Articulation of Conceptual Knowledge and Argumentation Practices by High School Students in Evolution Problems

Tavares, Marina de Lima; Jiménez‐Aleixandre, María‐Pilar; Mortimer, Eduardo Fleury

doi:10.1007/s11191-009-9206-6

Cited by 30 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Organizing classrooms around argumentation encourages students to interact directly with each other, as opposed to directing conversation exclusively to the teacher, who, in turn, evaluates comments (Berland, 2011;Duschl & Osborne, 2002;Martin & Hand, 2009). Making argumentation structures visible to students encourages them to make their ideas explicit, promoting the elaboration, connection, and consolidation of scientific understandings (Bell & Linn, 2000;Chin & Osborne, 2010;de Lima Tavares, Jiménez-Aleixandre, & Mortimer, 2010;Keys, Hand, Prain, & Collins, 1999;von Aufschnaiter et al, 2008). Some studies have shown that, over time, students appear to use more of the desired components and scientific norms in their argumentation (McNeill et al, 2006;Osborne et al, 2004;Sampson, Enderle, Grooms, & Witte, 2013).…”

Section: Implications and Critiquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Representing Student Argumentation as Functionally Emergent From Scientific Activity

Manz

2015

Review of Educational Research

152

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Science educators increasingly seek to support students' participation in scientific practices, particularly epistemic practices, that is, those that ground authority for knowing in the discipline. Argumentation is one practice that has received significant attention in the research literature. However, scholars who take a sociocultural stance increasingly suggest that current conceptualizations are not sufficient for characterizing and supporting important aspects of scientific practice. In this article, I explore how students' argumentation can be brought into closer alignment with that of scientists. I identify consequential differences in the contexts in which scientists and students typically enact argumentation and discuss how these differences have been addressed in the literature. Finally, I propose several directions for further research: embedding argumentation in uncertain scientific activity, supporting students to contest both what they know and their means of knowing, building more carefully from students' resources, and attending to the development of epistemic cultures in classrooms.

show abstract

Section: Implications and Critiquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Representing Student Argumentation as Functionally Emergent From Scientific Activity

Manz

2015

Review of Educational Research

152

143

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of their study show that students' engagement of argumentation enables them to use their prior knowledge and elaborate their understanding of science at high levels of abstraction. de Lima Tavares et al (2010) conducted a research with 45 twelfth-grade students in two classes to examine the articulation of conceptual knowledge about evolution and argumentation practices, documented in the use of evidenced claims at different epistemic levels. In their study, they argue that students' conceptual knowledge about evolution helps them to construct arguments and vice versa, that is, students' engagement in argumentative discourse promotes their understanding of evolution concepts.…”

Section: Argumentation and Conceptual Understanding 1141mentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium

Kaya

2013

International Journal of Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the impact of argumentation practices on pre-service teachers' understanding of chemical equilibrium. The sample consisted of 100 pre-service teachers in two classes of a public university. One of these classes was assigned as experimental and the other as control group, randomly. In the experimental group, the subject of chemical equilibrium was taught by using argumentative practices and the participants were encouraged to participate in the lessons actively. However, the instructor taught the same subject by using the lecturing method without engaging argumentative activities in the control group. The Chemical Equilibrium Concept Test and Written Argumentation Survey were administered to all participants to assess their conceptual understanding and the quality of their arguments, respectively. The analysis of covariance results indicate that argumentation practices significantly improved conceptual understanding of the experimental group when compared to the control group. Furthermore, the results show that the pre-service teachers exposed to argumentative practices constructed more quality arguments than those in the control group after the instruction. Based on these results, it can be concluded that the instruction based on argumentative practices is effective in concept teaching in science education. Therefore, argumentation should be explicitly taught in teacher education besides elementary and secondary education.

show abstract

“…Duschl and Osborne () argue that an absence of dialogical argumentation in the classroom could result in a reduction in science learning. Research has demonstrated the positive effect of argumentation on understanding of science concepts and improving reasoning skills in elementary school children (Mason, ; Mercer, Dawes, Wegerif, & Sams, ; Simon & Maloney, ), high school students (de Lima Tavares, Jiménez‐Aleixandre, & Mortimer, ; Jiménez‐Aleixandre, Rodrìguez, & Duschl, ; Zohar & Nemet, ), and college students (Aydeniz, Pabuccu, Cetin, & Kaya, ). These studies employed qualitative analysis of student utterances during argumentation or quantitative pre/post‐test designs to explore students' knowledge gain.…”

Section: Background and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation and participation patterns in general chemistry peer‐led sessions

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on the use of Toulmin's argumentation scheme to investigate the characteristics of student group argumentation in Peer-Led Guided Inquiry sessions for a General Chemistry I course. A coding scheme based on Toulmin's [Toulmin [1958] The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press] argumentation model was used for identifying arguments during group work without instructor intervention. A modification of the framework developed by Erduran et al. [Erduran, Simon, & Osborne [2004] Science Education, 88 (6), 915-933] for characterizing arguments was employed that considered both the strength of the argument and whether an argument contained contributions from one or more than one student. Data were collected by video recording weekly peer-led sessions with a focus on two small groups. Analysis of this video data with the coding scheme and the framework revealed that students were mostly engaged in co-constructed arguments, with more than one student providing evidence and reasoning during group activities. Students often supported their claims with data and warrants but rarely offered backings. That is, they supported their answers with evidence and reasoning but did not often elaborate on their reasoning or further validate their explanations. However, the percentage of arguments containing backings increased when arguments contained contributions from more than one student rather than being presented by one individual. Another significant finding is that students were able to resolve wrong claims through argumentation without peer leader intervention, an indication of independent learning.

show abstract

Articulation of Conceptual Knowledge and Argumentation Practices by High School Students in Evolution Problems

Cited by 30 publications

References 27 publications

Representing Student Argumentation as Functionally Emergent From Scientific Activity

Representing Student Argumentation as Functionally Emergent From Scientific Activity

Argumentation Practices in Classroom: Pre-service teachers' conceptual understanding of chemical equilibrium

Argumentation and participation patterns in general chemistry peer‐led sessions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About