWH) approach. J Korea Assoc. Sci. Edu, 30(3), 323-336.
9 Dianovsky, M. T., & Wink, D. J. (2012). Student learning through journal writing in a general education chemistry course for pre-elementary education majors. Science Education, 96(3), 543-565.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28(2), 122-128.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Fensham, P., Gunstone, R., & White, R. (1994). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London: The Falmer Press.
12 Gaskins, I. W., & Guthrie, J. T. (1994). Integrating instruction of science, reading, and writing: Goals, teacher development, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 1039-1056.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Glynn, S. M., & Muth, K. K. (1994). Reading and writing to learn science: Achieving scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 1057-1073.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Greenbowe, T. J., & Hand, B. (2005). Introduction to the science writing heuristic. In N. J. Pienta, M. M. Cooper, & T. J. Greenbowe (Eds.), Chemists'guide to effective teaching, (pp. 140-154). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall
15 Halliday, M. A., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press.
16 Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2002). Teachers implementing writing to learn strategies in junior secondary science: A case study. Science Educaion 86(6), 737-755.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Holliday, W. G. (1992). Helping college science students read and write. Journal of College Science Teaching, 22(1), 58-60.
18 Kahaney, P., & Heinrich, K. (1994). Journal writing as social interaction: Writing to learn in the workplace. In Sinnott, J. D. (Ed.), Interdisciplinary handbook of adult lifespan learning. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
19 Kelly, G. J., Chen, C., & Prothero, W. (2000). The epistemological framing of discipline: Writing science in university oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 691-718.   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prian, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the Science Writing Heuristic ac a Tool for Learning from Laboratory Investigations in Secondary Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084   DOI   ScienceOn
21 Klein, P. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology, 11, 203-270.   DOI   ScienceOn
22 Martin, N. (1992). Language across the curriculum: Where it began and what it promises. In A. Herrington & C. Moran (Eds.), Writing, teaching, and learning in the disciplines. New York: Modern Language Association of America.
23 Mason, L., & Boscolo, P. (2000). Writing and conceptual change: What changes? Instructional Science, 28(3), 199-226   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Massey, D. D., & Heafner, T. L. (2004). Promoting reading comprehension in social studies. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(1), 26-40.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 McCrindle, A. R., & Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learning and Instruction, 5, 167-185.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99(3), 440-466.   DOI   ScienceOn
27 Mokhtari, K., & Reichard, C. A. (2002). Assessing students'metacognitive awareness of reading strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 249-259.   DOI   ScienceOn
28 Mulcahy-Ernt, P. I., & Ryshkewitch, S. (1994). Expressive journal writing for comprehendinge literature: A strategy for evoking cognitive complexity. Reading and Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties, 10, 325-342.   DOI   ScienceOn
29 Parkinson, J., Jackson, L., Kirkwood, T., & Padayachee, V. (2007). A scaffolded reading and writing course for foundation level science students. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 443-461.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Perkins, D. N. (1992). Smart schools: From training memories to educating minds. New York: Free Press.
31 Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1996). Writing for learning in secondary science: Rethinking practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(6), 609-626   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1999). Students' perceptions of writing for learning in secondary school science. Science Education, 83(2), 151-162.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Pressely, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbalprotocols of reading: The natural of constructively responsive research, Mahwah. Nj: Erlbaum.
34 Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1986). Helping students become better writers. School Administrator, 42(4), 16-26.
35 Rivard, L. P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for Practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 969-983.   DOI   ScienceOn
36 Rose, D., Lui-Chivizhe, L., McKnight, A., & Smith, A. (2003). Scaffolding academic reading and writing at the Koori Centre. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 32, 41-49.
37 Royer, J. M., Cisero, C. A., & Carlo, M. S. (1993). Techniques and procedures for assessing cognitive skills. Review of Educational Research, 63, 201-243.   DOI   ScienceOn
38 Spence, D. J., & Yore, L. D. (1995). Explicit science reading instruction in grade 7: Metacognitive awareness, metacognitive self-management and science reading comprehension. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching , Sanfrancisco, CA, April 22-25.
39 Unsworth, L. (1997). Explaining explanations: enhancing science learning and literacy development. Australian Science teachers Journal, 43(1), 34-39.
40 Wallace, C. S., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2004). Writing and learning in science classroom. The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
41 Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Education Psychology, 91, 301-311
42 Wittrock, M. C. (1989). Generative processes of comprehension. Educational Psychologist, 24(4), 345-376.   DOI   ScienceOn
43 Zinsser, W. (1988). Writing to learn. New York: Harper & Row.