Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2014.34.8.0787

Analysis of Student Science Writing and Perception on Argument-Based Claim and Evidence Writing Approach  

Park, Sunyoung (Cheongwoon Girls' High School)
Choi, Aeran (Ewha Womans University)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.34, no.8, 2014 , pp. 787-794 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the science writing and perception of students who experienced the argument-based claim and evidence writing approach. One hundred and eight grade 11 students were assigned to an experimental group, while 99 grade 12 students were assigned to a comparative group in their earth science classes. Students' science writings on two science topics were scored using an analytic rubric developed in this study. The comparison of experimental and comparative groups in science writing was carried out using an independent two samples t-test. Students' perception on the instruction was examined using an open-ended survey. Science writing by the experimental group scored significantly higher than that by the comparative group, except for the big idea of 'green energy'. For six concepts in 'green energy' and four concepts in 'plate tectonics, there were more students in the experimental group than the comparative group who indicated them in their science writing. Students' perception on the instruction was positive in that they mentioned planning and conducting inquiry, citing of claims and evidence, and developing inquiry questions were helpful in science learning. The results of this study imply that the argument-based claim and evidence writing approach should be implemented in science classrooms for students to develop a conceptual framework for science.
Keywords
science writing; argument-based inquiry; high school science;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 8  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the science writing heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are they difference? International Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 1745-1765.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Cavagnetto, A. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K-12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336-371.   DOI
3 Choi, A., Hand. B., & Greenbowe, T. (2013). Students' written arguments in general chemistry laboratory investigations. Research in Science Education, 43(5), 1763-1783.   DOI
4 Ford, M. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92(3), 404-423.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Grimberg, B., & Hand, B. (2009). Cognitive Pathways: analysis of students' written texts for science understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 31(4), 503-521.   DOI
6 Hand, B., Wallace, C., & Yang, E. M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131-149.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Jang, K. H. (2013). Effect of argumentation-based negotiation in the science writing heuristic(swh) approach on students' question and claim-evidence(Doctoral dissertation, Pusan National University).
8 Jang, K. H., Nam, J. H., & Choi, A. R. (2012). The effects of argument-based inquiry using the science writing heuristic approach on argument structure in science writing. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(7), 1099-1108.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
9 Kang, N. H., & Lee, E. M. (2013). An analysis of inquiry activities in high school physics textbooks for the 2009 revised science curriculum. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(1), 132-143.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
10 Kelly, G., Chen, C., & Prothero, W. (2000). The epistemological framing of a discipline: writing science in university oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 691-718.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: an analysis of university oceanography student use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342.   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 205-226.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Keys, C. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: connecting knowledge production with to learn in science. Science Education, 83(2), 115-13.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Keys, C., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Kingir, S., Geban, O., & Gunel, M. (2012). How does the science writing heuristic approach affect students' performance of different academic achievement levels? A case for high school chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13(4), 428-436.   DOI
16 Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Kwak, K. H., & Nam, J. H. (2009). Enhancing the quality of students' argumentation and characteristics of students' argumentation in different contexts. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 29(4), 400-413.
18 Lemke, J. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.). Reading science: critical and functional perspectives of discourses of science(pp. 87-111). Oxford: Routledge.
19 Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2009). 2009 Science Education Curriculum. Notification No. 2009-41 of the Ministry of Education. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology.
20 Nam, J. H., Kwak, K. H., Jang, K. H., & Hand, B. (2008). The implementation of argumentation using science writing heuristic in middle school science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 922-936.   과학기술학회마을
21 Nam, J., Choi, A., & Hand, B. (2011). Implementation of the science writing heuristic approach in the 8thgrade science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 1111-1133.   DOI
22 Nam, J. H., Koh, M. R., Bak, D. C., Lim, J. H., Lee, D. W., & Choi, A. R. (2011). The effects of argumentation-based general chemistry laboratory on pre-service teachers' understanding of chemistry concepts and writing. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(8), 1077-1091.
23 National Research Council. (2013). The next generation science standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
24 Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(5), 553-576.   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Osborne, J. (2002). Science without literacy: A ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 203-215.   DOI   ScienceOn
26 Park, S. H., & Chung, Y. L. (2012). The effect of science writing heuristic on scientific inquiry skills, logical thinking, and metacognition of middle school students. Biology Education, 40(3), 367-383.   DOI
27 Park, S., & Moon, S. (2013). The effect of the Science Writing Heuristic laboratory class on creative thinking and critical thinking of middle school students. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(7), 1259-1272.   과학기술학회마을   DOI
28 Rudd, J., Greenbowe, T., & Hand, B. (2007). Using the science writing heuristic to improve students' understanding of general Equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(12), 2007-2011.   DOI
29 Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1996). Writing for learning in secondary science: rethinking practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12(6), 609-626.   DOI   ScienceOn
30 Rivard, L., & Straw, S. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: an exploratory study. Science Education, 84(5), 566-593.   DOI   ScienceOn
31 Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education; current perspectives and recommendations for future direction. Science Education, 92(3), 447-472.   DOI   ScienceOn
32 Sampson, V., Groom. J., & Walker, J. (2011). Argument-driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: an exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217-257.   DOI   ScienceOn
33 Sandoval, W., & Millwood, K. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanation. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.   DOI   ScienceOn
34 Shin, S. Y., Choi, A. R., & Park, J. Y. (2013). The effects of the science writing heuristic approach on the middle school students' achievements. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(5), 952-962.   DOI   ScienceOn
35 Shin, J. W., & Choi, A. R. (2014). Trends in research studies on scientific arguments and writing in Korea. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 34(2), 107-122.   DOI
36 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
37 Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.