DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Drawing Elements of Inquiry in Field Geology and Analyzing Field Geology Education in Previous Studies

야외 지질학 탐구 요소 추출 및 지질 답사 교육 문헌 분석

  • Received : 2017.04.28
  • Accepted : 2017.06.05
  • Published : 2017.06.30

Abstract

This study is a research synthesis analyzing how field geology education is conducted in domestic and foreign countries in the recent 20 years and how it reflects the characteristics of authentic geologic inquiry. For these purposes, we first drew five elements of inquiry in field geology (observation, representation, abductive reasoning, spatial thinking, and diachronic thinking) considering the field geologists' actual research method as well as its pedagogical significance in science education. We developed analysis criteria for field geology education. The 53 cases were analyzed based on each element of inquiry in field geology and its sub-elements, and also the tendency of overall elements. As a result, observation and representation were included in most cases, but there appeared less frequency in order of abductive reasoning, spatial thinking, and diachronic thinking. For observation, the ratio of purposive observation and autonomous observation is high. For representation, both visualizing and linguistic type of representation and free-form representation appear frequently. For abductive reasoning, the step of generating hypothesis is often included and the hypothesis tends to be about the geological formatting process. For spatial thinking, type of self-location and perception of the spatial configuration of the structure appear at a high rate. For diachronic thinking, type of stratigraphic sequence is the most frequent. The proportions of the cases including three or more elements of inquiry in field geology consist 87% of the total. We suggested implications for improving geological fieldwork as authentic science inquiry in the future.

Keywords

field geology education;authentic geologic inquiry;research synthesis;elements of inquiry in field geology;analysis criteria for field geology education

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단

References

  1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The Functions of Multiple Representations. Computers, & Education, 33(2), 131-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00029-9
  2. Ault, C. R. (1998). Criteria of Excellence for Geological Inquiry: The Necessity of Ambiguity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 189-212. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199802)35:2<189::AID-TEA8>3.0.CO;2-O
  3. Bae, H., & Chung, G. (2008). A Comparative Analysis on Inquiry Activities in Geology of High School Earth Science Textbooks of Korea and the U. S. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 29(7), 626-639. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2008.29.7.626
  4. Bamberger, J. (2014). The Laboratory for Making Things: Developing Multiple Representations of Knowledge. In Eilam, B. and Gilbert, J. K. (Eds.), Science Teachers' Use of Visual Representations (pp. 291-311). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
  5. Bannan, B., Peters, E., & Martinez, P. (2010). Mobile, Inquiry-based Learning and Geological Observation: An Exploratory Study. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 2(3), 13-29. https://doi.org/10.4018/jmbl.2010070102
  6. Behrendt, M., & Franklin, T. (2014). A Review of Research on School Field Trips and Their Value in Education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9(3), 235-245.
  7. Bentley, M. L., Ebert, C., & Ebert, E. S. (2000). The Natural Investigator: A Constructivist Approach to Teaching Elementary and Middle School Science. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
  8. Chamberlin, T. C. (1965). The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science, 148, 754-759. Originally published in Science in 1890. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.148.3671.754
  9. Cheong, C., Kim, J., & Lee, Y. (2011). 지질학 [Geology]. Seoul: Parkyoungsa.
  10. Chiappetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2014). Science Instruction in the Middle and Secondary Schools (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson Allyn, & Bacon.
  11. Cho, H., Jeong, S., & Yang, I. (2008). The Development of the Analytic Coding Frames on the Abductive Reasoning in Scientific Inquiry. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 29(7), 586-601. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2008.29.7.586
  12. Cho, H., Kim, H., Yoon, H., & Lee, K. (2011). 과학 교육의 이론과 실제 [Theory and Practice of Science Education] (4th). Seoul: Kyouyookgwahagsa.
  13. Choi, J. (2013). Middle and High School Students’ Self-location Ability in Map Reading for Wayfinding. Journal of Geographic and Environmental Education, 21(1), 65-77.
  14. Dodick, J., & Orion, N. (2003a). Cognitive Factors Affecting Student Understanding of Geologic Time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 415-442. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10083
  15. Dodick, J., & Orion, N. (2003b). Measuring Student Understanding of Geological Time. Science Education, 87(5), 708-731. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.1057
  16. Engelhardt, W., & Zimmermann, J. (1988). Theory of Earth Science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; English version.
  17. Esteves, H., Ferreira, P., Vasconcelos, C., & Fernandes, I. (2013). Geological Fieldwork: A Study Carried Out With Portuguese Secondary School Students. Journal of Geoscience Education, 61(3), 318-325.
  18. Frodeman, R. (1995). Geological reasoning: Geology as an interpretive and historical science. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 107(8), 960-968. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1995)107<0960:GRGAAI>2.3.CO;2
  19. Gaigher, E., Lederman, N., & Lederman, J. (2014). Knowledge about Inquiry: A study in South African high schools. International Journal of Science Education, 36(18), 3125-3147. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.954156
  20. Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J., & Elmer, R. (2000). Positioning Models in Science Education and in Design and Technology. In J. K. Gilbert, & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing Models in Science Education (pp. 3-17). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  21. Granshaw, F. D. (2011). Designing and Using Virtual Field Environments to Enhance and Extend Field Experience in Professional Development Programs in Geology for K-12 Teachers (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (DAI No. 3458471)
  22. Gray, R. (2014). The Distinction between Experimental and Historical Sciences as a Framework for Improving Classroom Inquiry. Science Education, 98(2), 327-341. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21098
  23. Gray, R., & Kang, N. (2014). The Structure of Scientific Arguments by Secondary Science Teachers: Comparison of experimental and historical science topics. International Journal of Science Education, 36(1), 46-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.715779
  24. Hand, B., Choi, A., Greenbowe, T., Schroeder, J., & Bennett, W. (2008). Examining the Impact of Student Use of Multiple-mode Representations in Constructing Science Arguments. In Annual International Conference of National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Baltimore, MD.
  25. Jeong, J., Won, H., & Kwon, Y. (2005). Application of the Triple Abduction Model for Improving the Skills of Scientific Hypothesis Generation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 25(5), 595-602.
  26. Jeong, S., Choi, H., & Yang, I. (2011). An Analysis of Abductive Reasoning on the Inquiry of Scientists and Elementary School Gifted Children in Science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(6), 901-919.
  27. Jun, Y., Kwon, H., Choi, B., Park, J., & Kim, C. (2007). Perceptions and Practices of Teachers in an Earth Science Teachers’ Research Group About Teaching Geologic Field Trip: A Case Study. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 28(6), 686-698. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2007.28.6.686
  28. Kali, Y., & Orion, N. (1996). Spatial Abilities of High-school Students in the Perception of Geologic Structures. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(4), 369-391. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199604)33:4<369::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-Q
  29. Kang, S., & Noh, T. (2014). 과학의 본성 [Nature of science]. Seoul: Bookshill.
  30. Kim, C. (2002). Inferences frequently used in earth science. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 23(2), 188-193.
  31. Kim, C. (2003). Preparing Teachers for Systems Science Methodology. In V. J. Mayer (Ed.), Implementing Global Science Literacy, (pp. 255-266). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University.
  32. Kim, C., Park, I., An, H., Oh, P., Kim, D., & Park, Y. (2005). Development of an Inquiry Analysis Framework Based on the Features of Earth Science Inquiry Methodology and the Analysis of Inquiry Activities in the 8th Grade "Earth History and Diastrophism" Unit. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 26(8), 751-758.
  33. Kim, J., Kim, M., & Park, Y. (2005). Analysis of Inquiry Tasks in Earth Unit of the 10th Grade Science Textbooks. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 26(6), 501-510.
  34. Kim, K., & Kim, J. (2006). High School Science Teachers' Understanding of the Contents Related to the Geologic Time in the Secondary School Science Textbooks and the Guidebooks for Teachers. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 27(1), 32-48.
  35. Kim, N., & Yoo, P. (2012). The Effect of Hypothesis Formulation using Abduction on Science Processing Skills and Creative Thinking Activities. Journal of the Korean Society of Earth Science Education, 5(1), 60-67.
  36. Kwon, Y., Jeong, J., Kang, M., & Park, Y. (2005). Patterns of Scientific Observation in Elementary and Secondary Science Teachers' Observing Biological Phenomena. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 25(3), 431-439.
  37. Kwon, Y., Shim, H., Jeong, J., & Park, J. (2003). Role and Process of Abduction in Elementary School Students' Generation of Hypotheses concerning Vapor Condensation. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 24(4), 250-257.
  38. Laudan, R. (1987). From mineralogy to geology: the foundations of a science, 1650-1830. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
  39. Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publication.
  40. Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
  41. Lee, B., Kim, J., Lee, Y., Hong, M., & Shin, D. (2000). 과학과 탐구과정의 하위 요소 추출 및 위계화 [Extraction and hierarchization of sub-elements of science inquiry process] (Report No. RR 98-6). Cheongju: Korea national university of education Institute for Curriculum and Instruction.
  42. Lee, B., Park, B., & Kim, H. (2007). Analyses of the Basic Inquiry Process in Korean 3-10 Grade Science Textbooks: Focused on Observation and Measurement. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(5), 421-431.
  43. Lee, G., & Kwon, B. (2010). Reasoning-Based Inquriy Model Embedded in Earth Science Phenomena. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 31(2), 185-202. https://doi.org/10.5467/JKESS.2010.31.2.185
  44. Lee, J., Lee, K., Park, Y., Maeng, S., & Oh, H. (2015). A Case Study on Spatial Thinking Revealed in Elementary School Science Class on Solar System and Stars. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 35(2), 179-197. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2015.35.2.0179
  45. Lee, K., Lee, S., Kang, E., Kwon, K., Kim, M., Nam, K., Byun, T., Lee, I., Lee, J., & Cho, Y. (2005). 과학탐구기능 들여다보기 제9장 추리하기 [Look into science inquiry skills chapter 9 Reasoning]. In Seoul National University Science Education Research Center (Ed). 성공적인 중학과학 탐구수업을 위한 길라잡이 자료 [Guidelines for Successful Middle School Science Inquiry Classes]. Retrieved from http://serc.snu.ac.kr/archives/read.php?bdid=6&page=1&msid=660&st=&mscat1=6&mscat2=
  46. Lee, W., Kim, H. S., & Kim, H. (2004). Development and Effects of Program for Enhancement of Spatial Abilities in the Units related to Geology of High School Students. Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 25(6), 391-401.
  47. Lemke, J. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and Verbal Semiotics in Scientific Text. In J. Martin, & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourses of Science (pp. 87-113). London: Routledge.
  48. Liben, L. S., & Titus, S. J. (2012). The Improtance of Spatial Thinking for Geoscience Education: Insights from the Crossroads of Geoscience and Cognitive Science. in Kastens, K. A., and Manduca, C. A. (eds.), Earth and Mind II: A Synthesis of research on Thinking and Learning in the Geosciences. 51-70. Boulder, CO: The Geological Society of America Inc.
  49. Lobben, A. K. (2004). Tasks, Strategies, and Cognitive Processes Associated With Navigational Map Reading: A Review Perspective. The Professional Geographer, 56(2), 270-281.
  50. Maeng, S., Park, M., Lee, J., & Kim, C. (2007). A Case Study of Middle School Students' Abductive Inference during a Geological Field Excursion. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 27(9), 818-831.
  51. Magnani, L. (2011). Abduction, Reason and Science: Processes of Discovery and Explanation. NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  52. Martin, D. J. (2012). Elementary Science Methods: A Constructivist Approach (6th Ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Inc.
  53. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The Promise of Multimedia Learning: Using the Same Instructional Design Methods across Different Media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6
  54. McComas, W., Clough, M. P., & Almazros, H. (1998). The Role and Character of the Nature of Science in Science Education. In W. McComas, W. (ed). The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  55. Ministry of Education (MOE). (1997). 7차 과학과 교육과정 [7th Curriculum. -Science-]. Seoul: MOE. MOE Notice No. 1997-15.
  56. Ministry of Education (MOE). (2015). 2015 개정 과학과 교육과정 [2015 Revised Curriculum -Science-]. Seoul: MOE. MOE Notice No. 2015-74.
  57. Mogk, D. W., & Goodwin, C. (2012). Learning in the field: Synthesis of research on thinking and learning in the geosciences. Geological Society of America Special Papers, 486, 131-163.
  58. Munn, B. J., Tracy, R. J., & Jenks, P. J. (1995). A Collaborative Approach to Petrology Field Trips. Journal of Geological Education, 43, 381-381. https://doi.org/10.5408/0022-1368-43.4.381
  59. National Research Council (NRC). (2006). Learning to Think Spatially: GIS as a Support System in the K-12 Curriculum. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  60. Oh, P. (2016). Roles of Models in Abductive Reasoning: A Schematization through Theoretical and Empirical Studies. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 36(4), 551-561. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase.2016.36.4.0551
  61. Oh, P., & Kim, C. (2005). A Theoretical Study on Abduction as an Inquiry Method in Earth Science. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 29(7), 586-601.
  62. Oh, J., Kim, S., & Kang, Y. (2008). A Suggestion for a Creative Teaching-Learning Program for Gifted Science Students Using Abductive Inference Strategies. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 28(8), 786-795.
  63. Oh, P., & Oh, S. (2011). A Study on the Processes of Elaborating Hypotheses in Abductive Inquiry of Preservice Elementary School Teachers. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 31(1), 128-142.
  64. Orion, N., & Ault, C. (2007). Learning Earth Sciences. In S. Abell, & N. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 653-688). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  65. Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that Influence Learning during a Scientific Field Trip in a Natural Environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1097-1120. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660311005
  66. Park, D., & Park, M. (2013). Examining the Features of Earth Science Logical Reasoning and Authentic Scientific Inquiry Demonstrated in a High School Earth Science Curriculum: A Case Study. Journal of Geoscience Education, 61(4), 364-377.
  67. Park, H., & Cho, H. (2003). Analyses of Scientific Inquiry in Science 8. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 23(3), 239-245.
  68. Park, J. (2000). Analysis of Students’ Processes of Generating Scientific Explanatory Hypothesis - Focused on the Definition and the Characteristics of Scientific Hypothesis. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 20(4), 667-679.
  69. Petcovic, H. L., Libarkin, J. C., & Baker, K. M. (2009). An Empirical Methodology for Investigating Geocognition in the Field. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57(4), 316-328. https://doi.org/10.5408/1.3544284
  70. Piburn, M. D., Reynolds, S. J., Leedy, D. E., McAuliffe, C. M., Birk, J. P., & Johnson, J. K. (2002). The Hidden Earth: Visualization of Geologic Features and their Subsurface Geometry. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
  71. Raab, T., & Frodeman, R. (2002). What is it Like to be a Geologist? A Phenomenology of Geology and its Epistemological Implications. Philosophy, & Geography, 5(1), 69-81.
  72. Renner, J. W., & Stafford, D. G. (1972). Teaching Science in the Secondary School. NY: Harper, & Row.
  73. Riggs, E. M., & Tretinjak, C. A. (2003). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Classroom and Field-based Curriculum Sedimentation and Change through Time for Pre-service Elementary Schoolteachers. Paper presented at the Geological Society of America annual meeting, Seattle, WA.
  74. Shin, N., & Youn, S. (2006). An Analysis on Inquiry of "Geology Units" in the "Science" Textbooks, the 7th Curriculum. Secondary education research, 54(2), 237-263.
  75. Smith, B. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2005). Explaining Behavior through Observational Investigation and Theory Articulation. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(3), 315-360. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1403_1
  76. Titus, S., & Horsman, E. (2009). Characterizing and Improving Spatial Visualization Skills. Journal of Geoscience Education, 57(4), 242-254. https://doi.org/10.5408/1.3559671