소집단 논변활동에 대한 협력적 성찰을 통한 중학생들의 소집단 규범과 논변활동 능력 발달 탐색
Exploring Secondary Students’ Progression in Group Norms and Argumentation Competency through Collaborative Reflection about Small Group Argumentation
1
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구의 목적은 중학교 학생들이 소집단 논변활동 수업과 협력적 성찰에 참여하면서 나타나는 논변활동에 대한 소집단 규범과 인식적 측면에서 이해 발달 과정 및 논변활동 실행에서의 변화를 살펴보고자 하였다. 참여 학생들은 중학교 1개 학급 내 1개 소집단 구성원으로 선정되었으며, 이들의 학업 성취 수준과 학습접근방식은 다양하였다. 소집단 논변활동 수업은 광합성 단원에 대해 10차시 동안 이루어졌 고, 협력적 성찰은 일주일에 한 번씩 총 7번 실시하였다. 학생들의 논변활동 수업과 협력적 성찰을 관찰한 결과 다음과 같은 결과를 확인할 수 있었다. 우선, 협력적 성찰과 소집단 논변활동 수업이 진행됨에 따라 참여 학생들의 논변활동 참여 형태와 관련된 사회적 규범이 발달하였고 논변활동의 인식적 측면에서 이해 수준이 높아지는 것을 관찰할 수 있었다. 또한, 학생들의 논변활동 산물과 논변활동 과정으로 살펴본 소집단 논변활동 능력도 향상되는 것도 확인할 수 있었다. 논변활동 산물 측면에서는 반박 관련 발화의 수가 증가하였고, 논변 활동 과정 측면에서는 다양한 학생들이 논변의 구조에서 증거, 정당 화, 주장을 제시하면서 논변활동 과정이 복잡해졌다. 협력적 성찰을 통해 학생들의 소집단 규범 및 논변활동의 인식적 측면에서 이해가 발달하고 이와 더불어 논변활동 능력이 발달한 것으로 보인다. 본연구 결과는 학교 현장의 과학 수업에서 논변활동을 적용하기 위한 좋은 본보기가 될 수 있을 것이다.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to explore secondary students’ progression in group norms and argumentation competency through collaborative reflection about small group argumentation. The progression is identified as the development of group norms and an epistemic understanding of argumentation with the enhancement of group argumentation competency during collaborative reflection and argumentation lessons. Participants were four first grade middle school students who have different academic achievements and learning approaches. They participated in ten argumentation lessons related to photosynthesis and in seven collaborative reflections. As a result, the students’ group norms related to participation were developed, and the students’ epistemic understanding of argumentation was enhanced. Furthermore, the students’ group argumentation competencies, identified as argumentation product and argumentation process, were advanced. As the collaborative reflection and argumentation lessons progressed, statements related to rebuttal increased and different students suggested a range of evidence with which to justify their claims or to rebut others’ arguments. These findings will give a better idea of how to present an apt application of argumentation to science teachers and science education researchers.
참고문헌 (42)
- Alexopoulou, E., "Small group discussions in physics : peer interaction modes in pairs and fours", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), pp.1099~1114 (1997)
- Berland, L. K., "A learning progression for scientific argumentation : Understanding student work and designing supportive instructional contexts", Science Education, 94(5), pp.765~793 (2010)
- Berland, L. K., "In pursuit of consensus : Disagreement and legitimization during small-group argumentation", International Journal of Science Education, 34(12), pp.1857~1882 (2012)
- Berland, L. K., "Making sense of argumentation and explanation", Science Education, 93(1), pp.26~55 (2009)
- Bricker, L., "Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education", Science Education, 92(3), pp.473~498 (2009)
- Chin, C., "Students’ questions and discursive interaction : Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), pp.883~908 (2010)
- 최지혜, "소집단 논변활동에서 학습자의 학습접근방식과 지식수준에 따른 사회적 상호작용 양상", 생물교육, 42(4), pp.371~385 (2014), 한국생물교육학회[DOI]
- Clark, D., "Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality", Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 45(3), pp.293~321 (2008)
- Cohen, E. G., "Restructuring the classroom : Conditions for productive small groups", Review of Educational Research, 6(1), pp.1~35 (1994)
- Denzin, N. K., "The sage handbook of qualitative research" (2005), Sage Publications
- Driver, R., "Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms", Science Education, 84(3), pp.287~312 (2000)
- Duschl, R. A., "Science education in three-part harmony : Balancing conceptual, epistemic and social goals", Review of Research in Education, 32(1), pp.268~291 (2008)
- Eldon, M., "Participative action research" (1991), Sage
- Erduran, S., "TAPping into argumentation : Developments in the application of Toulmin’s argument pattern for studying science discourse", Science Education, 88(6), pp.915~933 (2004)
- Hoffer, T. B., "Middle school ability grouping and student achievement in science and mathematics", Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 14(3), pp.205~227 (1992)
- Hogan, K., "Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions", Cognition and Instruction, 17(4), pp.379~432 (2000)
- Hooper-Greenhill, E., "Museums and Education : Purpose, pedagogy, performance" (2007), Routledge
- Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., ""Doing the lesson"or"Doing science" : Arguments in high school genetics", Science Education, 84(6), pp.757~792 (2000)
- Kim, M., "Decision making through dialogue : A case study of analyzing preservice teachers’ argumentation on socioscientific issues", Research in Science Education, 44(6), pp.903~926 (2014)
- Kuhn, D., "Science as argument : implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking", Science Education, 77(3), pp.319~337 (1993)
- Kuhn, D., "Teaching and learning science as argument", Science Education, 94(5), pp.810~824 (2010)
- Kuhn, D., "Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentative reasoning", Cognition and Instruction, 15(3), pp.287~315 (1997)
- Lee, S., "Exploring the impact of students’ learning approach on collaborative group modeling of blood circulation", Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2), pp.234~255 (2015)
- Lehrer, R., "Supporting development of the epistemology of inquiry", Cognitive Development, 23(4), pp.512~529 (2008)
- Martin, S., "Where practice and theory intersect in the chemistry classroom : using cogenerative dialogue to identify the critical point in science education", Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(1), pp.693~720 (2006)
- Merriam, S. B., "Case Study Research in Education" (1988), Jossey-Bass
- National Research Council., "National science education standards" (1996), National Academy Press
- NGSS Lead States, "Next Generation Science Standards" (2013), National Academy Press
- Oliveira, A. W., "Interactive patterns and conceptual change during student collaborations in science", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), pp.634~658 (2008)
- Osborne, J., "Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), pp.994~1020 (2004)
- Palincsar, A. S., "Pursuing scientific literacy in the middle grades through collaborative problem solving", Elementary School Journal, 93(5), pp.643~658 (1993)
- Richmond, G., "Making meaning in classroom : social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge building", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), pp.839~858 (1996)
- Ryu, S., "Improvements to elementary children’s epistemic understanding from sustained argumentation", Science Education, 96(3), pp.488~526 (2012)
- Sampson, V., "Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education : Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions", Science Education, 92(3), pp.447~472 (2008)
- Sandoval, W. A., "Elementary children’s judgments of the epistemic status of sources of justification", Science Education, 95(3), pp.383~408 (2011)
- Sandoval, W. A., "The quality of students’ use of evidence in written scientific explanations", Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), pp.23~55 (2005)
- Strause, A., "Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory" (1988), Sage
- Tobin, K., "Teaching to learn : Perspectives from the field. Rotterdam" (2006), Sense Publishers
- Toulmin, S. E., "The Use of Argument" (1958), Cambridge Universit Press
- Venville, G. J., "The impact of a classroom intervention on grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), pp.952~977 (2010)
- Yackel, E., "Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics", Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), pp.458~477 (1996)
- Zohar, A., "Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics", Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), pp.35~62 (2002)