Facilitating Argumentation in the Laboratory: The Challenges of Claim Change and Justification by Theory

Abstract

Scientific argumentation is a key means by which students make sense of content and processes in inquiry-based instruction. In scientific argumentation students make a claim that they support with evidence and provide reasoning as to how the evidence supports the claim. Integrating the different aspects of scientific argumentation can be challenging for students especially if they need to make a claim change to accommodate new evidence. This study examines student argumentation within a two-semester general chemistry laboratory sequence at a minority-serving, comprehensive university in the Midwest, which employed the Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instructional model for laboratory instruction. Video recordings of group argumentation from four investigations, two each semester, were coded using the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom (ASAC) observation protocol. On the basis of the data, students did not tend to change their claims or reasoning even when provided with contradictory evidence. Semistructured interviews with students also coded with the ASAC revealed that students did not view claim change as a valid component of argumentation.

Argument-Driven Inquiry Learning Model: A Systematic Review

“…From the analysis, twenty-three articles based on the applied categories were obtained. The reason was -two articles, Walker et al (2019) dan Kim & Hannafin (2016), discussed more learners' argumentation skills. From the findings, twenty-three articles based on the applied categories were analyzed and classified based on 1) the research types, 2) characteristics and ADI model stages, 3) research subjects, 4) the applied material content for research, and 5) ADI model implementation impacts.…”

“…Then, different parties proposed theories to explain phenomena or evidence (Dauphin & Cramer, 2018). Walker et al (2019) explain that scientists clarify, develop the model, rebuttal the evidence, and evaluate the information when developing new scientific knowledge. Therefore, scientists conduct several stages, as reflected in argument-driven inquiry syntax.…”

Student Behaviors and Interactions Influence Group Discussions in an Introductory Biology Lab Setting

“…Students need better tools to help them focus more on generating and exchanging reasoning while engaged in discussions, as they more naturally engage in explanations and analysis than in reasoning (Zeidler, 1997;Walker et al, 2012;Walker and Sampson, 2013; this study). One example from the literature that could be useful is argument-driven inquiry, a multistage instructional model for improving argumentation (Poock et al 2007;Schroeder and Greenbowe, 2008;Walker and Sampson, 2013;Walker et al, 2012Walker et al, , 2019. Another less formal approach would be to provide instructions that explicitly prompt students to focus on exchanging reasoning in support of developing an argument.…”

Importance of Teachers’ Beliefs in Development of Scientific Literacy

“…Inquiry-based learning (IBL) has proven effective in improving the science process skills (SPS) of students [5][6][7], their understanding of conceptual knowledge [8,9]; and general student achievement in science [10]. IBL has proven effective in changing attitudes toward science [7,11], increasing the students' understanding of inquiry processes [12,13], and increasing their motivation to learn about science [l4]. Research shows that students are able to transfer their argumentative skills from the given subject matter to everyday problems and apply these skills in order to solve them [l5].…”