ABSTRACT:Basing its arguments in current perspectives on the nature of the scientific enterprise, which see argument and argumentative practice as a core activity of scientists, this article develops the case for the inclusion and central role of argument in science education. Beginning with a review of the nature of argument, it discusses the function and purpose of dialogic argument in the social construction of scientific knowledge and the interpretation of empirical data. The case is then advanced that any education about science, rather than education in science, must give the role of argument a high priority if it is to give a fair account of the social practice of science, and develop a knowledge and understanding of the evaluative criteria used to establish scientific theories. Such knowledge is essential to enhance the public understanding of science and improve scientific literacy. The existing literature, and work that has attempted to use argument within science education, is reviewed to show that classroom practice does provide the opportunity to develop young people's ability to construct argument. Furthermore, the case is advanced that the lack of opportunities for the practice of argument within science classrooms, and lack of teacher's pedagogical skills in organizing argumentative discourse within the classroom are significant impediments to progress in the field. We should not assume that mere contact with science, which is so critical, will make the students think critically. (Rogers, 1948, p. 7) Correspondence to: J. Osborne; e-mail: jonathan.osborne@kcl.ac.uk *Deceased DRIVER, NEWTON, AND OSBORNE OVERVIEWThis study presents the rationale for a research program in the area of argument in science -an area to which science education has only given scant attention. As argument is a central feature of the resolution of scientific controversies (Fuller, 1997; Taylor, 1996), it is somewhat surprising that science teaching has paid so little attention to a practice that lies at the heart of science. It is our contention that this significant omission has led to important shortcomings in the education that is provided about science. It has given a false impression of science as the unproblematic collation of facts about the world, hence making controversies between scientists, whether historical or contemporary, puzzling events (Driver, Leach, Millar, & Scott, 1996;Geddis, 1991). Such a disregard for the practice of argument has also failed to empower students with the ability to critically examine the scientific claims generated by the plethora of socioscientific issues that confront them in their everyday lives (Norris & Phillips, 1994;Solomon, 1991).Science in schools is commonly portrayed from a "positivist perspective" as a subject in which there are clear "right answers" and where data lead uncontroversially to agreed conclusions. This is a view perhaps most aptly expressed by Schwab who argued that science is "taught as a nearly unmitigated rhetoric of conclusions in which the current and t...

Basing its arguments in current perspectives on the nature of the scientific enterprise, which see argument and argumentative practice as a core activity of scientists, this article develops the case for the inclusion and central role of argument in science education. Beginning with a review of the nature of argument, it discusses the function and purpose of dialogic argument in the social construction of scientific knowledge and the interpretation of empirical data. The case is then advanced that any education about science, rather than education in science, must give the role of argument a high priority if it is to give a fair account of the social practice of science, and develop a knowledge and understanding of the evaluative criteria used to establish scientific theories. Such knowledge is essential to enhance the public understanding of science and improve scientific literacy. The existing literature, and work that has attempted to use argument within science education, is reviewed to show that classroom practice does provide the opportunity to develop young people's ability to construct argument. Furthermore, the case is advanced that the lack of opportunities for the practice of argument within science classrooms, and lack of teacher's pedagogical skills in organizing argumentative discourse within the classroom are significant impediments to progress in the field.

No abstract

The view that knowledge cannot be transmitted but must be constructed by the mental activity of learners underpins contemporary perspectives on science education. This article, which presents a theoretical perspective on teaching and learning science in the social setting of classrooms, is informed by a view of scientific knowledge as socially constructed and by a perspective on the learning of science as knowledge construction involving both individual and social processes. First, we present an overview of the nature of scientific knowledge. We then describe two major traditions in explaining the process of learning science: personal and social constructivism. Finally, we illustrate how both personal and social perspectives on learning, as well as perspectives on the nature of the scientific knowledge to be learned, are necessary in interpreting science learning in formal settings.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract