• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.28 no.5
• /
• pp.495-505
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study was to analyze the level of evidence used in gifted elementary students' argumentation. The subjects were 15, 5th and 6th grade students selected in the Science Education Institute for Gifted Youth in K University. After the argumentation task was given to students 2 weeks ago, the students grouped themselves in the affirmative and negative and took part in a debate for 2 hours. Their argumentation process was observed, recorded and transcribed for analysis. Transcribed data was given a Protocol Number according to priority and was examined to find out what were the characteristics when students participated in the task. The evidence used in argumentation was graded from level 1 to level 6 according to Perella's Hierarchy of Evidence and the rate of frequency classified by the level was expressed in graph. Students used Level 1- Level 2 evidence above 50% without for or against task. They had weak argumentation making use of low-level evidence such as individual experience, opinion and another person's experience rather than objective evidences. On the other hand, students commented on the lack of opponent's evidence when they could not trust an opponent's evidence. If one team asked the other to present more evidence but could not, they disregarded the question and turned to another topic. And in cases where the opponent team refuted with evidences of high level, the other team just repeated their claim or evaded the rebuttal. The students tended to complete the argument without the same conclusions with some interruptions. The results show that we need an educational programs including scientific argumentation for science-gifted elementary school students.

• Communications of Mathematical Education
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.235-257
• /
• 2010

Contemporary belief is that the creative talented can create new knowledge and lead national development, so lots of countries in the world have interest in Gifted Education. As we well know, U.S.A., England, Russia, Germany, Australia, Israel, and Singapore enforce related laws in Gifted Education to offer Gifted Classes, and our government has also created an Improvement Act in January, 2000 and Enforcement Ordinance for Gifted Improvement Act was also announced in April, 2002. Through this initiation Gifted Education can be possible. Enforcement Ordinance was revised in October, 2008. The main purpose of this revision was to expand the opportunity of Gifted Education to students with special education needs. One of these programs is, the opportunity of Gifted Education to be offered to lots of the Gifted by establishing Special Classes at each school. Also, it is important that the quality of Gifted Education should be combined with the expansion of opportunity for the Gifted. Social opinion is that it will be reckless only to expand the opportunity for the Gifted Education, therefore, assessment on the Teaching and Learning Program for the Gifted is indispensible. In this study, 3 middle schools were selected for the Teaching and Learning Programs in mathematics. Each 1st Grade was reviewed and analyzed through comparative tables between Regular and Gifted Education Programs. Also reviewed was the content of what should be taught, and programs were evaluated on assessment standards which were revised and modified from the present teaching and learning programs in mathematics. Below, research issues were set up to assess the formation of content areas and appropriateness for Teaching and Learning Programs for the Gifted in mathematics. A. Is the formation of special class content areas complying with the 7th national curriculum? 1. Which content areas of regular curriculum is applied in this program? 2. Among Enrichment and Selection in Curriculum for the Gifted, which one is applied in this programs? 3. Are the content areas organized and performed properly? B. Are the Programs for the Gifted appropriate? 1. Are the Educational goals of the Programs aligned with that of Gifted Education in mathematics? 2. Does the content of each program reflect characteristics of mathematical Gifted students and express their mathematical talents? 3. Are Teaching and Learning models and methods diverse enough to express their talents? 4. Can the assessment on each program reflect the Learning goals and content, and enhance Gifted students' thinking ability? The conclusions are as follows: First, the best contents to be taught to the mathematical Gifted were found to be the Numeration, Arithmetic, Geometry, Measurement, Probability, Statistics, Letter and Expression. Also, Enrichment area and Selection area within the curriculum for the Gifted were offered in many ways so that their Giftedness could be fully enhanced. Second, the educational goals of Teaching and Learning Programs for the mathematical Gifted students were in accordance with the directions of mathematical education and philosophy. Also, it reflected that their research ability was successful in reaching the educational goals of improving creativity, thinking ability, problem-solving ability, all of which are required in the set curriculum. In order to accomplish the goals, visualization, symbolization, phasing and exploring strategies were used effectively. Many different of lecturing types, cooperative learning, discovery learning were applied to accomplish the Teaching and Learning model goals. For Teaching and Learning activities, various strategies and models were used to express the students' talents. These activities included experiments, exploration, application, estimation, guess, discussion (conjecture and refutation) reconsideration and so on. There were no mention to the students about evaluation and paper exams. While the program activities were being performed, educational goals and assessment methods were reflected, that is, products, performance assessment, and portfolio were mainly used rather than just paper assessment.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.49 no.2
• /
• pp.4-19
• /
• 2016

Jangkei(狀啓) made to the Royal Court by Yi Sun-sin during the Japanese invasions of Korea is handed down under the names of Jangcho(狀草), Keicho(啓草), Keibon(啓本) and others depending on copying patterns of those times and later times as it was copied out by a third person. In particular, "YimjinJangcho(壬辰狀草)" which Yi drew up during his service as the director of the naval forces in Jeolla Jwasooyeong is known as the most popular Jangkei. "ChungMinKongKeicho" which has been re-located recently after loss is a national treasure level cultural property as valuable as "YimjinJangcho" and should be treated as a model of Yi Sun-sin's other Jangkeis by next generations. As of now, however it is not confirmed if it is a totally new book related to Yi Sun-sin or is supplementary to the lost Jangkei, this study decided to ascertain relevant information through a bibliographic discussion on the question. "Chungmin(忠愍)" was the title that was used after the death of Yi Sun-sin, and "ChungMinKongKeicho" was completed when Jangkei was copied in 1662. 12 books that would not be found in YimjinJangcho are included in the book and such books are also present in the Jangkei supplement which has been known lost so far. What should be especially focused on here is that the forms and contents of these (11) photographs that Japanese shot from "ChungMinKongKeicho" in 1928 turned out to be completely identical to those of the original copy. The point that Korean History Compilation Committee added the 12 books to Jangkei as referring to the book as "One Keicho(啓草) partially copied(抄寫) in separation" and that Cho Sung-do categorized the 12 books into a supplement and others can be solid proofs to make the Jangkei supplement called "ChungMinKongKeicho". In terms of "ChungMooKongKeicho", since it consists of 62 books in total, it is not reasonable to see the book as Jangkei supplement which has the extra 12 more books for itself. "ChungMooKongKeibon" in "ChungMooKongYusa" was written with a total of 16 books. In the body, Yidumun is only clearly present, and the three books in the later part are same with the original copy of "ChungMooKongKeicho". "YimjinJangcho" by Korean History Compilation Committee has been the only book in which Yidumun was observed so far but now, it is assumed that the publication date of "ChungMooKongKeibon" goes before that of the former. The counterargument to the opinion that "ChungMinKongKeicho" is the supplement to Jangkei is based on Lee Eun-sang's comment "One page of a log in the Jangkei copy supplement." At first Seol Ui-sik introduced a piece photo of the rough draft of "MoosulIlki" in a drawing form through "Nanjung Ilkicho by Yi Sun-sin" in 1953. Lee Eun-sang also added two pages of the handwritten Yilkicho in the Jangkeichobon supplement to "MoosulIlki" and for the second time, the phrase "One page of a log written during the last 10 days after the Jangkei copy supplement" and "Supplement" were used. Those views are originated from the comment "One photograph of the rough draft of "MoosulIlki"" which Seol Ui-sik introduced without knowledge of the exact source. Lee Eun-sang said, "One page of a log in the Jangkei copy supplement" because Lee mistook "ChungMooKongYusa" for a book related to Jangkei. Since it is the wrong argument different from the actual situation of the original copy, if it has to be corrected, it should be rephrased "One page of a log in ChungMooKongYusa." After all, the source of the counterargument is the mistake because there has never been the Jangkei supplement with one page of a log included. All the Jangkeis other than "YimjinJangcho" can be said as the Jangkei supplements but still, they are separated from the other Jangkeis for the extra 12 more books are present in the commonly-called Jangkei supplement. Due to that reason, the argument on how "ChungMinKongKeicho" with the 12 books added is the popular Jangkei supplement should be considered more reasonable.