RESEARCH PAPER
Verbal Interaction Types in Science Inquiry Activities by Group Size
,
 
,
 
,
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Kyungpook National University, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
 
2
Kangwon National University, REPUBLIC OF KOREA
 
 
Online publication date: 2019-04-03
 
 
Publication date: 2019-04-03
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2019;15(7):em1720
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The extant research on linguistic interactions in scientific inquiry has focused solely on the quantitative analysis of the verbal interactions among the students and poses limitations to investigating the internal characteristics of such interactions. This paper presents connections among the members of a student group based on its interaction patterns and size to find out the ideal size of a student group in order to allow the student to have optimum participate in the group interactions. In this regard, this study sought to analyze the patterns of verbal interaction that occur during inquiry activities using social network analysis (SNA). 144 first-grade middle school students in science class in South Korea were participated and organized into small groups with three to six members each, and the language network of the 32 small groups that were thus formed was analyzed. The conclusions of this study are as follows: (1) the groups of students formed in school for learning activities should consist of only three members each to avoid alienation among the members, and (2) in student groups with four or more members each, there are many participation-type interaction structures that can be used if there is a group leader. The interactions among students within small learning groups can allow them to fully understand other students’ opinions which may otherwise not be very clear, and to solve a problem after considering all the opinions students have expressed, and support the effective learning by positive interactions among the members.
 
REFERENCES (32)
1.
Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-Group Discussion in Physics: Peer Interaction Modes in Pairs and Fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099-1114. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)...<1099::AID-TEA4>3.0.CO;2-N.
 
2.
Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., McNurlen, B., Archodidou, A., Kim, S., Reznitskaya, A., & Gilbert, L. (2001). The snowball phenomenon: Spread of ways of talking and ways of thinking across groups of children. Cognition and Instruction, 19(1), 1-46. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326....
 
3.
Brown, B. B., Mounts, N., Lamborn, S. D., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting practices and peer group affiliation in adolescence. Child Development, 64(2), 467-482. https://doi.org/10.2307/113126....
 
4.
Cheng, R. W., Lam, S., & Chan, J. C. (2008). When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 205-221. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709....
 
5.
Choi, Y., & Choi, O. (2010). Analysis of the Operational Activities within the Social Enterprises Network. Korean Comparative Government Review (KCGR), 14(1). 63-76. https://doi.org/10.18397/kcgr.....
 
6.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classroom. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)...<287::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A.
 
7.
Ernest, P. (1994). Varieties of constructivism: Their metaphors, epistemologies and pedagogical implications. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Educations, 2, 1-14.
 
8.
Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., & Smith, M. (2009). Analyzing social media networks: Learning by doing with NodeXL. Computing, 28(4), 1-47.
 
9.
Hennessy, S. (1993). Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship: Implications for classroom learning. Studies in Science Education, 22(1), 1-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572....
 
10.
Howe, C., Rodgers, C., & Tolmie, A. (1990). Physics in the primary school: Peer interaction and the understanding of floating and sinking. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 5(4), 459-475. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0317....
 
11.
Jang, H., & Kim, Y. (2017). An analysis of effect for grouping methods corresponding to ecological niche overlap of 7th graders’ photosynthesis concepts. Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 195-212. https://doi.org/10.21796/jse.2....
 
12.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1985). Oral interaction in cooperative learning groups: Speaking, listening, and the nature of statements made by high-medium, and low-achieving students. Journal of Psychology, 119(2), 303-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/002239....
 
13.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. NJ: International Book Company.
 
14.
Kang, S., Kim, H., & Noh, T. (2000). Analysis of verbal interaction in small group discussion. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 20(3), 353-363.
 
15.
Kim, J. (2006). Learning strategies for scientifically gifted children. The Journal of the Korean Society for the Gifted and Talented, 5, 19-32.
 
16.
Kim, J., & Kim, B. (2004). The effects of group size on science process skills and attitudes toward science in middle school science class. Science Education Research Institute Korea National University of Education, 14(1), 68-82.
 
17.
Kim, M., & Kim, Y. (2015). An analysis of the verbal interaction patterns of science-gifted students in science inquiry activity. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 35(2), 333-342. https://doi.org/10.14697/jkase....
 
18.
Kim, S. (2009). The effects of group size on mathematical achievement and mathematical attitude in the small group cooperative learning in mathematics classes. Unpublished Master thesis, Chungbook National University, Chungju, Korea.
 
19.
Kim, Y. (2018). Analysis of verbal interaction types and stability in science inquiry activities in 7th grade students. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(6), 563-584. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci....
 
20.
Kim, Y., Kim, M., Ha, M., & Lim, S. (2017). Analysis of stability in verbal interaction types of science-gifted students. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(6), 2441-2457. https://doi.org/10.12973/euras....
 
21.
Kyza, E. A., Constantinou, C. P., & Spanoudis, G. (2011). Sixth graders’ co-construction of explanations of a disturbance in an ecosystem: Exploring relationships between grouping, reflective scaffolding, and evidence-based explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2489-2525. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006....
 
22.
Lee, D. (1995). Human education and cooperative learning activity. Seoul: Sunghwasa.
 
23.
Lee, J., Kang, S., & Huh H. (2009). Establishment of teaching strategy through investigating scientific attitude, learning style, student’s preferences of teaching style and learning environments of Korea science academy students. Journal of Gifted/Talented Education, 19(1), 141-162.
 
24.
Lee, S., & Chun, J. (2017). Analysis of argumentation on socio-scientific issue in middle school students’ small group structure based on intimacy and leadership. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 17(24), 343-368. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci....
 
25.
Lumpe, A. T., & Staver, J. R. (1995). Peer collaboration and concept development: Learning about photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(1), 71-98. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.36....
 
26.
Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology (2010). Science curriculum. Seoul: Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology.
 
27.
Nattiv, A. (1994). Helping behaviors and math achievement gain of students using cooperative learning. Elementary School Journal, 94(3), 285-297. https://doi.org/10.1086/461767.
 
28.
Palinscar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 345-375. https://doi.org/10.1146/annure....
 
29.
Park, S. (2006). The effects of the group reward and cooperative skill training on the science achievement and learning motivation of elementary students. The Journal of the Korean Earth Science Society, 27(2), 121-129.
 
30.
Slavin, R. E. (1987). Development and motivational perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, 58, 1161-1167. https://doi.org/10.2307/113061....
 
31.
Storberg-Walker, J., & Gubbins, C. (2007). Social networks as a conceptual and empirical tool to understand and “do” HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 9(3), 291-310. https://doi.org/10.1177/152342....
 
32.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top