Abstract
In this study, we aimed to clarify how learners generated questions, based on the findings of Kawasaki and Yoshida (2021), and judged whether the questions could be scientifically explored. With this aim, we conducted a case study using the developed “Information Analysis Q-Chart” in a 5th grade unit on “How Electric Current Works”. From the data gathered, we analyzed the students’ questions and investigated the roots of their lines of inquiries by classifying the judgment of whether the question can be scientifically explored into four categories: “scientific judgment,” “unfounded judgment,” “personal judgment” and “unsolved judgment.” The “what type” and “how type” questions which included concrete methods for pursuing the process were classified as ‘scientific judgment’. The “what type” questions, which investigate the cause, and “how type” questions, which investigate the visible phenomenon itself, were regarded as “unfounded judgments” of phenomena that nonetheless could be scientifically investigated. In addition, it became clear that “how type” inquiries that pursue the process tend toward an “unsolved judgment” outcomes. Moreover, in the “how type” inquiries that pursue the process in “unfounded judgements” and “unsolved judgements”, it was suggested that there were actual cases in which learners judged the question in a manner enabling scientific exploration, or the discussion ended without being resolved when the phenomena was difficult to observe and demonstrate.
