Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.9722/JGTE.2013.23.6.861

Investigation of Science Gifted Students' Value-Judgement and Decision Making Writing on Space Exploration Enterprise  

Yu, Eun-Jeong (Seoul Science High School)
Ko, Sun-Young (Sin-Mok Middle School)
Publication Information
Journal of Gifted/Talented Education / v.23, no.6, 2013 , pp. 861-879 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore the science gifted students' value-judgments and decision making writing on the space exploration enterprise. Sixty-four first graders of a gifted science school took the seminar-style decision making instruction for 10 hours in one month. After having the seminar-style decision making instruction, we have analyzed science gifted students' value-judgments and decision making process utilizing questionnaires and their writings. As a result, gifted students were aware of both sides of the space exploration enterprise, benefits and risks, and showed different decision making depending on their priorities of evidence interpretation. Although the majority of gifted students were very well aware of the importance of space exploration enterprise, they would still need to know the background information of space exploration enterprise. Based on this study, implications of SSI education and future research about space exploration enterprise were discussed in the result.
Keywords
Value-judgement; Space exploration; Gifted students; Decision making; SSI;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 8  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 고선영, 최승언 (2013). 중학교 과학 우수아의 자기주도적 협동합습을 강조한 지구온난화 관련 의사결정 학습의 효과. 영재교육연구, 23(4), 567-592.
2 교육과학기술부 (2010). 창의 인성 교육을 위한 평가방법 개선. 교육과학기술부.
3 박은이, 홍훈기 (2011). 과학영재들의 과학기술에 대한 견해의 주장형식 분석. 영재교육연구, 21(1), 163-174.
4 은종원 (2013). 우리나라 위성 산업 경쟁력 제고 방안에 관한 연구. 통신위성우주산업연구회논문지, 8(1), 35-39.
5 이영진 (2010). 우주활동에 있어서 분쟁의 해결과 예방. 항공우주법학회지, 25(1), 159-203.
6 이창진 (2011). 우리나라 우주개발사업에서 이해당사자의 기대조건. 한국항공우주학회지, 39(11), 1077-1085.
7 장지영, 문지영, 유효숙, 최경희, Joseph Krajcik, 김성원 (2012). 과학과 관련된 사회윤리(SSI)의맥락에 따른 중학생들의 인성적 태도와 가치관 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 32(7), 1124-1138.
8 장해리, 정영란 (2009). 과학과 관련된 사회윤리적 문제에 대한 의사결정 시 수행하는 비형식적 추론 분석. 한국과학교육학회, 29(2), 253-266.
9 조성식, 권기훈, 김동현 (2012). 연구개발조직의 책임성에 관한 연구: 나로호 발사체 사례를 중심으로. 기술혁신학회지, 15(1), 163-184.
10 주인애, 이현주 (2013). 생명공학과 관려된 사회적 쟁점에 대한 중학생들의 가치판단 및 의사결정 과정에서 드러난 가치 적용 방식 유형. 한국과학교육학회지, 33(1), 79-93.
11 최남미 (2011). 2011년 세계 각국의 우주분야 투자 및 우주산업 현황. 항공우주산업기술동향, 9(1), 3-14.
12 최경희, 조희형 (2003). 과학의 운리적 특성 교수-학습 방법. 한국과학교육학회지, 23(2),131-143.
13 한국항공우주연구원 홈페이지 http://www.kslv.or.kr (검색일: 2013. 10. 1)
14 Crick, B. (1998). Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in School. London:Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
15 Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. (2008). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. New York: Springer.
16 Millar, R., (2006). Twenty first century science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(13), 1499-1521.   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Levinson, R. (2007). Teaching controversial socio-scientific issued to gifted and talented students. In K. S. Taber (Eds.), Science Education for Gifted Learners (pp. 128-141), New York: Routledge.
18 McLaughlin, T. (2003). Teaching Controversial Issues in Citizenship Education. In A. Lockyer, B. Crick and J. Annette, Education for Democratic Citizenship: Issues of Theory and Practice (pp. 149-160), Aldershot: Ashagete.
19 Miles. B. M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qulaitative data analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sag Publication.
20 Mueller, M. P., & Zeidler, D. L. (2010). Moral-ethical character and science education: Ecojustice ethics through socioscientific issues (SSI). In D. Tippins, M. Mueller, M. van Eijck & J. Adams (Eds.), Cultural studies and environmentalism: The confluence of ecojustice, place-based (science) education, and indigenous knowledge systems (pp.105-128). New York: Springer.
21 National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
22 Paccon, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.