No abstract

Argumentative writing advances students' understanding of scientific concepts, ability to communicate, and scientific literacy. However, it remains unclear which components of argumentative writing drive such advancement. Further, most studies on argumentative writing have focused on students majoring in science, rather than in the nonsciences. The purpose of this study was to determine which components of argumentative writing are predictors of academic achievement in a general chemistry course designed for nonscience majors. The participants included 163 undergraduates at a public university. The quality of argumentative writing was positively and significantly correlated with student academic achievement. Five components of argumentative writing were predictors of success on student achievement tests: accuracy of the claim, relationship between claim and question, relationship between claim and evidence, use of multiple modes to represent an argument, and the degree to which writing style aligns with the writing type desired. Therefore, results from this study would allow teachers to modify their approaches to emphasize components of argumentative writing that can predict student academic achievement. Results from open-ended questionnaires reveal that students viewed argumentative writing as a tool that improves their conceptual understanding, advances their epistemic understanding of an argument, and can be applied in their future careers. Implications of this pedagogy for chemistry teaching and learning are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

v Glory, I have done all of this for you. I want you to see that you can achieve all you want in your life. You have all the potential in the world. I want you to do all that gives you passion in life and I want you to enjoy life at the same time. Lucas, this is for you too. You are so special that later when you are able to read you will know I did this for you. Finally, I am deeply and highly grateful to my husband, Carlos; I love you and appreciate your encouragement from the first moment to pursue my PhD. Thanks for the sacrifices you made during my whole graduate program. Without your help and unconditional love, this would not have been possible. vi ABSTRACT The Hispanic population in the United States experiences many challenges in education that have placed them behind their Euro-American counterparts in terms of achievement. These challenges are associated with socioeconomic status and family structure, educational expectations, and low-quality schooling in the elementary grades. The purpose of this study was to examine how Hispanic students construct science learning in an argument-based inquiry classroom. This research constituted a qualitative case study grounded in a sociocultural constructivist framework. Data was collected using a variety of qualitative techniques, including nonparticipant observations, analysis of semi-structured interviews, audio recordings, and transcription. The focal participants of this study were three Hispanic students, two in fifth grade and one in fourth grade. Findings indicated that the two aspects of an argument-based inquiry approach (laboratory activities and cooperative negotiation) impacted students' learning in science under diverse factors. These factors included importance of dialogue, importance of classroom setting (grouping and time allotment), and importance of various learning tools. Students also encountered particular challenges while they were involved in this learning context. These challenges involved developing connections between claims and evidence, classroom routines and decisions, administrative decisions of the school, issues associated with group conforming or pairing up students, and language issues. This study provides implications for science education policies, teaching practices, and research in science learning improvement for minority students.