Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Comparing the Structure of Secondary School Students` Perception of the Meaning of `Experiment` in Science and Biology
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Comparing the Structure of Secondary School Students` Perception of the Meaning of `Experiment` in Science and Biology
Lee, Jun-Ki; Shin, Sein; Ha, Minsu;
  PDF(new window)
Perception of the experiment is one of the most important factors of students` understanding of scientific inquiry and the nature of science. This study examined the perception of middle and high school students of the meaning of `experiment` in the biological sciences. Semantic network analysis (SNA) was especially used to visualize students` perception structure in this study. One hundred and ninety middle school students and 200 high school students participated in this study. Students responded to two questions on the meaning of `experiment` in science and biology. This study constructed four semantic networks based on the collected response. As a result, middle school students about the `experiment` in science are `we`, `direct`, `principle` of such words was aware of the experiments from the center to the active side. The high school students` `theory`, `true`, `information` were recognized as an experiment that explores the process of creating a knowledge center including the word. In addition, middle school students relative to `experiment` of the creature around the `dissection`, `body`, high school students were recognized as `life`, `observation` observation activities dealing with the living organisms and recognized as a core. The results of this study will be used as important evidence in the future to map out an experiment in biological science curriculum.
the meaning of experiment;perception structure;secondary school students;semantic network analysis(SNA);
 Cited by
교육대학교 학생들의 '전기' 용어의 연상 단어 및 정의에 대한 네트워크 분석,송영욱;

한국과학교육학회지, 2016. vol.36. 5, pp.791-800 crossref(new window)
관찰과 재현에 대한 예비 생물교사들의 가치지향점 -객관성을 중심으로-,신세인;이준기;하민수;

한국과학교육학회지, 2016. vol.36. 4, pp.617-628 crossref(new window)
텍스트 네트워크 분석을 활용한 과학영재교육 언론동향 분석,박경진;류춘렬;최진수;김희목;

영재교육연구, 2017. vol.27. 3, pp.387-403 crossref(new window)
Anderson, J. R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261-295. crossref(new window)

Bodzin, A. & Gegringer, M. (2001). Breaking science stereotypes. Science and Children, 38(4), 36-41.

Brown, C. R. (1995). The effective teaching of biology. New York, USA: Longman Publishing Company.

Cho, H. J., & Yang, I. H. (2005). Review on the aims of laboratory activities in school science. Elementary Science Education, 24(3), 268-280.

Cho, H., Yang, I., & Lee, H. (2008). Comparison between secondary school science teachers' and students' perceptions about the important aims of laboratory. Journal of Science Education, 32(2), 103-120. crossref(new window)

Collins, A. M., Loftus, E. F. (1975). A spreading activation theory of semantic processing. Psychological Review, 82(6), 407-428. crossref(new window)

diSessa, A. A. (2008). A bird's-eye view of the "pieces"vs. "coherence" controversy. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 35-60). New York: Routledge.

Doerfel, M. L., & Barnett, G. A. (1999). A semantic network analysis of the international communication association. Human Communication Research, 25(4), 589-603. crossref(new window)

Fisher, K. (1990). Semantic networking: The newkids on the block. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1001-1018. crossref(new window)

Galison, P. (1987). How experiments end. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Galison, P. (1997). Three laboratories. Social Research, 64(3), 1127-1155.

Grunspan, D. Z., Wiggins, B. L., & Goodreau, S. M. (2014). Understanding classrooms through social network analysis: A primer for social network analysis in education research. CBE-Life Science Education, 13, 167-178. crossref(new window)

Hacking, I. (1983). The Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hacking, I. (1989). Philosophers of experiments. In A Hine & J. Leplin (Eds.), PSA 1988, East lancing (pp. 147-156). Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association.

Hammer, D. (1996). Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97-127. crossref(new window)

Han, S. Y. (2004). Educational reflections on laboratory experiment in school science. The Journal of Educational Principles, 9(1), 47-82.

Hodson, D. (1996). Is this really what scientist do? Seeking a more authentic science in and beyond the school laboratory. In J. J. wellington (Ed.). Practical Work in School Science. NY: Routledge, 93-108.

Hovardas, T., & Korfiatis, K. J. (2006). Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education. Learning and instruction, 16, 416-432. crossref(new window)

Kim, H., & Song, J. (2003). Middle school students' ideas about the purposes of laboratory work. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(3), 254-264.

Lawson, A. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

Lee, J. K., & Ha, M. (2012). Semantic network analysis of science gifted middle school students' understanding of fact, hypothesis, theory, law, and scientificness. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 32(5), 823-840. crossref(new window)

Lee, S. (2002). Two roles of experiment: Fact aquisition and theory testing. Cheolhak, 72, 273-294.

Lee, S. (2009). Phenomena and instruments. Hanul Academy: Seoul.

Lewicki, R. J., Gray, B., & Elliot, M.. (2003). Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: Concepts and cases. Washington D. C.: Island Press.

Mayr, E. (1997). This is biology: The science of living world. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

Park, H. W., & Leydesdorf, L. (2004). Understanding the KrKwic: A computer program for the analysis of Korean text. Journal of the Korean Data Analysis Society. 6(5), 1377-1387.

Park, J. (2003). An analysis of the experimental designs suggested by students for testing scientific hypotheses. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(2), 200-213.

Park, S. H., Ko, K. T., Jeong, J. S., & Kwon, Y. J. (2005). Types of hypothesis-testing methods generated in students' biology inquiry. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 25(2), 230-238.

Quillian, M. R. (1967). Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Sciences, 12, 410-430. crossref(new window)

Radder, H. (1988). The material realization of science. Assen/Maastricht, The Netherlands: Van Gorcum.

Radder, H. (1993). Science, realization and reality: The Fundamental issues. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 24, 327-349. crossref(new window)

Radder, H. (2003). The philosophy of experimentation. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Simpson, R. D., & Anderson, N. D. (1981). Science, students, and schools: A guide for the middle and secondary school teacher, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Thagard, P. (1998). Ulcers and bacteria I : Discovery and acceptance. Studies in history and philosophy of biological and biomedical science, 29(1), 107-136. crossref(new window)

Wassetman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. The Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.

Welzel, M., Haller, K., Bandiera, M., Hammelev, D., Koumars, P., Niedderer, H., Paulsen, A. C., Beou-Robinault, K., & von Aufschnaiter, S. (1988). Teachers' objectives for labworks; research tool and cross country results. Working paper 6, labworks in Science Education Project.

Wheeler, W. H. (1929). Present tendencies in biological theory. The Scientific Monthly, 28, 97-109.

Woolnough, B. E. (1994). Effective science teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Yang, I. H., Jeong, J. W., Hur, M. & Kim, S. M. (2006). The development of laboratory instruction classification scheme. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 26(3), 342-355.

Yang, I. H., Kim, S. M. & Cho, H. J. (2007). Analysis of the types of laboratory instruction in elementary and secondary schools science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(3), 235-241.