Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2019.39.1.59

Exploring Epistemic Considerations in Small Group Science Argumentation of Elementary Students  

Choi, Hyeon-Gyeong (Seoul Hannam Elementary School)
Kim, Hyo-Nam (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education / v.39, no.1, 2019 , pp. 59-72 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to show that epistemic considerations can be used meaningfully in the argumentation of elementary students, and to provide data on students' epistemic considerations that will be the basis for designing and evaluating scientific argumentation. The epistemic considerations in students' small group argumentations were explored based on Epistemic Considerations in Students' Epistemologies in Practice: EIP' suggested by Berland et al. (2016). The major results of this study are as follows: First, epistemic considerations in elementary school students' small group argumentation appeared in all four aspects: Nature, generality, justification and audience. The epistemic considerations varied according to context in each discussion situation. Second, epistemic considerations did not exist independently. They influenced each other and helped to reveal new types of considerations. The results of this study confirmed that argumentation can be used in elementary school science class. Understanding how students are involved in argumentation and how these epistemic considerations can affect students' argumentation can be helpful to teachers who design and evaluate small group argumentation. Students' achievement level affected epistemic considerations but learning approach types did not affect on. In addition, epistemic considerations may have a positive or negative effect on each other depending on the discussion situation in the process of interaction. So consideration of normative argumentation rules and teaching strategies should be considered in order for epistemic considerations to positively affect each other.
Keywords
science argumentation; epistemic consideration; small group activity;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Aufschnaite C., Erduran S., Osborne J., & Simon S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students’ argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 101-131.   DOI
2 Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082-1112.   DOI
3 Cavallo, A.M.L. (1996). Meaningful learning, reasoning ability and students’ understanding and problem solving of genetics topics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 33(6), 625-656.   DOI
4 Choi J., Lee S., & Kim, H. (2014). Social interaction according to students' approaches to learning science and their levels of scientific knowledge during small-group argumentation, Biology Education, 42(4), 371-385.   DOI
5 Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.   DOI
6 Duschl, R. (2008). Science education in three part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291.   DOI
7 Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W., Editors (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
8 Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39-72.   DOI
9 Kang, N., & Lee E. (2013). Argument and argumentation: A review of literature for clarification of translated words, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(6), 1119-1138.   DOI
10 Kwon, J., & Kim, H. (2016). Exploring small group argumentation shown in designing an experiment: Focusing on students' epistemic goals and epistemic considerations for activities, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(1), 45-61.   DOI
11 Maeng, S., Park, Y., & Kim, C. (2013). Methodological review of the research on argumentative discourse focused on analyzing collaborative construction and epistemic enactments of argumentation, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 33(4), 840-862.   DOI
12 Park, J., & Kim, H.(2012). Theoretical considerations on analytical framework design for the interactions between participants in group argumentation on socio-scientific issues, Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(4), 604-624.   DOI
13 Ryu, S., & Sandoval, W. A. (2012). Improvements to elementary children’s epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation. Science Education, 96(3), 488-526.   DOI
14 Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634-656.   DOI
15 Sandoval, W. A. (2014). Science education’s need for a theory of epistemological development. Science Education, 98(3), 383-387.   DOI
16 Sandoval, W. A., & Cam, A. (2011). Elementary children’s judgements of the epistemic status of sources of justification. Science Education, 95(3), 383-408.   DOI