• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.36 no.5
• /
• pp.757-768
• /
• 2016

This study developed an SSI (Socio-Scientific Issue) discussion program that applies a creative technique called six thinking hats, and then investigated the differences in argumentation patterns and effects on the decision-making abilities of each character feature of students between SNS debate and existing face to face debate. There were three SSI themes - Designer Babies, embryonic stem cell study, and legitimacy of abortion. Students were divided into two groups, the debate group using SNS and face to face debate group. The character patterns of students were divided to 'extraversion,' 'agreeableness,' and 'conscientiousness' through test sheets for character features for each student. Both groups were educated for creative discussion methods using six thinking hats and then, the class progressed. As a result of analyzing argumentation patterns used in SNS debate and face to face debate, the most used argumentation pattern was the "cause pattern." But comparing to face to face debate, other patterns (mark, inference, authority, motive) were also used in SNS debate. The study analyzed three factors of decision-making ability for each character feature of students such as complexity, perspectives, and inquiry. As a result, for 'complexity' factor, there was a significant difference between SNS debate group and face to face debate group only in the student group of Agreeableness. For 'perspectives' factor, there were significant differences between SNS debate group and face to face debate group in all three characters. Finally, for inquiry, there were no significant differences between SNS debate group and face to face debate group in all three characters. Accordingly it would be necessary to apply SNS debate using the six thinking hats in SSI education to enhance perspectives.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.141
• /
• pp.1-42
• /
• 2017

This paper's purpose is to seek to grasp how Descartes demonstrates proofs of God's existence on the basis of his works especially Meditations. To consider these points, I shall explore first, second, third proofs that are present in his works, and contents related to God. Descartes argues that there is idea of God within me, but it is God, which is first proof. On the basis of this fact, Descartes shows only God is the cause of thinking self who has idea of God(second proof), both of them are called Cosmological argument. To investigate this, at first he states that representative reality that is different from formal reality sets a kind of hierarchy, the degree of this reality is equally applied to cause and effect, consequently to the cause of my idea or existence(God). From Meditation V, third proof which is called Ontological argument, Descartes examined a supremely perfect God can't be separated from God's existence(perfection) just as surly as the certainty of any shape or number, for example triangle, namely it is quite evident that God's existence includes his essence. Through these processes I shall examine following points: the way of having Descartes' proofs of God's existence itself is not only exposed, God's existence who guarantees cogito ergo sum which is never doubted, despite doubting all things that is outside, is but also postulated; Proofs for the existence of God are an ultimate source of ensuring the clear and distinct perception of human reason, Descartes uses reason suitable for non-christians instead of faith suitable for Christians for these methods, which are similarities with the traditional views on the one hand, but nevertheless there are some of discontinuities establishing authority or power of the first philosophical principle to which God is subjected, on the other.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.133-151
• /
• 2002

많은 논리학 교과서들은 무지에의 호소 논증을 무차별적으로 오류로 취급하고 있다. 그러나 나는 무지에 호소하고 있다는 형식적인 이유만으로 오류라고 취급하는 것은 잘못이라고 주장한다. 무지에의 호소가 오류인지 아닌지는 그 무지가 철저한 조사 과정을 거쳐서 나왔는가 그리고 입증의 부담이 누구에게 있는가에 따라 달라진다. 그리고 그것은 그 논증이 어떤 맥락과 상황에서 쓰이고 있느냐에 의존한다.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.101-117
• /
• 2004

베나세라프는, 프레게의 플라톤주의를 비판하기 위하여 서로 다른 집합 순서열들이 수 순서열로 간주될 수 있다는 수 미결정성 논제를 주장한다. 이에 대하여 신프레게주의자인 헤일은 수 미결정성 논제를 정면으로 부정하는 논증을 제시하였다. 본 논문에서 필자는 헤일의 논증에서 핵심적인 역할을 하는 형이상학적 원리가 수용되기 어려운 것임을 보이고자 한다.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.5
• /
• pp.919-929
• /
• 2015

This study aims to develop a modeling-based learning program about geologic structures and to reveal the relationship between the argumentation patterns and levels of students' mental models. Participants included 126 second grade high school students in four sessions of modeling-based learning regarding continental drift, oceanic ridges, transform faults, and characteristics of faults. A modeling-based learning program was implemented in two classes of the experimental group, and teacher-centered traditional classes were carried out for the other students in the comparison group. Science achievement scores and the distribution of students' mental models in experimental and comparison groups were quantitatively compared. The video-taped transcripts of five teams' argumentation were qualitatively analyzed based on the analytic framework developed in the study. The analytic framework for coding students' argumentation in the modeling-based learning was composed of five components of TAP and the corresponding components containing alternative concepts. The results suggest that the frequencies of causal two-dimensional model and cubic model were high in the experimental group, while the frequencies of simple two-dimensional model and simple cross sectional model were high in the comparison group. The higher the frequency of claims, an argumentation pattern was proven successful, and the level of mental model was higher. After the rebuttal was suggested, students observed the model again and claimed again according to new data. Therefore, the model could be confirmed as having a positive impact on students' argumentation process.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.203-220
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study was to develop a rubric for assessing students' scientific argumentation. Through the analysis of relevant literature related to argument in science education for developing rubric, the procedure in development and the category in assessment for rubric were elicited. According to the general procedure in developing rubric, the standard for evaluating the argumentation derived three categories such as a form, contents, and attitude. The form category was further segmented into sub-functions composition, claim, ground, and conclusion in the whole. The category for contents was segmented into sub-functions understanding, credibility, and inference. And the category for attitude was set to sub-functions participatory level and openness. The standard for evaluating sub-functions in each of the categories formed in this way was minutely suggested with five stages. The rubric, which was developed on the basis of literature, was inspected through a regular seminar in one expert in science education and fellow researchers. The rubric, which was developed in the early days, was again modified by being verified on problem and improvement matter after being entrusted to four experts in scientific education. And, the finally-completed rubric indicated to be high with 0.96 in the content validity index by being verified the validity by the four experts in science education. The developed rubric will lead to being able to increase the understanding about demonstration in students, and to being available for being utilized as the criteria for developing the argumentation process program and for evaluating the argumentation activity.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.27 no.4
• /
• pp.401-415
• /
• 2006

The science education reforms put the emphasis of scientific literacy, so that students can understand how scientific knowledge is constructed through scientific inquiry at schools. However, scientific inquiry at schools has a problem as a cookbook system without the opportunity of developing argumentation, where students could understand how they use evidence to support their theory or vice versa. Teachers are supposed to understand the basic elements, purpose, and definition of scientific inquiry to implement authentic scientific inquiry at schools, then develop the instructional strategies of providing the opportunity of scientific argumentation to meet its needs.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.197-206
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to research pre-service chemistry teachers' inquiry ability and perception on inquiry by analyzing their argument structure. Nine graduating senior students have participated in this study. They have experimented with mass change during state change, which is included in 7th grade science textbook. We have analyzed pre-service teachers' experimental reports using Toulmin's argument model. Also, we have researched their views on science and experiments through questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. As results show, various factors have affected pre-services' argument structures; lack of science knowledge and inquiry ability, belief about error, and additive data. This study shows that pre-service teachers' inquiry abilities is insufficient, and it is necessary to review rearrangement of pre-service science teacher curriculum in order to offer inquiry experiments in teacher education program.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.117-134
• /
• 2010

In this paper, I attempted to show that 'Sorensen's Sorites' is not a successful argument for the vagueness of 'vague'. There are a lot of debates about it, but the central issue is whether Sorensen's Sorites is just small sorites; whether the vagueness certified by Sorensen's Sorites is just the vagueness of 'small'. Deas and Hull thought it was and rejected Sorensen's proof based on his sorites. But their rejection was rebutted by Varzi. The basis of his argument is that the subject of Sorensen's sentences - 'n-small' is vague - is not used but mentioned. I tried to reply on behalf of Deas and Hull and to show that the predicate 'vague' has not any effect on determining the truth value of "'n-small' is vague." Then it can be removed from the sentence. Of course I approve 'vague' is a homological term. What I do not agree with is only Sorensen's argument.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.161-172
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to characterize students' conceptions on causes of the phases of the moon. For this purpose, students were given a worksheet for argumentative writing activity where in they need to choose the right answer between five statements and provide reasonable evidences about causes of the phases of the moon. Written arguments collected were used as analysis data and TAP(Toulmin's argument pattern) including conceptual analysis of TAP elements were utilized to figure out logical structures and subordinate conceptions. The result showed that students had various alternative concepts about causes of the phases of the moon and associated with celestial. Also 70.5% of subjects had incomplete argument structures, and error types of concepts had difference according to types of alternative concepts as well as TAP. These results mean that importance of checking students' preconceptions, need of scientific argumentation, and appropriate instructional strategies considering alternative conception types and fallacy types that students had.