Using a Learning Progression to Characterize Korean Secondary Students' Knowledge and Submicroscopic Representations of the Particle Nature of Matter |
Shin, Namsoo
(University of Michigan)
Koh, Eun Jung (Seoul National University) Choi, Chui Im (Seoul National University) Jeong, Dae Hong (Seoul National University) |
1 | Stevens, S. Y., & Shin, N. (2010). An investigation into students' interpretations of submicroscopic representations. Poster presented at the International Conferences of the Learning Sciences, Chicago, IL, USA. |
2 | Stevens, S. Y., Shin, N., & Krajcik, J. S. (2009a). Towards a model for the development of an empirically tested learning progression. Paper presented at the Learning Progressions in Science (LeaPS) Conference, Iowa City, IA, USA. |
3 | Stevens, S.Y., Shin, N., & Peek-Brown, D. (2013). Learning progressions as a guide for developing meaningful science learning: A new framework for old ideas. Journal of Education Quimica, 24(4), 381-390. |
4 | Stevens, S., Sutherland, L., & Krajcik, J. S. (2009b). The big ideas of nanoscale science and engineering. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press. |
5 | Schwarz, C., Reiser, B., Davis, E., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009a). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632-654. DOI ScienceOn |
6 | Schwarz, C., Reiser, B., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Acher, A., Davis, B., Krajcik, J., & Hug, B. (2009b). Models: Defining a learning progression for scientific modeling. Paper presented at the Learning Progression in Science (LeaPS) conference, Iowa City, IA, USA. |
7 | Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. D., & Mamiala, T. L. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(11), 1353-1369. DOI ScienceOn |
8 | Tuckey, H., & Selvaratnam, M. (1993). Studies involving three-dimensional visualisation skills in chemistry: A review. Studies in Science Education, 21(1), 99-121. DOI ScienceOn |
9 | Wu, H. K., & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Pedagogical affordances of multiple external representations in scientific processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 754-767. DOI |
10 | National Research Council. (2013). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. In Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. |
11 | NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. |
12 | Noh, T,, Yoon, M., Kang, H., & Han, J. (2007). Semiotic analysis of the inscriptions representing concept of atom and molecule in the 9th grade science textbooks. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 51(5), 423-432. 과학기술학회마을 DOI |
13 | Noh, T,, Yoon, M., & Han, J. (2009). Students' comprehension and interpretation process of inscriptions representing the concept of atom and molecule. Journal of the Korean Chemical Society, 53(3), 355-367. DOI ScienceOn |
14 | Smith, C. L., Wiser, M., Anderson, C. W., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Implications of research on children's learning for standards and assessment: A proposed learning progression for matter and the atomic molecular theory. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 14(1-2), 1-98. |
15 | Roth, W. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68(1), 35-59. DOI ScienceOn |
16 | Scalise, K., & Gifford, B. (2006). Computer-based assessment in e-learning: A framework for constructing "intermediate constraint" questions and tasks for technology platforms. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 4(6), 1-45. |
17 | Schmidt, W. H., Wang, H. C., & McKnight, C. C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: An examination of US mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37(5), 525-559. DOI ScienceOn |
18 | Stevens, S. Y., Delgado, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). Developing a theoretical learning progression for atomic structure and inter-atomic interactions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 47(6), 687-715. |
19 | Justi, R. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers' views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369-387. DOI ScienceOn |
20 | Kenyon, L., Schwarz, C., & Hug, B. (2008). The benefits of scientific modelling. Science and Children, 46(2), 40-44. |
21 | Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105-143. DOI ScienceOn |
22 | National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academy Press. |
23 | Maeng, S. H., Seong, Y. S., & Jang, S. H. (2013). Present states methodological features and an exemplar study of the research on learning progressions. Journal of Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 161-180. 과학기술학회마을 DOI |
24 | Ministry of Education. (2011). The science curriculum of the republic of Korea 2009 revised version. Proclamation of the ministry of education, science and technology #2011-361. |
25 | Mohan, L., Chen, J., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Developing a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 675-698. DOI ScienceOn |
26 | National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. In R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. W. Shouse (Eds.). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. |
27 | National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on conceptual framework for the new K-12 science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. |
28 | Deboer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research Science Teaching, 37(6), 582-601. DOI |
29 | Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75(6), 649-672. DOI |
30 | Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7(2), 155-170. DOI ScienceOn |
31 | Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students' mental models of molecules: Implication for teaching chemistry. Studies in Science Education, 80, 509-534. |
32 | Gilbert, J. (1993). Models & modelling in science education. Hatfield, UK: The Association for Science Education. |
33 | Gilbert, J. K., Pietrocola, M., Zylbersztajn, A., & Faranco, C. (2000). Science and education: Notion of reality, theory and model, In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 19-40). Netherlands: Springer. |
34 | Glynn, S. M. (1991). Explaining science concepts: A teaching-with-analogies model. In S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, & B. K Britton (Eds.), The psychology of learning science. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. |
35 | Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84, 352-381. DOI |
36 | Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2002). The particulate nature of matter: Challenges in understanding the submicroscopoic world. In J. K. Gilbert, O. D. Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel, (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp. 189-212). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. |
37 | Hodgson, T. (1995). Secondary mathematics modeling: Issues and challenges. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 351-358. DOI |
38 | Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S. W., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Re-conceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 670-697. DOI ScienceOn |
39 | Bamberger, Y. M., & Davis, E. A. (2013). Middle-school science students' scientific modelling performances across content areas and within a learning progression. International Journal of Science Education. 35(2), 213-238. DOI |
40 | Chi, M. T., Slotta, J. D., & De Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4(1), 27-43. DOI ScienceOn |
41 | Cobern, W. W., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1998). Cultural aspects of learning science. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education part 1 (pp. 39-52). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers. |
42 | College Board (2009). Science college board standards for college sucess. New York, NY: The college board. |
43 | National Research Council. (2005). How students learn: Science in the classroom. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), Committee on how people learn, a targeted report for teachers. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. |