Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5012/jkcs.2006.50.1.079

The Patterns and the Characteristics of Students’ Interactive Argumentation in the Small-group Discussions  

이선경 (서울대학교)
Publication Information
Journal of the Korean Chemical Society / v.50, no.1, 2006 , pp. 79-88 More about this Journal
Abstract
study was to explore the patterns and the characteristics of students' interactive argumentation in the middle school science classes. The data were collected by observing and audiotaping the small-group discussions and the transcribed data were analyzed through the lens of Toulmin's argument frame. As the results, the three argumentation patterns, which could be combined different ideas with or without their warrants, were presented. In the first pattern, the argumentation including the claim and its warrant without any different ideas, the students argumentation did not have any conflict with each other in the discussions. In the second, the argumentation of different ideas without their warrants, the different ideas did not affect the claim. In the last, the argumentation of different ideas with their warrants, the students elaborated the claim through collaborative argumentation in search for the warrant. To understand and improve student discussions in the science classrooms, conclusion and implications were discussed based on the results.
Keywords
Small-Group Discussion; Interactive Argumentation; Toulmin's Argument Frame; Science Classroom연구의 필요성 및 목적
Citations & Related Records

Times Cited By SCOPUS : 1
연도 인용수 순위
1 Alexopoulou, E.; Driver, R. J. of Research in Science Teaching. 1996, 33, 1099-1114   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Geddis, A. N. Science Education. 1991, 75, 169-183   DOI
3 Russell, T. J. of Research in Science Teaching. 1983, 20, 27-45   DOI
4 Driver, R.; Newton, P.; Osborne, J. Science Education. 2000, 84, 287-312   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Kelly, G. J.; Druker, S.; Chen, C. International Journal of Science Education. 1998, 20, 849-871   DOI   ScienceOn
6 Zeidler, D. L. Science Education. 1997, 81, 483-496   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Kuhn, D. Science Education, 1993, 77, 319-337   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Lee, S.; Hewson, P. J. of the Korean Association of Research in Science Education. 2004, 24, 709-721
9 Osborne, J.; Erduran, S.; Simon, S. J. of Research in Science Teaching. 2004, 41, 994-1020   DOI   ScienceOn
10 이현영; 장상실; 성숙경; 이상권; 강성주; 최병순. 한국과학교육학회지, 2002, 22, 660-670
11 Meyer, K.; Woodruff, E. Science Education. 1997, 81, 173-192   DOI   ScienceOn
12 Kuhn, D.; Shaw, V.; Felton, M. Cognition and Instruction. 1997, 15, 287-315   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Toulmin, S. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1958
14 Eichinger, D. C.; Anderson, C. W.; Palinscar, A.; David, Y. M. Paper presented at the Amercian Educational Research Association, Chicago, U.S.A. 1991
15 Herrenkohl, L.; Palinscar, A.; DeWater, L.S.; Kawasaki, K. 1999. The J. of the Learning Sciences, 8, 451-193   DOI   ScienceOn
16 Vygotsky, L. S. Thinking and speech. New York, NY: Plenum, 1987
17 강순민. 과학적 맥락의 논의 과제 해결 과정에서 나타나는 논의과정 요소의 특징. 한국교원대학교 대학원 박사학위논문, 2004
18 Chin, C. A.; Anderson, R. C. Teachers College Record. 1998, 100, 315-368
19 Billing, M. Arguing and thinking (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996
20 강석진; 한수진; 정영선; 노태희. 한국과학교육학회지, 2001, 21, 279-288
21 Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. An introduction to reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984
22 임희준; 박수연; 노태희. 한국과학교육학회지, 1999, 19, 367-376