Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Exploring the Epistemic Goals and Features of Biology-Related Knowledge Construction Activities Shaped by Pre-Service Elementary Teachers as Epistemic Agents

초등 예비교사가 인식적 행위주체로서 고안한 생명과학 관련 지식 구성 활동의 인식적 목표 및 특성 탐색

  • Ha, Heesoo (Center for Educational Research, Seoul National University)
  • 하희수 (서울대학교 교육종합연구원)
  • Received : 2021.01.18
  • Accepted : 2021.02.25
  • Published : 2021.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study aims to explore the epistemic goals that pre-service elementary teachers can construct in their biology-related knowledge construction activities, how these goals are constructed, and how the shaping of the knowledge construction activities around the goals was afforded or constrained. The research participants were 26 pre-service teachers, divided into 11 groups of two or three to engage in the activity. Their discussions and products were collected and used as data for this study. The analysis revealed that the teachers constructed three types of epistemic goals: making sense of natural phenomena, proposing the most effective course of action, and proposing solutions to problems based on their causes. Construction of different types of goals depended on the conclusions the pre-service teachers expected to draw based on the explored natural phenomena. It was found that the elicitation of the pre-service teachers' epistemic goals could facilitate their shaping of the knowledge construction activity as an evidence-based justification. The participants planned the construction of mechanistic explanations of natural phenomena with the epistemic goals of 'making sense of natural phenomena' or 'proposing solutions to problems based on their causes.' However, enacting their knowledge construction plans with sophisticated epistemic features was constrained due to the limited resources available. This study can contribute to developing instructional strategies that facilitate learners' epistemic agency and addressing epistemic agency in the development of pre-service teacher education methods.

본 연구에서는 학습자의 인식적 행위주체성을 촉진하기 위하여 인식적 목표를 명시화하는 지식 구성 활동을 설계하여 초등 예비교사를 위한 생물학 강좌에 도입하였고, 이 활동에 참여한 예비교사들이 어떠한 유형의 인식적 목표를 어떻게 고안하였으며, 이 목표를 중심으로 정교한 수준의 인식적 특성을 지닌 지식 구성 활동이 형성되도록 촉진하거나 이를 제한한 요인을 탐색했다. 이를 위해 활동에 참여한 예비교사들의 실행 및 산출물을 녹음 및 수집했으며, 녹음 자료는 전사하여 본 연구의 분석 자료로 활용하였다. 분석 결과, 예비교사들이 고안한 인식적 목표의 유형은 '자연 현상에 대한 의미 형성하기', '실용적 선택안 제시하기', '문제 현상의 기작에 기반한 해결책 제시하기'로 도출되었다. 각 인식적 목표 유형은 예비교사들이 탐구하기로 선정한 자연 현상에 대한 지식을 바탕으로 어떠한 결론을 얻고자 하는가에 따라 서로 다르게 고안되었다. 예비교사가 인식적 목표를 명시화하는 활동 구조는 이들이 근거 기반의 지식 주장 정당화가 수반되는 지식 구성 활동을 고안하도록 촉진할 수 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 예비교사가 고안한 지식은 지식의 본성 측면에서 주로 현상에 관한 기술에 그쳤으며, 현상의 기작에 관한 설명 구성은 자연 현상이 일어나는 기작에 대한 의미를 형성하고자 하거나 현상의 기작에 대한 이해를 바탕으로 문제해결을 위한 해결책을 제시하고자 계획할 때 나타났다. 그러나 예비교사들이 활용 가능한 시간적·물리적 자원의 한계에 따라 기작에 대한 설명 산출 과정에서 정교한 수준의 인식적 특성을 지닌 지식 구성 활동이 제한될 수 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 본 연구는 학습자의 인식적 행위주체성을 촉진하는 교수학습 전략의 고안 및 인식적 행위주체성을 중심으로 한 예비교사 교육에 대한 논의에 기여할 수 있을 것으로 기대한다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2020년도 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2020S1A5B5A16083113).

References

  1. Barton, A. C., & Tan, E. (2010). We be burnin'! Agency, identity, and science learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 187-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530044
  2. Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082-1112. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21257
  3. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: OrientaKonsultit.
  4. Engestrom, Y. (2006). Development, movement and agency: Breaking away into mycorrhizae activities. In K. Yamazumi (Ed.), Building activity theory in practice: Toward the next generation. Osaka: Center for Human Activity Theory, Kansai University.
  5. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  6. Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  7. Hutchison, P., & Hammer, D. (2010). Attending to student epistemological framing in a science classroom. Science Education, 94(3), 506-524. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20373
  8. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Erduran, S. (2008). Argumentation in science education: An overview. In S. Erudran, M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 117-136). Dordrecht: Springer.
  9. Lemke, J. A. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  10. Miller, E., Manz, E., Russ, R., Stroupe, D., & Berland, L. (2018). Addressing the epistemic elephant in the room: Epistemic agency and the next generation science standrads. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55, 1053-1075. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21459
  11. Russ, R. S., & Berland, L. K. (2019). Invented science: A framework for discussing a persistent problem of practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(3), 279-301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1517354
  12. Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634-656. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20065
  13. Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., ... Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632-654. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20311
  14. Sewell, W. H. Jr. (1992). A theory of structure: Duality, agency, and transformation. American Journal of Sociology, 98(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1086/229967
  15. Sexton, S. S. (2004). Prior teacher experiences informing how post-graduate teacher candidates see teaching and themselves in the role as the teacher. International Education Journal, 5(2), 205-214.
  16. Sharma, A. (2008). Making (electrical) connections: Exploring student agency in a school in India. Science Education, 92(2), 297-319. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20246
  17. Stroupe, D., Caballero, M. D., & White, P. (2018). Fostering students' epistemic agency through the co-configuration of moth research. Science Education, 20(18), 1-25.
  18. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20035
  20. Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice?. Science Education, 87(1), 112-143. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10044
  21. Zimmerman, H. T., & Weible, J. L. (2018). Epistemic agency in an environmental sciences watershed investigation fostered by digital photography. International Journal of Science Education, 40(8), 894-918. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1455115