• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.24 no.6
• /
• pp.1216-1234
• /
• 2004

School science practical work is often criticized as lacking key elements of authentic science, such as peer argumentation or debate through which social consensus is obtained. The purpose of this paper is to review the recent studies about the argumentation and to explore the conditions and the model of argumentative scientific inquiry, which is specially designed open inquiry in order to facilitate students' peer argumentation. For this purpose, a theoretical discussion for the argumentative scientific inquiry as the way of authentic inquiry in schools was developed. The conditions for argumentative scientific inquiry were found to be the following: multiple arguments, students' own claims, opportunities for oral and written argumentation, equal status of debaters, and community of cooperative competition. For these conditions, the argumentative scientific inquiry was organized into experiment activities and argumentation activities. During argumentation activity, students should be guided to advance written argumentation through writing a group report for peer review and oral argumentation through a critical discussion. Through the argumentation between groups and in group, the students' arguments would be elaborated repeatedly. The feedback from argumentation links experiment activities to argumentation activities. Hence, the whole process of this inquiry model is circular.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.55 no.1
• /
• pp.199-222
• /
• 2022

It has been 100 years since the excavation of Geumgwanchong (Gold Crown Tomb), a tomb that was accidentally discovered in Noseo-ri, Gyeongju at the end of September 1921 during Japanese colonial rule. Although it is known for its discovery, not only in the Korean Peninsula but also in Asia and beyond, the excavation report was published in Japanese and English by the Government-General of Korea in 1924 and 1928, three years after the excavation. TOMB "KINKANTSUKA" or THE GOLD CROWN TOMB at KEISHU, AND ITS TREASURES) was published as a series of books and picture books. The excavation report was prepared by Kosaku Hamada (濱田耕作), who was a member of the Ruins Investigation Committee of the Japanese Government-General of Korea (later became the President of Kyoto Imperial University, Kyoto, Japan), and Sueji Umehara (梅原末治), who was commissioned to investigate the remains of the Japanese Government-General of Korea. In this paper, the preface was written in July 1922, about half a year after the excavation of tombs, which was much earlier than the official reports, in the 'Korean and Chinese reading book (稿本 高等朝鮮語及漢文讀本 巻五)' by Hamada Kosaku (濱田耕作) for high school students in Korea, which was titled 'New Excavated Artifacts in Gyeongju (慶州의 新發掘品)' with a subtitle '絶大의 發見', a slightly awkward expression in Korean, but it means 'a very big discovery'. The meaning has been introduced as a single unit, emphasizing its significance in terms of the achievements of the excavation of Geumgwanchong, academic and archaeological discoveries, and cultural history in Korean language rather than Japanese language. Since the manuscript was written immediately after the excavation, the excitement as an archaeological researcher at the time of the excavation and expectations for future research can be read as it is. In this paper, I would like to introduce the voice of the excited field leader of the Japanese Government-General of Korea after the excavation of Geumgwanchong in 2022, the 100th anniversary of the writing. In addition, the process from the discovery of the tomb to the preparation of the report was summarized in one chronological table to make it easier to understand the series of flows.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.109-125
• /
• 2020

The Ministry of National Defense is pushing for the Defense Acquisition Program to build strong defense capabilities, and it spends more than 10 trillion won annually on defense improvement. As the Defense Acquisition Program is directly related to the security of the nation as well as the lives and property of the people, it must be carried out very transparently and efficiently by experts. However, the excessive diversification of laws and regulations related to the Defense Acquisition Program has made it challenging for many working-level officials to carry out the Defense Acquisition Program smoothly. It is even known that many people realize that there are related regulations that they were unaware of until they push ahead with their work. In addition, the statutory statements related to the Defense Acquisition Program have the tendency to cause serious issues even if only a single expression is wrong within the sentence. Despite this, efforts to establish a sentence comparison system to correct this issue in real time have been minimal. Therefore, this paper tries to propose a "Comparison System between the Statement of Military Reports and Related Laws" implementation plan that uses the Siamese Network-based artificial neural network, a model in the field of natural language processing (NLP), to observe the similarity between sentences that are likely to appear in the Defense Acquisition Program related documents and those from related statutory provisions to determine and classify the risk of illegality and to make users aware of the consequences. Various artificial neural network models (Bi-LSTM, Self-Attention, D_Bi-LSTM) were studied using 3,442 pairs of "Original Sentence"(described in actual statutes) and "Edited Sentence"(edited sentences derived from "Original Sentence"). Among many Defense Acquisition Program related statutes, DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAM ACT, ENFORCEMENT RULE OF THE DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAM ACT, and ENFORCEMENT DECREE OF THE DEFENSE ACQUISITION PROGRAM ACT were selected. Furthermore, "Original Sentence" has the 83 provisions that actually appear in the Act. "Original Sentence" has the main 83 clauses most accessible to working-level officials in their work. "Edited Sentence" is comprised of 30 to 50 similar sentences that are likely to appear modified in the county report for each clause("Original Sentence"). During the creation of the edited sentences, the original sentences were modified using 12 certain rules, and these sentences were produced in proportion to the number of such rules, as it was the case for the original sentences. After conducting 1 : 1 sentence similarity performance evaluation experiments, it was possible to classify each "Edited Sentence" as legal or illegal with considerable accuracy. In addition, the "Edited Sentence" dataset used to train the neural network models contains a variety of actual statutory statements("Original Sentence"), which are characterized by the 12 rules. On the other hand, the models are not able to effectively classify other sentences, which appear in actual military reports, when only the "Original Sentence" and "Edited Sentence" dataset have been fed to them. The dataset is not ample enough for the model to recognize other incoming new sentences. Hence, the performance of the model was reassessed by writing an additional 120 new sentences that have better resemblance to those in the actual military report and still have association with the original sentences. Thereafter, we were able to check that the models' performances surpassed a certain level even when they were trained merely with "Original Sentence" and "Edited Sentence" data. If sufficient model learning is achieved through the improvement and expansion of the full set of learning data with the addition of the actual report appearance sentences, the models will be able to better classify other sentences coming from military reports as legal or illegal. Based on the experimental results, this study confirms the possibility and value of building "Real-Time Automated Comparison System Between Military Documents and Related Laws". The research conducted in this experiment can verify which specific clause, of several that appear in related law clause is most similar to the sentence that appears in the Defense Acquisition Program-related military reports. This helps determine whether the contents in the military report sentences are at the risk of illegality when they are compared with those in the law clauses.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.36
• /
• pp.35-67
• /
• 2013

As the office of crown properties expanded to financial structure having jurisdiction over various nation's purse in the Great Han Empire, its official document form has been changed. Unlike the early days, they had used official paper stamped with the words 'the Office of Crown Properties' eliminating 'Department of the Royal Household'. Also, the title on stamp of government position changed to 'Recipient of the Official of Crown Properties'. As the office of crown properties expanded as a great financial structure, it has grown in stature as an independent structure, and it was reflected in official document form. Such change was shown in document distribution system. The recipient of report from each district was the First Lord of Department of the Royal Household until 1897; however, the recipients of reports were mostly the office of Crown Properties from 1899. The Office of Crown Properties could not issue an official order before Aug 1899, since then the Office of Crown Properties had issued official orders to each district. However, the Office of Crown Properties could not handle the document in an equal position to the central organization yet. However, from Sep. 1900, the Office of Crown Properties handle the document with district organizations in equal position to the central organization, and a records office had been established in the Office of Crown Properties. Also, the Office of Crown Properties had handled official documents as an independent organization getting out of belonging organization to the department of Royal Household. Since the records office was established in Sep. 1900, the Office of Crown Properties had written receipt book autonomously. Comparing the receipt books in 1901 to the receipt books in 1905 and 1906, receipt numbers had been appeared from the book in 1905 and the organization in charge of the documents was recorded on some documents. Since no receipt book was found in 1902~1904, it is unknown when receipt number had been started indicating on the book. Seeing that the receipt number on the book of 1905 matched with contents on the receipt stamp, the receipt number has started indicating from around July, 1902; the period the receipt stamp has been started to use. Unlike the receipt stamp, the department in charge was indicated on the receipt book. It is because that the Office of Crown Properties changed writing system. Instead of classifying divisions, the Office of Crown Properties recorded in a book by order to receive, provided serial number, and wrote the department on the bottom of receipt book to classify by department in charge. Since establishment of the records office in Sep. 1900, the Office of Crown Properties had confirmed the receipt of document by stamping 'receipt of the Office of Crown Properties' and made receipt books as the office had started handled documents independently. Also, the Office of Crown Properties changed its system integrating division and recording in one book from the intial system classifying the book by division then receipt number and department in charge were indicated on the book. Also, receipt system has stabilized by stamping the receipt date and number on the received document.