UNDERSTANDING THE ALTERNATIVE CONCEPTIONS OF PRE-SERVICE SECONDARY SCIENCE TEACHERS ABOUT TIDAL PHENOMENA BASED ON TOULMIN'S ARGUMENTATION

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 353-370

  Oh, Jun Young ^a  

^a Hanyang University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

alternative conceptions; implicit backings; teachers; tidal phenomena; Toulmin's Argument Model

Indexed keywords

EID: 84899421297     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-013-9403-2     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Benson, H. (1996). University physics (Revth ed.). New York: Wiley.
2. Cros, D., Chastrette, M. & Fayol, M. (1987). Conceptions of second year university students of some fundamental notions of chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 10, 331-336.
3. Driver, R., Guesne, E. & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children's ideas and the learning of science. In R. Driver, E. Guesne & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children's ideas in science (pp. 1-9). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
4. Feldman, A. (2000). Decision making in the practical domain: a model of practical conceptual change. Science Education, 84, 606-623.
5. Ford, M. J. & Wargo, B. M. (2012). Dialogic framing of scientific content for conceptual and epistemic understanding. Science Education, 96, 369-391.
6. Gable, D. & Bunce, D. (1984). Research on problem solving in chemistry. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 301-326). New York: Macmillan.
7. Lee, S. K. (2012). Improving science teachers' teaching professionism: research and practice (Korean Language). Seoul: Kyoyookbook.
8. Lortie, D. (2002). Schoolteacher: a sociological study (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
9. Lythcott, J. & Duschl, R. (1990). Qualitative research: from methods to conclusions. Science Education, 74(4), 445-460.
10. Oh, J.-Y. & Kim, Y. S. (2006). Preservice elementary teacher mental models about astronomical phenomena: seasons and moon phases. Journal of Korean Association for Research in Science, 26, 68-87.
11. Oh, J.-Y. & Kim, Y. S. (2009). The advocation and educational applications about Toulmin's argument model. The Journal of Pan-Korean Philosophical Society, 55, 379-425.
12. Rea-Ramirez, M. A. & Núñez-Oviedo, M. C. (2008). Role of discrepant questioning leading to model element modification. In J. J. Clement & M. A. Rea-Ramirez (Eds.), Model based learning and instruction in science (pp. 195-213). New York: Springer.
13. Rieke, R. & Sillars, M. O. (2005). Argumentation and decision making process (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
14. Schwarz, B. B., Neuman, Y., Gil, J. & Ilya, M. (2003). Construction of collective and individual knowledge in argumentation activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2).
15. Thompson, C. (1989). Discrepant events: what happens to those who watch? School Science and Mathematics, 89(1), 26-27.
16. Toulmin, S. (1958). The use of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Verheij, B. (2005). Evaluating arguments based on Toulmin's scheme. Argumentation, 19, 347-371.