Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2011.21.2.309

The Analysis of Writing Types on the Hypothetical Deductive Inquiry Experiment of the 7th Gifted in Science  

Kang, Seong-Joo (Korea National University of Education)
Park, Hee-Kyoung (Korea National University of Education)
Publication Information
Journal of Gifted/Talented Education / v.21, no.2, 2011 , pp. 309-335 More about this Journal
Abstract
Writings of gifted students were classified by the writing analysis protocol built on the scientific inquiry process and writings of scientific journals. These writings were classified 7 types based on the existence of tentative explanations and types of conclusion. In addition the writings were classified by linear form, double linear form, supporting-conclusion form based on the number and position of writings. The characteristics of writings show that, first, the tentative explanation is located at the beginning and the drawing conclusion at the end of articles. Secondly, students prefer the linear form writing to explain their logics. Finally, supporting-conclusion writings are shown when answers of question is written only in the drawing conclusion without estimation.
Keywords
Writing; Hypothetical deductive inquiry; Gifted students in science;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 4  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Fellows, N. (1994). A window into thinking: Using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 985-1001.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 Hand, B., Prain, V., & Wallace, C. (2002). Influences of writing tasks on students' answers to recall and higher-level test question. Research in Science Education, 32, 19-34.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4 Rivard, L. P., & Straw, S. B. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566-593.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218.   DOI   ScienceOn
6 박은미, 강순희 (2007). 가설-연역적 수업 프로그램이 창의적 사고와 비판적 사고 및 과학적 태도에 미치는 영향. 한국과학교육학회지, 27(3), 225-234.
7 Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborn, J. (2000). Establishing the Norms of Scientific Argumentation in Classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 김요한 (2005). 디지털 시대의 글쓰기. 독일언어문학, 27, 245-259.
9 김희경, 송진웅 (2004). 학생의 논변활동을 강조한 개방적 과학탐구활동 모형의 탐색. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(6), 1216-1234.
10 정영란, 최진미 (2007). 중학생과 고등학생의 과학적 소양 평가, 한국과학교육학회지, 27(1), 9-17
11 정혁, 정용재, 송진웅 (2004). 빛을 주제로 한 11학년 학생의 과제 유형에 따른 글쓰기 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 24(5), 1008-1017.
12 Watson, J. R., Swain. J. R. L., & McRobbie, C. (2004). Students' discussions in practical scientific inquiries. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 25-45.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 진순희, 장신호 (2007). 과학 탐구에 대한 초등 교사들의 지도 경험. 초등과학교육, 26(2), 181-191.
14 교육인적자원부 (2007). 과학과 교육과정(교육인적자원부 고시 제 2007 - 79호 [별책 9]). 서울: 교육인적자원부.
15 교육인적자원부 (2007). 중학교 교육과정 해설서(III) 수학, 과학, 기술가정. 서울: 교육인적자원부.
16 교육과학기술부 (2009). 고교 과학과 교육과정 해설서(교육과학기술부 고시 제 2009 - 41호). 서울: 교육인적자원부.