A Communication Structure of Science Gifted Students Based on the Social Network Analysis

The purpose of this study was to investigate the communication structures that science gifted students used in small group activities, and to examine the relationship between communication styles and their achievement level. Eight small groups,5 members in each, participated in small group activities, in which they discussed how to calculate the average density of the earth. The communication structures and the achievement level presented in the group activities were analyzed using Pajek, Ucinet 6.0. As a result, we classified the communication styles of science gifted students into monopolistic type and co-ownership type according to the degree of dispersion of the interaction. We also classified it into type, type, type, and type based on the density and network centralization of interaction. The achievement levels of gifted students in their group work were affected by the density of interaction and the network centralization in small group activities, not by the dispersion of interaction among the members of the groups. Therefore, we recommend that teachers make the communication relevant to solving problem when they utilize a small group activity in science teaching.

[1]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperative Versus Competitive Efforts and Problem Solving , 1995 .

[2]  R. Slavin.  Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. , 1996 .

[3]  Y. Benito.  Metacognitive Ability and Cognitive Strategies to Solve Maths and Transformation Problems , 2000 .

[4]  James A. Pharmer,et al.  When Member Homogeneity is Needed in Work Teams , 2000 .

[5]  Jae-young Han,et al.  The Effect of Grouping Method in Cooperative Learning Strategy Applied to Concept Learning , 1999 .

[6]  Masahiro Morita,et al.  An Evaluation and Cost-Analysis on Distance Education via ISDN , 2007 .

[7]  K. Rogers.  Do the Gifted Think and Learn Differently? A Review of Recent Research and Its Implications for Instruction , 1986 .

[8]  E. Cohen.  Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups , 1994 .

[9]  David Hammer,et al.  Misconceptions or P-Prims: How May Alternative Perspectives of Cognitive Structure Influence Instructional Perceptions and Intentions , 1996 .

[10]  Shi-Eun Lee,et al.  Exploring the Patterns of Group model Development about Blood Flow in the Heart and Reasoning Process by Small Group Interaction , 2012 .

[11]  Janet E. Davidson,et al.  The Role of Insight in Intellectual Giftedness , 1984 .

[12]  H. Leavitt.  Some effects of certain communication patterns on group performance. , 1951, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[13]  M. Gail Jones,et al.  Relationship between ability‐paired interactions and the development of fifth graders' concepts of balance , 1994 .

[14]  Bob Campbell,et al.  Talking Science: The research evidence on the use of small group discussions in science teaching , 2010 .

[15]  Penelope L. Peterson,et al.  Ability × Treatment Interaction Effects on Children's Learning in Large-group and Small-group Approaches , 1981 .

[16]  Analyzing Perceptions of Small Group Inquiry Activity in the Gifted Education of Korea , 2008 .