共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
Kim and Roth (this issue) purport to draw on the social-psychological theory of L. S. Vygotsky in order to investigate social relations in children’s argumentation in science topics. The authors argue that the argumentation framework offered by Stephen Toulmin is limited in addressing social relations. The authors thus criticize Toulmin’s Argument Pattern (TAP) as an analytical tool and propose to investigate the genesis of evidence-related practices (especially burden of proof) in second- and third-grade children by studying dialogical interactions. In this paper, I illustrate how Toulmin’s framework can contribute to (a) the study of “social relations”, and (b) provide an example utilizing a theoretical framework on social relations, namely Engeström’s Activity Theory framework, and (c) describe how we have used the Activity Theory along with TAP in order to understand the development of argumentation in the practices of science educators. Overall, I will argue that TAP is not inherently incapable of addressing social relational aspects of argumentation in science education but rather that science education researchers can transform theoretical tools such as Toulmin’s framework intended for other purposes for use in science education research. 相似文献
2.
Argumentation as a form of introducing children to science has received increasing attention over the past decade. Argumentation tends to be studied and theorized through the lens of individual speakers, who contribute to a conversation by means of opposing statements. M.M. Bakhtin and L.S. Vygotsky independently proposed a very different approach by suggesting that dialogical relations inherently and irreducibly embody argumentation. From this position, dialogical relations allow children to individualize argumentation. In this study, we show how the dialogical framework provides a very different, collective perspective on children’s argumentation in problem-solving processes in elementary science classrooms. 相似文献
3.
To understand students’ argumentation abilities, there have been practices that focus on counting and analyzing argumentation schemes such as claim, evidence, warrant, backing, and rebuttal. This analytic approach does not address the dynamics of epistemic criteria of children’s reasoning and decision-making in dialogical situations. The common approach also does not address the practice of argumentation in lower elementary grades (K–3) because these children do not master the structure of argumentation and, therefore, are considered not ready for processing argumentative discourse. There is thus little research focusing on lower elementary school students’ argumentation in school science. This study, drawing on the societal-historical approach by L. S. Vygotsky, explored children’s argumentation as social relations by investigating the genesis of evidence-related practices (especially burden of proof) in second- and third-grade children. The findings show (a) students’ capacity for connecting claim and evidence/responding to the burden of proof and critical move varies and (b) that teachers play a significant role to emphasize the importance of evidence but experience difficulties removing children’s favored ideas during the turn taking of argumentative dialogue. The findings on the nature of dialogical reasoning and teacher’s role provide further insights about discussions on pedagogical approaches to children’s reasoning and argumentation. 相似文献
4.
Researchers have emphasized the importance of promoting argumentation in science classrooms for various reasons. However, the study of argumentation is still a young field and more research needs to be carried out on the tools and pedagogical strategies that can assist teachers and students in both the construction and evaluation of scientific arguments. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of argumentation on students’ conceptual learning in dynamics. True-experimental design using quantitative research methods was carried out for the study. The participants of the study were tenth graders studying in two classes in an urban all-girls school. There were 26 female students in each class. Five argumentations promoted in the different contexts were embedded through the dynamics unit over a 10-week duration. The study concludes that engaging in the argumentative process that involves making claims, using data to support these claims, warranting the claims with scientific evidence, and using backings, rebuttals, and qualifiers to further support the reasoning, reinforces students’ understanding of science, and promotes conceptual change. The results suggest that argumentation should be employed during instruction as a way to enable conceptual learning. 相似文献
5.
The literature provides confounding information with regard to questions about whether students in high school can engage in meaningful argumentation about socio‐scientific issues and whether this process improves their conceptual understanding of science. The purpose of this research was to explore the impact of classroom‐based argumentation on high school students' argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of genetics. The research was conducted as a case study in one school with an embedded quasi‐experimental design with two Grade 10 classes (n = 46) forming the argumentation group and two Grade 10 classes (n = 46) forming the comparison group. The teacher of the argumentation group participated in professional learning and explicitly taught argumentation skills to the students in his classes during one, 50‐minute lesson and involved them in whole‐class argumentation about socio‐scientific issues in a further two lessons. Data were generated through a detailed, written pre‐ and post‐instruction student survey. The findings showed that the argumentation group, but not the comparison group, improved significantly in the complexity and quality of their arguments and gave more explanations showing rational informal reasoning. Both groups improved significantly in their genetics understanding, but the improvement of the argumentation group was significantly better than the comparison group. The importance of the findings are that after only a short intervention of three lessons, improvements in the structure and complexity of students' arguments, the degree of rational informal reasoning, and students' conceptual understanding of science can occur. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 47: 952–977, 2010 相似文献
6.
William A. Sandoval Noel Enyedy Elizabeth H. Redman Sihan Xiao 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(13):1848-1869
ABSTRACTMost of the research on argumentation in science education has documented the myriad flaws in students’ argumentation, and the difficulties teachers have organising productive arguments in the classroom. We apply a sociocultural framework to argue that productive argumentation emerges from a classroom culture in which its practice meaningfully serves classroom goals. We present a case study using interaction analysis to contrast two elementary teachers’ efforts to organise productive scientific argumentation in their classrooms. One teacher used discourse moves to orient students to each other’s contributions in ways the other did not, reflecting differences in underlying aims for collective versus individual sense-making. This analysis shows that connecting discourse practices specifically to a goal of collective sense-making promotes productive argumentation. 相似文献
7.
The purpose of this study is to explore how Lakatos’ scientific research programmes might serve as a theoretical framework for representing and evaluating informal argumentation about socio‐scientific issues. Seventy undergraduate science and non‐science majors were asked to make written arguments about four socio‐scientific issues. Our analysis showed that the science majors’ informal arguments were significantly better than the non‐science majors’ arguments. In terms of the resources for supporting reasons, we find that personal experience and scientific belief are the two categories that are generated most often in both groups of the participants. Besides, science majors made significantly greater use of analogies, while non‐science majors made significantly greater use of authority. In addition, both science majors and non‐science majors had a harder time changing their arguments after participating in a group discussion. In the study of argumentation in science, scholars have often used Toulmin’s framework of data, warrant, backing, qualifiers, claims, and rebuttal. Our work demonstrates that Lakatos’ work is also a viable perspective, especially when warrant and backing are difficult to discern, and when students’ arguments are resistant to change. Our use of Lakatos’ framework highlights how the ‘hard core’ of students’ arguments about socio‐scientific issues does, indeed, seem to be protected by a ‘protective belt’ and, thus, is difficult to alter. From these insights, we make specific implications for further research and teaching. 相似文献
8.
9.
Liyang Mao Ou Lydia Liu Katrina Roohr Vinetha Belur Matthew Mulholland Hee-Sun Lee 《Educational Assessment》2018,23(2):121-138
Scientific argumentation is one of the core practices for teachers to implement in science classrooms. We developed a computer-based formative assessment to support students’ construction and revision of scientific arguments. The assessment is built upon automated scoring of students’ arguments and provides feedback to students and teachers. Preliminary validity evidence was collected in this study to support the use of automated scoring in this formative assessment. The results showed satisfactory psychometric properties related to this formative assessment. The automated scores showed satisfactory agreement with human scores, but small discrepancies still existed. Automated scores and feedback encouraged students to revise their answers. Students’ scientific argumentation skills improved during the revision process. These findings provided preliminary evident to support the use of automated scoring in the formative assessment to diagnose and enhance students’ argumentation skills in the context of climate change in secondary school science classrooms. 相似文献
10.
Yasemin Özdem Yilmaz Jale Cakiroglu Hamide Ertepinar Sibel Erduran 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(11):1443-1464
ABSTRACTArgumentation has been a prominent concern in science education research and a common goal in science curriculum in many countries over the past decade. With reference to this goal, policy documents burden responsibilities on science teachers, such as involving students in dialogues and being guides in students’ spoken or written argumentation. Consequently, teachers’ pedagogical practices regarding argumentation gain importance due to their impact on how they incorporate this practice into their classrooms. In this study, therefore, we investigated the instructional strategies adopted by science teachers for their argumentation-based science teaching. Participants were one elementary science teacher, two chemistry teachers, and four graduate students, who have a background in science education. The study took place during a graduate course, which was aimed at developing science teachers’ theory and pedagogy of argumentation. Data sources included the participants’ video-recorded classroom practices, audio-recorded reflections, post-interviews, and participants’ written materials. The findings revealed three typologies of instructional strategies towards argumentation. They are named as Basic Instructional Strategies for Argumentation, Meta-level Instructional ?St??rategies for ?Argumentation, and Meta-strategic Instructional ?St??rategies for ?Argumentation. In conclusion, the study provided a detailed coding framework for the exploration of science teachers’ instructional practices while they are implementing argumentation-based lessons. 相似文献
11.
Zuway-R. Hong Huann-shyang Lin Hsin-Hui Wang Hsiang-Ting Chen Kuay-Keng Yang 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(10):1625-1648
This study investigated the effects of a science and society intervention on elementary school students’ argumentation skills and their attitudes toward science. One hundred and eleven fifth grade students volunteered as an experimental group to join a 12-week intervention; another 107 sixth grade students volunteered to be the comparison group. All participants completed the Student Questionnaire at the beginning and end of this study. Observation and interview results were used to triangulate and consolidate the quantitative findings. The data showed that after the intervention, the quality of the experimental group students’ arguments and their attitudes toward science were significantly higher than their comparison group counterparts. In addition, the experimental group boys made significantly greater progress in the quality of their argumentation from the pretest to posttest than the girls; and low achievers made the most significant progress in their attitudes toward science and quality of argumentation. Interviews and observations indicated that their understandings of explanation and argumentation changed over the intervention. This indicated that a science and society intervention can enhance both the ability of students to develop strong arguments and their attitudes toward science. 相似文献
12.
Mirka Koro-Ljungberg 《Teachers and Teaching》2013,19(6):764-782
System-based and collaborative teacher inquiry has unexplored potential that can impact educational policy in numerous ways. This impact can be increased when teacher inquiry builds momentum from classrooms and teaching practices and simultaneously addresses district, state, and national discourses and networks. In this conceptual paper, I encourage scholars and practitioners to consider ways to methodologically, theoretically, and collectively strengthen teacher research and inquiry to increase its impact on policy. I propose a methodological framework for policy-oriented teacher inquiry that highlights multilayered research approaches and collaborative inquiry. I situate my arguments and the proposed framework in the context of qualitative research and Marx’s dialectic method. 相似文献
13.
14.
Troy D. Sadler 《Journal of Science Teacher Education》2006,17(4):323-346
Given a sociocultural framework of teaching and learning, argumentation and discourse become central elements of education, particularly in science education because of argumentation’s key role in scientific communities. This study documents preservice teachers’ perceptions of and aptitudes related to argumentation as they participated in a science methods course designed to promote discourse and argumentation. Data sources consisted of instructor reflections, course documents, and student work. Participants tended to view argumentation as a central element of science and as a means for promoting conceptual development in science classrooms. They were generally adept in the construction of arguments, particularly with respect to the evidentiary support of claims and demonstrated improved practice as the course progressed. Implications for using this course as a model and suggestions for its improvement are discussed. 相似文献
15.
Jan Alexis Nielsen 《Research in Science Education》2013,43(1):371-393
This paper explores the challenges of using the Toulmin model to analyze students’ dialogical argumentation. The paper presents a theoretical exposition of what is involved in an empirical study of real dialogic argumentation. Dialogic argumentation embodies dialectical features — i.e. the features that are operative when students collaboratively manage disagreement by providing arguments and engaging critically with the arguments provided by others. The paper argues that while dialectical features cannot readily be understood from a Toulminian perspective, it appears that an investigation of them is a prerequisite for conducting Toulminian analysis. This claim is substantiated by a detailed review of five of the ten most significant papers on students’ argumentation in science education. This leads to the surprising notion that empirical studies in the argumentation strand — even those studies that have employed non-dialectical frameworks such as the Toulmin model — have implicitly struggled to come to terms with the dialectical features of students’ discourse. The paper finally explores how some scholars have worked to attend directly to these dialectical features; and it presents five key issues that need to be addressed in a continued scholarly discussion. 相似文献
16.
In this paper, we seek to explore the inseparable role of emotions in the teaching and the learning of science at the primary school level, as we elaborate the theoretical underpinnings and personal experiences that lead us to this notion of inseparability. We situate our perspectives on the complexity of science education in primary schools, draw on existing literature on emotions in science, and present arguments for the necessity of working towards positive emotions in our work with young children and their teachers. We layer our own perspectives and experiences as teachers and as researchers onto methodological arguments through narratives to emerge with a reflective essay that seeks to highlight the importance of emotions in our work with children and their teachers in elementary school science. 相似文献
17.
Measuring instructional congruence in elementary science classrooms: Pedagogical and methodological components of a theoretical framework 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
This article is situated within a theoretical framework, instructional congruence, articulating issues of student diversity with the demands of academic disciplines. In the context of a large‐scale study targeting elementary school science, the article describes a research instrument that aims to combine the strengths of both quantitative and qualitative approaches to classroom data. The project‐developed classroom observation guideline is a series of detailed scales that produce numerical ratings based on qualitative observations of different aspects of classroom practice. The article's objectives are both pedagogical and methodological, reflecting the dual functionality of the instrument: (a) to concretize theoretical constructs articulating academic disciplines with student diversity in ways that are useful for rethinking classroom practice; and (b) to take advantage of the strengths of qualitative educational research, but within a quantitative analytical framework that may be applied across large numbers of classrooms. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 44: 424–447, 2007 相似文献
18.
Patricia Heitmann Martin Hecht Julia Schwanewedel Stefan Schipolowski 《International Journal of Science Education》2013,35(18):3148-3170
The ability to build arguments is a crucial skill and a central educational goal in all school subjects including science as it enables students to formulate reasoned opinions and thus to cope with the increasing complexity of knowledge. In the present cross-sectional study, we examined the domain-specificity of argumentative writing in science by comparing it with a rather general type of argumentation as promoted in first-language education and with formal reasoning to gain insight into different forms of argumentation on theoretical and empirical levels. Using a paper-and-pencil test, we analyzed written argumentations and the reasoning abilities of 3,274 Grade-10 students in German secondary schools. Correlation and multiple regression analyses as well as a qualitative analysis of students' answers to a subset of tasks in the domains of science and first-language education were conducted. Results showed moderate relations between argumentation in science, argumentation in first-language education, and reasoning. Half of the variance in argumentation in science was explained by individual differences in argumentation in first-language education and reasoning. Furthermore, the examination of written arguments revealed differences, for example, in students' weighing of pros and cons. We assume that the familiarity of the underlying scientific information may play an essential role in the argumentation process and posit that it needs to be investigated in more detail. Overall, the study indicates that investigating the argumentational abilities of learners in first-language education and reasoning abilities can help to shed light on the domain-specificity of argumentation in science. 相似文献
19.
This article describes an effort to explore and enhance argumentation skills of Taiwanese grade 6 students through instruction
in socioscientific issues. An experienced elementary school teacher was given 8 months of personalized instruction on argumentation
skills and socioscientific issues, then subsequently implemented a 17-h classroom unit on the establishment of Ma-Guo National
Park. His students learned to establish claims and warrants, construct counterarguments, offer supportive arguments, and provide
evidence for each one. Data consisted of student responses to questionnaires and individual follow-up interviews. A multiple
regression analysis revealed that success in learning argumentation skills was not substantially related to pre-instruction
argumentation skills, but significantly related to the student ability levels. High-ability students were significantly better
than low-ability students at generating complete arguments. Most students elaborated their arguments, and more high-ability
students offered rebuttals after instruction. However, even these high achievers did not completely understand the meaning
of evidence and often misused supplementary warrants as evidence. 相似文献