1 |
Von Aufschnaiter, 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 |
Wiliam, D. (2011). What is assessment for learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 37(1), 3-14.
DOI
|
3 |
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.
DOI
|
4 |
Jeon, S. (2019). The development and application of process-focused assessment for improving scientific communication skills. Elementary Science Education, 38(1), 16-30.
|
5 |
Keys, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83(2), 115-130.
DOI
|
6 |
Ko, H. (2019). The study on the perception, actual condition, and support strategies of process-centered assessment by each teacher. Journal of Learner-centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(9), 1137-1164.
DOI
|
7 |
Kim, J. (2018). The concept and educational implication of process-focused assessment. Journal of Learner-centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(20), 839-859.
|
8 |
Kim, S. S., Kim, H. K., Seo, M. H., & Seong, T. J. (2015). Formative assessment for classroom practice. Seoul: Hakjisa.
|
9 |
Kim, Y., & Choi, A. (2019). Teacher perception and practice on free semester science assessment. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 39(1), 143-160.
DOI
|
10 |
Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2003). The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74(5), 1245-1260.
DOI
|
11 |
Lee, K.-H., Kang, H. Y., Ko, E.-S., Lee, D.-H., Shin, B., Lee, H. C., & Kim, S. H. (2016). Exploration of the direction for the practice of process-focused assessment. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 26(4), 819-834.
|
12 |
Mason, L. (2001). Introducing talk and writing for conceptual change: A classroom study. Learning and Instruction, 11(4-5), 305-329.
DOI
|
13 |
McNeill, K. L. (2009). Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93(2), 233-268.
DOI
|
14 |
Calik, M., Ayas, A., & Coll, R. K. (2007). Enhancing pre-service elementary teachers' conceptual understanding of solution chemistry with conceptual change text. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(1), 1-28.
DOI
|
15 |
Berland, L. K., & McNeill, K. L. (2010). A learning progression for scientific argumentation: Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts. Science Education, 94(5), 765-793.
DOI
|
16 |
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment. Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5-31.
DOI
|
17 |
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2010). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), 81-90.
DOI
|
18 |
Charmaz, K., Thornberg, R., & Keane, E. (2017). Evolving grounded theory and social justice inquiry. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 720-776). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
|
19 |
Chen, J., Wang, M., Grotzer, T. A., & Dede, C. (2018). Using a threedimensional thinking graph to support inquiry learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(9), 1239-1263.
DOI
|
20 |
Chen, Y.-C., Park, S., & Hand, B. (2016). Examining the use of talk and writing for students' development of scientific conceptual knowledge through constructing and critiquing arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 34(2), 100-147.
DOI
|
21 |
MOE (Ministry of Education) (2015b). Science Curriculum (MOE Notification No. 2015-74 [supplement 9]). Sejong: Author.
|
22 |
McNeill, K. L., & Knight, A. M. (2013). Teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of scientific argumentation: The impact of professional development on K-12 teachers. Science Education, 97(6), 936-972.
DOI
|
23 |
McNeill, K. L., & Pimentel, D. S. (2010). Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation. Science Education, 94(2), 203-229.
DOI
|
24 |
MOE (Ministry of Education) (2015a). Overview of elementary and secondary school curriculum (MOE Notification No. 2015-74 [supplement 1]). Sejong: Author.
|
25 |
MOE & DMCOE (Ministry of Education & Daejeon Metropolitan City Office of Education) (2016). Development of teaching and learning materials for the 2015 revised curriculum-integrated science & science inquiry and experiment. Sejong: Author.
|
26 |
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 293-321.
DOI
|
27 |
Chiu, M. H., Guo, C. J., & Treagust, D. F. (2007). Assessing students’ conceptual understanding in science: An introduction about a national project in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 379-390.
DOI
|
28 |
Cho, S.-Y. (2017). Realization plan of connection between the competencebased curriculum, teaching-learning method, and evaluation in high schools. Secondary Education Research, 65(1), 255-281.
DOI
|
29 |
Choi, S. K. (2018). A study on the practice of process-focused assessment: Focusing on perceptions of Korean language teachers and application methods of Korean language education. Journal of CheongRam Korean Language Education, 68, 129-176.
DOI
|
30 |
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
DOI
|
31 |
Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 268-291.
DOI
|
32 |
Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2008). Argumentation in science education. Perspectives from classroom-based research. Dordrecht: Springer.
|
33 |
Gunel, M., Hand, B., & McDermott, M. A. (2009). Writing for different audiences: Effects on high-school students' conceptual understanding of biology. Learning and Instruction, 19(4), 354-367.
DOI
|
34 |
Rivard, L. P., & Straw, S. B. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 84(5), 566-593.
DOI
|
35 |
MOE & KICE (Ministry of Education & Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation) (2017). How do you assess the process? (KICE ORM 2017-19-1). Sejong: Author.
|
36 |
NRC (National Research Council) (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
|
37 |
Poehner, M. E. (2008). Dynamic assessment: A Vygotskian approach to understanding and promoting L2 development (Vol. 9). Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.
|
38 |
Sampson, V., Enderle, P. J., & Walker, J. P. (2012). The development and validation of the assessment of scientific argumentation in the classroom (ASAC) observation protocol: A tool for evaluating how students participate in scientific argumentation. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Perspectives on scientific argumentation (pp. 235-264). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
|
39 |
Hong, S. H., Chang, I., & Kim, T. S. (2017). Elementary school teachers’ recognition of process-centered evaluation using consensual qualitative research (CQR). The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(4), 47-69.
|
40 |
Ryu, S., Kwak, Y. & Yang, S. H. (2018). Theoretical exploration of a process-centered assessment model for STEAM competency based on learning progressions. Journal of Science Education, 42(2), 132-147.
DOI
|
41 |
Sandoval, W. A., & Millwood, K. A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 23-55.
DOI
|
42 |
Schwarz, B. B., & Asterhan, C. S. (2011). E-moderation of synchronous discussions in educational settings: A nascent practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(3), 395-442.
DOI
|
43 |
Tytler, R. (2009). Longitudinal studies into science learning: Methodological issues. In Quality research in literacy and science education (pp. 83-105). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
|
44 |
Son, J. (2018). The effect of backward design reflecting process-focused assessment on science learning achievement and science learning motivation of elementary school students. Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 11(2), 90-106.
DOI
|
45 |
Syh-Jong, J. (2007). A study of students' construction of science knowledge: Talk and writing in a collaborative group. Educational Research, 49(1), 65-81.
DOI
|
46 |
Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The use of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
|
47 |
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 952-977.
DOI
|