• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.39 no.3
• /
• pp.337-348
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to examine epistemic thinking in middle school students in an argument-based inquiry science class. Participants of the study were 93 9th grade students from four classes of a middle school in a metropolitan city. Observations were made over one semester during which argument-based inquiry lessons on five subjects were conducted. Data was collected from argument-based inquiry activity worksheets and student questionnaires. After analysis of epistemic thinking in the written reflections, students were found to have the highest frequency of epistemic metacognitive skills, followed by epistemic cognition, epistemic metacognitive experience, and epistemic metacognitive knowledge. While investigating the effects of an argument-based inquiry science class on student epistemic thinking and after analysis of the reflections written for the first ABI activity and the fifth ABI activity, we found that all of the sub-elements of epistemic thinking have increased. The rate of growth for epistemic cognition is greatest, followed by epistemic metacognitive knowledge and epistemic metacognitive skills. Assessed for epistemic thinking, the level of epistemic thinking improved over the course of the argument-based inquiry science class. The results of the survey show that students actively participating and being recognized for their active participation in the argument-based inquiry science class are helpful in understanding scientific knowledge. Therefore, an argument-based inquiry science class is a teaching and learning program that allows students to understand and experience the epistemic nature of scientific knowledge and its construction through collaboration and agreement.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.64 no.1
• /
• pp.38-48
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study was to analysis characteristics and changes of epistemic thinking in middle school students on class-argument activities in an argument-based inquiry(ABI) science class. Data was collected from class recording video and activity worksheets of five subjects argument-based inquiry. Results of the analysis of student epistemic cognition characteristics show that experimental data was presented the most as evidence, and depending on the ABI activity, personal experience-based evidence and evidence based on scientific principles were used. As a result of analyzing the changes between claims made before and after class argumentations on five ABI activities in an argument-based inquiry science class, student claim modifications could be classified, according to reasons for the modification, into three types: correcting incorrect claims, clarifying unclear content, and expanding the concept.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.30 no.3
• /
• pp.323-336
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was to evaluate students' written arguments embedded in scientific inquiry investigations using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Argument components defined in this study are questions, claims, questions-claims relationship, evidence, claims-evidence relationship, multiple modal representations, and reflection. A set of criteria for evaluating each argument component was developed to evaluate writing samples of students from college freshman general chemistry laboratory classes. Results indicate that students produced, on average, moderate to powerful questions, claims, and evidence. They also constructed reasonable questions-claims relationship and claims-evidence relationship. Compared to other component scores, the average score for reflection was relatively low. Overall, the average Total Argument score was 21.4 out of a possible 36, that is, the quality of the written arguments using the SWH approach during a series of inquiry-based chemistry laboratory investigations was moderate to powerful. The findings of this study suggest that students, on average, developed reasonable scientific arguments generated as part of scientific inquiry. In other words, students are capable of putting together reasonable arguments as they participate in inquiry-based laboratory classrooms.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.59 no.1
• /
• pp.78-87
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study was to investigate the argumentation of middle school students during the argument-based inquiry. A total of sixty eight 8th grade middle school students participated in this study and they performed six argument-based inquiry programs. Data were collected from two of the latest programs by audio-recording and transcription of each group engaging in argumentation. The study findings showed that; first, the most frequent element of argumentation in the all of stages of the two programs was following order: 'claim' and 'request and response' and 'simple agreement'. The most active argumentation was showed at the designing experiments stage and the most inactive was showed at the generating questions stage. Second, as a result of analyzing the argumentation level for each stage of the argument-based inquiry, a high level of argumentation was shown at the claim and evidence stage, and a low level of argumentation was shown at the generating questions stage in the argumentation structure. As a result of the validity of argumentation, the validity of argumentation was the highest level in the claim and evidence stage.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.64 no.6
• /
• pp.389-400
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of Argument-based Inquiry activities on the claims and evidence in elementary students' science writing. Participants were thirty three fifth grade elementary school students and argument-based inquiry activities on five topics were implemented. We analyzed the Summary Writing samples written by students to investigate the effect of the Argument-based inquiry activities on elementary students' claims and evidence in their science writing, and also analyzed the writing samples of the experimental group to which the Argument-based inquiry activities were implemented, to examine the change of claims and evidence. The results of this study showed that the mean of experimental group was significantly higher than that of the comparison group. As a result of analyzing claims and evidence in Summary Writing of experimental group, the level of claim and evidence has tended to increase gradually as the number of classes progresses.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.7
• /
• pp.1099-1108
• /
• 2012

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of argument structure on students' writing in implementation of argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. Participants of this study were 108 8th grade students (three classes). Two classes (68 students) were assigned to an experimental group, and the other class (35 students) was assigned to a comparative group. The experimental group was taught argument-based inquiry using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach, while the comparative group was taught with the traditional teaching strategy. After implementing this program, the two groups were asked to write summaries using structured argumentation in their writing. The result of this study showed that the experimental group used better argument structure and multimodal representation such as pictures, graphs and examples in evidence than the comparative group. The quality of evidence used in the students' writing was different between two groups. Students of the comparative group only listed fragments of science concepts for evidence to support their claims, but students of the experimental group explained science concepts by giving specific examples. The findings show that argument-based inquiry using the SWH approach was effective on argument structure in students' writing.

• 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.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.353-361
• /
• 2015

This study focused on the use of peer assessment activities to investigate its the impact on students' argumentation skills in argument-based inquiry. The participants of the study were 106 10th grade students (four classes). Two classes were assigned to the experimental group, and the other two classes were assigned to the comparative group. The experimental group was taught argument-based inquiry through the application of peer assessment activities. The comparative group was taught argument-based inquiry without peer assessments. At the claim and evidence stage, students were asked to evaluate whether peers' claims fit with the evidence and whether peers' explanation of the evidences validity was sufficient. The quality of argumentation used in the students' writing was different in each group. According to the analysis of the summary writing test, the results showed that the experimental group had a significantly higher mean score than the comparative group in argumentation components, including evidence and warrant/backing. In addition, the experimental group used better multimodal representation including explanation of evidence than the comparative group. The findings showed that argument-based inquiry applying peer assessment activities had an effect on the argumentation skills in students' writing.

• Journal of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.60 no.1
• /
• pp.39-47
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of negotiation in Argument-Based Inquiry on students’ claim and evidence. A total of 126 first grade middle school students participated in this study and they performed five Argument-Based Inquiry (ABI) programs for one academic a year. To investigate the process of generating claim and evidence through the ABI, we interviewed students after they completed five ABI activities. The study findings showed that students ability to make claim and evidence improved as they progressed from individual activity to group activity in ABI activity and as ABI activities. The results also showed that students generated high level of claim and evidence through internal and external negotiation in ABI programs.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.32 no.9
• /
• pp.1470-1488
• /
• 2012

This study examined changes in the quality of written arguments produced by freshman students in general chemistry laboratory classes using the SWH approach over a semester; difference in the quality of written argument between the original writing template (year I) and the extended writing template (year II); and any difference between Total Argument and Holistic Argument scores. 140 writing samples from 14 students on the year I and 228 samples from 19 students on the year II were collected. Results indicated that despite fluctuations, the students were producing stronger argument by the end of semester compared to the beginning of the semester. Original SWH template group received significantly higher argument scores than extended SWH template group. For the most of year I laboratory investigations, there was no significant difference in the quality of argument between Total Argument and Holistic Argument scores. An implication of this study would be to provide opportunities for students to practice constructing arguments using the original SWH writing template including questions, claims, evidence, and reflection.