No abstract

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 paperand-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 firstlanguage 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 firstlanguage 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.

No abstract

No abstract

Argumentation is considered crucial in numerous disciplines in schools and universities because it constitutes an important proficiency in peoples' daily and professional lives. However, it is unclear whether argumentation is understood and practiced in comparable ways across disciplines. This study consequently examined empirically how students perceive argumentation in science and (first) language lessons. Specifically, we investigated students' beliefs about the relevance of discourse and the role of facts. Data from 3,258 high school students from 85 German secondary schools were analyzed with multigroup multilevel structural equation modeling in order to disentangle whether or not differences in argumentation across disciplines exist and the extent to which variation in students' beliefs can be explained by gender and school track. Results showed that students perceived the role of facts as highly relevant for science lessons, whereas discursive characteristics were considered significantly less important. In turn, discourse played a central role in language lessons, which was believed to require less knowledge of facts. These differences were independent of students' gender. In contrast, school track predicted the differences in beliefs significantly. Our findings lend evidence on the existence of disciplinary school cultures in argumentation that may be the result of differences in teachers' school-track-specific classroom practice and education. Implications in terms of a teacher's role in establishing norms for scientific argumentation as well as the impact of students' beliefs on their learning outcomes are discussed.

Die Daten für die hier präsentierten Analysen stammen aus dem Projekt ManKobE ("Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Kompetenzen in der beruflichen Erstausbildung"), das aus Mitteln der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft gefördert wird (Förderkennzeichen: SAW−2012-IPN−2). ZusammenfassungBei der Evaluation der Bildungsstandards in den naturwissenschaftlichen Fächern sieht das Itemdesign vor, benötigtes Vorwissen innerhalb der Testung vorzugeben und damit auch im Sinne einer Kompetenzorientierung Umgang mit Fachwissen zu evaluieren. Dies setzt voraus, dass die Schülerinnen und Schüler die Informationen angemessen rezipieren. Es wird daher angenommen, dass schriftsprachliche Fähigkeiten eine zentrale Rolle für die Erfassung physikbezogener Kompetenzen in Leistungstests spielen, zumal einige Items schriftliche Antworten verlangen. Der vorliegende Beitrag geht daher der Frage nach, in welchem Umfang schriftsprachliche Fähig-keiten im Zusammenhang mit den Ergebnissen der Evaluation der Bildungsstandards im Kompetenzbereich Umgang mit Fachwissen des Fachs Physik steht. Die Studie zeigt an einer Stichprobe von N = 1961 Auszubildenden mittels Vergleich logistischer Modelle auf, dass die Items der Bildungsstandards von schriftsprachlichen Fähigkeiten beeinflusst werden. Ferner wiesen Items mit offenem Format im Mittel eine höhere Itemschwierigkeit auf im Vergleich zu Items mit geschlossenem Format, wobei sich eine Interaktion zwischen Antwortformat und schriftsprachlichen Fähigkeiten andeutet. 764 H. Härtig et al. 3Schlüsselwörter Evaluation der Bildungsstandards · Kompetenztests · Schriftsprachliche Fähigkeiten · Antwortformate Analyses of the tasks for evaluating the educational standards in physics -Differentiation between written language proficiency and content knowledgeAbstract Within the evaluation of National Educational Standards in science education all items provide information required for the answer. The items thereby are also competency-based. We assume that general language proficiency plays a central role in order to assess achievement in physics since some answers require an open response. Thus, this paper addresses the question to what extent general language proficiency can affect the results of the evaluation of the educational standards in physics education for the competence content knowledge. Drawing on a sample of N = 1961 vocational trainees first, it is shown that the National Educational Standards items are affected by general language proficiency to a relevant degree. Furthermore, items in open response format are more difficult than items in a closed response format, with a slight interaction between response format and general language proficiency.

No abstract

No abstract