Browse > Article

An Investigation on the Properties of the Argumentation for Students' Performing Geometric Tasks in Middle School-Based on the Type of the Rebuttal of Verheij  

Hwang, Hye Jeang (Chosun University)
Hong, Sung Gi (Graduate School, Chosun University)
Publication Information
Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics / v.27, no.4, 2017 , pp. 701-725 More about this Journal
Abstract
Students need to have opportunities to share their ideas with peers by taking part in the conversation voluntarily that is, by persuading others and reflecting the consequences. Recognizing the importance of this point, this study intended to examine students' argumentation occurring in the process of performing tasks in the math classroom. Also, it tried to explore the types of the argument that students used in the classroom and the reason why they employed them with a focus on 'rebuttal', which is one of the six elements of the argument scheme such as claim, data, warrent, backing, qualifiers, and rebuttal. The analysis of argumentation is based on the five argumentation schemes suggested by Verheij(2005). The experimental class was conducted twice a week with four participants who are third grade middle school students. In the argumentation class students were promoted to address two different kinds of geometrical tasks. After the second session of class, the researcher conducted the semi-structured interview. Accordingly, this study contributes to the existing research by making students to have concrete and active argumentation while obtaining the sound understanding of the argumentation.
Keywords
Argumentation; Argument scheme; Geometrical tasks; Semi-structured interview;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 4  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Toulmin, S. E.(2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
2 강순민(2004). 과학적 맥락의 논의 과제 해결 과정에서 나타나는 논의과정 요소의 특성. 한국교원대학교 박사학위 논문.
3 강현영, 송은영, 조진우, 이경화(2011). 통계적 논증 활동을 강조한 통계수업의 효과에 대한 사례연구. 수학교육학연구, 21(4), 399-422.
4 국립국어원표준국어대사전. http://stdweb2.korean.go.kr/search/List_dic.jsp
5 고연주, 최윤희, 이현주(2015). 과학관련 사회쟁점(SSI) 맥락에서의 소집단 논증 활동 분석틀 개발: 담화클러스터와 담화요소의 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 35(3), 509-521.   DOI
6 김동원(2007). 틀의 차이를 극복하기 -수학교실에서의 논증분석 연구-. 수학교육, 46(2), 173-192.
7 윤선미, 김희백(2011). 소집단의 논변활동을 위한 과학 탐구 과제의 개발과 적용. 한국과학교육학회지, 31(5), 694-708.   DOI
8 김진환, 강영란(2016). 초등영재학급을 대상으로 그래핑 계산기의 지오보드를 활용한 Pick 공식의 탐구 과정에서 나타난 논증 활동의 분석. 학교수학, 18(1), 85-103.
9 문아영(2016). 초등학생들의 소집단 논증 활동에서 의사결정에 영향을 주는 '반박' 양상의 사례. 서울교육대학교 교육전문대학원 석사학위 논문.
10 양일호, 김기영, 임성만, 김은애, 김성운(2015). 과학 관련 사회적 문제(SSI) 상황에서 반박 자료와 감정이입상황에 따른 초등학생의 의사결정 변화. 한국지구과학회지, 8(1), 66-75.
11 이선경(2006). 소집단 토론에서 발생하는 학생들의 상호작용적 논증 유형 및 특징. 대한화학회지, 50(1), 79-88.   DOI
12 이윤경(2016). 고등학교 확률통계 담화분석: Mehan의 이론, Toulmin의 논증패턴, Peirce의 가추법을 중심으로. 미출판 박사학위논문, 영남대학교 대학원 경산.
13 이윤경, 조정수(2015). 고등학교 확률 수업의 '몬티홀 문제' 과제 맥락에서 나타난 논증과정 분석. 학교수학, 17(3), 423-446.
14 이은주, 윤선미, 김희백(2015). 변칙 사례에 대한 과학 영재 학생들의 반응에서 드러난 인식론적 프레이밍과 소집단 논변활동 탐색. 한국과학교육학회지, 35(3), 419-429.   DOI
15 한혜진, 이태훈, 고현지, 이선경, 김은숙, 최승언, 김찬종(2012). 과학영재의 논증 활동에서 나타나는 반박 유형 분석. 한국과학교육학회지, 32(4), 717-728.   DOI
16 Dunham, W.(2004). 수학의 천재들. (조정수 역), 서울: 경문사. (1995).
17 Krummheuer, G.(1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.), The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures (pp. 229-269). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18 Erduran, S.(2007). Methodological foundations in the study of argumentation in science classrooms. In Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleizandre, M. P. (Eds.) Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 47-69). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
19 Erduran, S.(2008). Argumentation in Science Education: An Overview. In Erduran, S., & Jimenez-Aleizandre, M. P. (Eds.) Argumentation in Science Education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 12-16). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.
20 Inglis, M., Mejia-Ramos, J. P., & Simpson, A. (2007). Modelling mathematical argumentation: The importance of qualification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(1), 3-21.   DOI
21 Magalhas, M., & Martinho, M. H.(2012). The role of graphical calculator in developing mathematial argumentation. Retrived from http://www.icme12.org/upload/UpFile2/TSG/1308.pdf.
22 McCrone, S. S.(2005). The development of mathematical discussion: An investigation in a fifth grade classroom. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(2), 111-133.   DOI
23 Pedemonte, B.(2007). How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed?. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 66(1), 23-41.   DOI
24 Sampson, V., & Clark, D. B.(2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447-472.   DOI
25 Verheij, B.(2005). Evaluating arguments based on Toulmin's scheme. Argumentation, 19, 347-371.   DOI
26 Simon, S., Erduran, S., & Osborne, J.(2006). Learning to teach argumentation: Research and development in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2-3), 235-260.   DOI
27 Vincent, J., Chick, H., & McCrae, B.(2005). Argumentation profile charts as tools for analysing students' argumentations. In H. Chick & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 4 (pp. 281-288). Melbourne, Australia: IGPME.
28 Whitenack, J. W. & Knipping, N.(2002). Argumentation, instructional design theory and students's mathematical learning: a case for coordinating interpretive lenses. Journal of mathematical behavior, 21, pp. 441-457.   DOI
29 Yackel, E., & Cobb, P.(1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, pp. 458-477.   DOI
30 Yackel, E.(2002). What we can learn from analyzing the teacher's role in collective argumentation. Journal of mathematical behavior, 21, pp. 423-440.   DOI