This study was designed to examine students' use of multiple modal representations within their written arguments as a consequence of completing a series of investigations of an organic chemistry laboratory course. One hundred and eleven students from a major Midwestern university were involved in using the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach where they are required to use the argument structure of question, claim, evidence and reflection in completing the written report for their instructor on their laboratory investigations. Results indicate that students who achieved a high score for embedded multiple modal representations in the evidence section also constructed high quality arguments. That is, students who were able to embed multiple modal representations in evidence made strong reasoned connections to support their claim(s) and construct a cohesive argument. Further, there were strong correlations between the laboratory examination score and holistic quality of argument. This study suggests there is a need to build support structures pedagogically for the individual in order to help students understanding the role and function of multiple modal representations in science.

No abstract

A critical component of science is the role of inquiry and argument in moving scientific knowledge forward. However, while students are expected to engage in inquiry activities in science classrooms, there is not always a similar emphasis on the role of argument within the inquiry activities. Building from previous studies on the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH), we were keen to find out if the writing structure used in the SWH approach helped students in Year 5, 7, and 10 to create well constructed arguments. We were also interested in examining which argument components were important for the quality of arguments generated by these students. Two hundred and ninety six writing samples were scored using an analysis framework to evaluate the quality of arguments.Step-wise multiple regression analyses were conducted to determine important argument components. The results of this study suggest that the SWH approach is useful in assisting students to develop reasonable arguments. The critical element determining the quality of the arguments is the relationship between the student's written claims and his or her evidence.

Current initiatives in science education in Korea have emphasized science literacy as the most important purpose of science education; that is, science education needs to focus on helping each student to become a scientifically literate person who is able to make reasoned decisions. In attempting to address this focus concern about science literacy, the researchers of this study attempted to implement the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach and examined both the SWH and the control groups using the modified Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). Students' performance on a Summary Writing Test (SWT) was also examined. Participant students of this study were eighth grade students in three middle schools located in the second biggest city in Korea. Each of the three teachers from three schools taught both the SWH and the control classes. The results of this study showed significant differences between the SWH and the control groups on the SWT. There was a difference in the total RTOP scores between the SWH and the control groups. Differences among schools imply that higher level of teachers' implementation of the SWH approach would appear to result in better student achievement.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract