Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education (한국초등과학교육학회지:초등과학교육)

The Korean Elementary Science Education Society (한국초등과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Reflecting on Class Talks in Online Science Classes and Fostering Scientific Creativity

  • Received : 2024.11.14
  • Accepted : 2024.11.21
  • Published : 2025.01.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Students asking questions during class is a major factor in improving their scientific creativity. This is especially important in online class settings, where labs are limited, making teacher-student interactions central. To better understand how to develop students' questioning and interaction skills during class, we need to analyze class discourses. In this respect, action research, which is a type of case study approach, can help teachers reflect on their classes and explore practical ways to improve their teaching skills. In this research, three online class sessions were recorded to analyze the teacher-student interactions. After each class, I met with the teacher, who reflected on the session and explored ways to enhance students' scientific creativity.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This study was funded by Seoul National University of Education.

References

  1. Abdullah, A. B., Januarty, R., & Rahman, S. K. (2021). The difficulties in teaching and learning through online class during pandemic COVID-19. Klasikal: Journal of Education, Language Teaching and Science, 3(3), 120-126. https://doi.org/10.52208/klasikal.v3i3.115
  2. Adedoyin, O. B., & Soykan, E. (2023). COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: The challenges and opportunities. Interactive learning environments, 31(2), 863-875. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1813180
  3. AI-Abdali, N. S., & AI-Balushi, S. M. (2016). Teaching for creativity by science teachers in grades 5-10. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 251-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9612-3
  4. Ambawati, R., Putri, E. K., Rahayu, D. A., & Khaleyla, F. (2021). Science online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: Difficulties and challenges. Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 1747(1), 012007.
  5. Baer, J. (2011). How divergent thinking tests mislead us: Are the Torrance Tests still relevant in the 21st century? The Division 10 debate. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5(4), 309. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025210
  6. Baird, J. R., & Northfield, J. R. (Eds.). (1992). Learning from the PEEL experience. Melbourne, Australia: Monash University Printing.
  7. Beghetto, R. (2007). Does creativity have a place in classroom discussions? Prospective teachers' response preferences. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 2(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2006.09.002
  8. Beghetto, R. A. (2013). Killing ideas softly?: The promise and perils of creativity in the classroom. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
  9. Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High ability studies, 25(1), 53-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2014.905247
  10. Berg, H., Taatila, V. & Volkmann, C. (2012). Fostering creativity-A holistic framework for teaching creativity. Development and Learning in Organizations, 26(6), 5-8.
  11. Blosser, P. E. (2000). How to Ask the Right Questions. Arlington Virginia: National Science Teachers Association Press.
  12. Briscoe, C., & Wells, E. (2002). Reforming primary science assessment practices: A case study of one teacher's professional development through action research. Science Education, 86(3), 417-435. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10021
  13. Buck, G. A., & Cordes, J. G. (2005). An action research project on preparing teachers to meet the needs of underserved student populations. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16(1), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-005-6991-x
  14. Carlsen, W. S. (1991). Questioning in classrooms: A sociolinguistic perspective. Review of Educational Research, 61, 157-178. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543061002157
  15. Cassidy, D. J. (1989). Questioning the young child: Process and function. Childhood Education, 65(3), 146-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.1989.10522417
  16. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815-843. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20171
  17. Cho, B. K., Cho, S. Y., & Park, S. O. (1996). A study on the creativity of young children as a function of the questioning patterns of teachers. Korean Journal of Child Studies, 17(1), 23-37.
  18. Cliatt, M. J. P., Shaw, J. M., & Sherwood, J. M. (1980). Effects of training on the divergent-thinking abilities of kindergarten children. Child Development, 1061-1064. https://doi.org/10.2307/1129544
  19. Conrad, C., Deng, Q., Caron, I., Shkuiska, O., Skerrett, P., & Sundararajan, B. (2022). How student perceptions about online learning difficulty influenced their satisfaction during Canada's COVID-19 response. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 534-557. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13206
  20. Coughlan, P., & Coghlan, D. (2002). Action research for operations management. International journal of operations & production management, 22(2), 220-240. https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570210417515
  21. Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student-teacher relationships on children's social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 207-234. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3804_2
  22. de Jong, O. (2000). Crossing the borders: chemical education research and teaching practice. University Chemistry, 4(1), 31-34.
  23. Dinkelman, T. (1997). The promise of action research for critically reflective teacher education. The Teacher Educator, 32(4), 250-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878739709555151
  24. Edward. D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common Knowledge: The Development Understanding in the Classroom. London: Routledge.
  25. Faulconer, E. K., & Gruss, A. B. (2018). A review to weigh the pros and cons of online, remote, and distance science laboratory experiences. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(2). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v19i2.3386
  26. Fasko, D. (2000). Education and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3), 317-327. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1334_09
  27. Ferrari, A., Cachia, R. & Punie, Y. (2009). Innovation and creativity in education and training in the EU member states: Fostering creative learning and supporting innovative teaching. Luxembourg, Belgium: European Communities.
  28. Heinze, A. & Erhard, M. (2006). How much time do students have to think about teacher questions? An investigation of the quick succession of teacher questions and student responses in the German mathematics classroom. ZMD-International Journal on Mathematics Education, 38(5), 388-398. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02652800
  29. Hu, W., & Adey, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-403. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110098912
  30. Jang, S. J. (2009). Exploration of secondary students' creativity by integrating web-based technology into an innovative science curriculum. Computers & Education, 52, 247-255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.002
  31. Jo, Y. (2015). Field research and action research. The Korean Society for the Study of Anthropology of Education, 18(4), 1-49.
  32. Jeong, S. & Shin, Y. (2020). Analysis of the difficulties experienced by elementary school teachers due to the combination of online and offline classes in COVID-19. Gyeongin National University of 'Education: The Journal of Education, 40(3), 93-112. https://doi.org/10.25020/je.2020.40.3.93
  33. Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four C model of creativity. Review of General Psychology, 13(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
  34. Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (1988). The Action Research Planner. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
  35. Laudonia, I., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Abels, S., & Eilks, I. (2018). Action research in science education-An analytical review of the literature. Educational Action Research, 26(3), 480-495. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2017.1358198
  36. Lee, L. K. W., Goh, N. K., Chia, L. S., Wan, Y. K., & Lee, C. E. (2006). Some difficulties encountered in fostering creativity in science education. In Y. J. Lee, A. L. Tan, & B. T. Ho (Eds.), Proceedings of ISEC 2006: Science education: What works [CD-ROM] (pp. 491-500). Singapore: National Institute of Education.
  37. Lee, M.-K. & Erdogan, I. (2007). The effect of science-technology-society teaching on students' attitudes toward science and certain aspects of creativity. International Journal of Science Education, 29(11), 1315-1327. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600972974
  38. Lim, C. S. (2014). Development of an assessment formula for scientific creativity and its application. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 33(2), 242-257. https://doi.org/10.15267/keses.2014.33.2.242
  39. Lim, H. J., Yu, E. J., Kim, C. J., & Choe, S. U. (2019). A case study on the changed process of science teachers' teaching practice through collaborative action research for three years. The Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(5), 1121-1150. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2019.19.5.1121
  40. Lin, Y.-S. (2011). Fostering creativity through education-A conceptual framework of creative pedagogy. Creative Education, 2(3), 149-155. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2011.23021
  41. Maharani, K., Mahtari, S., & Suyidno, S. (2021). Improving scientific creativity and scientific attitude of students through creative responsibility based learning on energy-work materials during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prisma Sains: Jurnal Pengkajian Ilmu dan Pembelajaran Matematika dan IPA IKIP Mataram, 9(2), 325-335. https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v9i2.4386
  42. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning Lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  43. Merrotsy, P. (2013). A note on big-C creativity and little-c creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 25(4), 474-476. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2013.843921
  44. Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. H. (2003). Meaning Making in Secondary Science Classrooms. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
  45. Neira, J. & Soto, I. (2013). Creativity and physics learning as product of the intervention with conceptual maps and Gowin's V diagram. Creative Education, 4, 13-20. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.412A1003
  46. Prahani, B. K., Suprapto, N., Rachmadiarti, F., Sholahuddin, A., Mahtari, S., & Siswanto, J. (2021). Online Scientific Creativity Learning (OSCL) in science education to improve students' scientific creativity in COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18, 77-90. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.73
  47. Rhodes, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. The Phi Delta Kappan, 42(7), 305-310.
  48. Roth, W-M. (1996). Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: Interactions of context, content, and student responses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 709-736. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199609)33:7<709::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-R
  49. Runco, M. A. (2003). Education for creative potential. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47(3), 317-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313830308598
  50. Saktioto, S., Muhammad, J., Rini, A. S., Azzahra, S. K., Nuraini, S. A., Rizal, N. S., ... & Putra, A. S. (2022). An innovative model for the development of experimental learning science creativity in high school by online media. Journal of Innovation and Creativity Resources, 1(1), 1-6.
  51. Simonton, D. K. (2004). Exceptional creativity and chance: Creative thought as a stochastic combinatorial process. In Shavinina, L. V., & Ferrari, M. (Eds.), Beyond Knowledge: Extracognitive Aspects of Developing High Ability (pp. 39-72). UK: Routledge.
  52. Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an Analysis of Discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
  53. Skidmore, D. (2006). Pedagogy and dialogue. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36(4), 503-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640601048407
  54. Stringer, E. T. (2008). Action Research in Education (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
  55. Taber, K. S. (2001). Constructing chemical concepts in the classroom?: Using research to inform practice. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 2(1), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1039/B0RP90029J
  56. van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997a). Reflective discouise: Developing shared understandings in a physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 209-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190206
  57. van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997b). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 229-271. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0602_3
  58. Wellington, J. & Osborne, J. (2001). Talk of the classroom: Language interactions between teachers and pupils. In J. Wellington & J. Osborne (Eds.), Language and Literacy in Science Education (pp. 24-40). Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.