• Journal of Gifted/Talented Education
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.163-174
• /
• 2011

As the scientific technology has produced complex problems that required value judgment, science-gifted students need the program for enhancing the critical thinking. Therefore, this study analyzed patterns of claims on scientific technology of the science-gifted for the development of argument program. The data were collected by 60 science-gifted students using writing and e-mail. The result showed that 29% of the participants provided only advantageous factors for their claims, whereas only 10% among the participants who provided both sides used pattern of 'rebuttal.' In addition, the students who fell into the patterns of 'alternative suggestion' and 'overly positive expectation on scientific technology' revealed positive recognition on scientific technology. These results highlight the need of argumentation program for science-gifted students that could be guideline for knowledge or argumentation, help awareness of limitation and role of scientific technology and lead to well-balanced judgment between positive effects and negative ones.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.402-411
• /
• 2010

The purposes of this study are to analyze an argumentation between an astronomers group and a counter astronomers group that have concluded different results by using the same methods and to find an implication for applying to school science. For this study, two science research papers, which have been interpreted differently, were selected and analyzed in spite of observing same area in Titan and using same data process method. Their key issues are involved in interpretation and explanation, and the credibility of observed data. From this result, scientific argumentation accompanied with the credibility evaluation about the justification process of scientific explanation and experiment results needs to be developed.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.79-92
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this study is to develop an inquiry-based argumentation task for use in science teachers' professional development by providing them with the substantial experience of argumentation. To do so, the study has developed an argumentation task by utilizing the experiment on the Charles' Law of gas and revised by applying to eight teachers three times. We have revised the questions by analyzing three issues that have been revealed throughout this process in ways that facilitated teachers' argumentation. The effects of revision have been confirmed by the improvements in teachers' argumentation pattern. Three issues have been identified in developing argumentation tasks for science teachers' professional development and they are as follows: determining the openness of the structure of a question, achieving cognitive conflict and convergence of opinions at the same time, and ways of utilizing various evidence. As the task has been revised in ways that enabled scientific approach to the inquiry topic and facilitated the convergence of various opinions, the participants' argumentation patterns have improved both quantitatively and qualitatively. Meanwhile, the inclusion of an actual experiment has not influence their argumentation, while the observation of experimental data has been used as the core evidence according to the character of the problem. Based on the study's result, we suggest practical implications for developing argumentation tasks for science teachers in more varying contexts.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.31 no.5
• /
• pp.694-708
• /
• 2011

In this study, we developed tasks including cognitive scaffolding for students to explain scientific phenomena using valid evidences in science classroom and sought to investigate how tasks influence the development of small group scientific argumentation. Heterogeneous small groups in gender and achievement were organized in one classroom and the tasks were applied to the class. Students were asked to write down their own ideas, share individual ideas, and then choose the most plausible opinion in a group. One group was chosen for investigating the effect of tasks on the development of small group argumentation through the analysis of discourse transcripts of the group in 10 lessons, students' semi-structured interview, field note, and students' pre- and post argument tests. The discrepant argument examples were included in the tasks for students to refute an argument presenting evidences. Moreover, comparing opinion within the group and persuading others were included in the tasks to prompt small group argumentation. As a result, students' post-argument test grades were increased than pre-test grades, and they argued involving evidences and reasoning. The high level of arguments has appeared with high ratio of advanced utterances and lengthening of reasoning chain as lessons went on. Students had elaborate claims involving valid evidences and reasoning by reflective and critical thinking while discussing about the tasks. In addition, tasks which could have various warrants based on the data led to students' spontaneous participation. Therefore, this study has significance in understanding the context of developing small group argumentation, providing information about teaching and learning context prompting students to construct arguments in science inquiry lessons in middle school.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.219-234
• /
• 2018

In this study, we explored the possibility of automating the process of analyzing elements of scientific argument in the context of a Korean classroom. To gather training data, we collected 990 sentences from science education journals that illustrate the results of coding elements of argumentation according to Toulmin's argumentation structure framework. We extracted 483 sentences as a test data set from the transcription of students' discourse in scientific argumentation activities. The words and morphemes of each argument were analyzed using the Python 'KoNLPy' package and the 'Kkma' module for Korean Natural Language Processing. After constructing the 'argument-morpheme:class' matrix for 1,473 sentences, five machine learning techniques were applied to generate predictive models relating each sentences to the element of argument with which it corresponded. The accuracy of the predictive models was investigated by comparing them with the results of pre-coding by researchers and confirming the degree of agreement. The predictive model generated by the k-nearest neighbor algorithm (KNN) demonstrated the highest degree of agreement [54.04% (${\kappa}=0.22$)] when machine learning was performed with the consideration of morpheme of each sentence. The predictive model generated by the KNN exhibited higher agreement [55.07% (${\kappa}=0.24$)] when the coding results of the previous sentence were added to the prediction process. In addition, the results indicated importance of considering context of discourse by reflecting the codes of previous sentences to the analysis. The results have significance in that, it showed the possibility of automating the analysis of students' argumentation activities in Korean language by applying machine learning.

• 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 Chemical Society
• /
• v.66 no.1
• /
• pp.50-60
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to explore the Nature of Argumentation in Science education (NAS). For this purpose, we collected previous studies conducted on the argumentation in science education, and then collected previous studies were analyzed to extract the overall characteristics of argumentation in science education. Based on the results, an expert review was conducted, then the nature of argumentation in science education was finally derived to a total of seven components: 'evidence based', 'linguistic interaction', 'context dependency', 'public decision-making', 'tentative agreement', 'methodological diversity', and 'enculturation of scientific culture'. Understanding the nature of argumentation in science education can promote the practice of argumentation in science learning. Therefore, further studies will be necessary to conduct research to expand and refine the nature of argumentation in science education in order to effectively practice it in science learning.

• Korean Educational Research Journal
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.109-125
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was to examine how group argumentations mediated individual arguments by analyzing physics teachers' group argumentation and individual follow-up written arguments. Five in-service physics teachers participated in this study, two middle school and three high school teachers. The topics of argumentation included physics topics and pedagogy of them. Findings showed that the teachers constructed much more elaborated individual written arguments than group argumentation, which seemed to be resulted from different perceptions of teachers' verbal and written argumentations. Also, in their written arguments the teachers selectively utilized their colleagues' ideas shared during group argumentation. Lastly, teachers' argumentation showed different features between topics of physics and physics pedagogy. These differences were related to their orientations toward argumentation about content knowledge and teaching. These findings shed light on a productive physics teacher professional development in argumentation.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.58 no.6
• /
• pp.658-666
• /
• 2014

This study was designed to explore pre-service secondary science teachers' understanding and views of argument-based inquiry approach. Participants were 17 pre-service secondary science teachers enrolled in chemistry curricular materials and teaching methods course for majors in the college of education at a university in Seoul. Main data sources included each student responses to an open ended survey and individual interviews. Data analyses indicated that the pre-service teachers had very limited and biased understanding on scientific inquiry at the beginning of the semester. While the pre-service teachers understood that scientific inquiry should be an essential component of science teaching, a few pre-service teachers mentioned 'argumentation' or 'discussions' when they defined what scientific inquiry is. The majority of the pre-service teachers mentioned that science should be taught through scientific inquiry since science is inquiry itself. However, the pre-service teachers expressed several potential barriers and their concerns on implementing argumentation in scientific inquiry. While they concerned about students' lack of participation at the beginning of the semester, they concerned more about the teachers' ability of leading student argumentation at the end of the semester.

• Educational Technology International
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.1-39
• /
• 2022

We study emotion regulation in a distant CABLe (Collaborative Argumentation Based-Learning) setting at university. We analyze how students achieve the group task of synthesizing the literature on a topic through scientific argumentation on the institutional Moodle's forum. Distinguishing anticipatory from reactive emotional regulation shows how essential it is to establish and maintain a constructive working climate in order to make the best out of disagreement both on social and cognitive planes. We operationalize the analysis of anticipatory emotional regulation through an analytical grid applied to the data of two groups of students facing similar disagreement. Thanks to sharp anticipatory regulation, group 1 solved the conflict both on the social and the cognitive plane, while group 2 had to call out for external regulation by the teacher, stuck in a cyclically resurfacing dispute. While the institutional digital environment did afford anticipatory emotional regulation, reactive emotional regulation rather occurred through complementary informal and synchronous communication tools. Based on these qualitative case studies, we draw recommendations for fostering distant CABLe at university.