DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on Application of Reflective Thinking-Based Laboratory Report in General Physics Experiment

일반물리실험에서 반성적 사고를 강조한 실험보고서 적용 가능성 탐색

  • Received : 2016.10.11
  • Accepted : 2016.12.15
  • Published : 2016.12.30

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of reflective thinking-based laboratory report on learners' metacognition and inquiry skills. In a general physics experiment class consisting of 11 experiments, 20 college students used reflective thinking-based laboratory report, and then the changes of their metacognition and inquiry skills were compared with those of who used general laboratory report. The opinions of students used reflective thinking-based laboratory report were surveyed. The results showed that their metacognitions were increased more than those of comparison group that used common experiment report. Their inquiry skills also were increased as much as comparison group's. According to the survey results, they recognized that reflective thinking-based laboratory report helps to improve their performance, metacognitions, and inquiry skills.

References

  1. Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does Practical Work Really Work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945-1969. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701749305
  2. Berg, C. A. R., Bergendahl, V. C. B., Lundberg, B. K. S., & Tibell, L. A. E. (2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3), 351-372. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210145738
  3. Bringle, R. G., & Hatcher, J. A. (1999). Reflection in service learning: Making meaning of experience. Educational Horizons, 77(4), 179-185.
  4. Bybee, R. W. (2000). Achieving science literacy. Science Teacher, 62(7), 28-33.
  5. Dewey, J. (2011). How we think. (H.-W. Jung, Trans.). Seoul: Hakeesisub. (Original work published 1910)
  6. Driver, R. (1989). Student’s conceptions and learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11(5), 481-490. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069890110501
  7. Given, B. K. (2002). Teaching to the brain's natural learning systems. Washington, D.C.: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  8. Gupta, V. (2001). Aims of laboratory teaching. CDTL Brief, 4(1), 1-3.
  9. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (1982). The role of the laboratory in science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research, 52(2), 201-217. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543052002201
  10. Hofstein, I., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education:Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
  11. Jeong, A. J. (2011). The effects of metacognition strategy based on reflective self-assessment on the understanding of the genetic concept and metacognition ability of high school students (Master's thesis). Korea National University of Education.
  12. Kang, M., Im, Y., Kim, M., & Kim, J. (2009). The difference between two scaffolding types in academic achievement and science inquiry skills for WISE-based science education. The Korean Journal of Educational Methodology Studies, 21(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2009.21.1.1
  13. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199912)36:10<1065::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-I
  14. Kim, J., & Oh, W. K. (1988). The problems which appeared in 13 year old pupils performing experiment of textbook: Pupils suggested aims, their identifying relevant variables, and the relations between the suggested aims and the drawn conclusions. Journal of the Korea Association for Research in Science Education, 18(1), 35-42.
  15. Kim, O-B., An, U.-H., Kim, E.-A., Ko, M.-S., & Yang, I. (2013). Analysis of the types of teachers' questioning in verification laboratory instruction and discovery laboratory instruction. Journal of the Korean Association for in Science Education, 33(7), 1354-1366. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.7.1354
  16. Kim, S. (2009). The effects of metacognitive ability and the question-generation strategy on the type of question and academic achievement in the blended learning environment (Master's thesis). Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
  17. Kwon, J., & Kim, B. (1994). The development of an instrument for the measurement of science process skills of the Korean elementary and middle school students. Journal of the Korea Association for Research in Science Education, 14(3), 251-264.
  18. Larson, A. (1991). "Rerun" your labs. The Science Teacher, 58(6), 72.
  19. Lee, E. J. (2010). A study of direct teaching strategy of inquiry skills applying meta-cognition (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
  20. Lee, Y., & Im, S. (2011). An analysis of pre-service science teachers' reflective thinking about scientific experiment in experimental journal writings. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 31(2), 198-209.
  21. Manen, M. V. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6(3), 205-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1977.11075533
  22. Marzin, P., & de Vries, E. (2013). Students’ design of a biometric procedure in upper secondary school. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23(2), 361-376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9183-3
  23. Millar, R. (2004, October). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. Paper prepared for the Committee: High School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C.
  24. Park, H. (2013). A study of middle school science teachers' perceptions on science lessons with experiments. Journal of Science Education, 37(1), 79-86. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2013.37.1.79
  25. Park, S., & Moon, S. (2013). The effect of science writing heuristic laboratory class on the creative thinking and critical thinking of middle school students. Journal of the Korean Association for in Science Education, 33(7), 1259-1272. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2013.33.7.1259
  26. Rozen, M. T., & Kramarski, B. (2014). Metacognition, motivation and emotions:Contribution of self-regulated learning to solving mathematical problems. Global Education Review, 1(4), 76-95.
  27. Schraw, G., & Dennisun, R. S. (1994). Assessing metacognition awareness. Contemporary Education Psychology, 19(4), 460-475. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1994.1033
  28. Sohn, E. (2003). Reflective thinking and professionalism. Student Life Research, 28, 31-54.
  29. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition:Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2
  30. Yang, I.-H., & Cho, H.-J. (2005). Review on the aims of laboratory activities in school science. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 24(3), 268-280.
  31. Yang, I., Kim, S., & Cho, H. (2007). Analysis of the types of laboratory instruction in elementary and secondary schools science. Journal of the Korea Association for Research in Science Education, 27(3), 235-241.
  32. Yoon, D.-G., Kim, S.-H., Cha, H., Lee, K.-J., & Chung, W.-H. (2004). Application effects of biology modules for improving science high school students' creativity and science thinking. Journal of the Korea Association for Research in Science Education, 24(3), 556-564.